Print Page | Close Window

Final Destination: INADVERTENT HUMOR?!?

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: FORUMS on 2009 RELEASES
Forum Name: FINAL DESTINATION 3-D
Forum Discription: Death by Escalator, Death by Car Wash...Death by LAUGHING?!?
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3819
Printed Date: October 22 2014 at 7:13am


Topic: Final Destination: INADVERTENT HUMOR?!?
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: Final Destination: INADVERTENT HUMOR?!?
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 9:49am

OKAY, WE ADMIT IT: WE DO HAVE a DEFINITE BIAS AGAINST "HORROR MOVIES,"  LARGELY BECAUSE RECENT ONES HAVE BEEN EITHER SHAMELESSLY DERIVATIVE, INDEFENSIBLY GRAPHIC in THEIR GORE...or BOTH.

WE'LL GRANT THAT the PROMOs for http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=380 - FINAL DESTINATION 3-D  DID MAKE US LAUGH OUT LOUD...and WE'RE ASSUMING THEY WERE MEANT TO... BUT EVEN GIVING the FILM-MAKERS PROPS for HAVING a SENSE of HUMOR, THIS ONE LOOKS MORE SILLY THAN SCARY:

THE GIRL GETTING CRUSHED in the ESCALATOR REMINDS US of the OLD JOKE ABOUT HOW DUBYA WAS ONCE STRANDED on an ESCALATOR for HOURS DURING a BLACKOUT...

THE DEATH-by-RADIAL-TIRE MADE US THINK of a VARIATION on the OLD FIRESTONE MOTTO:"WHERE the RUBBER MEETS...the FACE..." 

...and the CHICK MEETING HER DEMISE in a CAR WASH LEFT US WONDERING -- DID SHE ORDER the CARNAUBA WAX??

SO, NOW THAT WE'VE TRASHED IT, IT's YOUR TURN. FEEL FREE to EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS BELOW... AWARE the WHOLE TIME THAT ALL of YOU, TOO, ARE GONNA DIE...WELL, EVENTUALLY! 

WOW! This Death-by Carwash is Just Like the Shower Scene from the Original PSYCHO...

Except That's It's Not Plausible, It's NOT That Scary...and It's Actually Laughably Dim-Witted!   



-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry



Replies:
Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 10:02am

I think I want my departure to be the result of being run over by an icecream truck.

I want a series of 4 tomb stones, each with a one line description...in order they will read:

We all must die

And go to our grave

So live it up!

Burma Shave

(The younger members of our group are probably puzzled, but a few of you will get it)



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 10:24am
(The younger members of our group are probably puzzled, but a few of you will get it)

Burma-Shave was an American brand of brushless shaving cream, famous for its advertising gimmick of posting humorous rhyming poems on small, sequential highway billboard signs. EPIC FAIL.

Anyways, like I said in the other thread, FD is one of the few franchises where the critics liked the recent sequels more than the original film. This seems assuring:

"Warner Bros. has forbidden me from tweeting how much fun FD4 is and that I think you should all go see it this weekend. So I won't do that." - BrianWCollins (from twitter)


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 10:33am

Well, perhaps there is a measure of reassurance in seeing that you have some familiarity with a Google search.

However, I think I could create a list of at least 86 million ways I'd rather have fun than watching a movie about people getting snuffed in "creative" ways. Count me out. And while we are at it, color me skeptical that Warner Bros. is "forbidding" anyone from generating positive word of mouth about this film. It'll probably need all it can get.



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 12:01pm

Wow, everyone's worst fear: death by carwash ... in 3-D!

It's bad enough that horror movies exist for the sole purpose of watching how people can die in over-the-top ways, but do we really need to see them die in 3-D as well?

Hell no! What's next, "Hostel 3-D"?



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 3:39pm
Even if the gimmick behind FD was fresh, it pushes the limits of patience with this 4th movie. Not to pass pre-judgment, but this really isn't a schtick that you can keep doing over and over without get boring. Because when it's this schticky, you're going to compare it to every other "gag" they've ever pulled. Which is why the Saw franchise is also dying.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: movieman
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 4:01pm
I have to admit that as cheesy as these movies are, I kind of enjoy them. They aren't what I would call "scary", but I don't think that's what they aspire to be. The reason these movies work (for me at least) is because of their macabre sense of humor, the spectacularly stylish bloodshed, and the dementedly clever death-traps set for idiot teens to fall into.

So yeah, I am looking forward to this one, because with these movies, you can feel the zeal and imagination going into the making -- unlike dreadful, bleak movies like Halloween 2, which are made without talent or skill, and with the sole purpose to depress the audience, arouse ugly and vile feelings...and leave them wishing they had their money back.

-------------


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 26 2009 at 1:13am

When any movie's "big selling point" is the the fact that it's in 3-D, it's never a good sign...

 



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 26 2009 at 8:32am
Originally posted by Michaels

When any movie's "big selling point" is the the fact that it's in 3-D, it's never a good sign...


The death scenes are the selling point. The 3D is just a huge plus.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 26 2009 at 8:58am
Since the film is released 2 days earlier in France (Wednesday, which is today), I got to read some comments on twitter and people seem to be enjoying it so far. *crosses fingers* I hope it's good.


Posted By: Knative
Date Posted: August 26 2009 at 10:07am
Originally posted by Michaels

Wow, everyone's worst fear: death by carwash ... in 3-
D!




