Reviews
The Final Destination
Reviewed by: Ryan Rotten
Rating: 5 out of 10
Movie Details: View here
Cast:
Bobby Campo as Nick O'Bannon
Shantel VanSanten as Lori Milligan
Nick Zano as Hunt Wynorski
Haley Webb as Janet Cunningham
Mykelti Williamson as George Lanter
Directed by David Ellis
Review:
Even death can be stretched thin. As The Final Destination proves, the ubiquitous, invisible force of New Line's profitable franchise which began nine years ago has officially run out of steam. Relying more on the gimmick (it's in 3-D in select theaters) and less on ingenuity, this fourth outing feels more like a remake. The gory thrills may be different, yet the scenario is all too familiar. By this point, shouldn't have greater strides been made to be progressive?
Apparently not, as writer Eric Bress (one half of the writing team who delivered the admittedly wicked and fun Final Destination 2 - which makes this entry all the more disappointing) and returning director David Ellis deliver a story that spins off from a disastrous race car event. Attending spectators Nick, Lori, Hunt and Janet are the primary players who escape unscathed thanks to Bobby's premonition. Others who escape grisly death include security guard George, a racist redneck (The Signal's Justin Welborn), a MILF (Krista Allen), the mechanic named Charlie and a cowboy. It isn't long, however, before death starts to claim them through a variety of Rube Goldberg scenarios - whether it's by flying tire, pool drain, a tub full of water or, well, you get the picture…especially if you've seen the previous three entries.
What's lacking is a narrative beat to thread this entry together with the other films. Oh, sure, the accidents from the predecessors are mentioned - when Nick and Lori Google search (no kidding) premonitions and swiftly learn about death's design - but there could have been some creative way to work The Final Destination into the morbid pattern as the second and third films had done. Alas, the film is just a vapid Grand Guignol trip.
An amusing one, to be fair. There's a certain glee to be had from seeing the massacre unfold in 3-D, especially when the meat and guts begin to slip, slide and careen across the screen (and there are plenty of entrails to behold, no doubt about that). Combining practical and CG effects, Ellis pulls off some grisly displays of dismemberment. He's also deft at misdirection and one of the more memorable set-ups involves a pedicure. The 3-D is extra sugar to this junk food and without this technique, The Final Destination's tedium would probably be more apparent.
The cast doesn't do much to elevate the material. They play to their stereotypes and earn little sympathy, save for Mykelti Williamson's George, a widow and recovering alcoholic. Still, his character is so broad, it's almost cartoonish. The film also wields a surprisingly racist edge, which makes sense for Welborn's character, but not during a moment in a hospital when a war vet berates his Asian nurse. Far more effective comedic gags come when Allen's MILF stuffs tampons in her childrens' ears and we come to discover what happens when someone in death's design attempts a suicide.
By the time The Final Destination attempts to pull off a false end (we all know it's not finished) and barrels along to its big third act disaster, one will find the life has been completely sucked out of franchise. Too bad it goes out with a whimper rather than a bang.
Related Articles
From our network of sites
Comments
Posted by: ScratStitch on August 28, 2009 at 11:50:56
Never seen a "Final Destination" film, but the trailer for this one was just stupid in every imaginable way. Not surprised to hear that it's apparentlty not very good.
Posted by: Dave P. on August 28, 2009 at 14:40:45
They have gotten progressively worse (although 2 was actually quite good), so it's no surprise that this one is getting the thumbs-down. And it's 82 minutes! If I've learned anything about movies, if you can't get at least 90 minutes out of a story, then don't bother making the film, because you don't have much to say! I stay away from all 80 minute movies now!
Posted by: moviewizguy on August 29, 2009 at 00:36:41
[Rec] is even shorter than 80 minutes. I don't see your point. Some movies are short because they work in that length. "Red Eye" was like 85 minutes and "The Simpsons Movie" was 82 minutes. "Stand By Me" was like 82 minutes. Many great films are around 80-85 minutes long. I don't know if this film fits into that list because I haven't seen it yet. I will tomorrow.
