Lionsgate | Release Date: October 24, 2008
5.6
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 227 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
97
Mixed:
62
Negative:
68
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
3
grandpajoe6191Sep 21, 2011
My god...I can't believe they dragged a brilliant film into a **** up franchise with exaggerated Cliches and preposterous plot twists. "Saw 5", a disgusting movie filled with 'gore' but no 'horror', precisely proves my statement. You have toMy god...I can't believe they dragged a brilliant film into a **** up franchise with exaggerated Cliches and preposterous plot twists. "Saw 5", a disgusting movie filled with 'gore' but no 'horror', precisely proves my statement. You have to stop your game, Jigsaw. It's not scary anymore Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
2
FitriAmirrolNov 21, 2010
Fails explicitly to live up to the success of the third, the franchise has now tumbled into what it was trying to avoid to be in the first place - pure, narcissistic blood-gushing torture porn. The moral of the story is now overlooked andFails explicitly to live up to the success of the third, the franchise has now tumbled into what it was trying to avoid to be in the first place - pure, narcissistic blood-gushing torture porn. The moral of the story is now overlooked and almost neglected, and each scene is all about wanting to please the mentally-unstable gore fans. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
3
SeanA.Nov 3, 2008
A thriller/horror that does not thrill nor horrify. Dull story and you'd probably fall asleep in the middle with too much unnecessary flashbacks and not enough gore to boot.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ChelseaC.Nov 6, 2008
I don' t know if anyone else noticed this in their viewing of this movie, but you could see the microphones they use to hear the actors. It was hanging down the entire movie, and the shots were always off-center. Poor production from a I don' t know if anyone else noticed this in their viewing of this movie, but you could see the microphones they use to hear the actors. It was hanging down the entire movie, and the shots were always off-center. Poor production from a movie I expect a lot from. And the story was completely lost in this. They should have stopped at 3. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JohnSmithOct 27, 2008
Truly a waste of time and money, friend convinced me to go and see it with her, waste of time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
AlecBousquetOct 27, 2008
Personally Saw 1 2 and 3 were i thought to be a very good series alone.. Then you make saw 4?..witch wasnt as bad as i predicted.. but Saw 5.. come on now.. this serious is going down the drain just like the friday the 13th, hellraiser, and Personally Saw 1 2 and 3 were i thought to be a very good series alone.. Then you make saw 4?..witch wasnt as bad as i predicted.. but Saw 5.. come on now.. this serious is going down the drain just like the friday the 13th, hellraiser, and halloween series's. Saw 5 had nothing at all..even the traps are dumb.. You need only one thing to make the Saw Franchise good and thats jigsaw..but he died in saw 3.. the only reason why they keep making more saw movies is because eveybody including myself buys tickets to go see it every halloween and believe it or not when they make saw 6 next year everybodys going to see that too.. Saw is finally dead... Game over Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ToddS.Nov 2, 2008
You would think that after killing the protagonist off 2 movies ago, and receiving worse and worse ratings after each movie, that Lionsgate would be done here. But Jigsaw isn't dead yet. He's never dead. As long as Lionsgate keeps You would think that after killing the protagonist off 2 movies ago, and receiving worse and worse ratings after each movie, that Lionsgate would be done here. But Jigsaw isn't dead yet. He's never dead. As long as Lionsgate keeps pulling Jigsaw apprentices out of nowhere, kills them off, and repeats that process, Saw will continue. Saw 5 was truly a horrible movie. Production values, low. The traps, not so clever. The actors, bad. The ending, terrible. I really wouldn't even recommend this to hardcore Saw fans, which I am. I still kick myself to this day for wasting money on this horrible movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
MatthewR.Oct 24, 2008
Saw V. Yes indeed I saw this film, or in other words a self-mockery of what was once a pretty good movie series. This film is so repugnant and repetitive that one should feel a sense of "I have been here before". This series should have died Saw V. Yes indeed I saw this film, or in other words a self-mockery of what was once a pretty good movie series. This film is so repugnant and repetitive that one should feel a sense of "I have been here before". This series should have died after the third one. Just another reason to prove that talent in Hollywood has fallen so much. What a shame, or in this case for all you ticket buyers; what a sham! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
EileenB.Oct 25, 2008
Zzzzz oh,it's over. Damn, I could have used a longer nap. BORING, and a waste of $11. Should have stopped after the third one.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
ChadS.Oct 25, 2008
