Reviews
X MARKS THE SPOT: A Spoiler-Free Review of ‘Saw X’

I feel like I need to tell you now: My favorite Saw film is the original. My second favorite Saw film is Saw 3D. My third is Saw VI.
Something For Every Fan of the Saw Franchise
Now, if that ranking got you in a bit of a tizzy, because who could possibly like Saw 3D that much? It’s terrible (I could, and it is), you should now understand what I find to be one of the fundamental issues of critiquing the Saw films in a way that feels fair or equitable to everybody. Everybody looks for different things in them, so a non-insignificant portion of the audience believes there should be a different metric for reviewing them.
Some people are here for the traps exploding gore all over the place, some for the endearingly convoluted story and all its plot twists, and some for their favorite characters and their development. If you’re here for crazy death traps and some top-tier John Kramer dialogue, you will probably love Saw X despite its flaws and find it a worthy entry in the franchise, just as I did.
John Kramer Returns to the Saw Series
For those who have been sleeping on the Saw franchise, Saw X is the latest installment in the series and brings back into the fold the legendary John Kramer (Tobin Bell), the first and greatest (not arguing with you on this) Jigsaw killer. Taking place between the first and second films, we see Jigsaw’s tests of the human body and spirit head south to Mexico City for vengeance: a group of five people who wronged John in his time of need are placed in a new game, with some of his most torturous contraptions yet. All the while, newly dubbed apprentice Amanda Young (Shawnee Smith) takes her fledgling steps into the role John has planned for her when he’s gone.
At the time of their respective releases, the ends of Jigsaw and Spiral seemed to promise an ever-increasing chain of bizarre timeline bends and new players for the franchise’s future, which excited some fans and underwhelmed many others. That promise doesn’t matter anymore because this movie mends the issue by bringing back to center stage the original heart and soul of Saw: Tobin Bell. The later films in the franchise have a big John Kramer-shaped hole in them that is hard to ignore, as Tobin Bell was undeniably instrumental in portraying an unforgettable character and steering the traps and rewriting dialogue on the fly. He was as important to the movies as any director, writer, or editor, and the cast and crew that worked with him have gone on record to say as much.
And that’s really the reason Saw X works. You can feel he’s brought that same essential energy to the role and helped guide the film, with this feeling like less of a straightforward return to form and more of a loving welcome back for Jigsaw and company that plays with the traditional formatting of the franchise. He shows off vulnerability especially here, with what is possibly his best performance to date thanks to the movie’s first act letting us really take the journey with John and see him in a whole new light.
Shawnee Smith also manages to capture a new side of fan favorite Amanda, as a still-green apprentice to John Kramer filling in the gap in her character development between the first two films. We get to see her slowly hardening into the person we meet in Saw II and III; it’s impressive and makes it easy to recognize the film’s place in the ever-muddied timeline almost instantly by visual and dialogue cues alone. Their onscreen chemistry is undeniable, and a solid emotional anchor to hold onto as the film chucks gore at us like an intestine lasso that pulls us along on Jigsaw’s wild ride.
The rest of the cast ranges from alright to pretty bad. Still, all of their characters are designed and written in the vein of one of those mid-to-late-2000s “you’re supposed to hate them completely” character templates. The writing hammers out bodies that are meant only to be mangled, except for one victim who clearly shouldn’t be there. This is the first and only Saw movie where I truly despised the victims in the traps, and the film will bang you over the head with that characterization. You might have found Jeff annoying in Saw III, or Charles unlikable in Saw V, and lord knows many people cheered at William’s death in Saw VI, but here our contestants are the peak of unlikable by design.
Some of the Nastiest Traps On Film Yet
This is a symptom of a script that really leans into the interpretation of Jigsaw as an anti-hero (especially in that hilarious ending shot before the credits roll), so if you find John’s philosophy and that framing of the character not quite your tempo, it might take you out of the movie.
In turn, the film relishes putting them through some of the franchise’s most comically evil traps, which I say with love. And yes, I say it’s comically evil, even in a franchise where they crushed a man’s head to death with two giant swinging ice blocks like Wile E. Coyote. The traps in Saw X stand as a worthy successor in the escalation of John Kramer’s machinations, evisceration engines you couldn’t think up in your wildest nightmares.
