Editorials
[Special Feature] ‘Final Destination’: Not So Final After All!
Death. It’s the most final of words; even in the thesaurus it is synonymous with words like ‘finish’ or ‘exit.’ To death, there’s no beginning, middle and end. There are no more birthdays, no more promotions at work. And that’s what makes death so damn terrifying- the fact that it’s all unknown. The fact that there really is nothing to look forward to once the clock stops ticking.
I was in high school when Final Destination hit theaters. I didn’t even bother to go and see it; I figured it was another cookie-cutter example of a teen slasher flick. From the sound of it, I was certain it would be some guy dressed as father death slinging a scythe around. Boy, was I wrong. It was an original; not necessarily a masterpiece, but a breath of fresh air amidst masked killers and by the book adolescent cinema. Now, here we are, eleven years later and looking dead in the eyes of ‘Final Destination 5’, the latest installment in the franchise. While most of us had tuned out after the massacre that was 4, those who believed in the idea stuck it out- and, thanks to their perseverance, this one is coming out smelling like roses. Some are going so far as to argue that this film is going to be the best of the series; while others, at the very least, have bestowed best sequel honors on the film. Since I haven’t seen the film yet, I can’t pass judgement- but our very own Mr. Disgusting actually liked it. Knowing how much he loves the series (probably as much as I love Justin Bieber), this is quite the compliment; and certainly a reason for me to be there this weekend.
In honor of Final Destination 5 (review), I took a trip down memory lane with story elitist Jeffrey Reddick, producer Craig Perry, and the man himself, actor Tony Todd; after all, if it weren’t for Flight 180, this bridge over troubled water wouldn’t exist.
“In death there are no accidents, no coincidences, no mishap, and no escapes.” ~~Bludworth, Final Destination (2000)
“It was fresh and original,” recalled Perry, who has produced all five films in the franchise. “We were given the latitude to explore the ideas.” Perry went on about the original 14 page treatment he helped Reddick complete. “[The film] was the perfect synthesis of what New Line wanted. It was different. It was unique in how it treated its audience. It treated you with respect. And ultimately, it was a way for audiences to explore the things we can’t define, the things that frighten us… and get away with it.”
If the plot isn’t familiar by now, there’s a problem. I’m thinking something along the lines of a residence being under a rock. Basically a teenager has a vision that the plane he’s on explodes and everyone dies. He snaps out of it, realizes he’s ON that plane, and freaks out. After exchanging words with the class jock and causing a ruckus that results in him and a few classmates, as well as a teacher, deplaning, the plane actually does explode, killing those still on board. By saving himself and the others, he ruined Death’s plan, causing a ripple effect that forces Death himself to hunt them down one by one.
And that is the first film in a nutshell.
Director James Wong and writer Glen Morgan’s mark on the franchise began when they were pulled onto the original film. Taking what Reddick had pieced together, they changed it to fit their vision and ultimately ran with it. But it was Reddick who had the ‘ah-ha’ moment. “I was actually flying home to Kentucky and I read this story about a woman who was on vacation in Hawaii and her mom called her and said ‘Don’t take the flight tomorrow, I have a really bad feeling about it,’” said Reddick, who is formally credited for his story creation in both Final Destination and ‘Final Destination 2’. “She switched flights and the plane that she would have been on crashed. I thought, that’s creepy- what if she was supposed to die on that flight?” Originally an X-Files spec script, Reddick, with Perry’s guidance, transformed the script into Flight 180, the movie’s original working title. Though Reddick wrote the entire first draft, eventually Wong and Morgan stepped in, rewriting the script and taking charge.
A lot of things had changed from the first ideas on paper. Initially, the characters had been a group of adult strangers- however, with the wave of teen horror, the characters were changed to fit the times. But the high school seniors were the only common dominator in those films. The biggest difference? The killer wasn’t physical. There was no mask, no weapon- and that’s what made it different. “New Line was very nervous about having a movie with death as the killer,” said Reddick. “What Final Destination has going for it is that death is all around us. It’s not just someone chasing somebody with an axe.”
The nervousness eventually wore off. Though the film only made around $10 million its opening weekend (less than half the budget), it came back to gross over $112 million worldwide when it was all said and done. And it was certainly a big enough return to nudge New Line in the direction of a sequel, even though it wasn’t a necessity. “We could have made no other movies and the first one still would have been a satisfying experience,” said Perry.”But when we were given the opportunity to make a sequel, we jumped at it,”
“There’s gonna be a huge accident. Everybody’s gonna die!” ~~Kimberly, ‘Final Destination 2’ (2003)
Riding off of the success that the crash of Flight 180, er, I mean Final Destination, brought down with it, New Line again approached Reddick to piece together the second installment. “I wanted to expand on the mythology and not just tell the same story over again.”
