Hmm. A human is going to review an sql statement that "...includes random bytes than can span the entire 0-255 range." That sounds like a fascinating challenge. But the more I think about, the more it sounds like the human won't really be able to look at such an sql statement the same way that a DBI database handle would.

If the goal is to provide for sensible manual validation of sql transactions before they are executed, I would look for a method that involves printing the sql statement in a manner similar to what you would prepare via DBI: print the sql syntax legibly (with line feeds and other whitespace as appropriate), and suitable placeholders for data values -- but maybe something more detailed than just "?" -- then print the list of data values (maybe in escaped form, if that's relevant, but the formatting would depend on whether the human should be validating the data values as well as the sql syntax). For example:

update big_table set easy_column=VAR1, messy_column=VAR2
  where index_column=VAR3

VAR1='easy_data_value'

VAR2='%01f%F8%F6-b$E5r%04'

VAR3='123'
[download]

I'm assuming that after the human has approved the proposed statement (and data), the method for actually executing the statement will be programmatic, and based directly on the data that the human reviewed and approved. The sort of review format suggested above could satisfy that sort approach.