Despite being the victim of some clunky integration into the script, its final set piece is an incredibly memorable one that will still stand out among the reverse bear traps and shotgun carousels of the earlier entries as an all-timer just due to how nauseating it is. This film brings the heat with how truly nasty its traps can get, and no expense was spared to make the practical effects here look as spine-tinglingly foul as they do.
A Saw Film Shot in Typical Saw Fashion
If the rest of the cinematography is another step in the evolution of Kevin Greutert’s work, you might consider it devolution depending on how important the series’ iconic screeching-fast editing and sped-up shots are to you. They’re shockingly absent for a return to the mainline series, given he’s the editor who coined them. I would have preferred a more traditional Saw film in this regard. I can’t technically call the way Saw X is shot poor on a technical level; it’s just less unique. The film is not as visually dynamic as any other entries, but it works. And no matter what I have to say about the camerawork and cuts, on an audio level, the soundtrack kills, as always.
Who doesn’t get hyped up at Zepp’s Theme, barring people without a pulse?
BOTTOMLINE: I have a soft spot for this film, even around its rustier, grimier bits; after all, what is Saw without some grime and rust? Ultimately, this will make a fine addition to the series because of its emotional core and instant classic traps. As a standalone entry, its script and ending can be unsatisfying at points, but if it’s the price we have to pay for more John Kramer, it’s a small fee. Saw X puts on a blood-filled, mean-spirited contest that will keep you guessing, so give it a watch, especially in theatres if you can.
Saw is rated R and has a runtime of 1 hour and 58 minutes. It releases in theaters on 9/29/2023.
Reviews
[Review] ‘Mother!’ (2017) Is the Greatest Movie of the 21st Century

Please give me a few minutes of your time as I take a weird deep dive into my favorite movie of all time. Darren Aronofsky’s Mother! is an incredibly divisive film, and I will never refute that. When I was thinking about what angle I wanted for this review, I was coming up blank. Jennifer Lawrence’s Mother is a compelling and beautifully written character so I knew it would fit this month’s theme. Cut to my 51st viewing of the film a few nights ago, a multi-hour call with a very good friend, and three pots of coffee…that’s when I found my angle.
For those who are unaware, the infinite monkey theorem states that if a monkey is given a typewriter and an unlimited amount of time, it will eventually write the entire works of Shakespeare. Even though NPR tried to disprove that, it still feels possible. If there was truly an unlimited amount of time, how could it not happen? But here’s where I have issues with this idea: who is the monkey, and who is the typewriter? Does Mother have the agency to actually change the outcome of her story? Is Him a passive observer? Does Him’s reactions to Mother’s actions dictate her next steps? And what can the death of first Mother/Foremother (Sarah-Jeanne Labrosse) and the awakening of third Mother/Maiden (Laurence Leboeuf) tell us? Join me as I try to decipher whatever the hell this movie is.
Mother! follows Mother, who awakens post-death from Foremother. Mother wanders around the house before being intercepted by Him. Him is a writer who has been frustrated by a bout of writer’s block. Man (Ed Harris) shows up out of the blue and is soon followed by Woman (Michelle Pfeiffer). After their two kids Youngest Brother (Brian Gleeson) and Oldest Son (Domnhall Gleeson) show up, and a fight ensues, one of them dies. This leads to a wild party to celebrate the deceased’s life in which Him eventually gets Mother pregnant. Him overcomes his writer’s block which leads to the downfall of everything.
When I first saw Mother! I was stunned. What started, on the film’s opening day, as a half-full theater ended with me and my friend sitting in a tearful silence. I went back the next day with another friend (the one I had a multi-hour phone call with for this piece) and watched the movie again. We both sat in stunned silence as the credits rolled. Thanks to being a MoviePass member (when it was still a movie a day), I was able to see Mother! every single day for the next five days. I have never had a theatrical experience like I did with this film. What was equally stunning was that Paramount Pictures had the guts to distribute a film like this.
Aronofsky has been very tightlipped about all of the intricacies of Mother!, and that’s okay. Frustrating, but okay. Here’s what we know. There are three main ideas behind Mother! and that is 1) the story of an artist and their muse 2) the destruction of Mother Earth and the most on-the-nose allegory 3) Him is God and Mother is Mary. While these ideas have been talked about to death, I want to look into how the infinite monkey theorem works here and how Him is experiencing one of the wildest examples of insanity seen in film.
