User Score
6.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 250 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 51 out of 250
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Apr 25, 2015
    5
    When people in heaven are trading stories about how they went out, at least the victims in Saw movies have original anecdotes: "How did you die?" "Heart attack, and you?" "Well, I was pinned to the bottom of a steel vat and drowned in a putrescent sea of rotting pig corpses." These novel deaths have to be the reason the franchise has survived as long as it has; unlike the Jasons andWhen people in heaven are trading stories about how they went out, at least the victims in Saw movies have original anecdotes: "How did you die?" "Heart attack, and you?" "Well, I was pinned to the bottom of a steel vat and drowned in a putrescent sea of rotting pig corpses." These novel deaths have to be the reason the franchise has survived as long as it has; unlike the Jasons and Michael Myerses of the horror world, Saw's Jigsaw killer has a flair for theatricality, and he replaces those banal butcher knives with elaborate homemade S&M apparatuses. The movies, too, are depressingly mechanical Rube Goldberg torture devices, with spring-loaded twists to go along with those reverse bear traps and ribcage-separators. Because of its efforts to make sense of the previous entries and even attempt an earnest parable about forgiveness, Saw III may be the best of the trilogy; hopefully, it'll encourage its makers to wrap the franchise on a relatively high note.

    After an inauspicious start—one man caught in the classic leg-shackle-and-a-saw scenario, another pinned next to a bomb with chains hooked into his flesh—the film slowly evolves into a macabre character study. Still bedridden with terminal cancer, Tobin Bell's Jigsaw leaves much of the dirty work to Shawnee Smith, a former victim turned overeager assistant. Determined to keep Bell alive for another round of "games," Smith kidnaps a doctor (Bahar Soomekh) and straps an explosive collar to her neck, connecting it to Bell's heart-rate monitor. If Bell's heart stops, ka-boom. Meanwhile, the two have designed an obstacle course of sorts for Angus Macfadyen, a bereaved father consumed with revenge for the driver who killed his son and got off with a light sentence. Can he learn to forgive?

    Perhaps his place on death's door makes him more sympathetic, but Saw III manages to transform Bell from a grim, obsessive sadist to an avuncular life coach, like Fangoria's answer to Dr. Phil. Bell has always insisted that he isn't a murderer—hey, if people can't retrieve the key from the bottom of the beaker of sulfuric acid, that's their problem—and this film finally gives a shred of credence to that claim, even as it questions whether his "trials" are constructive to the people who survive them. Pretty heady stuff, if only it weren't still in the context of a relentlessly bleak, humorless, gimmicky contraption that wore out its novelty two movies ago.
    Expand
  2. Feb 17, 2015
    5
    Saw III is a 2006 Canadian-American horror film directed by Darren Lynn Bousman from a screenplay by Leigh Whannell and story by James Wan and Whannell. From what I see, Saw movie series takes down. Maybe I have too high expectations from a movie like Saw. However it is quite interesting, but fails to attract me.
  3. Sep 4, 2014
    7
    "Saw III" is another great entry in the Saw series. It's gruesome, thrilling, and unpredictable. There's actually some good acting here and great cinematography. I felt there were too many flashbacks in this film which makes the movie less interesting, and it eventually became somewhat repetitive, but I still recommend it for fans of the series.
  4. Mar 4, 2014
    7
    Saw III is just too long for the story, but the characters are pretty good and I'm glad they didn't focus on the traps. Nevertheless one trap with the naked woman doesn't fit in the series, because it's the only erotic scene!
  5. Feb 27, 2014
    6
    Back on track after the second one. The story is an improvement and the ending is clever. The series is better when there is more storytelling and focus on the relationship instead of people just trying to survive. Also I must point out that the score or the theme music used in this movie is unforgettable. However, due to the extreme gore throughout this movie it is not for everyone evenBack on track after the second one. The story is an improvement and the ending is clever. The series is better when there is more storytelling and focus on the relationship instead of people just trying to survive. Also I must point out that the score or the theme music used in this movie is unforgettable. However, due to the extreme gore throughout this movie it is not for everyone even those who have the strongest of stomach's might turn away. In the end this is a big improvement from the second and only slightly worse than the first, I give it 61.0/100 (above average) Expand
  6. Dec 23, 2013
    6
    Saw III, which is most of the fan's favorite it seems. This was a good movie, and a worthy entry in the series, but it just wasn't as good as Saw or Saw II. The deaths are crazy graphic and fun, and it does mark the end of Jigsaw, which makes the movie interesting and fun to watch. Good movie, 6/10.
