Movie Review


FINAL DESTINATION 3

By: Rachel Reitsleff
Review Date: Friday, February 10, 2006

FINAL DESTINATION 3 takes the premise and two of the key creative staff though none of the same characters introduced in 2000's FINAL DESTINATION. The notion, introduced by Jeffrey Reddick's story in the original, is that when a psychic teen has a vision of a terrible accident and manages to save some peers by warning them, the people will eventually die anyway in extreme freak circumstances. In the first film, directed by James Wong and written by Glen Morgan & Wong (who perform the same duties here) with Reddick, it was a plane crash. In 2003's FINAL DESTINATION 2, it was a freeway accident.

The jumping-off or, to be more accurate, crashing-off point in 3 is a roller coaster ride that goes lethally out of whack. Self-proclaimed control freak and graduating high school senior Wendy (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) uneasily boards the ride with her boyfriend, her best friend and Kevin (Ryan Merriman), who winds up sitting with Wendy when she is too tense to sit at the front. Before the roller coaster gets under way, Wendy has a horrifically realistic vision of the whole thing falling apart, and killing one by one everyone aboard, including herself. Wendy's ensuing hysterics get her, Kevin and five others removed from the ride. Before too many people can tell Wendy she's just stressed out, the crash happens as foreseen. Already grieving her losses, Wendy is astonished then horrified when those who left the ride with her begin dying in truly bizarre incidents. It occurs to Wendy that there are clues in photos she took on the fateful night as to what will befall the other survivors, including Wendy and Kevin. But can these clues be used to prevent more deaths?

FINAL DESTINATION 3 gets points for inventive (and sometimes extreme) gore, dark humor and good acting from the young cast. As a director, Wong also stages some great stunts. However, writers Wong & Morgan still haven't licked the problem that was evident in the first film their premise is extremely plot-resistant, even compared to most other horror films. Having the two main characters strenuously pore over clues seems a bit of a cheat, since evading the accidents seems more a matter of luck and/or on-site observation than pragmatic warning. The structure is essentially watching Wendy and Kevin fret, have serious discussions on mortality and the hereafter and try (mostly ineffectually) to prevent more deaths, punctuated by creative catastrophes.

In a way, the movie works better as black comedy than horror, partly due to the fact that, as presented, the protagonists' quest is more absurdist than tragic and also because, while FINAL DESTINATION 3 is often bloody, it is just about never actually scary. It works for gorehounds and those who appreciate a supernatural riff that accommodates endless variations, but those seeking something that induces actual fear might do better looking elsewhere.




More Content By Rachel Reitsleff
88 Minutes
(Friday, April 18, 2008)
ALIENS VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM
(Wednesday, December 26, 2007)
HITMAN
(Saturday, November 24, 2007)
SLEUTH
(Friday, October 12, 2007)
THE SEEKER: THE DARK IS RISING
(Sunday, October 7, 2007)
HATCHET
(Friday, September 7, 2007)
RUSH HOUR 3
(Friday, August 10, 2007)
STARDUST
(Friday, August 10, 2007)
THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM
(Friday, August 3, 2007)
SUNSHINE
(Friday, July 20, 2007)
Comments/Responses
1 2 > >>
• Feb 10, 2006, 07:14am •
I haven`t seen it yet, but I can go ahead and say, without a doubt in my mind that they could of done without a sequel. I liked FD1, for a few reasons, but mostly because of the concept and the truly inventive way they killed people off.(The scene when dude`s girlfriend gets hit by the bus is the best)Even 2 was really cool as far as how they killed people off, but is it worth shelling out 12 bucks for a movie that only has that going for it and no real plot. I mean we all know, the moral seems to be that we can't cheat Death, or bad things will happen, but do we have to be reminded of it a 3rd time?
"Don`t Fear the Reaper, Man!"

• Feb 10, 2006, 07:15am •
Oh yeah, and I`m starting to question Cinescape`s review movie grades. A "B-" seems a bit high.

• Feb 10, 2006, 09:10am •
EVERYTHING reviewed on this site gets a B, B+ or B-.

Everything.

• Feb 10, 2006, 10:26am •
I don't think a B- rating "seems a bit high"... it accurately reflects the reviewers comments.

I like the Final Destination movies a lot. Not because they are scary, because they are fun. John Waters said they are the only true exploitation movies around anymore. I was hoping he'd have a cameo in this new one but I guess it did not happen.

• Feb 10, 2006, 12:32pm •
It's true that this movie isn't good by any stretch of means. The acting is choppy, the characters stale and cliche, the script a bit blah, and the story redone. But it's FD3. We're not here for any of that. Fans know how it is already. We're here for one thing, and one thing only: the incredibly creative death scenes. And on that note, this movie succeeds tenfold.

• Feb 10, 2006, 02:32pm •
Whether I enjoy this type of movie or not usually depends on where I watch it. I could easily see the review grade going from a C- in the theater to a B- on the couch with my lady.

• Feb 10, 2006, 02:42pm •
20105,

Agreed, but this site does do separate movie and DVD reviews so I have to assume the rating and commentary takes this into consideration.

• Feb 10, 2006, 03:13pm •
This is one of the few reviews where the grade actually matchesthe review. I sometimes wonder if the reviewer doesn't provide the grade, but some other person on the staff. I have seen some other decent (considering what this movie is) reviews of this flick. I like Morgan and Wong, though, if only because they brought me Space: Above and Beyond and some of the better X-Files. Even still, I won't be seeing this. Not in theaters anyway.

localsmuttmaster • Feb 10, 2006, 03:28pm •
Who cares about their grading system, it's some dudes opinion anyway. Don't judge things by what other people say. 90% of the time is what they think some thing should be. ust accept movies for what they are. If they are crap, then it sucks for who made them, but they still made some $ in the long run.

• Feb 13, 2006, 11:55am •
I would have given this movie a C if I was grading. The acting wasn't very good, especially the leads. The death scenes wree pretty good and the whole premise of how the leads knew who was going to die and how was ok, but the whole film felt very rushed. I enjoyed parts 1 and 2 a lot, but this left me empty. If you're going to se it, see a matinee. That's how I generally rate a movie, would I feel taken if I paid full price. In this case, it's not worth the $7.50 my cineplex charges for full price.

1 2 > >>
Login to post a comment!