There is actually a deadly car wash near where I live. Some high school kid
died in the machinery about 3 years ago. So you all laugh now, but you
won't be laughing tomorrow when you stumble upon the car wash of
SATAN!!!


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 26 2009 at 11:34am
Here's the NEGATIVE Variety review if anyone is interested: http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117940902.html?categoryid=31&cs=1 - http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117940902.html?categoryid=3 1&cs=1


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 26 2009 at 1:48pm
MWG, just remember that advanced screenings are typically reserved for people who are going to be into the movie no matter what. Look at GI Joe.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 27 2009 at 2:00am

Originally posted by moviewizguy

The death scenes are the selling point. The 3D is just a huge plus.

Huge plus? Try annoying gimmick that's getting quickly stale considering it's been used in 2 dozen movies within the past years alone.



Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 27 2009 at 8:07am
3D comes once a decade, and often quickly leaves when people remember how much of a headache it gives you. As much as I enjoyed Coraline, it was a real pain to keep that up for that long. Maybe FD3D is the straw that'll break the Camel's back for the 2000's.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 27 2009 at 8:41am
Originally posted by Michaels

Huge plus? Try annoying gimmick that's getting quickly stale considering it's been used in 2 dozen movies within the past years alone.


Really? Some movies are using the 3D to immerse the audience in the movies' environment, like "Coraline" and the upcoming "Avatar." This new 3D isn't getting stale at all.


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: August 27 2009 at 9:28am

Actually 3D techniques have improved radically since the old red and blue glasses days of the 50's, and cheesy productions like Creature From the Black Lagoon. (By far, my favorite movie monster and the film is actually better in non-3D). We have Disney studios to thank for the advances in 3D, but quite honestly, it is still more of a gimmick than an attraction.

But to address another issue, I've never been particularly terrified of dying in a car wash. My fear has more to do with financial ruin. On that score, paying 7 bucks to  let a robot pee on my car is a bit much to handle.

Originally posted by dEd Grimley

3D comes once a decade, and often quickly leaves when people remember how much of a headache it gives you. As much as I enjoyed Coraline, it was a real pain to keep that up for that long. Maybe FD3D is the straw that'll break the Camel's back for the 2000's.



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: JoBloMovieGoer
Date Posted: August 27 2009 at 10:25am

Just found out from a Variety review (the only one posted so far at RT) that this is from the director of "Snakes on a Plane." While that movie was funny, it wasn't nearly the laugh-fest its title seemed to promise. Haven't decided yet if that fact bodes well or ill for this film...

Here's a http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117940902.html?categoryid=31&cs=1 - LINK to read the entire Variety review (which is basically a slam).

 



Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: August 27 2009 at 12:38pm

Originally posted by moviewizguy


Really? Some movies are using the 3D to immerse the audience in the movies' environment, like "Coraline" and the upcoming "Avatar." This new 3D isn't getting stale at all.

The only thing I've ever really felt "immersed" in while watching a 3D movie was the greed of the studios that require me to cough up a couple of extra bucks per ticket. Heck, I can see a couple of 3D releases in standard format and save enough to let the robot pee on my car.



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 27 2009 at 2:16pm
I'll be posting some reviews here from a guy on IMDb. I must admit, I'm surprised. There are positive reviews so far (most from UK). You can argue that they are mediocre but that's MUCH better than any one of us were expecting:

3/5 - http://www.thelondonpaper.com/going-out/whats-new/the-final-destination-film-review - http://www.thelondonpaper.com/going-out/whats-new/the-final- destinatio n-film-review
C (But very positive) - http://www.film.com/features/story/the-final-destination-uk-review/29889220 - http://www.film.com/features/story/the-final-destination-uk- review/298 89220
3/5 - http://www.citylife.co.uk/cinema/reviews/17027_the_final_destination__%20%2015_ - http://www.citylife.co.uk/cinema/reviews/17027_the_final_des tination__ 15_
3/5 - http://www.timeout.com/film/reviews/87472/the-final-destination.html - http://www.timeout.com/film/reviews/87472/the-final-destinat ion.html
5/10 - http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/reviewsnews.php?id=11563 - http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/reviewsnews.php?id=1156 3
3.5/5 - http://movies.ign.com/articles/101/1018702p1.html - http://movies.ign.com/articles/101/1018702p1.html
4/5 - http://www.movies.sky.com/review/final-destination-4 - http://www.movies.sky.com/review/final-destination-4
3/5 - http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/aug/28/final-destination-review-3d - http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/aug/28/final-destination -review-3d
Short but sweet review: http://news.scotsman.com/entertainment/Film-review-The-Final-Destinati%20%20%20on.5596372.jp - http://news.scotsman.com/entertainment/Film-review-The-Final -Destinati on.5596372.jp
Another short but sweet - http://www.heraldscotland.com/arts-ents/film-tv-reviews/the-final-dest%20ination-1.824744# - http://www.heraldscotland.com/arts-ents/film-tv-reviews/the- final-dest ination-1.824744#
Variety's very negative review: http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117940902.html?categoryid=31&cs=1 - http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117940902.html?categoryid=3 1&cs=1
Weekly Pick + Review (They say it's the best movie to see this weekend!) - http://flixer.com/the-final-destination-2009-weekly-pick-review - http://flixer.com/the-final-destination-2009-weekly-pick-rev iew


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 27 2009 at 3:18pm

saturnwatcher speaks the truth, for every "Coraline" or "Avatar", we get 12 more movies that are just using 3-D solely as a gimmick to suck more money out of you. Kinda like for every 10 movie reviews you post that say the movie is "okay at best", there will be 100 more saying it sucks and shouldn't have been made. 