  7. Nov 2, 2013
    7
    I have never imagined that the films would last so far. "Saw III" improves on both its predecessors, and this time includes some love features. This is one of the first horror films that made me feel disgusted and sympathetic at the same time. Oh, and there's more blood and gore here too.
  8. May 3, 2013
    9
    A nightmarish film but yet so good at its plot it is sensitively awesome. And seeing Jigsaw finally getting killed was a important part in the Saw trilogy. Definitely a must watch for die-hard Saw fans like me.
  9. Oct 30, 2012
    9
    Ok Saw II was pretty crap, Saw III however goes back to what made the original great. It begins to continue the story of detective Matthews but then loses itself in an even bigger story, someone is copying the Jigsaw killings but giving their victims no hope of escape. With Jigsaw on his death bed dying of a brain tumour and his apprentice Amanda being a pretty stubborn **** a doctor andOk Saw II was pretty crap, Saw III however goes back to what made the original great. It begins to continue the story of detective Matthews but then loses itself in an even bigger story, someone is copying the Jigsaw killings but giving their victims no hope of escape. With Jigsaw on his death bed dying of a brain tumour and his apprentice Amanda being a pretty stubborn **** a doctor and her husband must play their own games to earn back their lives. Though the plot is pretty crappy the traps are nice and finally some good gore rather than the **** few litres of blood we have been used to over the past couple of years. Intestines, brains and even some mulched up pigs are thrown into the line up with the most disgusting Saw yet. Expand
  10. Oct 2, 2012
    5
    If the series ended here it could have been a very good horror franchise, becuase Saw III fits very well. It may seem like another re hash of Saw and Saw II, and watching people suffer is not really a sight for the eyes, but excluding that Saw III is actually quite good. Lightly brushing over ideas of human choice (much like Saw , and Saw II), and having a tense story line its quite aIf the series ended here it could have been a very good horror franchise, becuase Saw III fits very well. It may seem like another re hash of Saw and Saw II, and watching people suffer is not really a sight for the eyes, but excluding that Saw III is actually quite good. Lightly brushing over ideas of human choice (much like Saw , and Saw II), and having a tense story line its quite a ride, although surprisingly you are actually more on edge not watching the traps but Jigsaw, Lynne and Amanda's story. By no means a horror masterpiece, and will no way win any acting awards, it still a thrill ride, but if it had just gone that bit deeper into the humanity and decision side of things instead of caring about the worse ways someone could die. Expand
  11. Jun 13, 2012
    5
    This is probably the most "human" of the Saw films. You're actually allowed to get under the characters' skin this time round, and given time to care for the sympathetic protagonists, a melancholic surgeon (Bahar Soomekh) kidnapped to care for the dying John Kramer, and a grieving father (Angus Macfadyen) who is forced by Kramer to confront those responsible for the death of his young son.This is probably the most "human" of the Saw films. You're actually allowed to get under the characters' skin this time round, and given time to care for the sympathetic protagonists, a melancholic surgeon (Bahar Soomekh) kidnapped to care for the dying John Kramer, and a grieving father (Angus Macfadyen) who is forced by Kramer to confront those responsible for the death of his young son. Tobin Bell is still great as Jigsaw, and steals the show despite being bedridden throughout the film, but it is Jigsaw's apprentice Amanda (Shawnee Smith) who is actually more terrifying than her mentor. Without Jigsaw's strict (if misguided) moral code, she's more like a rabid dog than a calculated killer with purpose, and actually seems to relish the misery she puts others through on her master's orders. There are some particularly nasty and inventive traps, the best of which unusually for a "torture porn" film actually doesn't involve bodily destruction, but instead rancid pig carcasses are turned into slurry and dumped on the victim. The film is generally quite engaging and keeps your interest until the final act which well and truly begins to ramble and comes across as rather preachy. The now traditional Saw "twist" doesn't come as a surprise either, making me miss the ingenuity of the first installment's spectacular ending. Saw III is far better than Saw II because it's written by series masterminds Leigh Wannell and James Wan, and only directed by Darren Lynn Bousman (one of the failures of the second film was that Bousman wrote and directed, and he is far less talented as a screenwriter than he is behind the camera) and so the film feels more connected to the first film than any other in the series. That said, the message of the franchise (if there is one) has well and truly been lost by this point, and the third film brings very few new ideas to the table. You can appreciate Saw III for decent writing, good performances and a certain perverse joy in death in cruel and unusual ways, but the twisted novelty of the series is beginning to wear off, showing a glimpse of the ugly truth at its heart. Perhaps they should have ended Jigsaw's blood-soaked saga here, but as well we know, box office returns can be ever so persuasive... Expand