The story came to him while driving. He saw one of those oversized, overstocked log trucks teetering along, and the highway to hell was conceived. Initially he had been thinking of a hotel fire- but it seemed too simplistic for what would become the franchise’s signature: an elaborate opening that puts other death sequences to shame. Follow it up with some kills to remember and that’s the apparent recipe for success.
“The kills were just great,” said Perry of ‘FD2’, who is fond of the window pane kill of poor little Timmy. “I find it wildly entertaining.” For many, that’s the appeal of these films- the kills aren’t gratuitous. They aren’t overdone, nor can they be classified as ‘over the top’ or to the extremity of ‘torture porn.’ They’re fast, they’re clean, and they get the job done. “The kills are the punctuation of the cinematic sentence that comprises the sequence,” added Perry.
In ‘Final Destination 2’, the log truck loses its load and those in the path of destruction meet a horrendous fate; several escaping when a young woman has ‘the vision’ while driving and causes a traffic-stopping distraction; literally. As in the first film, the pattern begins, each survivor dying in a ghastly way to fit Death’s plan- only this time the deaths were much more elaborate and the film’s tone hit all the right notes. From first glance, it seemed as if New Line had another hit on its hands- and a possible franchise in the making. After all, it’s one thing to make a sequel; it’s another to continue in the name of success.
“Death is fucking complicated.” ~~Erin, ‘Final Destination 3’ (2006)
Final Destination reached franchise level when director/writer duo Wong and Morgan returned for 2006’s ‘Final Destination 3’, a vanilla compound in comparison to the two previous films. This time a horrendous roller coaster accident claims the lives of its victims. Great start, but something that was more of an ‘engine that could’ shot at filmmaking as opposed to a new take on an old concept. The film itself was well made, but it just didn’t fall into place as well as fans had hoped. And don’t even get us started on The Final Destination- its success was measured by 3D ticket sales and not creativity. Audiences far and wide were disappointed in the outcome; and even the filmmakers agree that it wasn’t what they’d hoped it would be.
But redemption is well overdue and the crew behind ‘FD5’ is looking forward to that achievement this weekend when the film hits theaters on Friday.
“We started fresh and brought in a new group of creative people who actually questioned why things happened the way they happened,” said Perry, who feels this film is his favorite of the five. “They were dedicated to making this movie the best it could possibly be.”
Director Steven Quale teams up with Eric Heisserer, the scribe behind The Nightmare on Elm Street remake, for the latest installment. Though Quale may not be a household name, he comes from a strong background in the industry- most notably as Second Unit Director on both Titanic and Avatar, learning the ropes by way of James Cameron. Not a bad place to hail from. “Once the film opens he’s going to have at least ten offers on the table,” bragged Todd.
By way of trailers and whispers, the bridge seems to be the culprit this time around; death sending its victims into muddy waters as the catalyst. “‘FD5’ got the tone right,” said Perry. “It’s serious, but still has humor – gallows humor. It’s not campy but is aware of how potentially absurd the situation is. I think everyone involved saw ‘FD5’ as a chance to redeem ourselves, to say we’re sorry, to say that we figured it out, and to really put our best creative foot forward as opposed to relying on the financial success of ‘FD4’.”
“They took the time to come up with a great twist on this one,” said Todd. And he was right. It’s not the same old formula- now there’s a new rule. If you’re in line to die, and you kill someone, they take your place. Talk about a complicated morality check. “With each of the movies we’ve been trying to establish the perfect vision of what the franchise can be,” said Perry. “With ‘FD5’, we got it right,”
Collapsing bridges, murder or be murdered; the Final Destination franchise has certainly evolved from what was originally supposed to be, as Todd puts it, “… one of those jobs where I was one and done.” Hoping to build off of the potential success, future installments are in the works. While rumors have been circulating for months, Perry put it into the best of words; “We hope to have the right to talk about [another installment] come Monday. It’s up to the audience.”
Death as a Killer
“It wasn’t just some slasher movie,” recalled Reddick. “The whole idea that there is a pattern to death added another level that set the franchise apart.” Perry added, “We don’t have a visible bad guy. The bad guy in some ways is a metaphysical idea, a thesis. Is it fate? Is it destiny? Is it death itself? By not providing a concrete answer, you can bring your own background to the viewing experience. It’s really a reflection of what you believe.”
Horror fans, hell, movie fans, had grown accustomed to physically seeing the attacker. Jason. Michael Meyers. Freddy Krueger. And despite arguments that the Final Destination franchise is not horror, it’s a disagreeable fact; it’s a slasher flick without the slasher. There’s suspense, there’s blood, there’s the dumb girl or boy doing the wrong thing at the wrong time. It’s not what we’re used to, but that’s the beauty of it. And that’s what keeps audiences coming back for more.
