Final Destination 3

In short, not a very exciting movie. It was not at all as good as the previous ones. Not that this was very surprising of course since the general consensus on the web seems to be that 1 & 2 are quite good, 3 & 4 not so much while the 5th is supposed to be back in shape. Unfortunately, in this 3rd installment it seems that the producer took some shortcuts and produced the all to common teenage splatter movie. That is, do not bother about spending time on a decent script nor any acting capabilities to talk about. Replace all that with some wiggling boobs and behinds to appeal to the not too intelligent part of the teenage movie going audience, kill of a few of the bearers of said boobs and behinds at regular intervals in an increasingly goory and spectacular way and you’re done. I kind of like the goory and violent bit, it’s supposed to be a horror movie after all, but I would prefer that it was strung together in something that at least can be said to be semi-intelligent way. Well, you cannot have a film collection if you do not have all the films in a series can you? So I cannot say that I regret buying the set but I do not think this one will go up on the films to re-watch list any time soon.

***Decent, but now formulaic entry in this 'Dead Teenager' series*** The first "Final Destination" movie in 2000 was a rather innovative 'Dead Teenager Movie' in that the killer was Death itself, as an invisible spirit. A group of people, mostly teens, escape a great tragedy due to a premonition of one of them and the rest of the movie involves the Grim Reaper systematically slaying the kids who cheated Death in various creative ways, usually an unlikely chain of events. The opening tragedy in the first film was a plane crash, in the second it's a horrible highway pile-up while in this third entry it's a rollercoaster mishap. All of the movies in the five-film franchise tell the same basic story with different characters and minor nuances; all of them are of the same high quality of technical filmmaking. Whether you prefer one or another depends on your preference for cast members and the death sequences (and the locations). Other than these factors they're all basically the same. Released in 2006, "Final Destination 3" has a quality doe-eyed heroine or 'final girl' in Mary Elizabeth Winstead. There are some other worthy female cast members, like Alexz Johnson, Chelan Simmons, Crystal Lowe and Amanda Crew. These five ladies represent perhaps the best assortment of women in the series yet. While it’s true that you know exactly how this film plays out if you've seen the first two installments, or any of them, there are some highlights beyond the female cast. For instance, the rollercoaster accident is thrilling and rings true in light of real-life mishaps at amusement parks. There’s also a horrifying tanning booth death sequence, which was done better in “Urban Legends: Bloody Mary” from the previous year (2005). Another death scene occurs at a warehouse where two of the protagonists work. I also liked how an extended sequence outside the teens’ school takes place in the rain, which shows attention to detail (or making the best of a rainy day during shooting, whatever). For me, what makes these movies kinda dull is the fact that it's impossible to cheat Death. Sure, you can escape it here or there, but Death's been in business for millennia and expertly knows what he's doing. As such, everyone's gonna die except maybe the 'final girl,' who will most probably die in the sequel. In case you’re interested, there's an interesting 20-minute documentary about "Dead Teenager Movies" on the 'extras' disk with Roger Ebert being a highlight. The film runs 93 minutes and was shot in the Vancouver area, as were all the Final Destination flicks, except the fourth one. GRADE: C+/B-

This has the best intro to a movie I have ever seen. I'm sure we all have thought about a disaster on a roller coaster at some point in our lives. When we are about to get on a roller coaster. It's a messed up thing to see but it's awesome to see it in this movie.

<em>'Final Destination 3'</em> is another dud from this franchise, even if it isn't anything that I'd consider truly terrible - just real forgettable. The plot is boring, the repetitiveness is starting to ring as true as expected. They aren't trying to add any freshness, just respinning the same wheel. The cast are OK, Mary Elizabeth Winstead is the better lead compared to this entry's predecessor. Those onscreen aren't strong enough to make up for the movie's many other shortcomings, though. At least the effects and deaths are still solid, certainly the best element of these follow-ups. I can't say I'm expecting much from the final two sequels, here's hoping they tried to add new intrigue - something that has been missing since the gist of the plot was revealed in the original.