  12. Mar 25, 2012
    5
    I have really mixed feelings about Saw III. As a fan of the first two Saw films, I was intrigued to see what Wan and Whenell would do with the series, and the result was somewhat unusual. Tobin Bell, once again reprising his role as Jigsaw/John Kramer, is the standout in terms of acting. It was hard to care about the other characters, with the possible exception of Amanda, simply becauseI have really mixed feelings about Saw III. As a fan of the first two Saw films, I was intrigued to see what Wan and Whenell would do with the series, and the result was somewhat unusual. Tobin Bell, once again reprising his role as Jigsaw/John Kramer, is the standout in terms of acting. It was hard to care about the other characters, with the possible exception of Amanda, simply because they're portrayed so unconvincingly. It was interesting seeing the new focus on character development come into play, as Kramer transforms Amanda from survivor to apprentice. The ending really did surprise me; it's revealed this game was truly testing Amanda, and Lynn and Jeff were merely pawns. Traps in Saw III were gruesome, especially the pig carcass pit. My only problem with them is how straightforward they are to solve. Saw III was certainly a more mature entry in the series, but as usual, the interesting premise is let down by unconvincing acting and awkward, jumpy editing Expand
  13. Feb 12, 2012
    6
    The acting was ok but no where near as good as the first two films. The traps were scary though and imo the best in the series. The plot isnt interesting though and fails to keep you entertained like the first two films did. Its an above average horror film but thats about it.
  14. Dec 4, 2011
    7
    A lot better then the previous film. The cast is solid and Tobin Bell once against steals the show with his performance as Jigsaw. Overall, It was scary and kept you on the edge of your seat during some traps. I enjoyed it.
  15. Nov 25, 2011
    7
    It was ok. I didnt like the female that played Amanda at all and I thought she overacted quite a bit in the film. The rest of the cast was ok and Bell once again steals the show as Jigsaw. The traps were a lot sicker this time around and actually pretty frightening if you ask me.
  16. Nov 9, 2011
    9
    Woo! Awesome fella. Better than the previous one. Still a little shallow and too incomplete. But the deaths are quite favorable to my preference. The ending really breaks my heart though.
  17. Sep 18, 2011
    6
    Surprisingly despite the gruesome cinematography and a cynically unexplained plot, "Saw 3" bests the its other 2 prequels by focusing deeply into character depth. Although the depth is shallow, at least they tried.
  18. May 22, 2011
    5
    Saw III is the most unique entry in the series thus far, Jigsaw's "game" takes a less important role this round for character development, in which you learn more about Amanda and how she's coping with her new life, and it really adds depth and makes her all the more enjoyable, while Jigsaw does still have a victim dealing with the tests, those parts ultimately aren't enjoyable, and oneSaw III is the most unique entry in the series thus far, Jigsaw's "game" takes a less important role this round for character development, in which you learn more about Amanda and how she's coping with her new life, and it really adds depth and makes her all the more enjoyable, while Jigsaw does still have a victim dealing with the tests, those parts ultimately aren't enjoyable, and one part in particular involving a lady in the freezer made me a little sick, not because it was gory (as there was none in this scene), but because it was just inappropriate, and the fantastic endings these movies are known for isn't here this time, yeah it throws a little twist in, but it was honestly just retarded, honestly it's not the best Saw yet and will divide fans sharply, but if your like me and want to know more about Amanda's character, this does a good job of that, but everything else like plot, action, and the ending all suffer in the end. Expand
  19. Apr 29, 2011
    7
    The Saw series is pretty good, and this is probably the best one of them all. But still, if you strip away the decent plot, it's just blood and guts, which is alright if you're not eating (which I was at the time). It gets a 7 because, out of all of the movies in the series, it is the only one I would go back to and watch again.
  20. Dec 3, 2010
    5
    This movie is alright, it is too long- I thought Jigsaw died in the second movie. I mean- it's gory and disgusting, this movie needs to be shorter, i saw the unrated cut, it was too long
  21. Nov 19, 2010
    6
    Gorier than the first two combined, Saw 3 officially labels the series as torture porn. Despite the more emotional path it takes, this instalment has little else to offer asides more smart twists and well-elaborated tortures, which wouldâ
  22. Oct 31, 2010
    9
    It's worse than the first and the second movies, but it's quite good. It's a film very exciting and the end is excellent, even better than Saw I. It wasn't the best film of the year but it's impossible take your eyes of it.
