high-powerera

This was the worst entry in the series for the following reasons:
1. At approximately 80 minutes the film is too short and there isn't any sort of time given to building up tension.
2. Pretty much all of the deaths are given away in the previews, so when someone dies its no surprise whatsoever. By taking away the surprise aspect the movie was ruined.
3. There is even less of a plot here then the other 3. Granted the basic premise is the same but they didn't even try here.
4. The deaths themselves were very 'meh' and fake looking. Way too much CGI was used. Not only that but they cut away from what probably would have been the most visually interesting death. 5. No Tony Todd. He was seen in the first 2 and heard in the 3rd one. At this point the fans expect to see him. They should have tried to get him in here somehow.
I could go on and on. I hope that if they make a 5th one that James Wong (who directed the first and third films) returns to give the series a proper send off as the David Ellis entries to the franchise (the second and fourth films) are definitely the weakest links in the series. To his credit though, part 2 did probably have some of the best deaths in the series (opening premonition, fire escape ladder, and plate glass).

162 out of 215 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

For me, a rating of 5 out of 10 means I didn't like the movie, but I didn't hate it either.
'The Final Destination' is a 3D horror thriller gimmick. Even though I saw this in 2D, there were many elements that were very obviously designed to be in 3D to take full advantage of the medium.
However, the film itself just isn't good.
The acting is terrible. The story is formulaic. There's nothing really interesting as far as the plot. No discussion of death. No new interesting concepts. Lots of fluff in the form of false kills. And the entire film from the opening credits to the closing credits is about the methods in which these people die.
What this movie is really about is killing young, attractive individuals in a manner which will compliment the 3D. Nothing else. It's just killing people using a Rube Goldberg device or a flying object in 3D.
Some of the special effects are good, and a few of the deaths are interesting, however, the film doesn't really do anything for me. It's just kind of there. I don't really hate it, but I don't really like it either. I also don't really care for 3D in general. I think it's a stupid way of getting you to pay a little extra, like IMAX (which is a bigger screen and some extra speakers. Yaay).
Overall, if you like the 3D gimmick; you're just looking for a movie to take a few friends to and have a little fun; and you don't really care about plot, characters, or story, you might have some fun. To anyone else, I wouldn't really recommend it. It's just a studio gimmick and can be easily ignored.
5/10 - Nothing special.

93 out of 126 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I never, ever expected to give this film 3 out of 10, i'm a fan of the series and thought FD3 was pretty damn awesome - by far the best of the trilogy. So when i saw this movie was 'THE' final destination (a pretty cocky title, but hey it may have lived up to it) and it was gonna be in 3D i had pretty high expectations.
My expectations were wrong. This movie SUCKED. If it wasn't part of the franchise it would have been a straight-to-DVD suckfest. Seriously i was WAITING for it to end. The accident at the car racing ring was just so - blah. I mean i know the whole series is far fetched and you have to have an imagination to believe it but this one was just so uninvolved. I mean getting on a plane, getting in a car and getting on a roller-coaster are things where you are putting your life at risk without thinking. Sitting in an audience? I mean come on, what's next 'Final Destination 5 - i walked down a street and a building fell on me'. By making the accident so un-scary what ensued just didn't really leave you involved. Nothing scared me here, i wasn't unnerved like i was with 1 through 3. Every time i get on a roller-coaster i get FD3 flashback, the only thing that will flashback to me from 'THE' final destination will be the HORENDOUS performances.
Ah the performances. FD1 had Seann William Scott & Kerr Smith, FD2 has Ali Later & FD3 had the immensely talented Mary Elizabeth Winstead. This film had 1 guy who could act trying to carry the whole sorry mess and a whole lot of bitches who need to be slapped for even thinking they should move to Hollywood. I know it's a lot to compete with but rather than just ignoring this you'd think the producers / casting directors would really try and pull something out of the bag here. Apparently not. To give him his due Bobby Campo was charismatic and tried his best with the shoddy dialogue he had. If the rest of the cast had been as good as him then we would have no problems. Nick Zano was OK as the cocky guy but there are people who could have done that way, way better. The real problem? The support actresses here were AWFUL. I just wanted to scream THIS IS NOT A COLD READING. I'm pretty sure that there were a friggin ton of young talents who auditioned for this piece and THIS is what they cast? Even the 'MILF' (yes, she was actually credited as that) sucked. How hard is it to be a MILF?. Shantel Von-whatever her name is (AKA, A poor mans Ashlee Simpson) and Haley Webb (god i wanna slap her SO hard) apparently call themselves actresses. Before they continue to do this may i suggest something to them, ACTING LESSONS. GET THEM. YOU SUCK! For the love of god EMOTE. They sounded like they were reading straight from the script and looked blank in every scene. Awful.
The deaths in FD4 were just too unrealistic. The special effects sucked - not even 3D could begin to save them. They looked like somebody got a little too excited with a computer and didn't really put any thought into making it look real. Making it look just a little bit real will scare people, making it look FUNNY is gonna annoy people.
This film was just so, disappointing. Unrealistic, uninvolving, uninspired JUNK.
The only thing i wanna say is, if there is gonna be an FD5, and i really hope there is considering 3/4 were awesome - then please, for the love of god bring back Glen Morgan & James Wong. Those guys know how to really scare people and the whole feel of the 1st & 3rd films is just so much better.
Oh, and find people who have mastered the art of acting. Its pretty vital.

