Chapter Two: Final Destination 2
By Brett Beach
May 28, 2009
BoxOfficeProphets.com
The premise behind the Final Destination series is ridiculous in its simplicity, yes, but conversely, it is also such a genius offshoot of the Dead Teenager movie canon that I find it incredible it took a screenwriter (in this case Jeffrey Reddick) so long to dream it up. Instead of being stalked by a hockey or William Shatner-masked psycho, the not-long for-this-world leads in the FD films are hounded by "Death" itself. A slasher film without a slasher, in other words. After escaping a horrific disaster at the beginning of the film (airplane explosion, multi-car pileup, roller coaster derailing) thanks to a vision by one of the characters, those whose time was up become the victims instead of outrageously elaborate Rube-Goldberg style accidents or violent coincidences. To borrow a cue from a classic Depeche Mode tune, "I don't want to start any blasphemous rumours, but it seems that Death has a sick sense of humor."
I can appreciate black comedy when it's well done - and it so rarely is - which probably explains why I like the FD films in general and Final Destination 2 in particular. The first one sets the rules, creates the vision, and constructs the archetype, but it also suffers from too much gloom and portent, too much angst. A funereal pall (no pun intended) hangs over the proceedings. Final Destination 3 comes off as schizophrenic. It seems to recognize the strengths of the second film and incorporates them intermittently but it ultimately leaves a bad aftertaste. This is best represented by its desire to kill off all the characters by the end, even the ridiculously winsome and engaging female lead, played by Mary Elizabeth Winstead (who is still just one great film away from deservedly being on everyone's radar).
The fact that the first and third films were done by the same director, X-Files veteran James Hong (working in conjunction with his long-time screen writing collaborator Glen Morgan), explains their similarities in tone. He approaches the material at times like one of the (lesser) non-mythology episodes of that series. It wouldn't surprise me to see Scully and Mulder show up to begin investigating the "accidents".
The second film was directed by David R. Ellis, a four-decade veteran of Hollywood who has acted, done 2nd unit work and coordinated stunts on over 70 films. His timing in staging and delivering those sequences might explain the success of FD2. Ellis will probably go down dubiously as "that dude who directed Snakes on a Plane", which is a shame because it certainly isn't his best work, though there are numerous elements in that film that show the same strengths he brings to FD2. See Snakes for the campiness (though it tries too hard to achieve that) but also check out Cellular, his unheralded race against time thriller with Kim Basinger, Chris Evans and William H. Macy. Ellis is also helming the latest (fourth) FD film and working again with screenwriter Eric Kress, who scripted FD2. If their new one delivers as well, Final Destination may become the Star Trek of the horror genre.
What makes FD2 work so well? Let me jump back to my seemingly confusing comment about the pressing darkness of the first film. It may seem appropriate for a series that revolves around death to take place at night, in the rain and under a cloud of gloom but FD2 averts all those cliches and most everything happens during the day, outside, brightly lit. In my mind, this actually heightens the anxiety because it denies the audience the ordinary cues of terror that the dark automatically brings. Having been trained to expect the killer to strike or the obligatory cat to leap out from the darkness, it seems unexpected and unfamiliar for the mayhem to take place out in the open. It also avoids an easy out where shoddy special effects could be hidden by shadowy lighting. The makers of FD2 are proud of the violent deaths on display and don't do anything to hide them or cut corners.
While FD2 isn't a model of storytelling or dialogue (with some exceptions), it achieves something that suits its purposes far better. In its construction, it is as relentless as the Grim Reaper. There are no throwaway bits, though there certainly are some gratuitous ones. (That is not a complaint, by the way.) FD2 exists almost entirely as a tremendous series of devilishly clever set pieces while working in a ridiculous amount of plot and tying back to the original in almost every way possible.
For all those horror sequels that seem to play by different rules or just ignore the plot of previous installments FD2 works overtime to justify itself. Supporting role for lone survivor from original? Check. (Doesn't mean she is going to make it to the end, though). Another superfluous, not-so-helpful visit to the creepy cryptic mortician played by Tony Todd? Ditto. The master stroke is when the characters in FD2 realize that they are all only alive because of the "ripple" effects caused by the survivors in the first film. Their time has been up for a lot longer than they knew. The second film even plays with the logic that there is a precise order to the way the deaths will unfold, when one character attempts suicide, death by revolver, and all six bullets turn out to be duds. This would be something to play up in future installments, I think.
FD2 ramps up the comedy in "black comedy" to such an extent that the deaths themselves become well-told jokes that end in sharp, brutal (but for the most part funny) punchlines. Scream 2 acknowledged that in sequels, the deaths have to be more elaborate and FD2 takes that philosophy and runs with it. The opening highway wreck (which of course, doesn't really happen since it is only a vision) plays like one of those driver ed high school filmstrips with more humor and a bigger budget, but turned on its head. It encapsulates in eight minutes the structure of the film: buildup ... buildup... buildup... payoff! (i.e. death by sheet glass, fire escape ladder, or combination airbag/PCV pipe) It might seem like such a recurring loop would get tiresome but Ellis, Kress and their collaborators, particularly editor Eric A. Sears whose precise cutting finds the humor in the deaths, are up to the task. In a way, the deaths become a visual equivalent of the variations on the legendary Aristocrats joke that comedians trade with one another. The humor is all in the details, the delivery, and the grossness.
I haven't talked much about great acting or memorable characters (okay, I haven't at all) and yes, if FD2 could be faulted for anything, it's a lack of these. Still, no one is supposed to have the big emotional "win me an Oscar moment," it would detract from the plot machinations. And yet... Jonathan Cherry, an actor with an appealing hangdog face, has one perfectly delivered line of dialogue - shortly before a barbed wire fence comes at him at 100 mph - that comes wrapped in regret, sadness and a dash of irony.
I also appreciate, marshmallow at heart that I am, that Final Destination 2 settles for a happy ending and - perversely - doesn't leave room open for a sequel. Of course, it also finds time for one more perfectly timed joke/death, one which adds a whole new dimension to summer barbequing.