Posted by: Zarahai on August 29, 2009 at 01:44:44
uh.. other than the Stand By Me movie the other two sucked. I only walked out of three movies in my live: the recent die hard movie, the simpsons movie and the transformers 2 movie (it made me feel stupid). As for red eye i rented it and couldnt last 10 mins same with teeth. The Final Destination is probably a rental if anything. The roller coaster one was the best for me I think it was 2 or 3
Posted by: Private Vasquez on August 29, 2009 at 07:48:17
I thought this movie was absolute fun in the expected "Final Destination" formula. I know a lot of people complain cause of the basic same premise for each one. I however find it comforting to know what I'm getting into. These movies are like comfort food, you know what your going to get. Although part 3 still stands as my favorite, I can feel good about putting this in my collection when it comes out on DVD. I love the Manicure/Hair cut scene the most, and found the humor to be right on the mark, but you have to see this in 3-D in the theater. The 3-D element is crucial to David Ellis vision as it is a big "character" in this movie. FUNTASTIC!
Posted by: The Biggness on August 29, 2009 at 10:37:07
OK, so let me start off by saying I'm not a real big fan of horror films, the current iteration anyway. I liked the classics (Jason, Freddy, Halloween, etc), but current horror films seem so one dimensional.
This movie, to me, absolutely SUCKED! The no named actors SUCKED, the directing SUCKED, and the writing SUCKED. I appreciate how the immediately tried to get into the action with the killing, but in no way was I drawn into the story. Although it is fiction, I didn't get the sense that it was believable. The characters were so lame, you just wanted them to die to get it over with and to get them off the durn screen. And the only star they could get was "Bubba" from Forest Gump? Dang, what a waste of 6 bucks.
Posted by: Matt on August 29, 2009 at 13:30:18
I actually liked this movie, if you are a fan of the Final Destination Franchise, then I reccomend that you go and see it. And remember, if you have negitive thaughts about a movie before you go see it, you purpously look for the negitave parts of the movie, so try to have a neutral attitude untill you see it
Posted by: JetSylar on August 30, 2009 at 11:04:04
I dont care what anybody says, I thought the movie was amazing and the intro was the best, brings back memories and gives a more modern unique perspective on a few of the deaths from the other movies. If your huge fan, go see the movie right now. I know im seeing it again
Posted by: Laura on August 30, 2009 at 14:23:14
It was awful! I really liked all three of the previous movies but this one was a huge disappointment. I should have known that if they were doing it in 3D that it was viewer beware. They based the accidents around the 3D effects and not around the storyline and the storyline was awful. They should have stopped while they were ahead.
Posted by: Chris on August 30, 2009 at 16:52:34
Hate all you want but TFD won at the box office big time, 28.3 millions baby and not only that but it was way better than that sad excuse of a movie called Halloween II.
Posted by: Eo on August 31, 2009 at 15:43:38
That was awesome somebody trying to use Red Eye as a reference to good short movies...
I'm going to be honest and say the only reason i saw this was for the 3d kills..if it wasnt for that i wouuld have passed it up..
3 was awful but i have to say the rollercoaster scene was one of the most intense things ive seen personally. I liked one and 2 was a guilty pleasure but i wish they would stop. These movies really have been the exact same for 9 years..its getting old
Posted by: Nico on August 31, 2009 at 19:20:41
It's dumb fun. You get exactly what you pay for.
Posted by: luismile on September 1, 2009 at 19:44:02
No.
Posted by: JF on September 2, 2009 at 22:29:39
I'm so tired of people freaking out over how "horrible" this movie is. It was never intended to be an instant classic. It was meant to be a fun time and that is exactly what it is. It's not to be taken so seriously. If you didn't like the first three, don't go see the fourth, it's a pretty simple concept. There isn't really a point in going on and on about how much you hated it though, if you thought it was so bad, stop wasting your time commenting about it.
Posted by: SB on September 5, 2009 at 23:49:39
i just wonder how it's all made?
i don't get how all that, and no cast member is actually ded??
1
Add a comment