46 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Arriving on local theaters without the benefit of 3-D, the novelty of 'The Final Destination' goes doubly kaput, as it not only lacks inspired deaths and sympathetic characters, but also because the flatness of David R. Ellis' body bag-fodder isn't mitigated by whatever shallow entertainment an additional dimension might have brought.
Eric Bress' script wastes no time in shaping its interchangeable characters as, apparently, Death has to immediately dive into placing its cardboard victims in intricate fatalities that have been the series' central gimmick. Nick (Bobby Campo) experiences a premonition of a disaster in a race track and manages to get a few people out, who would have otherwise died. As per the franchise's tradition, Death won't be cheated and it starts to do anything -- like toppling cans and letting waters drip -- to create a ripple of events that would eliminate the survivors.
Despite showing how lame entertainment can be entertainingly lame with 'Snakes on a Plane,' Ellis -- who also directed 'Final Destination 2' -- doesn't strive for an ounce of creativity, resulting to a terribly disposable fare that fails to hit its its mark despite aiming so low. And as embodied by the narrative shortcuts this gorefest constantly employs, the Rube Goldberg set pieces start to feel less impressive than mechanical, which makes one believe that Death has worked itself too much over the last three installments.

61 out of 83 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I would like to start off by saying I'm a fan of the FINAL DESTINATION series. Even the much maligned third film is starting to grow on me. When it was announced that David Ellis was returning to the director chair (along with screenwriter Eric Bress), I was quite excited, considering that part two is arguably the best in the series. But this one. If I were to describe this film in one word, I would say DISAPPOINTING. In fact, this is one of the most disappointing movies of this year! The fact that the makers of part two has returned just adds on to the frustration.
The film starts off pretty rushed. In fact, the film is rushed altogether. You feel as if the filmmakers wanted to get through with the film. The laziness is so apparent in here that you're wondering how much the executives offered in their salary. The film is so lazy that there are even glaring plot holes in the hackneyed script! How the hell does a film that is based on something ridiculous have plot holes? The film—better yet, the franchise, spends most of its time in setting up rules on the order people are going to die yet this film ignores practically everything and kills people in any order it feels like!
Even the clever foreshadowing from the previous films is quite blatant here. The laziness is also extended to the death scenes. Remember, quality, not quantity. Even though this film has the most death scenes compared to the previous entries, most of them suck and even that word wouldn't give the deaths that much justice. We all have to admit it sooner or later but we see these films for the death scenes. What is the freaking point in watching this film if they turn out to be lazy to an extent that some death scenes are rehashed from previous FD films? Exactly. There is no point.
Another problem about the death scenes is that there is barely any suspense when people are about to get killed. Usually, in the FD films, seeing the set up of the Rube Goldberg-like death scenes IS the suspense, but in here, they feel as if they come out of nowhere because of how rushed everything is. They're surprising, yes, but the surprises wear off very quickly. Google up Alfred Hitchcock's definition of 'suspense' to learn the difference between surprise and suspense.
Let's move on to the next problem: CGI. With the 3D technology, it's obvious the filmmakers wanted to add more CGI effects so the images could pop out on the screen. The problem here is that the FINAL DESTINATION series is always known for their practical effects. The premonition sequence in here works well in 3D, sure, but the CGI is terrible! They look so fake that I questioned how this film wasn't released direct to DVD.
You know you have a bad film when a franchise that was supposed to be scary and mysterious now turns into something that pokes fun of itself. It has happened many times before, most notably, the NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET franchise. It's as if the filmmakers were aware that the franchise is dying and that their last attempt was to add self-aware characters and idiotic, dumb lines in the film with the many problems the film already has.
Even the characters are more like an excuse to kill them off later. It's apparent that this isn't a movie but more of a carnival ride, waiting to see who dies and how they will die. That's how low this film has gone. You'd also be surprised to find out that the most fleshed out character is, in fact, not the protagonist, but a supporting character, played by Mykelti Williamson. He gives a laughable and forced performance but that's nothing compared to Bobby Campo, who is easily the worst premonitionist in the franchise. He can't act to save his life. And the less we say about the others, the better. However, I'm willing to admit the only character I did feel sympathy for was played by Krista Allen, who plays a motherly role with an extremely short running time.
However, there are other few things that I liked about the film (emphasis on the word 'few'): There's a sequence in a salon and a car wash that have at least SOME suspense. I don't know if this counts but I also liked the opening credits, which I thought was ingenious, a montage of the previous films' memorable death scenes. And that's about it. Three things. What an accomplishment!
I guess it isn't hard to tell but this is, by far, the weakest in the series because there's nothing new. You'd expect that a mythology so easily expandable would be explored here but no. By the end of the film, you feel underwhelmed. You wished they could have done better. In fact, you KNOW they could have done better. If they were to make a fifth film, they better put some thought into it. If you're thinking about watching this movie only ONCE, you should see it in its intended format in 3D AND in theaters, but I don't see why anyone should waste their money on this film.