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 28 2009 at 8:09am
Wow. The reviews are coming in and they are BAD. I feel kinda depressed now. I never thought these movies would be that bad. These reviews are BAD.


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: August 28 2009 at 8:21am
I know... I'm stunned.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 28 2009 at 2:24pm

Oh, God. This is so horrible. Don't you just hate it when the movie you're looking forward most in this year turns out to be one of the worst reviewed movies of this year? I've waited over a year for this movie, since it was announced in November 2007!

This is just sad (well, for me, anyway).



-------------


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 28 2009 at 3:14pm
Maybe my super low expectations will help me like the movie even more? I totally would do that for every movie if that worked all of the time.


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: August 28 2009 at 4:47pm

Call me a maverick if necessary, but if I want to see a movie, I go to see it regardless of the critical opinion. It has happened that I've enjoyed movies that the lion's share of critics didn't care for. The world continued to spin on regardless of the fact I liked a movie that got panned. It has also happened that I have gone to a movie that got fried by critics and walked out saying, "Wow, the critics were right...that movie blew." No harm done. By the way, I've probably had more experiences of going to see movies that were well received by critics that I personally found unbearably tedious.

If you can bear one moment of insufferable, old-guy advice, you are going to find people attempting to tell you what to think for the rest of your life. Make up your own mind!



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 1:57am

Thank you, saturnwatcher. That's a good advice. I'll be watching it in like 2 hours anyway.

I need to see at least one FD movie in theaters before I die. 

Originally posted by saturnwatcher

Call me a maverick if necessary, but if I want to see a movie, I go to see it regardless of the critical opinion. It has happened that I've enjoyed movies that the lion's share of critics didn't care for. The world continued to spin on regardless of the fact I liked a movie that got panned. It has also happened that I have gone to a movie that got fried by critics and walked out saying, "Wow, the critics were right...that movie blew." No harm done. By the way, I've probably had more experiences of going to see movies that were well received by critics that I personally found unbearably tedious.

If you can bear one moment of insufferable, old-guy advice, you are going to find that people are going to be attempting to tell you what to think for the rest of your life. Make up your own mind.


 



-------------


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 3:11am
Here's a creepy FD moment:

http://omg.yahoo.com/news/dj-am-found-dead-in-nyc-police-sources-suspect-drug-overdose/27062?nc - http://omg.yahoo.com/news/dj-am-found-dead-in-nyc-police-sou rces-suspect-drug-overdose/27062?nc

Basically, this guy survived a plane crash a year ago and now he turns up dead the exact day this film was released (yesterday). CREEPY!


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 4:55am

The only creepy thing about it is that people like you are trying to make it seem like this movie had anything to do with that guy's death. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill!

As a man named Gump once said, "Sh*t Happens!" And that's exactly what's happening here...  



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 7:57am
I just came back from watching the movie. I'll post a longer review later but my one-sentenced review? Disappointing.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 11:55am
On what should have been a fun-filled day at the races, Nick O'Bannon has a horrific premonition in which a bizarre sequence of events causes multiple race cars to crash, killing him and his friends. When he comes out of this grisly nightmare Nick panics, persuading his friends and others to leave, escaping seconds before Nick's frightening vision becomes a terrible reality. Thinking they've cheated death, the group has a new lease on life, but unfortunately, it is only the beginning. As his premonitions continue and the crash survivors begin to die one-by-one Nick must figure out how to cheat death once and for all before he, too, reaches his final destination.

I would like to start off by saying I'm a fan of the FINAL DESTINATION series. Even the much maligned third film is starting to grow on me. When it was announced that David Ellis was returning to the director chair (along with screenwriter Eric Bress), I was quite excited, considering that part two is arguably the best in the series. But this one. If I were to describe this film in one word, I would say DISAPPOINTING. In fact, this is one of the most disappointing movies of this year! The fact that the makers of part two has returned just adds on to the frustration.

The movie starts off pretty good. The premonition sequence works fantastically with the 3D, even though it's not as good as part two's brilliant car pile-up. The opening credits is ingenious, showing us the previous films' memorable death scenes. From there on, I was enjoying the film for what it was. This film also contains the most ironic and funniest death scene in the whole series but since everyone knows that people go watch these movies for the death scenes, I'll keep my mouth shut. One paradoxical thing I should say is that the death scenes in here are more for quantity than quality, which is quite unfortunate. However, these deaths work really well with the 3D.

In fact, one can argue that the laziness from the filmmakers is because of the format of the 3D. You see, what's presented on the screen should work in relationship with the 3D. Even the clever foreshadowing from the previous films are quite blatant here, most of them just being premonitions that (like I said earlier) works in relationship with the 3D. The filmmakers have embraced the fact that their film is in 3D and uses all of the tricks in the book to use the 3D to add to the entertainment.

But there's a huge problem: There comes a point in the film where things get tedious, uninteresting, and predictable. Like I said, the death scenes are just so unoriginal and lazy, some even borrowed from the previous three films! Sure, there are some funny scenes and scenes in which the characters in the film are aware that they are in a film, like the SCREAM films. However, you just wish that the filmmakers could have done better from what they were given. You would be thinking, "This is all they can do?" by the end of the movie.

