Final Destination 3 - or "Been there, seen that, choked to death on the t-shirt"
I've seen the first two of the Final Destination movies - and thought #1 was a great horror flick. Nice concept, some decent actors and some nicely grisly deaths. All round top marks that film.
When the second film came out I went to see it and got what I expected. The same. The spark of originality had gone, and it just wasn't as good. I didn't bother with the third at all.
That is until I saw it on the bargain rack of the local video store. I'm a sucker for a horror movie cheap - and this one set me back a mere three quid. I'm for that.
But was it three quid well spent? I'm going to have to say yes, although I'm glad I didn't pay more. Replacing the big-bad accident with a rollercoaster was different and a little scary - I'm no good with heights so I don't do rollercoasters. Made the scare element quite good. But it did lack the punch of a plane crash. Once you've exploded a jet airliner then most everything else is just going to be second rate.
Once again we have a bunch of people get off just before the accident happens and then once again they start to die in increasingly bizarre ways just to prove that death can't be cheated.
So nothing original at all. Or is there? Well, to be honest - nope! You get what you expect.
But that said it is well made and some of the deaths are particularly violent or painful. And the effects are as up there as they should with this being a mainstream with a budget of over $30 million.
The film's well directed, well pace and decently acted. It has gory action sufficiently often to keep the horror fan well satisfied and I would say manages to overcome the obvious weakness of the same-old, same-old second sequel issue.
Not sure if the two review quotes on the cover "One Hell of a Ride" and "10 out of 10" are entirely justified but this is a very watchable movie.
When the second film came out I went to see it and got what I expected. The same. The spark of originality had gone, and it just wasn't as good. I didn't bother with the third at all.
That is until I saw it on the bargain rack of the local video store. I'm a sucker for a horror movie cheap - and this one set me back a mere three quid. I'm for that.
But was it three quid well spent? I'm going to have to say yes, although I'm glad I didn't pay more. Replacing the big-bad accident with a rollercoaster was different and a little scary - I'm no good with heights so I don't do rollercoasters. Made the scare element quite good. But it did lack the punch of a plane crash. Once you've exploded a jet airliner then most everything else is just going to be second rate.
Once again we have a bunch of people get off just before the accident happens and then once again they start to die in increasingly bizarre ways just to prove that death can't be cheated.
So nothing original at all. Or is there? Well, to be honest - nope! You get what you expect.
But that said it is well made and some of the deaths are particularly violent or painful. And the effects are as up there as they should with this being a mainstream with a budget of over $30 million.
The film's well directed, well pace and decently acted. It has gory action sufficiently often to keep the horror fan well satisfied and I would say manages to overcome the obvious weakness of the same-old, same-old second sequel issue.
Not sure if the two review quotes on the cover "One Hell of a Ride" and "10 out of 10" are entirely justified but this is a very watchable movie.
Comments