Who knows if ‘FD5’ will be a success. Who knows if there will be another Final Destination sometime in the future. My guess is that audiences will flock to it to see what happens next; what’s changed, what’s new. They’ll buy some popcorn, sit back, and cringe as one by one, Death follows the pattern, distributing his plan. Maybe seeing or avoiding this film is a part of your plan; either way, death is ever present, and the Final Destination series stands by its motto; life is short, and then you die.
For more from Andrea, visit her blog, THE ALBIN WAY.
Soon after the New Hollywood generation took over the entertainment industry, they started having children. And more than any filmmakers that came before—they were terrified. Rosemary’s Baby (1968), The Exorcist (1973), The Omen (1976), Eraserhead (1977), The Brood (1979), The Shining (1980), Possession (1981), and many others all deal, at least in part, with the fears of becoming or being a parent. What if my child turns out to be a monster? is corrupted by some evil force? or turns out to be the fucking Antichrist? What if I screw them up somehow, or can’t help them, or even go insane and try to kill them? Horror has always been at its best when exploring relatable fears through extreme circumstances. A prime example of this is Larry Cohen’s 1974 monster-baby movie It’s Alive, which explores the not only the rollercoaster of emotions that any parent experiences when confronted with the difficulties of raising a child, but long-standing questions of who or what is at fault when something goes horribly wrong.
Cohen begins making his underlying points early in the film as Frank Davis (John P. Ryan) discusses the state of the world with a group of expectant fathers in a hospital waiting room. They discuss the “overabundance of lead” in foods and the environment, smog, and pesticides that only serve to produce roaches that are “bigger, stronger, and harder to kill.” Frank comments that this is “quite a world to bring a kid into.” This has long been a discussion point among people when trying to decide whether to have kids or not. I’ve had many conversations with friends who have said they feel it’s irresponsible to bring children into such a violent, broken, and dangerous world, and I certainly don’t begrudge them this. My wife and I did decide to have children but that doesn’t mean that it’s been easy.
Immediately following this scene comes It’s Alive’s most famous sequence in which Frank’s wife Lenore (Sharon Farrell) is the only person left alive in her delivery room, the doctors clawed and bitten to death by her mutant baby, which has escaped. “What does my baby look like!? What’s wrong with my baby!?” she screams as nurses wheel her frantically into a recovery room. The evening that had begun with such joy and excitement at the birth of their second child turned into a nightmare. This is tough for me to write, but on some level, I can relate to this whiplash of emotion. When my second child was born, they came about five weeks early. I’ll use the pronouns “they/them” for privacy reasons when referring to my kids. Our oldest was still very young and went to stay with my parents and we sped off to the hospital where my wife was taken into an operating room for an emergency c-section. I was able to carry our newborn into the NICU (natal intensive care unit) where I was assured that this was routine for all premature births. The nurses assured me there was nothing to worry about and the baby looked big and healthy. I headed to where my wife was taken to recover to grab a few winks assuming that everything was fine. Well, when I awoke, I headed back over to the NICU to find that my child was not where I left them. The nurse found me and told me that the baby’s lungs were underdeveloped, and they had to put them in a special room connected to oxygen tubes and wires to monitor their vitals.
It’s difficult to express the fear that overwhelmed me in those moments. Everything turned out okay, but it took a while and I’m convinced to this day that their anxiety struggles spring from these first weeks of life. As our children grew, we learned that two of the three were on the spectrum and that anxiety, depression, ADHD, and OCD were also playing a part in their lives. Parents, at least speaking for myself, can’t help but blame themselves for the struggles their children face. The “if only” questions creep in and easily overcome the voices that assure us that it really has nothing to do with us. In the film, Lenore says, “maybe it’s all the pills I’ve been taking that brought this on.” Frank muses aloud about how he used to think that Frankenstein was the monster, but when he got older realized he was the one that made the monster. The aptly named Frank is wondering if his baby’s mutation is his fault, if he created the monster that is terrorizing Los Angeles. I have made plenty of “if only” statements about myself over the years. “If only I hadn’t had to work so much, if only I had been around more when they were little.” Mothers may ask themselves, “did I have a drink, too much coffee, or a cigarette before I knew I was pregnant? Was I too stressed out during the pregnancy?” In other words, most parents can’t help but wonder if it’s all their fault.
At one point in the film, Frank goes to the elementary school where his baby has been sighted and is escorted through the halls by police. He overhears someone comment about “screwed up genes,” which brings about age-old questions of nature vs. nurture. Despite the voices around him from doctors and detectives that say, “we know this isn’t your fault,” Frank can’t help but think it is, and that the people who try to tell him it isn’t really think it’s his fault too. There is no doubt that there is a hereditary element to the kinds of mental illness struggles that my children and I deal with. But, and it’s a bit but, good parenting goes a long way in helping children deal with these struggles. Kids need to know they’re not alone, a good parent can provide that, perhaps especially parents that can relate to the same kinds of struggles. The question of nature vs. nurture will likely never be entirely answered but I think there’s more than a good chance that “both/and” is the case. Around the midpoint of the film, Frank agrees to disown the child and sign it over for medical experimentation if caught or killed. Lenore and the older son Chris (Daniel Holzman) seek to nurture and teach the baby, feeling that it is not a monster, but a member of the family.
