With a budget just a tad over $1 million, 2004’s Saw grossed about $104 million worldwide. We call that a fine return on investment, and that success resulted in the release of 2005’s Saw II 364 days later.

After sadistic mastermind John “Jigsaw” Kramer (Tobin Bell) created havoc and death, a squad led by Detective Eric Matthews (Donnie Wahlberg) arrests him. However, this doesn’t end the menace of Jigsaw.

Instead, Detective Matthews plays right into Jigsaw’s hands and soon learns that the criminal trapped eight people in a location where they must submit to his cruel games. This group includes Matthews’ teen son Daniel (Eric Knudsen) and that forces the police officer to engage in Jigsaw’s bloody antics as well.

The budget for Saw II jumped more than three times higher than that of its predecessor to a “massive” $4 million. It also took nearly $148 million total, so it grossed more than the original film did.

Saw II provided a less insane return on investment, as the first flick made about 87 times its budget and the sequel earned a mere 37 times its cost. Somehow I don’t think anyone involved cried too much about this.

With the current hindsight of 20 years since Saw hit screens, we know that the franchise continued to churn enough out movies through 2023’s Saw X, with an eleventh flick due in 2025. With the exception of 2021’s spinoff Spiral, all of these made good money.

To some degree, I suspect we can thank the success of Saw II for 20 years of Saw. Had audiences tired of the series’ brand of “torture porn” quickly, Jigsaw would’ve petered out years ago.

Of course, horror franchises work by different economic rules than do other genres. The combination of their typically bargain basement budgets and their reliable fanbases means they don’t need massive ticket sales to stay in the black, so even if Saw II made $100 million less than it did, I suspect the series would’ve continued.

In any case, the big question here becomes what Saw II does to differentiate itself from its predecessor. With Jigsaw back in action and more not-always-so-innocent victims at risk, the sequel could easily just feel like a remake of its predecessor.

To their credit, the filmmakers found some new ways to explore the gore. The biggest shift here comes from the fact we get much more onscreen time with Jigsaw himself.

In Saw - spoiler alert? – Jigsaw didn’t appear to the audience until a surprise at the very end. With the sequel, we see the character as a prime component from start to finish.

That adds a shift, and the involvement of multiple participants does so as well. Saw kept a tighter character focus than the octet we find here, and that creates some new dynamics.

All that said, I won’t claim Saw II does a whole lot to alter the first flick’s framework. I’m sure those involved followed the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” philosophy.

Just as the Friday the 13th movies became more about creative kills than characters and story, Saw II already shows this series’ move down that path. While not heavy on plot, Saw offered better development in those domains than its second chapter does.

Of course, some – most? – of this results from the bigger cast. With more mouths to feed, Saw II lacks the same space for exposition.

Still, I get the impression the filmmakers understood audiences responded to the sadistic “games” more than characters and plot. As such, Saw II becomes less concerned with those elements and more focused on torture.

Unfortunately, the spotty manner in which the film involves its participants means we simply don’t care much what happens to them, and Saw II also lacks the intimate cruelty of the prior flick. Again, so many characters ensures that the various “games” come and go quickly and fail to present much impact.

Most of the scenes between Jigsaw and Matthews feel superfluous. Although they do connect to the overall story, I feel Saw II could lose much of this content and not suffer at all.

Some of this stems from the disinterested manner in which Saw II presents these sequences. The filmmakers regard them as the tedious shoe leather than offer and don’t want to bother with them more than the minimum.

In an attempt to create a sense of urgency, Saw II goes with an annoyingly hyperactive style too much of the time. Cameras whip and romp, music pounds concepts into us, and editing tears through the tale.

Rather than add to the experience, these choices simply distract and irritate. I get the impression those involved lacked confidence in the basic material so they ladled out cinematic gimmicks in an attempt to ratchet up the energy level.

It doesn’t work, and not much about Saw II succeeds. While not a terrible sequel, it fails to capitalize on the franchise’s potential.

Note that this Blu-ray provides only an unrated cut of Saw II. It extends the “R”-rated theatrical version to include about two additional minutes of content.

