Action / Horror / Mystery / Thriller

Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten 28%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 71%
IMDb Rating 6.2 10 161381


Uploaded By: OTTO
Downloaded 240,581 times
September 11, 2011 at 01:31 PM


Dina Meyer as Kerry
Shawnee Smith as Amanda Young
Donnie Wahlberg as Eric Matthews
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
649.91 MB
23.976 fps
1hr 48 min
P/S 26 / 99
1.70 GB
23.976 fps
1hr 48 min
P/S 10 / 35

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by TheLittleSongbird 4 / 10

Neither disturbing or puzzling

Finally saw all the 'Saw' films prior to seeing 'Jigsaw' (as part of my wanting to see as many 2017 films as possible this year, during a quieter and less intensive period). Heard a lot about the films, good and bad, but wanted to see them for myself to know what to expect.

The films as an overall series are a very mixed bag. The original 'Saw' had a great premise and while it was problematic it was still pretty good and one of the best in the series. 'Saw II' had its own problems but it was still one of the few follow-ups to be just as good and have what made the first click as well as it did. However, whereas there was the sense that the novelty was still there with 'Saw II', in 'Saw III' it's the opposite, not just gone but almost done to death. It just goes over the top in some elements and forgets what elements were instrumental in the series' appeal.

'Saw III' is not unwatchable by all means. Credit is due for providing origins for Jigsaw, one of those characters where his modus operandi, impulse and justification sets him apart from most characters of his type, and his enthusiastic helper. The music score is suitably eerie.

Acting-wise, the film is also performed surprisingly quite well, especially a suitably tortured Angus McFadyen and a bone-chilling Tobin Bell, if there is one thing that hasn't lost impact and continued to not do so it's Bell. Donnie Wahlberg continues to show that he is a vast improvement over Cary Elwes, but he doesn't have much to do here.

On the other hand, a big problem with 'Saw III' is that it isn't that disturbing or puzzling. There aren't the truly ingenious traps, just as imaginative demises or the devilishly clever twists seen previously (primarily the twist ending of the first). They are instead replaced by rambling exposition, a flashback-within-flashback framework that just confuses the story and the viewer and a distastefully overblown over-reliance on violence and gore. It was just overkill, and actually made the film exhausting and almost unintentionally funny in places.

Will admit that the script was not a strength in either of the first two films, but even they weren't this flat or insultingly contrived. At least too they had clever and intriguing moments and were easy to follow, this cannot be said for the script for 'Saw III'. The story is basically a retread that's both overdone and anaemic and has little sense of unease or suspense, the exposition/flashback-heavy structure and the very flawed execution of it hurting it severely. It also multiplies any credibility lapses and ridiculousness of before by a hundred and doesn't really go to anywhere much until the climactic moments, which felt so unresolved it was almost like a cheat.

Missed the effectively claustrophobic look of the first 'Saw' and the more elaborate and no less creepy one for the second film. Here the production values just look rushed and amateurish, especially in the editing. Bahar Soomekh does her best as Lynn, though believing her as a surgeon is a bit of a stretch. The direction doesn't seem as assured and the film really could have done with being 15-20 minutes shorter.

In conclusion, okay for 'Saw' series completests but neither disturbing or puzzling. 4/10 Bethany Cox

Reviewed by qmtv 1 / 10

Implausible! Garbage! Cheap amateur filmmaking! – Advice, next time perhaps you try to think, before leaving positive reviews on garbage films.

OK, I bought the DVD with the first 7 Saw movies. The first was decent when I saw it years ago, watching it last year, no more surprises so I thought it was just OK, a C rating for a B movie. #2 sucked full on. Crappy lighting, cinematography, editing, acting, dialogue, convoluted story. Just plain garbage.

Now, #3. The best part about this movie was the chained guy, and the chained female cop. Straight up copy from Hellraiser! And I enjoyed Donnie smashing his foot, next time they should try Donnie smashing his face! Besides these scenes this movie is garbage.

The cinematography was not as bad as #2. But still amateur, point and shoot. The editing is quick and garbage. The lighting is crap. The acting is horrible. The characters are garbage. Nobody acts like this. Tobin Bell seems like a decent actor, but I hate his voice, and his character and dialogue is garbage. Shawnee Smith's character is garbage. If she's crazy, then make her character crazy. But then, how the hell could they pull off all the kidnappings, and all the equipment and set up? It is impossible. It can't happen. And that is where most of the problem is. How the hell did she get into the female cops apartment without the cop noticing. Think about it! Where were these abandoned locations? The only way you can have access to locations like this is if you have a film studio paying to rent them and shooting the film, but not if you're a wackjob on a mission to teach some people with emotional problems a lesson on how to appreciate life. The female doctors acting was OK, not great. And the husband who lost his boy, this guy was plain horrible. The frozen woman was OK, but then we get a scene of her completely frozen, very stiff! The judge, OK. The black guy, well he acted terrified.

The story and the twists. Now, I'm sure someone can come up with something better than this.

Last two weeks I watched the first 8 Hellraiser movies. First 2 were decent because of the stories. The rest were below par mix bag of I don't know what. But at least all of them were better than Saw 2 or 3. The older I get, the more I want stories. Compelling stories, with characters that relate, and actors that can portray plausible situations, within the context of the film. Saw 3, and Saw 2 do not do that. These stories only happen because the screenwriter wrote them and the production team went ahead and filmed and produced the product for our supposed entertainment. I cannot believe that some said hey, how the hell did some sick guy and a drugged out/wacko chick pull off all these sets and traps, and kidnap all these people. Lots of equipment all around. Is Jig independently wealth? So, some points for the chain kills near the beginning of the film, minus stealing scenes from Hellraiser. This film is a complete failure. F, 1 star, garbage.

Reviewed by ajourneywithjake 8 / 10

Best Saw Film so Far

The reason why this film is my favorite Saw film so far was that it really focused on the characters. Instead of using an overabundance of gore or morbidity, which is surprisingly minimal (for a Saw film), the challenges that the game player, Jeff, faces involve being able to learn to forgive. Granted one of these is beyond gross, but at the same time Jeff has to deal with emotional pain free from physical pain in order to advance in the game. I found that to be very clever. The plot also has plenty of surprises that are set up well throughout the film and result in some really great on screen revelations. The characters' interactions during these scenes are also great and have a lot of emotion and significance behind them. I feel that the definition of tragedy in the Shakespearean sense is put on display in this film in a textbook example. The film has the characteristic bleak and grungy Saw settings, but they fit the story well. If you've been watching the series this long and aren't just jumping in then they are almost to be expected at this point. The film was created very well and has pretty good cinematic quality. Most of all, it has a decent moral message to it that most horror movies don't have or attempt but can't achieve.

You can read this and other reviews on my blog at

Read more IMDb reviews


Be the first to leave a comment