Sergio Leone Web Board

Other/Miscellaneous => Off-Topic Discussion => Topic started by: The Firecracker on September 02, 2009, 06:29:21 PM



Title: Final Destination 160 (2009)
Post by: The Firecracker on September 02, 2009, 06:29:21 PM
Mediocre horror movie made somewhat watcxhable by the 3-D.
In other words... waste of time and money.

This seems to be a bit more gimicky with the 3-D (unlike say... UP or BLOODY VALENTINE) and for that I raise the rating by one point.

3/10


Title: Re: Final Destination 160 (2009)
Post by: Groggy on September 02, 2009, 07:36:20 PM
My brother loves those movies but I have no interest.


Title: Re: Final Destination 160 (2009)
Post by: The Firecracker on September 02, 2009, 10:08:14 PM
Never seen the first but the 2nd and 3rd had their merits.

The first sequel has a pretty darn good opening disaster (a gruesome/brutal car pile up) because it utilizes a lot of practical effects. With the exception of an animated log and some CGI fire it all feels very organic.
The problem lies with the remainder of the movie. The deaths are entertaining, sure, but the parts in between are boring due to the sub-par high school film student acting.

The third film went the opposite route for their opening disaster set piece.
Its a bunch of CGI hokum that looks terrible. I'm sure a roller coaster accident looked good on paper but on the screen it looks like a cartoon.
The movie makes up for it with a surprisingly talented cast. If memory serves, mostly everybody was charismatic enough to keep the film running between the deaths (which weren't as brutal as they were in two but it didn't really matter too much).

This new one is just workmanlike from the get go.
From the acting to the death scenes.
No pizazz.
I guess they figured the 3-D would be the spectacle but they didn't even milk it.

It didn't help that my screening was in a relatively small screen, so the effect of the 3-D was dulled.