  23. Oct 19, 2010
    6
    it wasn't as good as the original, but it beats the second movie in just one shot. it wasn't a bad movie, but it was this close and it ended the trilogy that focuses on John Kramer also known as Jigsaw. Saw III is also worth a try.
  24. Sep 1, 2010
    6
    More grizzly horror from the Jigsaw chap & his side-kick.
    This time it just seems to be a series of gore set-pieces rather than a plot like the first two.
    Some truly horrible moments & where it falls down on actual story, the effects & traps are top notch.
  25. JobA.
    Mar 26, 2008
    5
    Very disappointed.I liked Saw and loved Saw II but this one was terrible.
  26. JasonS.
    Oct 23, 2007
    6
    Not quite as good as saw 1 but better then saw 2.
  27. lkhoiuhA.
    Oct 13, 2007
    5
    The second was better.. it was more disturbing than the second and it was not as intriguing
  28. BalzacBalzac
    Sep 26, 2007
    0
    Morally repugnant, sadistic and pointless unless you kick your kicks watching people being tortured physically and mentally. If you do then you should probably join Al-Queda.
  29. MatthewT.
    Sep 16, 2007
    10
    It's Amanda's story and is really pretty brilliant and heartbreaking. It's the best of the three.
  30. AB
    Aug 26, 2007
    9
    Although "Saw III" is even less scary than its prequels, it retains the unique mood and attitude of the series while boasting the best story yet. The level of gore has been raised considerably, which is actually a positive characteristic - it maintains a series trademark in a film that otherwise could have easily been shown on the Lifetime channel. For its ability to mix an important Although "Saw III" is even less scary than its prequels, it retains the unique mood and attitude of the series while boasting the best story yet. The level of gore has been raised considerably, which is actually a positive characteristic - it maintains a series trademark in a film that otherwise could have easily been shown on the Lifetime channel. For its ability to mix an important message with an extreme level of gore and a surprising ending, "Saw III" is the best "Saw" by far. Expand
  31. ScottL.
    Aug 25, 2007
    10
    It makes you think! existentialism.
  32. BrianH.
    Apr 5, 2007
    7
    I think it was a good movie. It wasn't better than the first (mainly because the first ending was so original and unexpected). It was definitely better than the second though. The bad part about it is that the Jigsaw killer kept giving away the ending of the movie, and it was made very apparent who was actually benig "tested" due to all of the emotions that character was portraying I think it was a good movie. It wasn't better than the first (mainly because the first ending was so original and unexpected). It was definitely better than the second though. The bad part about it is that the Jigsaw killer kept giving away the ending of the movie, and it was made very apparent who was actually benig "tested" due to all of the emotions that character was portraying (she was the worst actor in the movie to me as well). Visually, it was definitely a cut above the rest, I am an avid horror film spectator and never, I mean NEVER feel like anything is too graphic to endure. This movie definitely made me cringe, especially in the opening sequence. For those who say there was no story line, what movie were you watching? There is definitely a story line, which is fairly decent (not great or spectacular), at least until the very end. Anyone who thought differently is being waaaayy too critical, because the plot was actually well drawn out. The very final test was the most ridiculous lead-in to the sequel they have ever come up with, and will result in disaster if they try to formulate it into a Saw 4. But the rest of the movie was enjoyable and interesting at least. Don't watch this movie expecting it to be a true horror movie, because it is actually more of a Drama. And if you go into it expecting it to be better than the first, you will definitely be dissapointed. If you rent or buy the movie and watch it with a fresh prospective (and an open mind), you may actually enjoy it. Expand
  33. ML.
    Apr 4, 2007
    6
    The first 15 minutes were among the MOST DISTURBING MINUTES I've ever spent watching a movie. I almost turned off the movie! That being said, I enjoyed it. Not as good as the first one...but sequels never are. I have it on DVD now, and I will never watch it again. That was too graphic, even for me. But, it's a "puzzle piece"--please forgive the pun--that needed to be in the The first 15 minutes were among the MOST DISTURBING MINUTES I've ever spent watching a movie. I almost turned off the movie! That being said, I enjoyed it. Not as good as the first one...but sequels never are. I have it on DVD now, and I will never watch it again. That was too graphic, even for me. But, it's a "puzzle piece"--please forgive the pun--that needed to be in the saga. I'm almost afraid of watching Saw 4 this Halloween Expand
  34. JordanA.
    Mar 8, 2007
    0
    This movie was very disgraceful. I mean, does Mr. Jigsaw over there say anything but "its all a test"? There is no plot what so ever. All it is, is a bunch of people being tortured in contraptions that they have a 0% chance in surviving.