Danny Glover in "Saw", that was unexpected. Then again, after Miles Davis lended his sax to a Scritti Politti track("Oh, Patti(Don't Feel Sorry for Loverboy) from the album "Provision"), nothing could ever surprise me to quite that Danny Glover in "Saw", that was unexpected. Then again, after Miles Davis lended his sax to a Scritti Politti track("Oh, Patti(Don't Feel Sorry for Loverboy) from the album "Provision"), nothing could ever surprise me to quite that extent again. Davis actually went so far as to cover "Perfect Way"(from "Cupid and Psyche '85); he thought Green Gartside was a musical genius. Some music critic, at the time(I think it was Rob Sheffield), called Davis' assessment about Scritti Politti's music, "a cry for help". Glover, on the other hand, participated in the original "Saw", strictly for the money. By lending his name, he gave the low-budget film some credibility, just as Donald Pleasance did in John Carpenter's "Halloween". Now Glover is back, sort of, as a black and white image on a 8 X 11 photograph, and a flashback. Since "Saw", Glover has worked with Lars Von Trier, Michel Gondry, Fernando Merilles, and John Sayles. Thanks to "Saw", Glover underwent a renaissance. He became relevant again(the "Lethal Weapon" star was also in Bill Condon's "Dreamgirls"). Filmmakers saw "Saw"; saw his cry for help, and put his talent to better use. That 8 X 11 glossy, that flashback, are probably the classiest moments in "Saw V". Maybe seeing the last three sequels would help me understand whatever subtleties lie in this poorly photographed, poorly acted film, but being "Saw"-literate still wouldn't make the "creative" murders any more easier to stomach. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
AnonymousOct 26, 2008
The Saw 'franchise' is an example of Hollywood at its worst. Take an interesting indie film and turn it into a series of boring, identikit, brain-dead films. Saw should have never been a 'franchise'. It should have been The Saw 'franchise' is an example of Hollywood at its worst. Take an interesting indie film and turn it into a series of boring, identikit, brain-dead films. Saw should have never been a 'franchise'. It should have been one standalone movie. Funny how the first movie is good and all the sequels are terrible. Could that be because they're trying to pull story out of their arse and add to a film that had no more story to tell once it ended? Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
RobDentOct 27, 2008
The scariest part about this movie was me knowing i couldn't get a refund, The HORROR!!!!! It was that bad. Sloppy job of putting everything together and loopholes everywhere.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
SawnoM.Jan 10, 2009
Saw 1 and 3 were great, (i personally prefer three) saw 2 was alright, but saw 4 was pretty bad. by saw 4 they were making shit up and production values were getting lower. But by saw five... well lets just say it was MORTIFYING.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JessicaS.Jan 13, 2009
At first I was a big Saw fan as i enjoy gory horror films, and i like all of the games throughout the films. This Saw went so far away from the first movie it was unbelievable, After all when you go to watch a horror you do expect blood, all At first I was a big Saw fan as i enjoy gory horror films, and i like all of the games throughout the films. This Saw went so far away from the first movie it was unbelievable, After all when you go to watch a horror you do expect blood, all there was in this was one game which was crap, a plot that jumped around from 1 saw to another throughout it made you feel dizzy and a ending which was a total let down, i mean i love saw 1 but it has now got terribly numb. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
danieldanielJan 25, 2009
saw is the most disgusting thing ever,how can any of you saw saw 1-4 are the best is it nice watching others get tortured, i know it is only a movie but a movie represents something i am not saying dont watch em but still you cant say they saw is the most disgusting thing ever,how can any of you saw saw 1-4 are the best is it nice watching others get tortured, i know it is only a movie but a movie represents something i am not saying dont watch em but still you cant say they give you anything you to learn Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
GregC.Nov 16, 2008
Four was pushing it. Five is too much- this movie was unbearable to watch and was a complete waste of an afternoon, which I will never get back.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
EdgarV.Nov 26, 2008
The first was a great movie that was different, fresh, gory and very pleasurable to watch because of its unexpected turns and sense of latent diziness and ignorance... then came the second, not exactly better than the first but twice as fun, The first was a great movie that was different, fresh, gory and very pleasurable to watch because of its unexpected turns and sense of latent diziness and ignorance... then came the second, not exactly better than the first but twice as fun, then the third, not interesting but watchable, fourth was a pain in the... blah, blah... you get the picture. It should have been "Game Over" after the third right? And now the fifth? This is not even worth seeing, the acting is bad, the story is not interesting anymore, the ending sucks- lest not we forget that the cliffhangers on the endings of the first three were awesome- and so on... on top of a confusing "back and forth" script structure that explains events from the past that are not important at all... Avoid seeing unless you are a devoted fan. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
R.G.Nov 5, 2008
Why did they made this movie, is it for more money from the jigsaw success. There is a simple formula to know the rating of these movies -2 each movie saw 1= a perfect 10 awesome movie to remember, saw 2 = 8 good but you already expect what Why did they made this movie, is it for more money from the jigsaw success. There is a simple formula to know the rating of these movies -2 each movie saw 1= a perfect 10 awesome movie to remember, saw 2 = 8 good but you already expect what will happened, saw 3 = 6 its starting to become more of the same, saw 4 = 4 I would gladly wait longer for the release of the next chapter if it means a better movie, Saw 5 = 2 I just don't understand why was this garbage released. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
AronJ.Dec 1, 2008
The first saw was amazing, everyone after become progressively worse, and five is as bad as it gets. The acting was horrid, the production was horrid, as well with every other aspect
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
