Final Destination 5

You spin me right round baby right round like a record baby. Hee, no surprise to find great division among horror fanatics, whatever the film or franchise, hot debate - even furious anger - can be found. FD5 has unsurprisingly garnered mixed reactions, but even allowing for the fact that as an idea it's a series that can't get better, part 5 is a considerable step up from the very poor part 4. It also boasts a neat trick of the tail, where some ingenuity is used to bring the series full circle, with a glint in the eye and a bloody tongue in the cheek. Once again the opening and closing credit sequences are superb, doffing its cap to what is undoubtedly a very popular horror franchise. The disaster that underpins the formula is one of the best to be staged, a mighty bridge collapse that terrifies and thrills in equal measure. Then of course it's same old same old, which you would think anyone venturing into watch would expect anyway. Acting is as usual mixed, but the deaths are up to the ingenious standard set throughout all the other films, and then a narrative twist at the finale arrives to seal the deal for a rollicking good time. We even get a welcome return of Tony Todd - Bonus! If it proves to be the final Final Destination then it's a fitting closure, because there is thought here. Anyone taking on another will have to come up with a whole new idea to appease the horror hordes. Enough Now. 7.5/10

***One of the best of the franchise, if not THE best*** The first "Final Destination" movie in 2000 was a rather innovative 'Dead Teenager Movie' in that the killer was Death itself, an invisible spirit. A group of people, mostly youths, 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 a highway pile-up, in the third a rollercoaster mishap, in the fourth a racetrack calamity. In this fifth and most recent film (2011) it’s a spectacular bridge collapse and it’s probably the best opening tragedy of the franchise. All of the movies in the series 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. "Final Destination 5" features Nicholas D'Agosto as the main protagonist with Emma Bell as his blonde girlfriend. Tom Cruise lookalike, Miles Fisher, is also on hand while Ellen Wroe plays the gymnast. Meanwhile Tony Todd returns as the creepy coroner who seems to know more about the situation than he should. While it’s true that you know exactly how this film will play out if you've seen the first four installments, or any of them, there are some highlights beyond the females. For one, this movie has a superb score and soundtrack, at least on par with the previous installment. Aside from featuring the most thrilling opening tragedy, there are several creative death scenes involving a gymnast accident, an Asian spa, eye surgery, a factory mishap and a restaurant altercation. This entry also throws in a unique twist that I’m not going to give away (but if you’ve seen the trailer you already know what it is). There’s an additional surprise at the end, which nicely wraps up the five-movie franchise. The film runs 92 minutes and, like the first three films, was shot in the Vancouver area (the fourth film was shot in the East). GRADE: B+

Part 5 has a lot more interesting ways to have people killed. There getting wiser and smarter with every killing.

Final Destination 5 is a solid step up from the last few entries, but it still doesn’t come close to the original. The plot follows the usual formula, with a group of people escaping a disaster only to find out that death doesn’t like being cheated. It doesn’t try to break new ground, but it delivers what fans expect. The directing is competent, with well-paced tension leading up to the signature over-the-top death sequences. The cinematography and visual effects stand out, especially with the impressive 3D work that actually enhances the experience instead of feeling gimmicky. Outside of the thrilling set pieces, the rest of the movie just exists. The acting is forgettable, with performances that feel more like reading lines than embodying characters. The script is serviceable but nothing special, mostly there to connect the death scenes. The score does its job, adding to the tension without being particularly memorable. The biggest highlight remains the creative ways the characters meet their fate, and if that’s what you’re here for, you won’t be disappointed.

'Final Destination 5' actually won me over in the end. There's a detail about it that I didn't know about before watching, it's to do with the conclusion. I'm glad I was unaware, it made it much more enjoyable to see. If you plan of seeing this, go in as blind as possible - it's worth it. The film does eventually (much of the film plays out similarly, mind) do something different with the plot, which is something I've wanted to see whilst watching the previous four entries. It involves Miles Fisher's Peter, a character that isn't perfectly written but is narrowly serviceable. Nicholas D'Agosto is a decent lead, while Emma Bell also appears - first time I've seen her act away from 'The Walking Dead'. Courtney B. Vance is solid in a smaller role, though P. J. Byrne's character is annoying; one like that is kinda a staple of these, tbf. The effects are as good as across the opening three films, but are a step above 'The Final Destination'. The main event looks the part and is fun to see, I'd say it's the best disaster in any of the sequels. There are also couple of well done deaths across the 90 minutes too. It isn't an undoubtedly good movie, but I think all in all I'd consider it just about passable. The ending might not totally work if you analysed it deeply (or maybe it would, I don't mind either way) but it worked for me so I'm happy with it.