75 out of 112 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

If you're a fan of the franchise, you'd know the drill by now, and can probably mentally run through all the cliché moments you'll be expected to see being played out on screen once again. Start with a spectacular death-defying escape from certain demise, and because Death cannot accept those who cheated on him, hence begins that hunter-prey game where the Death's invisible hand starts to design some elaborate life-ending sequence for its victims, sometimes with some wickedly black humour thrown in.
Seriously though, Death has turned hip in the series, allowing a select group of survivors led by a prophetic messenger, if anything just to challenge himself to pick them off one by one through the simple rule of elimination in order of the premonition, dangling the carrot that whosoever can break any of his death traps, will be worthy of a second chance in life, not. One thing's for sure, an audience is not going to just walk in and expect great acting or high drama. All we want, simply and crudely put, is to see how brutal or comical death can result from sometimes the most ridiculous of set ups.
To top its predecessors, this installment had its introductory big scene set in stock car racing, which is the perfect avenue for 101 things to go wrong, and when they do, have thousands of potential victims to pick off from. While the very first movie had a spectacular, and some say too realistic for good taste in having witness from within a plane break up and explode upon take-off, this one had an adrenaline pumping race that got enhanced thanks to the latest gimmick in town, 3D.
And while some films are presented in 3D format without exploiting its 3D elements to the maximum, The Final Destination milked every single sequence that it could. From the get go you have objects darting around and flying toward you, be it huge tyres or mashed body insides, everything got hurled toward you from the screen, which I have to admit made me duck a couple of times, having deliberately chosen to sit up front so that the screen totally enveloped my field of vision. But there were still some sequences that looked quite cheaply done though, akin to the quality of those made for television movies due to a smaller budget devoted to effects. But for what it's worth as a 3D film, this is one of the better contemporary live action ones out there now.
One does not expect Oscar winning material in its storyline or acting, though the eye-candy cast made sitting through this film palatable, even if they're acting range comes with vast rooms for improvement. The film's relatively short, clocking under 90 minutes, and had enough cheat sheet deja-vu moments (which included the opening credits priming you on what to excpect) to repeat itself for the sole purpose of bloating the runtime. It also ran out of steam in its final act, leading to a very convenient and rushed conclusion which was just probably director David R. Ellis' way of saying 'I do not know how to end this'.
Will there be another Final Destination? Sure, if the writers can dream up of another shocker of an opening sequence to set the stage for more deathly carnage to happen. It's no brainer, and if box office results this opening weekend prove to be stellar, then we should expect this franchise to develop some legs to keep going on. And on. But if that happens, this will be viewed in 3D, or naught.

83 out of 127 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This entry to the series takes a different approach. From the moment I saw the X-rayed-death-scene opening credit sequence with the hard rock cover of the creepy main theme of the series, I knew that the movie was not to be taken seriously, and a little help from the third dimension drove that idea home.
The Final Destination is a caricature of itself and the the entire series for that matter. This film was made with the knowledge that people still see these films for the ridiculously over the top and creative death scenes. Its like watching the trap go off in mouse trap; Its the only thing people came for.
There are about a dozen deaths in this entry as opposed to the regular 6-8 and the majority of them are fairly lengthy. Little attention is payed to the story or the characters but why bother? We've seen all this before? And I find that the hammy dialogue that the characters do manage to sputter out, only enhances the self-parody.
Fans of the series are either going to love it or think its OK and almost everyone else will hate it. SO If you've stuck it out through the other 3 films, check it out, and don't take it seriously.

58 out of 91 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

but i doubt this will be the final installment.these things are so cheap to make,what with their no name actors.maybe i'm just getting old,but i found myself bored out of my skull with this thing.i guess maybe i'm just not all that entertained by people dying in gross,disgusting ways anymore.that and i just found it all too absurd.not too mention the story is old hat.at slightly less than ninety minutes,this thing is slightly less than ninety minutes too long,in my opinion.for the fourteen to mid twenty crowd,i guess this might hold some value,and yes,it would have for me,at that age,and even beyond.until recently in fact.it's only been maybe two years since i realized i wanted more form my movie experience.one thing's for sure,when the next installment comes around,that's one destination i won't be going on.for me,The Final Destination is a 3/10

40 out of 62 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

You have GOT to be kidding me people. Let's preface this: you decided to watch FInal Destination part 174. AKA you know what you are getting into. Every Final Destination has the exact same formula. At this point, if you decide to watch the movie, you are 150% aware of what is going to happen. I find this to be fantastic. I love the fact that when I rent this crap from Redbox for $1 a night, I am getting exactly what I want. TONS of ridiculously silly carnage, cheese, and hot lead characters. If you rated this movie less than 8.5...I HATE you. If you have watched 3 or more Final Destination movies...this film is definitely for you. Grab a beer and a few shots with your friends, and make it a drinking game, for goodness sake.

21 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

First off 7.3? That has got to be a joke. This movie had nothing going for it besides the 3D effect, which was not used well in my opinion. The trailer for the scrooge movie used it better/more. Besides the fact the 3D was not used well, the acting was dreadful, even by horror movie standards(what happened to Bubba from Forrest Gump?) and the director did not take advantage of what he could have done with the 3D, it was like he read a book on directing and just did all the basic shots you are taught, when he could have got really creative with it.
Sure if your 14 maybe its tolerable, but if you have any knowledge of how real movies should be made, save yourself.I wish the my final destination would have hit me before I watched this useless trash.