The characters in here are more like an excuse to kill them off later, which doesn't really bother me. It's apparent that this isn't a movie but more of a carnival ride, waiting to see who dies and how they will die. However, I would liked to have known more about two characters in the film that we barely get to see in the film before getting killed off in a gruesome way. The most fleshed out character is played by Mykelti Williamson, who also starred in FORREST GUMP. The main characters are sufficient enough in their role, usually just screaming or looking afraid. It's not that hard to do.

Another problem of in the movie was the pacing. It felt way too rushed with a running time of 75 minutes without credits. There's barely enough time to learn anything from characters or about characters. This is, by far, the weakest in the series because there's nothing new, which means it's going to be predictable. The only thing they have left is the anticipation of who's going to die and even that doesn't work here. Usually, in the FINAL DESTINATION films, there's suspense in how a person is going to die. In here, the deaths just appear out of nowhere. There's only the punchline and not the joke.

By the end of the film, you feel underwhelmed. There's nothing new here. You wished they could have done better. In fact, you KNOW they could have done better. If they were to make a fifth film (which I wouldn't mind), they better put some thought into it. If you're thinking about to watch this movie only ONCE, you should see it in its intended format: 3D AND in theaters. Other than that, there should be no other reason to wait for it on DVD or watch it in theaters in 2D. This is so unfortunate. The film started off big and ended in a whimper. 5/10


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 12:34pm
This film opened with $28.3 million. As a FD fan, I'm really happy, even though this chapter in the series was disappointing. I hope they make a sequel to fix the things they did wrong here. Maybe some thought on the death scenes? Anywho, that's about it.

Also, the film currently has a 30% on RT, which makes the first film still the lowest in the series. Weird.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 1:27pm
Or better yet, since it was such a disappointment -as all fourth movies in a series are- they could not make any more sequels and let this tired series die.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 6:01pm
You got 4 movies out of a 1 movie idea. Take what you got and run, MWG. There's no need to drag this on any longer.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 04 2009 at 12:39pm
One thing I loved in this movie is that it has the funniest and the most ironic death scene in the whole series! I really loved that sequence.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 05 2009 at 2:57am

If H-Wood is dumb enough to make more movies out fo these series, they need to go to straight to DVD, where all the sequels should have gone in the first place.



Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: September 05 2009 at 2:55pm
Ya know, I just saw the commercial for Sorority Row again, and I really think these movies are only getting worse and worse and worse. They seem to be trying to take the element of scary out of horror movies.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 05 2009 at 3:41pm
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

Ya know, I just saw the commercial for Sorority Row again, and I really think these movies are only getting worse and worse and worse. They seem to be trying to take the element of scary out of horror movies.

I wasn't planning on seeing that movie in theaters. The first thing that popped into my head while watching the previews was "I Know What You Did Last Summer"! But silly me, it's actually a remake of "The House on Sorority Row," which was released in 1983.

However, I saw the preview again and again before movies in theaters and it started to grow on me. Some parts of the trailer actually scared me! Now I might actually go watch it in theaters! Not only that but the first two reviews online are actually HIGHLY POSITIVE! One is from a blooger, which I know you guys won't care of but the other is from Fangoria, http://www.fangoria.com/reviews/2-film/3808-sorority-row-film-review.html - http://www.fangoria.com/reviews/2-film/3808-sorority-row-fil m-review.html . Twitter updates also show that people liked the movie a lot. Now if this praise continues, I will watch it in theaters.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 05 2009 at 4:14pm
Here's a HILARIOUS spoof of TFD. I never laughed so hard in a looong time! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOwwuUnCtSg - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOwwuUnCtSg


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 06 2009 at 3:24am
Ah, two highly positive online reviews for "I Know What You Did Last Summer Part 4", er, I mean "Sorority Row", that can mean only one thing ... the next 100 reviews will all be negative. That seems to be the pattern.


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: September 06 2009 at 3:05pm

Originally posted by dEd Grimley

Ya know, I just saw the commercial for Sorority Row again, and I really think these movies are only getting worse and worse and worse. They seem to be trying to take the element of scary out of horror movies.

The suspicion here is that these guys have become so completely clueless about how to draw the appropriate reactions out of their audience they can't even take their own work seriously anymore and now they are just doing stupid self-parodies.

Maybe they all ought to take a year off and go back and watch some of the classic genre pieces from the past (i.e pre original Halloween et al)...they could all learn that when it comes to envoking fear in the audience, less is more. We can all scare ourselves worse than anything they put on the screen with a simple suggestion rather than a graphic representation. They have succeeded in desensitizing their audiences to the point that all shock value is gone. Maybe it's time to take a good step backward.

Lest anyone forget, the scariest moments in the classic movie Jaws all occured before we saw Bruce. There was practically no graphic gore in that movie...only the suggestion of it.



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: September 06 2009 at 5:21pm
The problem is that they're still drawing people into the theaters. People apparently don't want to actually be "scared" they just like the idea of surreal violence.
MWG, if you're "scared" by this, especially considering all the horror movies you claim to see, you're a liar, or one of the world's biggest p...wussies of all time. And I'm not trying to be a dick about this, but there is no way you can possibly think that there's anything in this movie that you haven't seen before.
Horror movies today are turning into episodes of The Mighty Morphin Power Rangers... a slightly different plot, with the exact same conclusion each and every time.
I'll give credit to your Orphan fixation - at least it's not another 1 star slasher crapfest. Or another nothin-doin' haunting.


