"If it's Halloween, it must be Saw." Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've heard that one what, five times now? How about a new catchphrase for the tired Saw Franchise? Something like; "Put a fork in, it's done!" "Saw that Already."

In Saw V's defense, it is better than the last installment. It offers up far more gore and for the first fifteen minutes or so, I was actually somewhat engrossed. Furthermore, screenwriters Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunston – who replaced original Saw creators Leigh Whannell and James Wan for Parts IV and V - do answer the key questions posed in Saw IV. Namely, what the hell does this Detective Mark Hoffman have to do with Jigsaw. If the name Mark Hoffman means nothing to you, then clearly you haven't seen Saw IV and if you haven't seen Saw IV, then Saw V won't make a lick of sense to you. I 'have' seen Saw IV, and a good portion of Saw V still doesn't make a lot of sense.

It's sort of irritating that Melton and Dunston – affable writers whose love for the genre is quite apparent in films like Feast – couldn't just make this a stand alone film. Instead, they felt compelled to raise new questions so that the series can continue should this film make enough money to warrant yet another sequel.

V picks up where IV left off. Then, through the miracle of modern flashback techniques, the film makers double back giving us new insight into the diabolical mind of Jigsaw. When the film isn't delving into Jigsaw's psyche, it's shoveling out torture porn mayhem by the truck load. In one of the film's key plot threads, a group of total strangers – or are they – wake up in a room and are forced to play one of Jigsaw's deadly games of survival.

Logic is best left at home when taking in a Saw film. The thing is when I'm being engaged by a picture, I can leave logic behind. It's when things become overly familiar or completely uninteresting that the knit-picker in me rages to the surface.

I can happily say I no longer question how the hell a cancer afflicted Jigsaw puts all these elaborate traps together. What I question now is when the hell does he find the time. Through five films, the Saw franchise has become more convoluted than clever. Every time something unbelievable happens in one of these pictures, the film makers cover things up by suggesting Jigsaw has yet another accomplice in the next installment. It's a cheap, lazy tactic all the more disheartening when taking into consideration that Jigsaw started out as such an intriguing character. Here's this guy who, after learning a sickness would take him from this world, realizes that his sole purpose is to force ungrateful souls into being thankful for what they have. This little play on morality is what sets Saw apart from other films of the slasher variety.

Now, the compelling Jigsaw – played by a wonderfully committed Tobin Bell - has been reduced to a supporting player. A madman with a purpose who now plays second fiddle to blood and guts. I've always believed the first Saw picture to be fairly overrated – am I alone in my assessment that Cary Elwes nearly destroyed that picture with his unaffecting performance?-- but I always appreciated that it offered up a killer worth respecting. Saw V offers up several creative and nauseating torture sequences – courtesy of director David Hackl – but the play on morality seems to be a distant memory. If you're going just for the gore, you'll probably walk away happy. If you want a little originality and a crafty twist ending, you'll be disappointed.

On a side note, Saw V had a massive opening weekend – no surprise there – so expect the inevitable Saw VI next Halloween.