83 out of 143 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

'The Final Destination' has achieved the unexpected – it's actually worse than the third film in the franchise! This fourth film in the series has nothing that made the first two, and to an extent, even the third, films unique and amazing. 'The Final Destination' doesn't have the cleverness intricacies of the previous films. None of the freak accidents are elaborate this time around. I blame the uncreative deaths on the fact that this film was released in 3D. The deaths were obviously created in order to fully utilize the 3D. Polls are sticking out towards the audience, things fly towards the screen, etc. Because all of the deaths are trying to utilize and please the 3D effect, the originality and creativity of the deaths are lowered. And that's the main problem with 'The Final Destination.' The main reason the 'Final Destination' films are so good is the fact that the deaths are cunning and captivating. The acting and story comes second. The deaths are what makes the films work, and what makes the films actually fun.
Now, the first film in the series was actually pretty good. The acting was good, the story was good, the plane explosion was good, and the deaths were intricate. The second film was almost just as good as the first. The third film sort of had not-as-good acting or a not-as-good storyline, but the deaths were still fun and interesting. In 'The Final Destination,' the story is boring. We never really get to settle with the characters or learn about them enough to actually care whether or not they're going to die. In the first three films, I actually cared for many of the characters. In this film, things just happen. The characters wander from one place to another, moving the plot along without a care in the world. The only thing we learn about the main characters is who's the hero, who's the girlfriend, who's the mom, who's the asshole, etc. We don't know anything else about them.
In the previous films, the accidents portrayed in the beginning were always bad-ass and amazing. The plane explosion was intense, the highway crash/pile-up was breathless, and the roller-coaster accident was crazy (although cheesy at many points). The race car accident in this film is boring and uninteresting.
The 'Final Destination' films don't necessarily need amazing actors and actresses, though they usually do have good actors and actresses. 'The Final Destination,' however, has wooden and stiff actors/actresses. The two main leads are okay, but the other characters suck.
Honestly, the only good thing I'd have to say about this film is the fact that the pool scene was filmed down my street. My house is a few doors down from the country club where the pool scene was filmed, which was pretty cool. Other than that, the film was a letdown. The next and fifth film in the franchise is currently in the works, and tentatively titled '5nal Destination.' The filmmakers have hired Eric Heisserer to write the next film, and apparently they're hoping he takes the film in a new direction. Let's hope the next film in the 'Final Destination' series will bring back the intricate and elaborate deaths, and also the fun and joy that was included in the first three.

6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I went to this movie on the day it came out in London expecting to see something which was like the first 3, but maybe had a little change, maybe a twist from the original 3.. But i was left disappointed as it is the same as the previous 3 and is just obvious and you can just tell whats going to happen. When this situation develops, you are just going to the movie to see gruesome deaths which just send a tingle down your spine of utter disgust. This movie gets 4 stars because of the following 2 stars- 3D 2 stars- acting of Nick Zano (hunt) I don't recommend this film, but if you are a big fan of The Final Destination and are ready to see gruesome deaths based on the same concept in 3D then this movie is for you.
4/10

68 out of 119 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

In truth there's nothing especially bad about THE FINAL DESTINATION . There is I hasten to add absolutely nothing good enough to want to make you rush out and spend money on a cinema ticket fot it either . It is merely a marketing tool in order to extend a franchise that reached its zenith in the second movie and now proves there's only a limited number of ways you can kill off characters in a film before audiences stifle a yawn . Perhaps the fact that the only difference between this film's title and the original is a THE tells us all we need to know as to how much creative work went in to it ?
There is of course the small gimmick of it being shot in 3D went merely remains a gimmick. 3D movies didn't catch on it the 1980s and they won't catch on 30 years later despite the studios trying their worst . It also means
1 ) The camera angles are unnatural
2 ) If you're watching this on a 2D television then the framing of the movie is unnatural and irritating
There might be a third point and that is cinema still remains a narrative driven art form and no matter how a film is shot then if you're not compelled by the premise or plotting then everything else is secondary
As some people have pointed this sequel does seem to talk down to its audience somewhat by having signs saying a certain container is combustible etc . This is a flaw and you get the feeling that it's made entirely for dumb teenagers . Certainly the film does have dumb adolescents as protagonists which is a flaw because of of the major strong points of FD2 which makes it the best film in the series is that it contained a wide cross section of the public demographic where as whining adoslecents don't evoce much sympathy

12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I went out with some friends tonight and everyone wanted to see this movie, and it had been a long time since I saw a horror movie, so I thought it might be fun.
I saw the original 'Final Destination' when I was younger and thought it was an interesting idea, and that movie was pretty well done. This movie, however, follows the EXACT same formula, in every way shape and form. No new plot devices are used, making this movie feel exhausted and uninteresting.
All the characters are incredibly cliché for a teen horror flick. The nice, protagonist couple, the bitchy friend and her sex crazed boyfriend, etc. Not to mention the completely unnecessary sex scene in the middle of the movie, which only was shown to make sure male viewers remained moderately interested in this poor excuse for a movie, I imagine? The 'horror'. Ohhh, they loved gore, alright. Too bad that the gore came off as laughable instead of scary. I honestly can say that I was never once grossed out by the excessive amount of blood they showed, no matter how much they tried. Every 'death' that occurred in this movie was so incredibly far-fetched that it was extremely difficult to take seriously.
In conclusion, I do not recommend this movie. If you look at this as a comedy instead of horror, you may enjoy it more. You also might enjoy it more if you get drunk first. However, seeing it sober as I did will be very painful, you have been warned.
*****SPOILERS***** Also, while there are many goofs in this movie I'm sure, I would like to add that this film contains a HUGE plot hole towards the end that made me want to rip my hair out. Water would NOT extinguish a chemical fire, it would only make it worse. I believe that this was taught in... elementary school? wtf.

29 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I actually rather liked the third sequel, it was quite a bit of fun, this sequel is silly and has a lot of cheesy 3-D effects to try to revive the series so to speak. Yet again, the main lead has an epiphany about future events at a race track and we have a few survivors who are on death's list. Let's start off with the amateurish acting, and they obvious so little effort that was put forth here in this sequel. It has plenty of gore, plenty of creative sequences to set up the death sequences, but it's missing the most important element that this series has, characters that I give a damn about. I didn't care about any one of these people, and I had to go through 90 or so minutes of pure boredom when all was said and done. The most intriguing storyline for me was the security guard's character, but they didn't explore that enough for my liking, and instead focused on the two bland and wooden leads.
Performances. Bobby Campo is a terrible lead and has no talent as far as I'm concerned. I didn't give a damn about what happened to him. Shantel VanSanten looks cute, but she's no heroine that's for sure and her chemistry with Campo didn't feel genuine too me. Mykelti Williamson was the most intriguing character for me, but they didn't focus on him enough for my liking.
Bottom line. They said it was The FINAL Destination, but a 5th one is in production, how quickly things change?.
3/10

3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

You can just imagine the suits sitting around their big round table discussing how to churn out another financially beneficial Final Destination movie and get away with it. Big suit number one puts forward that they obviously need more inventive mouse trap like deaths. Big suit number two has the genius notion that 3D is again taking off so why not utilise that option too. And that's pretty much all that it took, with the end result being a movie that is very self aware of its roots, but still plays out as the runt of the Final Destination litter.
Just as the director of the first one, James Wong, was brought back to direct part 3, the makers here bring back the director of part 2, David R. Ellis, to direct part 4! Which ultimately proves to be nothing more than some sort of nepotism like factor because The Final Destination is basically just over 82 minutes of poor acting, bad writing and a series of kills weaved together by the odd 5 minutes of barely relevant characterisations (the exposition as painful as the gory deaths!).
The kills entertain as they pretty much always have throughout the franchise, with the opening disaster sequences (here set at a speedway stadium) continuing one of the series' great traditions. While the opening and closing X-Ray/Skeletal credit sequences are superb and a credit to those involved. Yet it all feels so tired, where in spite of the willingness to upgrade the technology, it's still lazy and has nothing to really justify its very being other than that to make easy money.
The makers of part 5 would have to come up with something special to not turn this franchise from being one that was once bright and inventive, into that of a money train joke. 4/10

5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

As a big fan of the series this is the biggest disappointment of all 4. It is definitely a movie that if you do not see it in 3-D, then you probably shouldn't see it at all. The movie is made to be seen in 3-D, to the point that certain scenes and characteristics seem completely out of place since they can't jump out of the screen at you. The best part of the other movies are the unique and eccentric death scenes, making you look over your shoulder in real life, wondering if something crazy could actually happen to you. The death scenes in FD4 are a complete joke compared to its predecessors and almost all of them are ruined by the trailer. I would recommend just not watching the trailer since it leaves nothing to the imagination and leaves virtually no surprises. If you're a die hard fan of the series I would recommend buying it instead of renting it since the retail version is at least in 3-D.
http://thisweeksdvdsonreview.blogspot.com/

5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

There's a lesson to be learned about movies that sell themselves on the premise that it's meant for 3D; movies like this have very little foresight--myopic at best--and add to the terrible cliché, and somewhat of a misconception, that blood and guts somehow compensates for the egregious amounts of Deus Ex Machina it takes to make this premise work at all. If you're seeing this movie because you want some 3D fun, fine, by all means purchase the grossly expensive ticket and buy your overpriced popcorn and sit there and enjoy it. The entire plot is implausible. It had the potential to be a not-so-sucky movie, but they failed to be aware of themselves during production. Seriously, the death scenes--or so called 'accidents'--would require an obscene amount of Death hating your guts. It reminded me of the let-down in Beowulf when the only sword (and only thing able) to kill Gretle JUST to happened to be hanging in his cave during the battle. Seriously? Do you really believe it? Most of all, it defies your sense of, well, common sense. In the first one (Final Destination), you really felt that these things that are being brought on by death COULD actually be accidents. (not so much with the shower gel) But in this one, you really have to think that Death is really livid at this guy messing up his whole convoluted plan. Some of the things that happen (the fire scene in the mall) are just like 'wtf?' (excuse the colloquialism). The nail gun going off after hitting the floor? It would not remain in a static state on a trigger for more than two seconds, especially with the propulsion of the nail affecting it's state of balance. I mean, come on, physics still applies! And that's completely ignoring the fact that nail guns have safety triggers, which means they won't shoot unless it's pressed against something where the nail comes out And if it's too old to have that safety function, they wouldn't be contracted to work. This movie is presumptuous and assumes the audience will buy anything it dishes out just as long as the audience gets some entertainment. Oh, and the whole tire flying over the stadium to hit the first friend casualty... not gonna happen in real life. Every death scene was like 'Come on!' in the theatre. The special effects were awful. If you were to buy this movie on DVD, it would just be awful. This movie was made to be seen in theaters, and is thus insistent upon the fact that it is only meant to be a blockbuster and nothing more. Honestly, better than the first one? No. This entire Final Destination 'franchise' should have stopped at one or two. Not four. I felt cheapened and suckered out of my money when walking out of the movie. Maybe they wanted me to feel like a 5 year old-- maybe i'd believe everything they sold me. But Final Destination was a decent movie... and this 'The' Final Destination fiasco pretty much stained the name of a good movie. I honestly wish I could get my money and my time back. If you like pointless entertainment, by all means, see it. But if you liked the first one and have SOME self respect and respect for the original, don't see it. Seriously. And if you know what Deus Ex Machina is, you will be annoyed at how much there is of it in this movie.

13 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The horror genre seems to be really dull these days. It was tough to decide which movie I was going to see tonight: Rob Zombie's HALLOWEEN sequel or the latest installment in the FINAL DESTINATION series. I watched both of the trailers and HALLOWEEN 2 seemed like it would be really boring. FINAL DESTINATION didn't look impressive either but I was sold on the 3-D and was ready to watch over-the-top death scenes in Digital 3-D at a sold out theater with a crowd that just wanted to have a good time. Unfortunately, the 3-D did more harm than good.
The original FINAL DESTINATION wasn't a classic but it is one of the better horror movies to come out in the last 10 years. The death scenes were set perfectly and really well executed and it also had a good atmosphere. The second movie, directed by David R. Ellis who returned to direct this one, was fun in some ways and the death scenes were creative but there was no reason for a sequel. The third one, I remember seeing it and not liking it. Now we have yet another unnecessary sequel where the only appeal is the 3-D.
The movie begins at the worlds worst racetrack where everything is falling apart (benches, fences, the roof, etc). Bobby Campo plays Nick who has a vision that everyone will die in the stands as the biggest crash in the history NASCAR will happen in front of them. He and his friends leave the stadium with a handful of others and they survive. It isn't long after the accident that Nick has more visions and the survivors die on some freak accidents.
This is lazy filmaking. No one is trying at all. Every performance in this movie is terrible and the script is just a mess. We learn little bits about some of the characters problems but there is no reason for us to care. One of the survivors, only known as the mechanic, says that after the accident he is trying to make changes in his life for the better. He then dies 3 seconds later. It is impossible to care about these characters, especially when one of them doesn't have a name and is just known as the mechanic. No one is trying here and they're just depending on the 3-D gimmick to bring in audiences. Honestly, you deserve better than this. The death scenes were not even well done. They are quick and just focus on throwing blood and guts in your face. In the original film, the deaths had a build up to them that were really well put together and the execution was perfect. Here, it just kind of happens. We don't even get to really know the characters enough so that we can care about them and most of them deserved to die.
This is a waste of 3-D and just an excuse to get a crowd of people to fork over their hard earned money to watch people die for an hour and a half and then leave the theater with a headache. My eyes are still sore as I am typing this review. This is one of the worst movies of the year. Do yourself a favor: instead of paying $15 to see this crap fest, go see something better like DISTRICT 9.

17 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I have watched the movie in 3D yesterday, couldn't stop thinking how foolish and ridiculous the movie was. Really bad acting. Not much of effects, just had lot of gore. The bloody and meaty scenes were awful. No true difference in 3D and non-3D, so you have an option to save about 5$. There's no genre for this movie, its not scary, horrific, suspense, thriller or even comedy. There are plenty good movies which released recently, its better to watch em twice or thrice, rather than going for super-claimed, Final destination 4 in 3D, last of the series(thank god).
Finally, i would rate it 1/10 just for 3D effect. Nothing left for actual movie.

50 out of 103 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

When it comes to the 'Final Destination' series anyone who has seen any of them knows what to expect: people survive a horrific accident because someone has a vision, and they start to die in brutal ways in the order they would've died had they stayed. After Final Destination 2 I was really excited to hear that David Ellis was returning as director and Eric Bress (one of the scribes from it as well) was back. The problem starts with the opening, since there was not much you can really do with an accident at a racetrack even with the people in the stands (the opening shots and music certainly fit I must admit). We have people crushed by an engine, impaled on wood from a broken bench, and lots of people being crushed by the overhang as it collapses. The characters and acting in the end were okay at best, but that's not what most people want to see- we want the deaths. Like many others have said, they are rather tame compared to the others in my opinion. The idea of believability is to be thrown out the window upon entering any of these films, but this time I had trouble ignoring it. The idea that death manipulates things is completely fine, but what set me over the edge was a can of hairspray moving completely on its own for quite a long distance and being unnoticed at that. The actual deaths consist of some great setups followed by lackluster payoff- none of these beat some of the better deaths in the series, whether it be an engine fan shredding a man's head open or even the simplistic deaths, such as a shard of metal lobbing the top off of someone's head. They didn't put near the time in effort into this film that they did in the previous ones, and the lack of our beloved Rune Goldberg devices certainly shows this. In the end, it did have some well-done moments: the opening credits were rather awesome with a near complete recap of the previous deaths in the series through the use of skeletons and CGI, the escalator death sequence (just about the only true 'Final Destination' death in the film gore-wise), and the opening accident itself, which despite what I said negative of above, still was rather slick from my eyes. I'd say if you must see it, see the cheap show.

10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Final Destination films have always been more suspenseful than anything, and in a genre full of stalk-and-slash films, they were always a fun diversion and often even encompassed incredibly good film-making. The newest and supposedly last installment in the ten-year series, aptly titled The Final Destination, does an incredible job of matching some of the series' best moments, and ends things in a very satisfying way. Explosions and insanity abound in the new horror film directed by David R. Ellis, and starring Bobby Campo, Nick Zano, Krista Allen, Haley Webb, and Shantel VanSanten.
So, the basis of all the Destination films relies on the opening disaster sequence, and in stunning 3-D, I believe I can honestly say that this one was the best of the four. There's all sorts of blood and cool CGI-effects blazing across the screen, it was just a very fun and exciting sequence.
Obviously by now, everyone knows the most enticing aspect about these films: the highly original and creative deaths. In this movie, it's heightened tenfold by the extremely fascinating use of the 3D, which at times sends all sorts of really cool things flying at the screen. We get a lot of really disgusting death scenes and sequences, the coolest stuff definitely taking place at a mall towards the end. Saying even a single word about the hugely inventive deaths in the film would completely spoil the whole point of the movie, but at a series high of eleven, The Final Destination displays the most kills of the entire series.
The 3D works the very best in the film when it comes to the high-definition, CGI-laden premonitions, which are vastly different than the brief glimpses at future events that were in the first and second films (the third had a complete lack of person-to-person premonitions due to the interesting and vastly original picture-death system). The premonitions are highly effective and in-your-face, for once displaying just the perfect amount of foreshadowing without going overboard. And in a Final Destination movie, foreshadowing is what it's all about.
Perhaps the most interesting thing about this installment of the series is seeing the return of 'presence' or evil force that was so prevalent in the original movie that started it all. While many of the situations and things this time around were incredibly unrealistic, the 3D definitely was an excuse for all sorts of crazy stuff. The presence works well in this installment, definitely fitting more with the semi-cheesy tone of the film overall. I really enjoyed the red herrings that popped up all throughout the movie; it almost got to a point where you're never really sure quite how a character is gonna bite it, and it makes for an extremely entertaining watch.
The acting? Probably the last thing the audience is thinking about when they come to see a Destination movie. There's some impressive performances here, and a very charismatic lead performance from Bobby Campo, but nobody is trying to win an Oscar here. It's horror, after all. All the actors and actresses are just trying to have a good time, and it really shows. They all work well off of each other. Honestly, with the short runtime, I was seriously concerned that the acting and character development would sort of fall by the wayside. In a lot of ways, the development definitely did, but the actors bring a lot of life to their characters, even the ones who have very little screen time. It's almost like a very fun little ensemble.
David R. Ellis was, absolutely, the perfect choice to close up the final chapter of the franchise. He's at home behind the camera, and he seems to really 'get' the whole feel of the movie. The tongue-in-cheek thing is his specialty; he also directed Snakes on a Plane and the well-received Final Destination 2.
What the third film succeeded in the most was three things: character development, highly realistic death scenes, and building tension to a massive boiling point. Where The Final Destination fails in building up much decent character development and in making the deaths hyper-realistic and disturbing, it succeeds in both a fun factor that wasn't present much in the other movies and building tension. Horror-suspense is pretty much the perfect genre classification for these films, and there's just as much fear and intensity emanating from the big screen in this one as there ever was before. A scene toward the middle that I especially liked where two people were in danger at the same time was one that really got to me.
For months now, I've been raving about how badly I wanted to see this movie. After all, it was without a doubt my most anticipated movie of 2009. Did it live up to the hype? Hell yes. It was every bit as brutal as I was expecting and I pretty much loved everything about it. One of my favorite things about the movie was the highly original opening credits sequence, which was sort of a lament to all of the series' death scenes. It was very well-orchestrated, and it set an extremely fun mood for the scenes that followed. All in all, this was definitely near the top of my list for best horror films of the year. It was absolutely fantastic.
While I still think Final Destination 3 was the perfect film and the best out of the stellar franchise, The Final Destination was definitely a good contender and loads of tongue-in-cheek fun. I dug the characters, dialogue, death scenes, and ending a whole hell of a lot, and I'd recommend it to any fan of the franchise or any fan of 3D.