-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 07 2009 at 3:20am

Originally posted by dEd Grimley

The problem is that they're still drawing people into the theaters. People apparently don't want to actually be "scared" they just like the idea of surreal violence. 

Exactly! And that is why I have no respect for modern day horror movies or their fans.



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 07 2009 at 5:58am
Originally posted by Michaels

Exactly! And that is why I have no respect for modern day horror movies or their fans.


You're kind of a hypocrite. You say you hate modern horror movies because they have only violence yet you bash on Orphan, a movie which clearly relies on suspense and build-ups to make the audience get in the edge of their seats. Another horror movie that doesn't rely on violence is The Strangers. I didn't like the movie at all but that film uses atmosphere and barely show any blood. If there is violence, they usually show it off screen.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 07 2009 at 6:39am
Originally posted by Michaels

Ah, two highly positive online reviews for "I Know What You Did Last Summer Part 4", er, I mean "Sorority Row", that can mean only one thing ... the next 100 reviews will all be negative. That seems to be the pattern.

To be fair, Fangoria gave both H2 and TFD negative reviews and the first review on RT is also positive, from Empire. I think we can all agree it will do better with the critics than most horror movies.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 07 2009 at 6:42am
Originally posted by dEd Grimley


MWG, if you're "scared" by this, especially considering all the horror movies you claim to see, you're a liar, or one of the world's biggest p...wussies of all time. And I'm not trying to be a dick about this, but there is no way you can possibly think that there's anything in this movie that you haven't seen before.

Ok. I worded it the wrong way. I JUMPED during the trailer.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 07 2009 at 11:50am

Originally posted by moviewizguy


Ok. I worded it the wrong way. I JUMPED during the trailer.

I YAWNED more than once during the trailer.



Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: September 07 2009 at 11:56am
Originally posted by moviewizguy


Originally posted by dEd Grimley

MWG, if you're "scared" by this, especially considering all the horror movies you claim to see, you're a liar, or one of the world's biggest p...wussies of all time. And I'm not trying to be a dick about this, but there is no way you can possibly think that there's anything in this movie that you haven't seen before.
Ok. I worded it the wrong way. I JUMPED during the trailer.


Really?... Seriously?... You're kidding me, right?...
Are you sure you're a dude, dude? SR is a chick horror movie... For chicks, that is, not just because it stars them.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 07 2009 at 1:28pm

Originally posted by dEd Grimley


Really?... Seriously?... You're kidding me, right?...
Are you sure you're a dude, dude? SR is a chick horror movie... For chicks, that is, not just because it stars them.

I saw the trailer for "Anaconda 2" in theaters and I swear, the woman next to me jumped at the sight of the giant snakes. I rolled my eyes because how could anyone be scared by the sight of such obiviously fake CGI snakes? If you're scared of CGI effects, you're either a little kid or just a plain lightweight.



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 07 2009 at 2:36pm
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

[QUOTE=moviewizguy]
Really?... Seriously?... You're kidding me, right?...
Are you sure you're a dude, dude? SR is a chick horror movie... For chicks, that is, not just because it stars them.

I'm sure if you view the trailer in the theaters with full blasted sound effects that you would jump at some parts, like where the guy stabs the girl who he thought she was "dead" and the end where Carrie Fisher--


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: September 07 2009 at 2:44pm
... Honestly, dude. No, no I wouldn't. The only time I jump at movies like that is when someone next to me is inexplicably scared by something like that. Every once in a while you get those "gotcha" moments, but those aren't realy scares, those are... startles. Movies aren't even trying to scare people anymore. One thing about the Blair Witch Project, they actually tried to be scary. Haven't seen much like that in a while. But then again, that's a gimmick that can't work too often.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 08 2009 at 4:10am
So, what MWG just said is that it's the atomsphere of a theater with a big screen and loud speakers that makes one jump during a horror movie trailer ... not the quality of the horror movie itself. So in that case, any "jump" worthy moments in the movie are gone when watched in any other format, which is not a good sign of quality in a horror movie, which should scare you no matter what format it's presented in.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 08 2009 at 9:31am
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7DtgF-V2fqI/SqVmRW8rmaI/AAAAAAAAAL8/-nRZ8xH8PuY/s1600-h/graph.jpg - http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7DtgF-V2fqI/SqVmRW8rmaI/AAAAAAAAAL 8/-nRZ8xH8PuY/s1600-h/graph.jpg


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 08 2009 at 1:25pm
Now if there's anything more scary about those movies, it that graph, because it proves some movie goers really are just plain stupid to buy into a product that was one note for the past 9 years.


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: January 25 2010 at 2:43pm
I went through the late third of 2009 thinking this was among the worst films of the year. My friends agreed. I hoped it had some chance at Worst Picture, but does this movie have any redeeming qualities? (please answer without citing Revenge of the Fallen and The Rise of Cobra if at all possible!)

