The “Saw” franchise has always been centered on one question: How much blood would you shed to stay alive? But with its fifth installment now in theaters, the bigger question these days is “How much money will audiences continue to shed to keep a dying series alive?”

Ever since Darren Lynn Bousman (“Saw II-IV”) took over the helm from original director James Wan (“Death Sentence”), the series has continued to disconnect itself from its innovative beginnings on the way to becoming blood-splattered trash reminiscent of the later “Friday the 13th” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street” sequels. “Saw V” is no exception, as it forgoes all originality in favor of a sloppy storyline that only serves as a way to tie up the loose ends from the previous films.

Although producers made the right decision to replace Bousman as a way of breathing new life into the franchise, they clearly made the wrong choice in choosing David Hackl, a production designer for the past three films with no previous directing experience. Hackl does not revert to the series’ creative roots but instead takes this opportunity to reflect on his past visual work. While the movie does feature one of the most inventive Jigsaw traps to date, and slightly better acting than in the past, these improvements are heavily overshadowed by the film’s horrendous main plot thread.

The film picks up from where “Saw IV” last left off: with Special Agent Peter Strahm (Scott Patterson, “Gilmore Girls”) left alive to put the pieces together as to who is the last remaining apprentice of Jigsaw (Tobin Bell, “Saw IV”). Meanwhile, Detective Mark Hoffman (Costas Mandylor, “Beowulf”), who secretly revealed himself as Jigsaw’s apprentice in the last film, is starting up his master’s last wish, a trap where five seemingly unconnected people face a gruesome lesson on teamwork.

When putting together a sequel, it is always to the director’s advantage to create a movie that has the ability to stand on its own. One of the major drawbacks associated with the third and fourth “Saw” films was that, unlike the first two movies, these films overlapped each other and only made sense if you had seen both of them. Unfortunately, this film requires you to be familiar with all of the previous films in order for it to be relatable. The worse part, though, is that this film is not even necessary to begin with; all the film does is reveal some additional background that is neither interesting nor significant.

This franchise has often been categorized under the sub-genre of “torture porn” for the excessive amount of torture, mutilation, nudity and sadism that comes with it. Although the series has notoriously become exceedingly gorier with each new installment, this film actually appears as if some of the needless brutality has been turned down a notch. However, it is difficult to tell whether this reduction was an intelligent, conscious decision by the producers or just an illusion that comes as a result of the movie including an abundance of previously seen torture montages that audiences have already been desensitized to.

Regardless of whether the grisly violence has been toned down or not, this film still lacks any real sense of terror. Blood and guts are really only frightening when fittingly used to supplement the fear in a horror film. Like many horror flicks these days, this movie uses gore solely as a gross-out element. Nowadays, audiences are only covering their eyes as way to prevent puking, not nightmares.

While the acting performances in this film are a cut above those usually found in this franchise’s low-budget casts, it does not make a noticeable difference. In all honesty, no one really goes to these films expecting spot-on portrayals of heavily developed characters anyway.

For diehard fans of the series, “Saw V” may serve as an acceptable nostalgic trip to past films, but, for everybody else, this movie will only disappoint. So, for now, audiences can only hope for a more frightening experience next Halloween when the already confirmed sixth installment will fight to keep the franchise breathing.

1 1/2 stars out of 5