xyzxyzOct 24, 2008
DON'T SEE THIS MOVIE! It's only out to make money and NOT to tell a good story. There are no surprises, nothing new, there is NO point other than to get your $10 dollars. Don't see it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
GavinA.Oct 24, 2008
The gruesomeness of saw still remains, but this seems more of a B-Movie rip off of what was once a decent series of movies, the acting is sub par as is the story and ending
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
MichaelB.Oct 24, 2008
Wicked awesome Saw V is super-cool this is a run-on sentence I can't find the period key what's going on somebody please stop me... Sorry, I went into a Roland G.-like frenzy there. No, but seriously, the movie is awful. Wicked awesome Saw V is super-cool this is a run-on sentence I can't find the period key what's going on somebody please stop me... Sorry, I went into a Roland G.-like frenzy there. No, but seriously, the movie is awful. You're better off spending an afternoon knitting a nice sweater. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
MattKOct 25, 2008
It doesn't seem like they know how to progress the franchise at all. This doesn't even play out much like its own movie, but a grand prologue for parts six and seven. There are definitely wince-inducing moments, but after the It doesn't seem like they know how to progress the franchise at all. This doesn't even play out much like its own movie, but a grand prologue for parts six and seven. There are definitely wince-inducing moments, but after the opening scene (which I'll admit, I thought was kind of good), there was nothing resembling tension throughout the rest of the movie. Just a ton of idiots killing each other and limp acting all around. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
JayHJan 18, 2009
Unpleasant people doing extremely unpleasant things. My, what fun! Extremely gory and nasty, not much of a plot. The acting is fair. Pointless.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
TimEJan 31, 2009
I've seen all the Saw movies and this one was really weak. The plot was sort of nothing, the "game" itsself was really short. I think this series is done.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
OfficialNov 2, 2013
Ok, I really just don't see the point of continuing on with the Saw series. "Saw IV" was already garbage and guess what? "Saw V" is even worse. It's dull and sloppily filmed as if the budget has shrunken massively. "Saw V" is a terribleOk, I really just don't see the point of continuing on with the Saw series. "Saw IV" was already garbage and guess what? "Saw V" is even worse. It's dull and sloppily filmed as if the budget has shrunken massively. "Saw V" is a terrible combination: grisly and tedious. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
Annoymous1May 3, 2013
Beyond this I only liked the Pendulum and Agent Strahm's death it was not good at all. But put all five movies together that this can enter the trash DVD list. I am still hoping that Saw VI is better.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
MarickFeb 24, 2015
Sorry to say this, but the Saw series gets becoming worse. I do not understand the point of this film. For me it is just a continuation which is pointless. The long half hour of the film, that it does not make anything interesting.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
MovieManiac83Apr 25, 2015
Give the Saw franchise credit for sticking to its original vision, as repugnant and hypocritical as it is. Collectively, Saw's torture-porn series has grossed more than $500 million worldwide, yet its sequels still look like they cost theGive the Saw franchise credit for sticking to its original vision, as repugnant and hypocritical as it is. Collectively, Saw's torture-porn series has grossed more than $500 million worldwide, yet its sequels still look like they cost the catering budget of a studio horror film. David Hackl, the production designer for Saw II, III, and IV, graduates from hurling buckets of slime all over the film's grimy torture-dungeon sets to directing, but at this point, the series pretty much writes and directs itself. The driving force is inertia and commercial calculation, not inspiration.

Scott Patterson stars as a hard-charging FBI agent who survives one of the nefarious traps set by the Jigsaw Killer (Tobin Bell), then begins to investigate shadowy cop Costas Mandylor, a survivor of the bloodshed that ended Saw IV. For the audience's benefit, Patterson considerately announces the implications of every new clue he picks up, even when he's alone; apparently, he's unfamiliar with the concept of interior monologue. Patterson's investigation leads to plenty of flashbacks involving Bell, who, as in Saw IV, logs plenty of screen time even though he died two installments ago. Meanwhile, five hapless souls battle to survive another of Bell's sadistic games of death.

Saw V devotes so much time and energy to flashbacks and recycling footage from its predecessors that it threatens to implode. The film unwisely skimps on the gore in favor of endless scenes of Bell espousing his, um, unique philosophy of self improvement through surviving horrible ordeals—he's like the world's grisliest life coach—and the mystery plot grows less interesting with each passing frame. The death-trap scenes, always the franchise's money shots, feel like half-baked afterthoughts, and the plotting and deaths lack the scuzzy ingenuity of the film's predecessors. Saw V jumps back and forth in time in ways that are confusing to downright incoherent, but chronology isn't the only thing that's hopelessly muddled in this punishingly arbitrary retread.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
EpicLadySpongeApr 5, 2016
When you officially run out of ideas, just think of another sequel to the Saw franchise to gain even more money than the first four installments and make it official. Thing is... this Saw installment hasn't even changed a single tiny bit at all.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews