Final Destination DVD > Reviews > Watch Out

Author's product rating:   

Did you enjoy it?	Liked it
Story	Good
Characters / Performances	Satisfactory
Special Effects	Outstanding
How does it compare to similar films?	Good

Advantages:	Good Fun, Impressive Deaths, Decent Performances
Disadvantages:	Fustrating Script, Some Bad Cliche, Bland Dialouge

Recommend to potential buyers:

yes

Full review

Did anyone see the trailer for this film on television? I did, and as much as I may hate to admit it, that is why I went to see the Final Destination at the cinema.

I enjoy all things horror, particularly in literature, but have always been disappointed with films (don’t you feel most leave too little to the imagination?), so the site of a room full of people jumping and shrieking made me hope this would be a real scare feast. It wasn’t. But wait. I went to see Final Destination twice at the cinema, for several different but equally pleasing reasons.

I guess, so that this opinion makes even a little sense to those who haven’t seen the film, I should explain the basic plot. Feel free to skip this is you already know it, I’ll leave plenty of room at the top and bottom so you can tell.

The lead character in the film (please don’t expect me to remember the names) has the unusual knack of seeing things before they happen. Quite a party trick if you can manage it. But instead of seeing literally into the future, this boy (teenager) sees visions of death before they happen. The story begins as he sees the explosion of the plane he and his school friends have boarded moments before take off, and inadvertently causes a small group of them to leave with him in his panic. After that, the boy comes the conclusion that death has a ‘pattern’, and that because he and his friends had avoided death, they will all die regardless in some way. He and his friends set about trying to cheat death, and the bulk of the story follows the set-pieces that show how they fail to avoid death, right until the end (?)

There we go, hope that wasn’t too boring.

Now as I said before, Final Destination is not a particularly scary movie, or at least not in the traditional sense of the word. One thing is that some of the special affects are very hard-hitting, and feelings of horror (or perhaps sickness) must reside in most viewers as they ‘wow’ at the plane crashing or the drawn out deaths. The film also relies a lot on ‘shock’ tactics, meaning things creeping up on the viewers and taking them by surprise. I admired this movie because of this. Unlike other teen-horrors, FD doesn’t build up and milk the suspense like a film in the same genre as Scream may do, it hits you out of no where and doesn’t give you time to predict what will happen. This is a very different type of horror that should either work with you or not, and a simply test would be to ask yourself this – did you fill your pants more during Jaws when the decaying face suddenly appeared underwater or during Candyman when the unsuspecting victims muttered the name five times in the mirror? That should help you out. There is one more point about this horror type though, and that is that FD uses it a lot. I said it avoids predictability, and it does to begin with but after a few shocks I at least began to guess when the next one would come. I suspect the best horror films combine elements of both techniques, but to be fair, FD doesn’t. The film may not be terribly frightening. Suspense is lacking, and chew your nails
you will not.

Now many people I’ve heard talk about this movie claim it has ‘an intelligent plot’. While I accept that the notions put forward in the film about death and it’s ‘design’ or ‘pattern’ are at least different, I can’t help feeling the distinct lack of logic that exists in favour of imagination in this film prevents it from being ‘intelligent’. Perhaps I’m just too fussy, and I know things in films are to be taken with a pinch of salt, I would not sit watching a sci-fi movie pointing out every un-realistic moment. Then again, sci-fi moves don’t generally take themselves quite so seriously as FD. Watching the film, I couldn’t shake off the feeling that the writer had, somewhere along the line, forgotten what exactly it is he is saying about death. The theory is contradicted and the boundaries are tested so much it’s almost ridiculous. There was just no logic in the plot at all. Why would death take such long and complicated routes in killing them all? (I know it is to make better cinema, but surely the writer could have justified it in some better way), it would seem more logical to have someone killed in an straight forward accident then an elaborate set-piece. Like I say, I know it is all just for good viewing, but when a writer approaches a subject as serious as death, specially when putting forward such a extravagant theory, surely some kind of consistency is required. A note of irony or sarcasm was perhaps needed to balance how over the top the film was becoming, but that was lacking and so FD seemed to take it’s self a tad too seriously. The over-all impression of the storyline? It seemed a mere basis for a series of set-pieces rather then a real plot, and the fact the plot had so many holes took much away from the film.

But what about those set-pieces. My personal favourite was the scene when the young man died in the bathroom. Once again, it was all very over the top, but it was still highly entertaining and very cleverly organized. Perhaps this is were the film is intelligent, because the complex series of events in each death were so precise. I guess this is were small amounts of suspense did exist (whoops! Contradicting myself a little here), as waiting to find out how each death turned out was excellent fun (for the sadistic among us). This is one of those films when it seems to have a lot of excellent ‘bits’, or a lot of scenes that seem to stick in your memory without gelling firmly together. While the plot was at times laughable, the horrifying scenes in the plane or some of the sudden deaths can be quite sinister to remember. It was these scenes that made me go back to watch it on the big-screen for a second time. Some films, like perhaps The Blair Witch Project or The Phantom Menace, simply have to be viewed at the cinema to gain full affect. Films that rely on big meaty scenes with high visual stimulation are aided tremendously by surround-sound and a huge screen – I haven’t seen FD on video yet but I bet a million pounds it won’t seem as good as I remember on my home television.

Amongst all the special effect however, a film needs good acting to gain full marks in my book. I remember being impressed with the role played by Kerr Smith (of Dawson’s Creek fame). It’s strange seeing him in another part, but I thought he pulled of the ‘bad boy’ role in the group well. He was the ‘attitude’ element of the cast, and I thought he did well and made the best of his part. Other notable performances were from the teacher, whose name I can not recall. Personally, I think this lady had a good script, and while her part was quite short, she gave a good performance. The same goes for most of the cast, although I don’t think the script gave any of them the chance to really make a serious acting impression. The characters, like in so many films these days, were mere extensions for the special effects and eye-pleasing events. Films that contrast this style include my personal favourite Good Will Hunting (check out my review below this one). If you are a person who thrives on a complex plot and a intelligent script, this one is perhaps a little too basic to cater for your tastes. Still, I think the young cast made good work of what they were given.

I actually can’t remember a great deal about the soundtrack to this film, which perhaps suggests it wasn’t all that good. I don’t think anyone particularly famous contributed – most of the music was your basic piano-suspense background music that clichés in most horror flicks.

So, to conclude. Like all movies, you will either enjoy this or you won’t (doh!), but why, who, what and when?

If you’re a person looking for something a little different to the typical teen-horror movie, and enjoy things in the genre in general, definitely check this film out. Some of the set-pieces are quite breath-taking, and I’m pretty sure most people will be caught out at some point by the shock tactics used in FD. The ideas about death are fairly interesting, if not very polished, and while it made me cringe a little you may find it fine to put up with. If you are impressed with the average standard of horror films around today, which I am not, this will be sure to better your expectations. I struggle to think of a clear example of a film like this, if and when I do, I shall come back and edit the opinion to suit. If your definition of good horror is strictly suspense or strictly gore, then you will either find this very lame or a great change of pace.

If you’re a person who hates all teen-horror’s – stay away, it isn’t that different. If you can be easily frustrated by a shabby plot, and seek Oscar winning acting performances, find something else. Don’t come here expecting the scare of your life, but do be prepared to walk out the cinema (dam, it isn’t here anymore!), or perhaps your living room, feeling a little dizzy. You will find yourself going back over some scenes in your mind – if your looking for a forgettable film to fill an hour maybe this isn’t right for you.

As for me, I enjoyed it thoroughly. There are a thousand better films then FD, but my bet is there is a thousand worse to match it. This film is not a classic, nor is it very scary, but it is undoubtedly entertaining. I went back to see this film again because watching the spectacular set-pieces and scenes is enjoyable, simple as that. I suggest that if you met anything like the rough criteria I’ve outlined, you book this movie straight away and watch it on as big a TV as possible and enjoy.