It’s Alive takes these ideas to an even greater degree in the fact that the Davis Baby really is a monster, a mutant with claws and fangs that murders and eats people. The late ’60s and early ’70s also saw the rise in mass murderers and serial killers which heightened the nature vs. nurture debate. Obviously, these people were not literal monsters but human beings that came from human parents, but something had gone horribly wrong. Often the upbringing of these killers clearly led in part to their antisocial behavior, but this isn’t always the case. It’s Alive asks “what if a ‘monster’ comes from a good home?” In this case is it society, environmental factors, or is it the lead, smog, and pesticides? It is almost impossible to know, but the ending of the film underscores an uncomfortable truth—even monsters have parents.
As the film enters its third act, Frank joins the hunt for his child through the Los Angeles sewers and into the L.A. River. He is armed with a rifle and ready to kill on sight, having divorced himself from any relationship to the child. Then Frank finds his baby crying in the sewers and his fatherly instincts take over. With tears in his eyes, he speaks words of comfort and wraps his son in his coat. He holds him close, pats and rocks him, and whispers that everything is going to be okay. People often wonder how the parents of those who perform heinous acts can sit in court, shed tears, and defend them. I think it’s a complex issue. I’m sure that these parents know that their child has done something evil, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are still their baby. Your child is a piece of yourself formed into a whole new human being. Disowning them would be like cutting off a limb, no matter what they may have done. It doesn’t erase an evil act, far from it, but I can understand the pain of a parent in that situation. I think It’s Alive does an exceptional job placing its audience in that situation.
Despite the serious issues and ideas being examined in the film, It’s Alive is far from a dour affair. At heart, it is still a monster movie and filled with a sense of fun and a great deal of pitch-black humor. In one of its more memorable moments, a milkman is sucked into the rear compartment of his truck as red blood mingles with the white milk from smashed bottles leaking out the back of the truck and streaming down the street. Just after Frank agrees to join the hunt for his baby, the film cuts to the back of an ice cream truck with the words “STOP CHILDREN” emblazoned on it. It’s a movie filled with great kills, a mutant baby—created by make-up effects master Rick Baker early in his career, and plenty of action—and all in a PG rated movie! I’m telling you, the ’70s were wild. It just also happens to have some thoughtful ideas behind it as well.
Which was Larry Cohen’s specialty. Cohen made all kinds of movies, but his most enduring have been his horror films and all of them tackle the social issues and fears of the time they were made. God Told Me To (1976), Q: The Winged Serpent (1982), and The Stuff (1985) are all great examples of his socially aware, low-budget, exploitation filmmaking with a brain and It’s Alive certainly fits right in with that group. Cohen would go on to write and direct two sequels, It Lives Again (aka It’s Alive 2) in 1978 and It’s Alive III: Island of the Alive in 1987 and is credited as a co-writer on the 2008 remake. All these films explore the ideas of parental responsibility in light of the various concerns of the times they were made including abortion rights and AIDS.
Fifty years after It’s Alive was initially released, it has only become more relevant in the ensuing years. Fears surrounding parenthood have been with us since the beginning of time but as the years pass the reasons for these fears only seem to become more and more profound. In today’s world the conversation of the fathers in the waiting room could be expanded to hormones and genetic modifications in food, terrorism, climate change, school and other mass shootings, and other threats that were unknown or at least less of a concern fifty years ago. Perhaps the fearmongering conspiracy theories about chemtrails and vaccines would be mentioned as well, though in a more satirical fashion, as fears some expectant parents encounter while endlessly doomscrolling Facebook or Twitter. Speaking for myself, despite the struggles, the fears, and the sadness that sometimes comes with having children, it’s been worth it. The joys ultimately outweigh all of that, but I understand the terror too. Becoming a parent is no easy choice, nor should it be. But as I look back, I can say that I’m glad we made the choice we did.
I wonder if Frank and Lenore can say the same thing.
Dev Patel’s ‘Monkey Man’ Is Now Available to Watch at Home!
‘Infested’ Review – One of the Best Spiders Attack Horror Movies in Years
Five Underseen Vampire Horror Movies to Stream This Week
Limited Edition ‘Creature from the Black Lagoon’ Monster High Doll Releasing This Week!
‘Stream’ – Horror Movie from the Team Behind ‘Terrifier’ Sets August Theatrical Release
You must be logged in to post a comment.