-------------


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 25 2010 at 5:58pm
Originally posted by GTAHater767

I went through the late third of 2009 thinking this was among the worst films of the year. My friends agreed. I hoped it had some chance at Worst Picture, but does this movie have any redeeming qualities? (please answer without citing Revenge of the Fallen and The Rise of Cobra if at all possible!)
I can't mention any 80s cartoons being ruined by H-Wood for profit?! Damn it! Okay, um .... "Street Fighter: Legend of Chung-Li" .... if enough people write-in vote it. As for redeeming qualities, no, there are none.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: January 25 2010 at 6:12pm
I'm not really sure how Trannies or GI Blow factors in, other than they probably weren't as comically bad as Chris Klein in SF:LoCL. But that's one of those things where only he really deserves the award.

Here's my new award though, let's Razz the entire year of 2009. It was probably the worst year that most of us will see in our lifetimes. Movies and otherwise.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 28 2010 at 5:42pm
Here's a good quote from the producer of the film on how people view violence and how that affected the way they set the tone for this film:

“We’ve had a problem with the kids being really gloomy and moody in the past, and although I would never pull back on the violence or black comic elements, I think it was important to show that this generation has a slightly different view of violence. Look how kids capture everything that happens on their cell phones and upload it to YouTube. There’s more of a care-free ambivalence to the whole thing. It’s the whole “Jackass” where they film each-other getting hit by cars and laughing in the background. Part of the fun will be having these kids take it slightly lighter in the beginning, and then as it gets closer to them… they start to acknowledge the reality of the situation.”


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 28 2010 at 6:13pm
MWG, you do realize the only reason why this movie made so much money is because of the 3-D surcharges, right? You yourself said it was a disappoint. Do yourself a favor, and stop defending this movie. The studio has not out to make a good movie out of this series any more, they are just making sequels to suck more money out of teenagers' wallets and the whole 3-D thing was the gimmick they needed.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 29 2010 at 5:37pm
If you actually read my post, you would have noticed it was a continuation of audience's fascination on violence on that other thread. I was in no way defending the movie like you say I am.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 29 2010 at 7:17pm
Originally posted by moviewizguy

If you actually read my post, you would have noticed it was a continuation of audience's fascination on violence on that other thread. I was in no way defending the movie like you say I am.
Come on, why else does anyone go see a horror movie in 3-D? The acting? The well fleshed out characters? The multi-layered plot? No, you go to see the killing in 3-D. The murders in horror movies are like the sex scenes in pornos, without them, there's no point to the movie. The 3-D is just a gimmick to make extra money.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: January 29 2010 at 8:52pm
Well, that depends on the horror movie. Most of the best ones have very little actual killing. In fact, it seems like the higher the body count, the less actual "horror" there is.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 30 2010 at 6:17am
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

Well, that depends on the horror movie. Most of the best ones have very little actual killing. In fact, it seems like the higher the body count, the less actual "horror" there is.
Ah, yes, but those days are long gone. Instead now we have nothing but killings and we have these teenagers sworing up and down that it's just as good and entertaining and deserves to be produced.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 30 2010 at 7:41am
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

Well, that depends on the horror movie. Most of the best ones have very little actual killing. In fact, it seems like the higher the body count, the less actual "horror" there is.

Actually, if you look at the original Halloween and Nightmare on Elm St., they had "high" body counts, depending on the way you look at it. You take the number teens/characters that die in a movie over how many teens/characters there were. It's like proportion. Oh, and Orphan had like only three.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: January 30 2010 at 8:05am
... And neither of those movies were actually scary.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 30 2010 at 12:46pm
Originally posted by moviewizguy


Actually, if you look at the original Halloween and Nightmare on Elm St., they had "high" body counts, depending on the way you look at it. You take the number teens/characters that die in a movie over how many teens/characters there were. It's like proportion. Oh, and Orphan had like only three.
And the very first and original "Halloween" and "Nightmare" were fine they way they were, until a million sequels were made for each of them and it became a whole "what over the top ways can we kill people this time" deal.
 
Oh, and no one cares about "Orphan", it's not going to get any Oscar nods, give it up. My bet on it getting shut out still stands.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: January 30 2010 at 2:43pm
The thing about Orphan is that there's no way I could possibly enjoy it after it's been so over-sold like this, and I've been tempted to rent it lately. Now I can't. Thanks MWG.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 30 2010 at 8:13pm
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

The thing about Orphan is that there's no way I could possibly enjoy it after it's been so over-sold like this, and I've been tempted to rent it lately. Now I can't. Thanks MWG.

But why would you take my opinion seriously? I thought none of you took me seriously so me praising that film should really give you the opposing effect, which, through the course of events, will make you enjoy the movie.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: January 30 2010 at 8:17pm
It's not even about your opinion anymore, you've simply talked about it too much.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 31 2010 at 8:09am
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

It's not even about your opinion anymore, you've simply talked about it too much.

And why can't you just simply ignore what I say about Orphan? I don't see what the problem is. I've heard Michael complaining about Trannies 2 so much so that I wanted to punch a baby but you don't see me complaining now do you?


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: January 31 2010 at 8:29am
Did you see Trannies 2? Did you like it? I think we're talking about a far different case in point altogether.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 31 2010 at 8:41am

Well, gee, these are the Razzie forums, in which we talk about bad movies that are deserving to "win" our Razzie awards. "Trannies 2" was a bad movie that was all over the Razzie voting ballot and will also probably be announced more than once come tomorrow when the final nods are released. So, if this forum is about mocking bad movies, and "Trannies 2" is a bad movie, why can't I talk about it?