40 out of 83 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Well guys, look at it this way. The Final Destination Series has now made its fame in the horror movie world: the gory accidental deaths, the premonitions leading up to each, the shattering conclusions. We get it... Final Destination. And if anything, this better be 'The Final Destination'. How many instalments have we endured already? Oh right, 4. I forgot since we have had so many fly our way.
I very well enjoyed the first movie. It was original, it had a cool concept that we hadn't seen before, good acting, some good gory deaths, and also some good aspiring actors that are still in movies today. The second one I enjoyed, but not as much, but I still enjoyed it. And hell, I'm man enough to even fess up to enjoying the third one, even though it was slightly retarded, but I still liked it- it had that kid from the opening scene of The Ring 2, it solidified my fear of roller coasters (I don't think I'll be going on The Mind Bender anymore or going tanning after seeing it), Had lots of gore, and that (choose their fate) thing was fun to play with.
And then I saw this one. I missed its 3D theatrical release which is something I regretted. But recently tonight I sat down and watched it in 2D on Blu-Ray, and I guess I don't regret missing it in 3D. This movie is pretty much a confirmation that the series is pure straight dead in the water (no pun intended).
The movie begins with the four principal characters: One's a guy named Nick that looks like my friend Nick, two are sexy chicks: Lori and Janet, and another guy, named Hunt, who has hair that is but a hint to how big of a douche bag he is. They are all gathered at the speedway for a bit of the ol' Speed racing... in a VERY OLD speedway. After smuggling Jack Daniels into binoculars (*makes JD smuggling plans for the coming U2 concert*... OK!!! I'm joking!!!! God, take a joke, will ya?), tampons as ear plugs, and an obnoxious racist redneck behind him, a car crash is caused by a flat tire, and the guy's car basically collapses on the speedway, and... well... its parts shoot out towards everyone! And furthermore... *dramatic music*... the speedway collapses!...
...oh, well, it was just a premonition. So like in the other movies, our heroine, Nick saves everyone... except one who escaped! Anyways, so after. Basically, there's a memorial at the speedway after it actually happens, and thus like in the other movies, a bunch if far-fetched deaths and other stuff happen, and Nick tries to 'rip up Death's list', yada yada yada. And I don't need to summarize the rest because you have seen the other three (or at least I hope you have), and so you basically know the turn of events.
Now let's take a look at the movie in general. It's called 'THE' Final Destination. The 'the' is emphasized for a reason: it's THE Final Destination. Thankfully it is. At 80 minutes, this movie goes by fast. Thankfully it does- the movie is an 80 minute re-hashing of movies 1-3, but with more deaths and gore, more of everything basically. More nudity, more douche bags, more hot girls, more... need I continue? See the problem with this movie is that as virtually plot-free as it is, it's also criminally BORING. Maybe it's because of the nausem of the first three movies. But there's nothing new, nothing exciting here. This is basically just the entire series in autopilot mode- with nothing but more deaths and gore. You can basically say this movie is The PERIOD Final Destination, but then again you could say that for the others too. And Ellis tries to fill in the void with some CG, but even that fails, because it is virtually fake looking and cheap.
Also, despite this movie being THE Final Destination, the ending leaves the gates open for a fifth movie. But why I would want to sit through a fifth installment after an arse-numbing 80 minutes of a fourth installment is beyond me. But then again, a completist, my inner hypocrite will see the fifth movie. Who am I to break up a series? So basically, by skipping this movie, you aren't missing anything. Just what you saw in movies 1-3 again, and what you will continue to see for years to come.

4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

........................................................from Pasto,Colombia...Via: L.A. CA., CAKI, COLOMBIA....and ORLANDO, FL
This is a Review of the 3-D VERSION, from the GUT! (My 'Id' was in Suspended Animation while viewing this...As was the rest of my brain!) Recently, It occurred to me that I hadn't seen a 3-D movie in a long time! (NOT Counting the SHREK shorts at Universal!) Suddenly, I had a tremendous urge to see the 3-D version, A.S.A.P.! Well, I just saw it hours ago!
This Movie and my opinion of it can easily be encapsulated in just a few words: '3-D GLASSES ON: 7*'/ 3-D GLASSES OFF: '4*!' That's the whole Enchilada! Decided to see 'The FINAL' with a very specific purpose in mind: To enjoy the hell out of the 3-D gimmick aspect! And solely based on that single criterion, it was most satisfying indeed! As entertained as I was with the 3-D images, I'd like to add some observations: Would NEVER consider seeing it again, with or without glasses! Do not think the urge to see another 3-D movie will ever grab me again, unless convinced that the film had stand alone merit.
The recent 'REAL 3-D' process, incidentally, is FAR superior to the old RED/GREEN 3-D glasses we've known for decades! No headaches! No blurry vision during the film! Much crisper and cleaner image! ' FINAL' hardly has anything else positive going for it...'Same Old-Same Old' in just about every area you could mention, except for everything related to visual & 3-D department.
4*.....ENJOY/DISFRUTELA! (If that's Possible!)
Any comments, questions or observations, in English o en Español, are most welcome!

5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Everything this film could have got wrong it did: Horrible pacing, cringe-worthy weak dialog, terrible music and literally some of the worst acting i have ever seen. All this coupled with bad special effects and unimaginative deaths scenes we have a horror film that would work better as spoof comedy. Unfortunately this film takes itself seriously and everybody comes off looking stupid because of it.
This film has none of the originality or suspense that the previous installments had, in fact its hard to believable its even part of the same series. And the acting....was just beyond horrible, i actually sat there with my mouth open. As each actor spoke i kept thinking 'ok it cant get much worse' only to be even more horrified by the next. Bobby Campo and Shantel VanSanten star as the main leads Nick and Lori, they fail miserably to give the audience any reason to care for their characters, Bobby gives the same 'im slightly confused' look thought-out the whole film, shows no emotion what-so-ever.
At a merciful one hour 13 minutes its thankfully only an hour or so of utter rubbish. One of the worst horror films i have ever seen with actors that porn stars could have upstaged.

5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink