Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Final Destination 5 - quick review


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 of 4 OFFLINE   Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul



  • 38,028 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted August 23 2011 - 05:30 PM

While it's better than the last installment, and there is enough kill-vision sequences and actual clever kills to keep the fans of this franchise somewhat happy. There's a scene which should scare away prospective lasik patients, too. I give it 2.5 stars, or a grade of C+.
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#2 of 4 OFFLINE   WaveCrest

WaveCrest

    Producer



  • 4,140 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 2008
  • Real Name:Richard

Posted September 24 2011 - 09:34 AM

Best post any detailed comments on Final Destination 5 (3D) (2011) with the spoiler tag, just in case there's anyone who comes on the HTF who hasn't seen the film (both the 2D and 3D versions) at the cinema yet.  
 

First of all, I will give the film 3.5 out of 5. I enjoyed it that much. It's certainly better than The Final Destination (aka Final Destination 4) (2009), which I felt has been the weakest entry in the series. However, Final Destination 2 (2002) is still the best one (assuming there won't be a sixth film). If you count the ending of the third film as being real and not imaginary, the second film is the only one which ends with most of the lead actors surviving (if my memory serves me correctly, Michael Landes and AJ Cook's characters survived at the barbeque at the end of Final Destination 2).  

These films follow a familiar pattern, except when they turn things on their heads and twist things round, like they have done in this fifth film. Horror films usually do follow a familiar path and pattern, a recipe which while it is at times repetitive, can work wonders for entertainment value and hindsight memories. The Final Destination movies have been very imaginative - the death scenes a mixture of humour and scares. This fifth film lives up to what has gone before and come up with some fresh death scenes - the laser eye scene lives up to expectations generated by the theatrical trailer. It and the other death scenes were gory but at the same time entertaining. Most of the CGI in the suspension bridge scene, not long after the beginning of the film, didn't look fake. This was a problem with the fourth Final Destination, a lot of the CGI looking fake. The theatrical trailer was good with what they showed of the death scenes. I thought "they're showing the best bits and showing everything". But things went off in a different direction.  

The short running time of the last film didn't help, but thankfully this one (10 minutes longer) felt more expanded.  

Good seeing some recognisable faces like Courtney B. Vance (Law & Order: Criminal Intent) and Tony Todd (which brought some continuity).   Things were going along nicely, until three parts through the film when the path of the story went off in an unexpected direction. And the end was baffling and threw the whole timeline up in the air. It was one of those endings which you don't want to reveal, as it made Final Destination 5 even better. But I didn't like the clips show ending, showing clips from other Final Destination movies. Not sure if those were altered so that they could be shown in 3D, but I thought the clips show was pointless. I'm guessing that this will be in the last film in the series, although you can never say never with a horror franchise.

 

#3 of 4 OFFLINE   Shubham Kashyap

Shubham Kashyap

    Auditioning



  • 1 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2012

Posted September 14 2012 - 01:31 AM

Death did not enjoy the extended weekend, with Final Destination 5 releasing in 3D. Death (personified rather creepily by Tony Todd, the only recurring member of the series) had to perform its seasonal rituals, against those who defied the rules of the cosmic universe. It was Independence Day for some, and a gruesome travel to their ‘final destination’ for an unfortunate few. It’s been 12 years since the first Final Destination movie blew us away, with its clever premise and not much has changed plot wise, with the fifth installment. Since the first bunch of people escaped the Flight 180 crash, Death has been standing guard – through 4 more films – at anybody who dare defy the cosmic laws of the universe. One by one, each person gets scratched out and you can’t help but think of Death as a Death Eater prototype, sitting in a grey cloud with a notepad of all the names. However, 5 movies later, a clever premise has now been transformed into a grotesque, gory parade of jaw droppers. You could easily watch the entire movie through the slit between your fingers, while your hand covers your eyes. If you’ve followed the series from the first film, you will sense a slight disappointment. But for those of you who are just in for the blood and gore, Final Destination 5 is money well spent. Final Destination 5 has a brand new cast, mostly from television series. Sam (Nicolas D'Agosto, from Heroes) is the one who sees a premonition about a breaking bridge. The lucky few who manage to escape include Emma Bell (The Walking Dead) playing Sam’s girlfriend; Miles Fisher (Gossip Girl) also Sam's coworker and best friend; and P.J.Byrne (Horrible Bosses) as a distant co-worker. Director Steven Quayle, also James Cameron’s protégé, leaves no stone unturned with regard to visual effects. For once, the usage of 3D is justified, when the characters are all burnt, boiled, poked, laser-ed to death. While the premise remains ( rather predictably at that), somehow you feel through the years, this franchise has become more about the blood and gore than about visually playing out one of the most interesting concepts to come out of the movies. The cinematography is in line with the genre, we intercut between slow establishing scenes and fast-paced cuts of the death scenes. The film maintains a blue tone, and when coupled with eerie background score provides a true horror experience. If you get time to think between flying objects whooshing at you and blood drops splattering across the screen, you’ll realize the film approaches the most superficial part of your psyche – and so, it becomes that much more important to bring that out to discuss. It’s a typical discussion; one which adopts a to-each-their-own fixation.:D:D:D:D:D:D:o:o[/I][/I][/I]

#4 of 4 OFFLINE   Stan

Stan

    Screenwriter



  • 2,258 posts
  • Join Date: May 18 1999

Posted September 14 2012 - 03:19 AM

Never saw it in 3-D, just the standard DVD version when Redbox got it, but some pretty obvious 3-D gimmicks thrown in. I think it was probably the weakest in the series. The trailers looked great, especially all the action on the bridge. But as often happens, the trailer was filled with the best scenes while the movie itself was pretty lame. Don't know how financially successful it was, but I'd be willing to bet another entry will follow in the next year or so.
Stan




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users