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 31 2010 at 3:48pm
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

Did you see Trannies 2? Did you like it? I think we're talking about a far different case in point altogether.

No, it's actually the same case. Even though I liked or disliked the movie doesn't matter because it's still annoying but like I said earlier, I'm not complaining.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 31 2010 at 3:48pm
Originally posted by Michaels

Well, gee, these are the Razzie forums, in which we talk about bad movies that are deserving to "win" our Razzie awards. "Trannies 2" was a bad movie that was all over the Razzie voting ballot and will also probably be announced more than once come tomorrow when the final nods are released. So, if this forum is about mocking bad movies, and "Trannies 2" is a bad movie, why can't I talk about it?


Did I ever say you couldn't talk about it?


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 31 2010 at 4:13pm
Originally posted by moviewizguy


Did I ever say you couldn't talk about it?
No. But considering "Trannies 2" is a bad movie and is considered a front-runner for Worst Picture, in the awards that these forums are devoted to, then I have the right to mention it as the worst movie of 2009 all I want.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: June 20 2010 at 5:25pm
I actually rewatched the film and have now rewritten most of my previous review:

I would like to start off by saying I'm a fan of the FINAL DESTINATION series. Even the much maligned third film is starting to grow on me. When it was announced that David Ellis was returning to the director chair (along with screenwriter Eric Bress), I was quite excited, considering that part two is arguably the best in the series. But this one. If I were to describe this film in one word, I would say DISAPPOINTING. In fact, this is one of the most disappointing movies of this year! The fact that the makers of part two has returned just adds on to the frustration.

The film starts off pretty rushed. In fact, the film is rushed altogether. You feel as if the filmmakers wanted to get through with the film. The laziness is so apparent in here that you're wondering how much the executives offered in their salary. The film is so lazy that there are even glaring plot holes in the hackneyed script! How the hell does a film that is based on something ridiculous have plot holes? The film—better yet, the franchise, spends most of its time in setting up rules on the order people are going to die yet this film ignores practically everything and kills people in any order it feels like!

Even the clever foreshadowing from the previous films is quite blatant here. The laziness is also extended to the death scenes. Remember, quality, not quantity. Even though this film has the most death scenes compared to the previous entries, most of them suck and even that word wouldn't give the deaths that much justice. We all have to admit it sooner or later but we see these films for the death scenes. What is the freaking point in watching this film if they turn out to be lazy to an extent that some death scenes are rehashed from previous FD films? Exactly. There is no point.

Another problem about the death scenes is that there is barely any suspense when people are about to get killed. Usually, in the FD films, seeing the set up of the Rube Goldberg-like death scenes IS the suspense, but in here, they feel as if they come out of nowhere because of how rushed everything is. They're surprising, yes, but the surprises wear off very quickly. Google up Alfred Hitchcock's definition of "suspense" to learn the difference between surprise and suspense.

Let's move on to the next problem: CGI. With the 3D technology, it's obvious the filmmakers wanted to add more CGI effects so the images could pop out on the screen. The problem here is that the FINAL DESTINATION series is always known for their practical effects. The premonition sequence in here works well in 3D, sure, but the CGI is terrible! They look so fake that I questioned how this film wasn't released direct to DVD.

You know you have a bad film when a franchise that was supposed to be scary and mysterious now turns into something that pokes fun of itself. It has happened many times before, most notably, the NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET franchise. It's as if the filmmakers were aware that the franchise is dying and that their last attempt was to add self-aware characters and idiotic, dumb lines in the film with the many problems the film already has.

Even the characters are more like an excuse to kill them off later. It's apparent that this isn't a movie but more of a carnival ride, waiting to see who dies and how they will die. That's how low this film has gone. You'd also be surprised to find out that the most fleshed out character is, in fact, not the protagonist, but a supporting character, played by Mykelti Williamson. He gives a laughable and forced performance but that's nothing compared to Bobby Campo, who is easily the worst premonitionist in the franchise. He can't act to save his life. And the less we say about the others, the better. However, I'm willing to admit the only character I did feel sympathy for was played by Krista Allen, who plays a motherly role with an extremely short running time.

However, there are other few things that I liked about the film (emphasis on the word "few"): There's a sequence in a salon and a car wash that have at least SOME suspense. I don't know if this counts but I also liked the opening credits, which I thought was ingenious, a montage of the previous films' memorable death scenes. And that's about it. Three things. What an accomplishment!

I guess it isn't hard to tell but this is, by far, the weakest in the series because there's nothing new. You'd expect that a mythology so easily expandable would be explored here but no. By the end of the film, you feel underwhelmed. You wished they could have done better. In fact, you KNOW they could have done better. If they were to make a fifth film, they better put some thought into it. If you're thinking about watching this movie only ONCE, you should see it in its intended format in 3D AND in theaters, but I don't see why anyone should waste their money on this film. 3/10


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 20 2010 at 5:43pm

Holy s***!!! Are my eyes playing tricks on me?! MWG gave a movie a score lower than a 6!!! Can it be? Is there hope for him yet? Hopefully, this will become common place. Wishful thinking, I know.



-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: June 20 2010 at 8:45pm
Well, I actually gave this film a 5/10. I rewatched the film, hoping it would be better, but nope. I hated it a lot more this time -- It's trash! 


