The latest installment in the "Saw" series features the same characters, similar traps, and, through liberal use of flashbacks, much of the same footage.

The “Saw” franchise has chewed through writers, directors, characters, and plot devices with the inhuman precision of one of John Kramer’s grisly traps. The formula is so powerful (read: profitable) that it exists outside any single creative mind; it is clearly a product of a studio, rather than an author. The latest installment shows that while “Saw’s” appetite for mutilation and dismemberment is unlimited, its supply of original material is not.

Of course, it’s too easy to simply complain that the franchise has run out of ideas: this happened millions of dollars (and gallons of fake blood) before “Saw VI,” and cinematic originality has never been “Saw’s” strong point. The appeal, of course, is the blood and gore, and “Saw VI” delivers exactly what audiences have come to expect. Writers Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan, also responsible for “Saw IV” and “Saw V,” essentially re-combine the elements of earlier films into various permutations: “Let’s cut off someone’s hands and feet... with bombs!” or, my personal favorite, “Let’s cut someone in half... with acid!”. Standard “Saw” tropes like head-mounted traps, automated shotguns, self amputation, and smashing extremities to escape bondage make up the bulk of the film, while the few original elements (such as a maze filled with hot steam) are the least interesting of the mutilation machines. But this indirect borrowing from previous films apparently wasn’t enough to fill out “Saw VI’s” 90 minutes, so Melton and Dunstan resort to direct copying: much of the movie is comprised of endless flashbacks from earlier installments.

If there was any subtlety in the director’s cut, it has been removed. With profit-minded executives wielding the razor, narrative developments have been cut down to terse, perfunctory, and hilariously blunt lines. The implication of every plot twist is quickly and explicitly summarized for the audience’s benefit before the film rushes on to the next bloodbath. When Agent Hoffman, Jigsaw’s protege, [SPOILER OR NO?] goes to the audio lab responsible for decrypting a recording which will ultimately incriminate him, the lab technician delivers the following description of un-scrambling audio over a close-up of Hoffman’s face: “We’ll turn his algorithm upside-down and hear what he sounds like.”

The characters are similarly one-dimensional, with no motivations or desires other than those necessary to keep the film moving: detectives want to solve the case, psychopaths want to kill, and greedy executives (both those within the film and the real executives responsible for its creation) want to make money. The exception is Kramer [an executive?], whose predictable philosophy of appreciation of life receives almost all of the screen time not devoted to torture. Conveniently, his character provides an excuse for the flatness of those of his proteges, whose actions are motivated only by the fascism of Kramer’s master plan. [huh?]

In this way, the film gets us from trap A to trap B without creating an attachment to the characters or even the plot. Much like pornography, “Saw” uses laughably transparent devices to bring us what we want with a minimum of effort. Of course, plot is not the only point of resemblance to porn: poorly-airbrushed characters, ignorable dialogue, and extended penetration close-ups abound in this film.

Gore-porn, like sex-porn, follows a strict set of rules: it will present the explicit content we desire, but in a codified format which neutralizes any emotional attachment or psychological impact. Just as pornography’s implicit prohibition of kissing allows us to experience exploitative sex without any discomfort, so does gore-porn’s implicit prohibition of relatable characters and substantial plots allow us to experience unthinkable brutality with utmost detachment.

As evidenced by the massive profitability of “Saw” and other types of pornography, this formula is wildly successful. In this sense, “Saw VI” is a masterpiece: an efficient, polished, and profitable product of the Hollywood studio system. It is a perfectly consumable serving of violence, and its merits in this regard are undeniable.

—Staff writer Mark A. VanMiddlesworth can be reached at mvanmidd@fas.harvard.edu.