  35. BryantK.
    Feb 23, 2007
    0
    There was no point in this movie at all.The first movie was very good, the 2nd movie was just ok. But this one just takes the cake its so BAD!!!! Its like they did this movie with their eyes closed. They should have at least made the ending much better.
  36. [Anonymous]
    Feb 23, 2007
    0
    Remember when American horror was turning out movies like Alien and The Thing? You know, ones that were actually terrifying? Yeah, don't expect that anytime soon. This is what horror has become. Cheap torture movies like this and Hostel. They really want to bother you with their gory contraptions, but really, they're ridiculous. Atleast you get to watch some terrible actors die. Remember when American horror was turning out movies like Alien and The Thing? You know, ones that were actually terrifying? Yeah, don't expect that anytime soon. This is what horror has become. Cheap torture movies like this and Hostel. They really want to bother you with their gory contraptions, but really, they're ridiculous. Atleast you get to watch some terrible actors die. But I can just watch The Departed for that, and actually have fun. Expand
  37. MikeJ.
    Feb 23, 2007
    9
    Awesome!! This movie was for sure better then the first as it explained the entire trilogy. Also I love the testing of Amanda it was a great twist with great games and great horrors.
  38. JohnnyP.
    Feb 8, 2007
    9
    Although it does not live up to the much anticipated release- it captures many storylines from first two in series, it does the series justice and I am eagerly awaiting a SAW4 in Oct if it comes to be.
  39. MasonH
    Feb 4, 2007
    0
    This movie is just a whole bunch of people dying in rediculously painful ways with no way of escape. There is no story, there is no way to live. Jigsaw is possibly the dumbest character ever created. He hates murderers yet he puts people in a position where theres a 99% chance of dying. The people in the traps are usually no better. They are aggressive and stupid and can't figure out This movie is just a whole bunch of people dying in rediculously painful ways with no way of escape. There is no story, there is no way to live. Jigsaw is possibly the dumbest character ever created. He hates murderers yet he puts people in a position where theres a 99% chance of dying. The people in the traps are usually no better. They are aggressive and stupid and can't figure out how to get around the most basic traps. This movie is a complete waste of time unless you enjoy bloodlust. Expand
  40. MikeD
    Jan 30, 2007
    4
    Nowhere near as good as the first two. The end twist was and dual storylines were good but the two hot babes working as the doctor and psycho assistant was too much of a stretch. Saw got a little too Hollywood compared to the first two.
  41. Justin
    Jan 27, 2007
    3
    Saw 1 was a good movie with a great ending. Saw 2 was a terrible movie with a decent ending. Saw 3 is just plain terrible. The reasoning behind this movie, in particular, makes me question whether the writers truly had no idea where to go with it. I found the movie tedious and frustrating to watch, and the ending "twist" was laughable. I was so disappointed with this movie after several Saw 1 was a good movie with a great ending. Saw 2 was a terrible movie with a decent ending. Saw 3 is just plain terrible. The reasoning behind this movie, in particular, makes me question whether the writers truly had no idea where to go with it. I found the movie tedious and frustrating to watch, and the ending "twist" was laughable. I was so disappointed with this movie after several people told me it was the best in the series. Expand
  42. JamesK.
    Jan 26, 2007
    9
    Saw 3 builds on the foundations of the two previous installments of the series, and to that it should take credit. It follows almost flawlessly from the story of the previous movie, seamlessly integrating the unique themes, storyline and motives. Writers Leigh Whannell and James Wan, who co-wrote the first two installments, create a fresh new atmosphere, heavily influenced with the token Saw 3 builds on the foundations of the two previous installments of the series, and to that it should take credit. It follows almost flawlessly from the story of the previous movie, seamlessly integrating the unique themes, storyline and motives. Writers Leigh Whannell and James Wan, who co-wrote the first two installments, create a fresh new atmosphere, heavily influenced with the token horror mystery thriller genre that leaves audiences suspended on the edge of their seats. Although not for the faint-hearted, and admittedly a little disturbing, the visual effects provide an appealing complement to the plot. Expand