-------------


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 21 2010 at 5:06am
I'm just glad you've realized that not every movie is great, nor is every movie worth defending --Sometimes, movies are just plain BAD.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 25 2010 at 11:54am

Spoilers ahead!

It's so easy to tell that this entire production was lazy and rushed. The characters are uninteresting, and the actors aren't awful, just bad(Bobby Campo is just copying Devon Sawa). The deaths are as shocking as always, but predictable, non-scary and barely cringe-worthy. The effects may be made for 3-D, but they're still fake looking. 
 
By having actual premonitions throughout the movie, this doesn't even feel like a FINAL DESTINATION film. By having another big and wise black guy as the side-kick, it feels like they're too desperate on to make it seem like the first one. Having everybody die at the end, instead of letting it remain ambigous, was OK when this was still the last one, but now they're making a 5th one. 

Let's just hope the crew for the new one is the same crew from FD I & III, rather than the crew from FD II & IV. 
 
This are my ratings for the saga:
I:7/10
II:1/10
III:5/10
IV:3/10


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: October 25 2010 at 12:11pm
Again, notice the pattern? The sequels just keep getting worse. The first movie was okay, but they have been milking it for a decade now. And besides MWG, I don't know anyone who wants to see a 5th movie. To most people, the series died with the 4th one because it was utter s***.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 25 2010 at 12:22pm
I think the series died after the first 2. The 2nd one may have been bad, but at least it gave some closure to the 1st one. After that, there was barely any continuity and or connections between the movies. If the plan for the last one is to tell us all the main characters from each movie will die no matter what, fine! But end the saga already! 



-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: October 25 2010 at 1:23pm
The 2nd film is arguably the best in this series. It's the only one that has a different structure from all the others!


-------------


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: October 25 2010 at 4:54pm
Then maybe they should have stuck with that structure.  Instead, they made the "half-assed-sleep-walked-through/you're-only-watching-to-see-what-creative-new-ways-we-can-kill-people-off-and-no-other-reason" movies that came after #2.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 08 2014 at 8:57pm
Time for my next review of this piece of crap. Without a doubt, this is the worst film in the franchise. While Final Destination 3 sucked, at least that had some good kills and helped make Mary Elizabeth Winstead famous. Aside from the deaths of the racist and the milf, there's nothing to recommend about this movie, so this is going to be a 9 worst things review.

9.) The visions of death: A big problem with this film and the third was its use of visions to show who's going to die next. Doing this pretty much defuses all the tension. The second one did this too, but the visions didn't explicitly point out what was going to happen like in this one. For example, the vision about the hook-handed man in Final Destination 2 lead to a unique and creepy death.

8.) Nick Zano: Zano plays Hunt, the designated douchebag of the film. The deisgnated douchebag is supposed to be unlikable, but he shouldn't be painful to watch. Look at PJ Byrne's character from the fifth one. He's the designated douchebag, but he's entertaining to watch. Hunt's scenes are a chore to watch, mainly due to Hunt's awful performance.

7.) Janet is an idiot: The character of Janet (played by Haley Webb) is a total idiot. After almost dying in a car wash, she refuses to believe that anything supernatural is going on. If her almost death was average, like if her almost death involved something mundane like slipping on something, I'd be less annoyed. But her death is completely unexplainable from a logical standpoint. She's so awful and annoying, that she's actually less likable than Hunt the designated douchebag. However, that last one is mainly because...

6.) Haley Webb is a terrible actress: Webb's performance is so awful, that she makes an already annoying character even more annoying. The way she snarls "I was MEANT to see this movie!" towards the end is one of the worst line-readings I've ever heard.

5.) The Korean War vet scene: As the film lurches towards another bland and boring kill, we get a baffling and uncomfortable scene involving a Korean War vet. A Chinese orderly is filling a pool up and he's repulsed by his racism. This causes him to leave him alone, which causes the pool to overrun and cause the floor to collapse and kill the man below. Was this scene REALLY necessary? I know they needed to set up the death, but it this the best they could come up with? This rivals Ride To Hell Retribution in terms of awful and needlessly complex build-up.

4.) The comedy: Of the five films, this film is the most comedic. This film also has the least amount of laughs of the five films. Aside from the death of the racist. none of the comedy works. More often than not, the jokes are so baffling that I wasn't sure if they were supposed to be jokes or not. Like the scene at the beginning where the milf puts tampons in her sons' ears. Or when a race car is overdubbed with a dolphin sound effect. What's the joke?

3.) The cartoony special effects: The special effects took a MASSIVE downturn with this film. They look so cartoony and fake, that it's somewhat painful to look at them. Bafflingly, this cost MORE than Final Destination 3, which had non-crappy special effects.

2.) The death premonition: Whatever the quality of the rest of the Final Destination film, at least the death premonition has to be good right? Well, The Final Destination shows this isn't always right. The death premonition in this film is boring. Even worse, Final Destination 2 already did the car crash death premonition. And it did it way, way, way, way, way, better.

1.) The twist: This film reveals who's giving out the premonitions that the protagonist's receive: it turns out that it's Death himself sending them so he can set his plans up. This is more of a personal thing: I prefer the Final Destination films where the deaths aren't so needlessly complex that Death needs to have a chart to plan them out. This twist sends the ENTIRE FRANCHISE into "Death needs a chart" territory.

Well, at least this isn't the worst Mykelti Williamson film I've reviewed this year. Grade: D-


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html



Print Page | Close Window