Let’s take note of what we can infer as well as what is directly told to us. In the beginning, we see Foremother burn to death/explode the same way that Mother does. Maiden ends the film by turning over and saying, “Baby” as Mother does. Mother’s recitation of “Baby” is quite different from Maiden’s delivery. When we hear Mother say the line it sounds partially panicky, partially forlorn. Maiden’s almost sounds calm and accepting. To me, Mother’s delivery of the line almost feels like she’s calling out for the recently deceased child while Maiden’s call is toward Him.
The wording of this may sound offensive, but it is simply used in conjunction with the infinite monkey theorem. For the sake of my argument, I believe that Mother is the monkey. When I started writing this piece, I thought that Him might be the monkey until I realized I was wrong. The actual inciting incident of Mother! is when Man and Woman destroy the crystal. (The metaphorical biting of the apple.) Him is not just testing Mother, Him is also testing Man and Woman. When Him, Man, Woman, and Mother are sitting around the table drinking coffee, Mother brings out some snacks. One of the snacks is a bowl of what looks like cookies and two singular slices of fruit that look very similar to apples.
One can imply that Him is watching Man and Woman closely because he yearns for the romance he feels between them. I think he’s intently watching to see if they go for the two apples. Him has put Man and Woman in this scenario before and they have failed; here they have passed. It’s not until the breaking of the crystal that all hell [literally] breaks loose.
We see moments of reflection and acknowledgment in some actions. When Mother is asked by Him if Man can stay the night she replies with, “Of…course.” A tinge of sadness echoes through the line and she chokes on her words. When Man sees the crystal he asks if it was a gift from Mother and she replies with a singular, “No.” Again, her voice cracks, she sounds like she wants to cry. It’s almost as if she has been asked this before and something inside of Mother is telling her it was Foremother’s heart she was looking at.
There are countless examples of these moments that crossover between timelines. One can assume that if a monkey will eventually type the entire works of Shakespeare, it will also type a few of the same lines over and over. Multiple moments coexist within these different timelines, and something in Mother is letting her know that.
Him is God. The Great Storyteller. The most egotistical man that can exist. The true definition of good and evil. But is he writing Mother’s story or is she in charge of her own destiny? When Mother wakes up, she wanders around the house. She makes her way to the front door, opens it, and steps outside. Before she can take any further steps, as it can be interpreted as she wanted to continue walking, Him stops her. (This raises another question of whether or not she can exist outside of the confines of this astonishingly octagonal house.) It’s clear that Him remembers everything that happens with previous Mothers, but how far will he go to ensure Mother goes the path he truly wants?
Later in the day, Mother goes to one of the walls in the house to paint it. She puts muted yellow paint on the wall but doesn’t seem content with it. Mother puts her hand on the wall and sees the heart beating inside of it, a small amount of decay starts to grow. This prompts her to sprinkle a yellow substance in the paint for a more vibrant yellow, and she seems happy with the choice. This is one of many examples of the house speaking to Mother, warning her of potential mistakes.
Mother’s body fights back multiple times when she makes the wrong decision. Once Man is in the house, she goes to make tea. A cup is dropped and shattered, which sends a terrible ringing through her ears and a painful tightening of her chest. We know the crystal that reinvents the house is created upon the death of each Mother.
Later, Mother goes to the basement to grab sheets for Man after agreeing he can stay the night. As she grabs the sheets, the furnace kicks in. This seems to imply her decision to agree to Man’s stay is a mistake that Foremother made (which we know led to her demise). That same night, she flicks Man’s lighter off the dresser, which causes another bout of intense ear ringing and reveals a sliver of a charred floor. Once Woman is there, Mother finds Woman and Man making out. This reveals more of the charred floor.
Interestingly, we get a moment of Mother possibly making a choice previous Mothers have not. Mother and Woman go to the basement and Woman makes fun of Mother’s plain underwear. After Woman leaves the basement, Mother sees a pair of Woman’s bright yellow underwear sticking out of the washer. Mother throws the underwear behind the washer (presumably to save it and use at a later date) but there’s no furnace sound. Has she finally made a good decision?
After the brothers arrive and have their tiff, Mother is left alone in the house to clean up. The spot where Younger Brother died has now turned into a goopy hole that reveals the then-blocked-off furnace. She rests her head on the wall while emptying the bloody water bucket, and we see the heart again. It’s decaying more and more.
Mother is still making the wrong decisions.