  43. GaborA.
    Jan 25, 2007
    2
    Saw has always been flawed. Jigsaw's "reasoning" is like the Nazis pleading innocent at the Nuremberg Trials based on the fact that some of their prisoners, the ones who actually "tried," survived. Ridiculous, I know. But it isn't until Saw III that it gets really annoying as Jigsaw preaches more than the first two movies combined and the pointless body count just increases. Saw has always been flawed. Jigsaw's "reasoning" is like the Nazis pleading innocent at the Nuremberg Trials based on the fact that some of their prisoners, the ones who actually "tried," survived. Ridiculous, I know. But it isn't until Saw III that it gets really annoying as Jigsaw preaches more than the first two movies combined and the pointless body count just increases. Unlike Saw II, however, which was just gross and boring this second sequel is at least laughably bad. The last fifteen minutes of the movie is literally a flashback montage which ridiculously shows things that literally happened ten seconds ago in the movie. I don't know about other people, but i couldn't stop laughing during this. Expand
  44. CoryH.
    Jan 24, 2007
    9
    First of all, the Saw movies are not really meant to be scary in my opinion. They are popcorn movies that you will talk about for days after viewing, either good or bad. This flick definitetly accomplished that for me. It wraps up a lot of the holes I had forgotten about from the first two, and makes the series better as a result. It is a fun, no nonsense, bloody and squirm inducing good First of all, the Saw movies are not really meant to be scary in my opinion. They are popcorn movies that you will talk about for days after viewing, either good or bad. This flick definitetly accomplished that for me. It wraps up a lot of the holes I had forgotten about from the first two, and makes the series better as a result. It is a fun, no nonsense, bloody and squirm inducing good time. Just watch it and have fun! Expand
  45. EvilM.
    Jan 23, 2007
    10
    This movie was excellent. I loved the blood and the sadistic games of Jigsaw. Everybody who thinks the movie was too awful are typically Britney Spears roadmovie fans.
  46. AlexV
    Jan 11, 2007
    0
    Just about the sickest. most sadistic, meaningless load of trash I've ever seen. The ending is just hollow....If you enjoy this movie you simply enjoy watching people suffer and are a little like jigsaw yourself.
  47. bobt.
    Dec 30, 2006
    8
    Saw 3 is easily the best Saw movie in the triology. For once, the acting is way better than the first two, especially the first one. Saw 3 shows how sick and messed up Jigsaw is but yet it shows his reason behind things and how he gives people a chance to survive the games rather than just torture. It also shows the downfall of Amanda and how no one can be Jigsaw. The movie is much more Saw 3 is easily the best Saw movie in the triology. For once, the acting is way better than the first two, especially the first one. Saw 3 shows how sick and messed up Jigsaw is but yet it shows his reason behind things and how he gives people a chance to survive the games rather than just torture. It also shows the downfall of Amanda and how no one can be Jigsaw. The movie is much more "dark" than the other two and I like that. It has its twists, although the other two, in my opinion, had better twists. But, Saw 3 has better plot and character development, and of course, it has blood, tons of it. Expand
  48. BradJ
    Nov 23, 2006
    8
    A great film, but not as good as the first 2. The movie has more blood and gore than the first 2 which is good. I recommend you go see it, if you're a fan.
  49. SarahC.
    Nov 21, 2006
    10
    It was a great movie that involved a lot of blood and torure, but also sadness. I was sitting on the edge of my seat waiting to see what was going to happen next. I loved this movie.
  50. halb
    Nov 11, 2006
    1
    Awful, awful, awful. Perhaps the worst movie I have ever seen. Are we supposed to care about any of the characters? The plot and dialogue could have been developed by a middle-school drama club. The acting is atrocious, but the script is likely responsible for most of that. And the horror is simply gratuitous torture. I guess I'm giving it a "1" because I'm sure a worse movie Awful, awful, awful. Perhaps the worst movie I have ever seen. Are we supposed to care about any of the characters? The plot and dialogue could have been developed by a middle-school drama club. The acting is atrocious, but the script is likely responsible for most of that. And the horror is simply gratuitous torture. I guess I'm giving it a "1" because I'm sure a worse movie will come out at some point... or perhaps not. Expand
  51. johnnyf.
