Comments on: ‘The Final Destination’ – Is this what horror fans really, really want?

By: What IsThis

What IsThis — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 04:38:55 +0000

I never understood why people liked these films. Death went out of its way to kill these people who through sheer luck and/or premonition avoided an untimely demise. Did death not realize that nobody escapes death forever and death always ultimately wins?? Does the movie intend to say if we ever somehow cheat death that now death becomes a stalker trying to kill us in the most intricate and gruesome way it can?? The whole premise makes no sense to me, so I couldn’t enjoy any of the movies.

By: Dave Taylor

Dave Taylor — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 15:26:55 +0000

As we’ve discussed, Christian, I thought that the basic premise of the series, that the kids were “supposed to die” and therefore had weird and improbable experiences as death caught up with them was a pretty cool idea. There are some philosophical glitches in the concept, but, hey, it’s a horror film, no worries!

As with too many franchises, however, risk aversion on the part of the studio overtook creativity on the part of the writers and the most recent installment really isn’t very engaging at all. Worse, it felt like a “let’s play with 3D” film too and we all know from experience what happens when the sf/x team are the leaders of the proverbial band…

By: kort r4i

kort r4i — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 09:26:26 +0000

You may see it then understand everything why i am saying to see it…The 3-D effect been applied. It adds a bit of extra fun to what is otherwise a routine repeat of the formula.

By: Gory

Gory — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:55:16 +0000

Actually I thought the first three were pretty good films. The first one taking the more serious route where the second more of a dark comedy and the third a mix. The fourth one though is literally nothing new. It is just the same as the first three with the added 3-D which was fun in the theatre but the movie as a whole was just meh. While not classics the first three are fun films.

Too bad you started here because I think you might have dug the other films at least on a small level.

By: JimmyC

JimmyC — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:54:37 +0000

I really liked the first Final Destination. It was a genuinely creepy and involving shocker, and Devon Sawa’s lead character generated real sympathy as he heroically tried to use his premonitions to save people’s lives, including his own.

But the sequels were terrible. Like the “Saw” sequels, they had an interesting premise (and a solid first film) to build on, and instead used those elements to make a series of glorified snuff films. What a waste of potential.

By: cftoto

cftoto — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 17:31:53 +0000

‘Intricate death scenes can’t substitute for compelling characters and an interesting story, but these movies try to do just that’ — wish I wrote that as succinctly as you did, Paula

By: Paula

Paula — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 16:59:15 +0000

I’ve never understood the appeal of the “Final Destination” films which I find utterly pointless. Intricate death scenes can’t substitute for compelling characters and an interesting story, but these movies try to do just that.

Granted, it’s not a horror movie, but I think “The Parallax View” does an excellent job with a loosely similar storyline. Poor Paula Prentiss was scared out of her wits and the audience felt for her.