Franchise Review: Final Destination Bloodlines

Final Destination is an interesting franchise in retrospect. Successful by financial standards, but never - until now - by critical ones.

Releasing in 2000, coming in near the beginning of what would either affectionately or divisively become known as the “torture porn” era of mainstream horror, Final Destination starring Devon Sawon, Ali Latner, and Tony Todd, predated films Saw (2004) and Hostel (2005) that would become the definers of that era. Even Eli Roth’s other gore-tastic works such as Cabin Fever wouldn’t be released until 2002.

Yet, despite its current reputation, Final Destination didn’t begin as the Looney Tunes carnage fun-house rides they’ve since become known as. The original, in fact, was hardly violent by comparison to its sequels let alone the films of the sub-genre in general.

Blood is sparing in Final Destination, let alone the splatter, gush, and squish of later entries. The most violent death is, perhaps, the decapitation of American Pie actor Seann William Scott’s Billy Hitchcock. Yet even that doesn’t reach the levels of literal head explosions and gooey-ooey gushes that would occur in following films.

Truly the real slaughterhouse didn’t begin until Final Destination 2, with the now iconic and shivering car pile up scene. Beginning with the glorious and mildly hilarious shot of Michael Landes’ well meaning police officer Thomas Burke whose head does in fact, go splat, squish, smush when struck by a falling log.

The original Final Destination was not beloved by critics, most lamenting an interesting concept thrown aside for yet more ways to creatively kill teenagers - yes the originals were teenagers! - with overall competent if lackluster film making. There were high hopes from critics that director James Wong and screenwriter Glen Morgan, with their X-Files credits, would bring something new to the table. When the reality was the new was “make Death a slasher” critics were seemingly let down overall.

Not an utter critical failure, but certainly not a darling either.

The franchise has since yo-yoed with both critics and audiences regarding quality over the years. Final Destination 2 was more warmly welcomed than its predecessors critically, but Final Destinations 3 and Final Destination 4 were much more maligned. Final Destination 5 would receive, until now, the highest aggregate score from the critical establishment of the franchise in 2011. Though even then, it wasn’t enthusiastic, just lukewarm.

Fans have more readily embraced the installments of Final Destination 2, 3, and 5, particularly 5 because of the way it wrapped back around to the original film without advertising itself as such. A genuine surprise from a franchise that didn’t appear to have anything left in the tank.

And now we come to six, or Final Destination Bloodlines which currently has an aggregated score of 92% on Rotten Tomatoes as of this writing.

Now I’m rather bearish on RT overall, as well as asking the question “does Final Destination Bloodlines deserve its score?” When compared to other films released this year, such as Sinners - which has a 97% on RT therefore there is only a 5 point difference between the two - the answer would appear as no.

But I’d argue this is entirely irrelevant a question to ask in the first place. Rather, a more interesting question to inquire is the why of it all.

Why has Bloodlines gotten such a high score not compared to other horror films - Bloodlines has a higher scoring than classics like John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982) for another comparison - but rather why has the critical establishment embraced this specific installment so readily? In comparison to the other films of the franchise? What has changed in the last 25 years since the original's release?

Perhaps it is partially because Final Destination Bloodlines is so charmingly self-aware in its own lack of high brow film quality. Directors Zack Lipovsky and Adam Stein - perhaps best known for better or worse for the live action Kim Possible movie - are competent in their work here. The editing is smooth, the composition of shots easy to follow. There is even some clever work done with framing.

One of the most memorable shots in the film isn’t one of bloodletting, but a cleverly outlined plan by Death happening in the background.

When films premonition protagonist Stefani (Kaitlyn Santa Juana) describes the outwardly ridiculous design of Death’s ACME trap ready to snap - a tree saw falling down, startling a man blowing leaves with a leaf blower, who would then blow the soccer ball a group of children are playing with in a driveway somehow leading to the death of somebody - the other characters scoff. Yet, this is exactly what plays out wonderfully in the background of a shot. It’s the most subtle bit of filmmaking in the movie, and all the more memorable for it.

Almost an easy moment to miss until the characters in the foreground realize what was foretold has actually occurred and thus the screaming starts.

These moments are rare, most blare themselves at us in garish detail. Every needle drop isn’t on the nose, it's punching you in the nose. However, even this is welcomed. Lipovsky and Stein understand what this franchise is, and readily embrace it. This is Sharknado but for Saw fans who want a little less pretension and a little less crime drama in their gore buffets.

I believe The Guardians Radheyan Simonpillai said it best, “There’s a decadence in the film-making that isn’t at odds with the campy nature of Final Destination but instead realizing its full potential.”

Perhaps what has changed since 2000 - the release of the first film - and 2011 - the release of the fifth one, is after five entries, and more entrails spilling, brain exploding, chainsaw ripping violence in films that followed, critics have embraced what fans have found ironically lovable about the franchise all along.

---

---

Click image to sign up!