Some of this revolves around trims of gore/violence, but we also get some minor character/dialogue beats as well. None of these seem likely to really change/improve the movie, but I suspect fans will feel happy to see them nonetheless.

Saw II appears in an aspect ratio of approximately 1.85:1 on this Blu-ray Disc. A release from the format’s early days, this became a spotty image.

Granted, some of that stemmed from the source. Like the prior film, Saw II went with an intentionally ugly sense of visuals.

Still, I thought the Blu-ray could – and should – have looked better than this. Overall sharpness felt decent to good. I couldn’t claim the flick looked razor-sharp, but it brought more than acceptable delineation most of the time.

No issues with jagged edges or shimmering materialized, and edge haloes failed to appear. Grain seemed heavy but appropriate, and only a handful of small specks popped up along the way.

Saw II came with a palette that leaned heavily toward grungy greens and blues, with some ambers as well. These tones generally suited the movie’s choices, though they seemed messier than I might expect even within those parameters.

Blacks seemed a bit inky, while shadows came across as somewhat dense. This was a watchable but less than stellar presentation.

As for the movie’s DTS-HD HR 5.1 soundtrack, it came across as active but not as immersive as I might like. To be sure, the soundscape created a nearly constant flow of information around the room.

However, this felt kind of out of control and not always best suited to the story. The soundfield wanted to wear down the viewer, I guess, so it created a lot of involvement that could annoy at times.

Audio quality worked fine, with speech that appeared natural and concise. Music seemed full and vibrant.

Effects felt accurate and dynamic. Ultimately, I didn’t love the soundfield but thought the track worked fairly well nonetheless.

Two audio commentaries appear, the first of which comes from director Darren Lynn Bousman, editor Kevin Greutert and production designer David Hackl. All three sit together for a running, screen-specific look at editing, sets/locations, alterations for the unrated cut, cast and performances, music, photography, and connected domains.

The guys gleefully bust on each other through the chat, and they happily point out various goofs along the way. This piece maintains a brisk pace and a fun tone along with plenty of good insights about the film.

For the second commentary, we hear from executive producer James Wan and weiter/executive producer Leigh Whannell. Both sit together for a running, screen-specific view of story/characters, cast and crew, and connected topics.

Like Bousman/Greutert/Hackl, Wan and Whannell devote much of the commentary to wisecracks. Unlike the prior trio, unfortunately, their remarks rarely actually amuse.

Wan and Whannell also fail to tell us much of use, as outside of notes about various permutations of the screenplay, I can’t recall anything particularly interesting here. The Wan/Whannell track lacks much to make it worth a listen.

Three video programs follow. In Memoriam lasts six minutes, 32 seconds and involves Whannell, Wan, Bousman, executive producers Stacey Testro, Jason Constantine and Peter Block, film executives Lynda Obst, Wayne Rice, and Seth Ersoff, producers Mark Burg and Oren Koules, Lynda Obst, co-producers Greg Copeland and Daniel Jason Heffner, and director of photography David Armstrong.

Producer Gregg Hoffman died between the release of Saw II and Saw III so this reel offers a fond farewell. It doesn’t provide anything especially fascinating but it seems well-intended.

The Scott Tibbs Documentary spans 15 minutes, 57 seconds. It presents a mockumentary in which the title character (Zach Starr) looks into the Jigsaw crimes and the nature of the traps.

This sounds better on paper than in reality, partly because Tibbs becomes a persistently annoying personality. Big fans may enjoy it but I thought it offered a tedious enterprise.

With The Story Behind the Story, we get a three-minute, 43-second reel. Here we find notes from Wan and Whannell.

“Story” offers basics about the origins and influences of Jigsaw. I suspect this is a load of crap and not based on truth, but who knows?

Though Saw II expands the first film’s horizons, it proves no more satisfying. The sequel offers intriguing possibilities but suffers from problematic execution. The Blu-ray delivers decent picture along with fairly good audio and a mix of bonus materials. Maybe Saw III will hit the mark, but Saw II doesn’t click.