    Nov 5, 2006
    3
    It's kind of funny, really. The writers have tried to disguise the numerous flaws and inconsistencies of the second movie as a plot point in Saw III. It doesn't work, as it becomes even more clear that the, um, villain I guess, Jigsaw's greatest disconnect from the real world is probably his misconception of himself as some sort of genius. This would be less of a problem if It's kind of funny, really. The writers have tried to disguise the numerous flaws and inconsistencies of the second movie as a plot point in Saw III. It doesn't work, as it becomes even more clear that the, um, villain I guess, Jigsaw's greatest disconnect from the real world is probably his misconception of himself as some sort of genius. This would be less of a problem if the concept of the movie was not the idea of watching a clever, yet sadistic, genius at his diabolical work. When the conclusion explains the "purpose" behind everything, it is even harder not to roll your eyes than in Saw II. The acting leaves quite a bit to be desired, as I often didn't buy the characters' responses, but this might just be bad writing. As far as the gore goes, it is hard to tell if it's lameness lies in that society become inured to blood and guts as a result of increasing violence (in art and real life), or if the disconnect due to overall crappiness of the movie prevented any visceral response to the gore. I recommend this movie only as a reminder of how thankful we should be that some movies, even some horror movies, are good. Expand
  52. VeraA.
    Oct 30, 2006
    4
    Stylish and impressive, but that's only for a horror movie. It achives cheap scares through old tricks and new gore but really leaves you dissapointed at the end. Lets hope 4,5 and 6 are better than the first three. My ratings for the movies thus far: Saw -7.1 Saw ||- 3.4 Saw |||- 3.9. The first was the best because it played with real character development and showed plot twists Stylish and impressive, but that's only for a horror movie. It achives cheap scares through old tricks and new gore but really leaves you dissapointed at the end. Lets hope 4,5 and 6 are better than the first three. My ratings for the movies thus far: Saw -7.1 Saw ||- 3.4 Saw |||- 3.9. The first was the best because it played with real character development and showed plot twists while achiving low-budget but brillant scares and always keeping you intrested with good acting. The second was only there for the purpose of money and proved to be a complete waste of time: Watching people brutally suffer for pleasure while showing no real plot and just making the viewer sligtly disturbed with ketchup gore. The Third: A girl takes control of the killing making it more fun. But the unorginal scares and copy-cat script makes the movie dull and uneffective. The gore is real but not revolutionary and the acting is all together dreadful. The Saws, in general, suck. Expand
  53. Darkmage
    Oct 30, 2006
    7
    Saw III is annoying in two main ways -- these may or may not bother you, so take this with a grain of salt. Firstly, the storyline does not become apparent until exactly one full hour has passed. I was hoping for some originality here, and it didn't deliver. The entire first hour of the movie was a long, drawn out mess that basically rehashed the Saw I and II formula. Secondly, the Saw III is annoying in two main ways -- these may or may not bother you, so take this with a grain of salt. Firstly, the storyline does not become apparent until exactly one full hour has passed. I was hoping for some originality here, and it didn't deliver. The entire first hour of the movie was a long, drawn out mess that basically rehashed the Saw I and II formula. Secondly, the ENTIRE MOVIE is on steroids, shot as if it is a music video. Cameras are zipping here, zipping there, flashing back, etc. On TV, this may not be an issue. But on the damn big screens, where their horrible resolution for motion shots (you MUST know what I mean -- everything blurs!), you may find yourself annoyed as hell. The violence and gore was good, but come on! Hasn't every horror movie lately been a blood-soaked mess? The MPAA has been asleep, and when a bunch of underage kids are whipping popcorn around and yelling, you know the rating system doesn't work anymore. Do you really want to go see a movie on the basis of gore anymore? Expand
  54. Marlowe
    Oct 29, 2006
    9
    Although some of the scenes were quite out-played and over done. It was, in my opinion, the best movie since "The Lobsterman From Mars" or "Killer Klowns From Outer Space."
  55. Yashar
    Oct 28, 2006
    9
    SAW is still the best horror franchise out there and while 2nd and 3rd films are weaker than original, at least this one has a rather different direction (Though more like SAW2).
  56. AMovieCritic
    Oct 28, 2006
    6
    I was kind of disappointed with this. Granted, I was never a huge Saw fan...I thought the first movie was boring and just not that interesting. Saw II, though, proved to be an extremely fun ride with one of the best plot twist endings I had ever seen. Saw III attempts to combine the best of both movies but really doesn't do a great job. It's neither as scary as the first Saw or I was kind of disappointed with this. Granted, I was never a huge Saw fan...I thought the first movie was boring and just not that interesting. Saw II, though, proved to be an extremely fun ride with one of the best plot twist endings I had ever seen. Saw III attempts to combine the best of both movies but really doesn't do a great job. It's neither as scary as the first Saw or as thrilling as Saw II. Still, it's an extremely enjoyable movie, until you reach the end, where there is *supposed* to be a big twist, but both of the 2 twists completely fall flat. And unlike Saw I and II, III fails to generate even a single likable character. The traps aren't really all that interesting, just gory. Meh....it was a fun movie and I was really enjoying myself during it, but the ending, which completely fell flat, just kinda left a negative mark. Has a few great moments but can't shake the feeling that they should have quit while they were ahead. Note to casual viewers; this movie assumes knowledge of the first 2 movies and unfortunately, there's no recap (it would have been helpful) so I recommend seeing those (or at least Saw II) before seeing Saw III. Saw III picks up literally seconds after Saw II ended. Expand
  57. LadyBladethrust
    Oct 28, 2006
    10
    The best horror flick I have seen since SeVen. Writing, acting, plot twists all superb.
