User Score
5.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 197 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 62 out of 197
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. Sep 21, 2011
    3
    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 to stop your game, Jigsaw. It's not scary anymore
  2. Nov 21, 2010
    2
    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 and almost neglected, and each scene is all about wanting to please the mentally-unstable gore fans.
  3. SeanA.
    Nov 3, 2008
    3
    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.
  4. ChelseaC.
    Nov 6, 2008
    3
    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.
  5. JohnSmith
    Oct 27, 2008
    0
    Truly a waste of time and money, friend convinced me to go and see it with her, waste of time.
  6. AlecBousquet
    Oct 27, 2008
    3
    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 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
  7. ToddS.
    Nov 2, 2008
    1
    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 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
  8. MatthewR.
    Oct 24, 2008
    2
    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 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
  9. EileenB.
    Oct 25, 2008
    3
    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.
  10. ChadS.
    Oct 25, 2008
    0
    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 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. Collapse
  11. Anonymous
    Oct 26, 2008
    0
    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 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
  12. RobDent
    Oct 27, 2008
    1
    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.
  13. SawnoM.
    Jan 10, 2009
    0
    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.
  14. JessicaS.
    Jan 13, 2009
    2
    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 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
  15. danieldaniel
    Jan 25, 2009
    0
    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
  16. GregC.
    Nov 16, 2008
    1
    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.
  17. EdgarV.
    Nov 26, 2008
    1
    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 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
  18. R.G.
    Nov 5, 2008
    2
    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 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
  19. AronJ.
    Dec 1, 2008
    0
    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
  20. xyzxyz
    Oct 24, 2008
    0
    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.
  21. GavinA.
    Oct 24, 2008
    2
    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
  22. MichaelB.
    Oct 24, 2008
    2
    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.
  23. MattK
    Oct 25, 2008
    3
    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 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
  24. JayH
    Jan 18, 2009
    3
    Unpleasant people doing extremely unpleasant things. My, what fun! Extremely gory and nasty, not much of a plot. The acting is fair. Pointless.
  25. TimE
    Jan 31, 2009
    0
    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.
  26. Nov 2, 2013
    3
    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 terrible combination: grisly and tedious.
  27. May 3, 2013
    3
    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.
  28. Feb 24, 2015
    3
    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.
  29. Apr 25, 2015
    2
    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 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 overGive 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
Metascore
20

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 13 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 13
  2. Negative: 9 out of 13
  1. Reviewed by: Peter Hartlaub
    Jan 27, 2013
    50
    Hackl weaves scenes from the previous films into this one in clever ways, without adding to the confusion. The director also does a good job of maintaining the dark tone, which includes FBI offices that look as if they're being illuminated by night-lights, and dungeons that look as if you'd catch a venereal disease or two just by touching the door handles.
  2. This year's installment is as disappointing as a Halloween bag filled with nothing but raisins.
  3. By-the-numbers retread.