What does all of this tell us? Mother has a certain amount of agency. But also that previous mother’s soul wants her to succeed. We don’t know how many times Him has gone through this series of events, we only know that it hasn’t worked up to this point. We also don’t know what he wants. When Mother becomes pregnant, Him gets over his writer’s block and writes the New Testament. I believe that he’s completely Id-driven at this point. Him lost sight of what he needed to do and remembers the fame that comes with his writings.
The last thing Him says to Mother before she perishes is, “You were home.” As with nearly everything in this film that can have two meanings. Was that line meant to imply that Mother was in her rightful home? Did he think that she was the one who would end this cataclysmic cycle of pain and torment? Or was he saying that Mother was home? Is this his smooth-talking way of getting her heart to retroactively find solace in his love to turn into the crystal he so desperately needs to make Maiden?
Mother! has an undeniably dense amount of layers that become increasingly apparent with each viewing. As I finish this article I have the film on in the background and I’m noticing more pieces of evidence that make my point more apparent. An argument could possibly be made that Him is the monkey and Mother is the typewriter but that all falls down to perspective and selective examples.
If there’s one thing I can leave you with, it’s that Mother! is one of the most important films of the 21st century. With the recent death of David Lynch, many people feel that art in Hollywood is truly dead. Few filmmakers can make a truly astounding piece of art that transcends time with the conversation it creates. Darren Aronofsky’s Mother! is a film that will be discussed for decades, if not centuries. That is unless we completely destroy Mother Earth and destroy it from the inside out.
Reviews
[REVIEW] SXSW 2025: ‘Drop’ It’s Hard Not to Fall for This One
Drop is a surprisingly cool take on domestic abuse survivors woven into a thrilling narrative of a woman who is forced into a situation where she can trust no one. A single mother who survived an abusive ex-husband goes on her first date in years. She soon discovers that her first-date jitters are the least of her worries when she begins receiving anonymous drops on her phone. As the drops get more terrifying, she soon realizes that her son and sister’s lives hang in the balance as a mysterious tormentor forces her to carry out a chilling plan on her date.
Drop is fun, sophisticated, dangerous, and over the top in all the right ways. It is definitely worth checking out in a theater to see all of the jaw-dropping mayhem unfold.

Many genre fans know Christopher Landon from his wildly popular slashers (like Happy Death Day, Freaky) and his time in the Paranormal Activity universe. Because he’s carved out a name for himself in these two very different horror arenas, most of us leaned in when we heard Drop would be a thriller. I’m happy to report that Landon’s newest film has the energy of Wes Craven’s Red Eye. Elder millennials like myself might also feel a similar vibe to Robert Zemeckis’ What Lies Beneath chaotic conclusion. It is the kind of thriller that’s unafraid to go off the rails and swing big. Luckily, the payoff is huge and a compelling entry to an overstuffed subgenre. Drop breathes new life into the first-date-gone-wrong films and reinvigorates the mystery genre. It feels like a Hitchcockian fever dream filtered through a modern day lens.
A Fresh Take on the Thriller Genre
Violet (Meghann Fahy) wins us over immediately. We have all either been an abused woman, witnessed the abuse, or have seen the end results in the news. So, we instinctively want to root for her as Fahy begins making her a relatable survivor. She’s funny, smart, cool, and grounded and is easily everything more women characters should be. Fahy is also captivating as she drives this film to the out-of-this-world ending while having so much thrown on her plate. She navigates the humor, guilt, fear, and shame spiral as she ascends to her place as a badass. I also appreciate that while Violet’s past is central to the story, she is never a helpless victim. It is giving a final girl who survived her slasher and will carry those lessons with her instead of starting at square one for the sequels.
Her supporting cast is also very fun and filled with red herrings that make you doubt your prime suspect. Is the culprit her hot date, Henry (Brandon Sklenar), who has been very patient and understanding with a woman he is only meeting in person for the first time? Is it the cool bartender Cara (Gabrielle Ryan) who has kept an eye on Violet’s date? Or is it the many other characters she has encountered in this fancy restaurant? Because Drop is a proper mystery, it makes everyone seem like the perfect suspect. Which I enjoy as someone who sees a lot of predictable movies just lazily hand you the culprit in the first five minutes.
Stunning Cinematography Elevates the Mystery
Drop is fun, sophisticated, dangerous, and over the top in all the right ways. It is definitely worth checking out in a theater to see all of the jaw-dropping mayhem unfold.
Drop falls into theaters on April 11.