  58. LindaO.
    Oct 28, 2006
    1
    Just like the first two, a waste of time and money. Will surley dissapoint horror fans and there craving of gore. If saw 4 wants to get serious, i say go for the NC17.
  59. RobinH.
    Oct 28, 2006
    0
    Why would anybody find pleasure in this sick and boring fest of unnessacary gore and unresulting terror. This movie may be grim, but it is not scary. It is simply a brillant load of garbage. Worst flop of 2006. Well of course its #1 in the box office for the first week but so was grudge 2 and that fell apart after three seconds.
  60. SeanK.
    Oct 28, 2006
    6
    The only reason it deserves six points from me is because Saw III did good job iin explaining the whole background of its previous ones. Just like the first two, it has a shocking plot twist/ gruesome scenes. nevertheless, b/c the plot twist was kinda expected and there were simply TOO MUCH blood in my opinion. If you are a hardcore/semi-hardcore saw fan, this should be on your must-seeThe only reason it deserves six points from me is because Saw III did good job iin explaining the whole background of its previous ones. Just like the first two, it has a shocking plot twist/ gruesome scenes. nevertheless, b/c the plot twist was kinda expected and there were simply TOO MUCH blood in my opinion. If you are a hardcore/semi-hardcore saw fan, this should be on your must-see list for it explains the previous stories also. Expand
  61. MattE.
    Oct 27, 2006
    2
    Filth. Rubbish. Muck. Drab. Bad. Pointless. Unnecessary. Redundant. Hollow.
  62. ThomY.
    Oct 27, 2006
    3
    The saw III writers took the movie in the wrong direction after the first saw. Poor acting. Poor killing. Poor writing. Equate to a poor movie.
  63. HughJass
    Oct 27, 2006
    1
    Too much gore, too little scares.
  64. Eric
    Oct 27, 2006
    8
    The series' creators have achieved a hat-trick with 'Saw III'. For those who don't follow hockey, I'm saying thay they're 3 for 3 with this latest installment. As original and different as 'Saw II' was from the first. It's an engaging story that moves at an outstanding pace that somehow works despite it's potentially disappointing short The series' creators have achieved a hat-trick with 'Saw III'. For those who don't follow hockey, I'm saying thay they're 3 for 3 with this latest installment. As original and different as 'Saw II' was from the first. It's an engaging story that moves at an outstanding pace that somehow works despite it's potentially disappointing short running-time. Also, a treat for skeptics (I was one as well) - Amanda is convincing. Oh yeah, and it's the bloodiest one of the three, for you gore-hounds. Kudos. Expand
  65. VinceN.
    Oct 27, 2006
    10
    This film was amazing! Scary and enjoyable disgusting!
  66. GeorgeG.
    Oct 27, 2006
    10
    Incredible, a reality horror film, good end, good begining, a good movie.
  67. Erwin
    Oct 27, 2006
    8
    A cut above the rest and just enough around the edges to cause white knuckle grip. This flick is predictable mayhem and wholsale carnage, but thats just what our customers paid to see. A classic "B" sreamer!! A Thanksgiving Day must watch!!
  68. AndrewR
    Oct 26, 2006
    1
    Boring and dumb. Bad acting, bad dialogue, lame deaths. Last ten minutes are the only good scenes.
  69. DanaS
    Oct 26, 2006
    1
    Terrible! End the franchise now!
Metascore
48

Mixed or average reviews - based on 16 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 16
  2. Negative: 4 out of 16
  1. 63
    An improvement over the tedious "Saw II" (2005), this second sequel to the surprise 2004 hit still features the series' trademark gruesome "games" but shifts the focus to the relationships among the characters.
  2. While Saw III provides a decent number of new twists, psychological as well as torture-wise, it necessarily lacks the originality of its predecessors.
  3. The most depressing thing about this series is not the creativity of the bloodletting but the bleak view of human nature.