Things I learned from the Final Destination series.

The Final Destination series is, to me, exactly the same as the Saw series. The first one (or two in Saw’s case) are enjoyable thrillers with, overall, very little blood. In subsequent parts, however, the bloodfest increases and, as such, it loses me as an audience a bit.

Though I must admit that the Final Destination series kept itself a few steps above the Saw-series because it knew how silly it all was and added humor into the mix.

Anyway here is wish to point out seven (the amount of parts in the Saw-franchise) things I liked about the Final Destination-series sofar.

1. Making the introduction of characters short but memorable.

It's often quite difficult to write a good but short introduction for a character. Especially in a horror film where the primary goals is (after all) depicting creative slaughter, not characters.

Because so many people have to be put in the spotlight for a second before the first casualties fall, you  don't want to overdo it. But you do want your audience to care too much about the characters. A balance needs to be struck.

 The most famous spotlighting for this is this quote from the remake of Ocean’s eleven: 

“You look down, they know you're lying and up, they know you don't know the truth. Don't use seven words when four will do. Don't shift your weight, look always at your mark but don't stare, be specific but not memorable, be funny but don't make him laugh. He's got to like you then forget you the moment you've left his side. And for God's sake, whatever you do, don't, under any circumstances...“

I’m certain the writers of Ocean’s eleven wrote this to highlight their own work on introducing the eleven members of Danny Ocean’s-gang. 
 But it works just as well for horror movies.

Final Destination always does this introduction quite well. Each and every character is lovable enough and you hate to see them go: but not enough not to enjoy seeing these people get a sticky end.

The main trick for this the Final Destination-movies, or horror movies in general, use is archetypes. So you got the jock, the beauty princess, the wisecracker, the nerd, the stoner and all the other well known tropes of characters with their behavioral pallets you can use.

Why not? Movies do this all the time. Saving private Ryan was filled to the brim with archetypes. So is any play by Shakespeare. Horror movies, and Final Destination in particular, just enjoys ‘selling you what’s on the tin’. Yet these archetypes remain shallow enough so you won’t hate it too much when they die.

My prime example for a well written (short) introduction scene is 2012’s Cabin in the Woods. Short, sweet and you’ll remember each and every character throughout (except the scholar, perhaps). The trick of this movie is though that they introduce the archetypes against type. So the jock is smart and the dumb blond isn’t self obsessed.

In the same way that in This is the end the fictional James Franco didn't have a brother. You need to root for the character enough not to want them to get hurt. But if they do anyway, that has to be fine as well. After you know who you are dealing with you can sit back and enjoy the carnage to come.

2. The structure is the same.

The structure of the Final Destination series is always the same: First a massive mayhem disaster-scene with many (many) casualties. While the main character tries to work things out there are several singular scenes focused on a single character's death that is postponed ‘till the inevitable. Then, after the first hour mark, one or two shock-deaths. After which the movie slowly makes its way towards the finale.

And always, always a classic song to set the mood.

Like a James Bond-movie. Why would I, the person in the audience, want something else than what I bought the ticket for. Bring me mayhem. I don’t care if it’s predictable, as long as it’s enjoyable.

3. Clichés are okay.

The Final Destination-movies are made for one simple reason only:  to see somebody die after a lengthy how-dunn-it.

So somebody leaves the victim alone. The chief detectives keep on suspecting the main protagonist. Expecting that there is a fighting chance. Thinking it is all over and then (the twist).

We’ve all seen this before done better. But that shouldn’t be the problem. Again: this is what the movie sells on the tin. There’s nothing wrong with a movie broadcasting: ‘leave your brain at the door’ if it embodies this warning wholeheartedly. The problems usually start when a movie tries to be more than it originally intended to be.

4. Everything can be suspenseful.

Suspense is all about informing the audience. So, for instance, the infamous Hitchockian bomb placed by the villain that the audience knows about.

Final Destination does exactly the same yet with one little twist: It doesn't tell you exactly how a  person is going to die. Instead it zooms in on several parts of the Rube Goldberg-device that look scary enough to get an audience's disturbed mind going. Final Destination is a how-dunnit instead of who-dunnit.

The sick twist of the Final Destination series has always been that the movies finally kill the  characters in the way the audience least expects it.

And this is fun! As a mind game, it is fun to make something ordinary dangerous. The ESC-button in Die hard 4, a phone in Payback even a pie in Diamonds are forever. Inform the audience, zoom in on all the nuts and bolts and you can keep tension going for hours.

5. The willingness to change a character halfway through.

Willaim Bludworth’s Todd (best known for being Candyman) started off in the first Final Destination as a creepy  undertaker. The producers were obviously having fun using his legendary status as an in-joke. But as the Final Destination-series progressed the mythos had to be built upon. So, Todd became the man with all the answers. Some would even say: death personified.

This was a good move for the franchise (and a welcome little cult part for William Bludworth). That way you inject some supernatural elements into the franchise without overdoing it.

The cynical me, however, does expect future entries in the series to make William Bludworth’s undertaker to take center stage.
I hope they never will.

6. Growing with the series.

As the movies progressed the Final Destination-series also took a chance or two, not only, in enriching the mythology (by William Bludworth). But also by incorporating new features.

The videotape-fun, for instance, in Final Destination 3 was just that. Suspense is great and all but sometimes people don’t want to watch the bloody end result. Some people (like me) prefer tension and suspense over gore. So with this little video-logo blinking in the corner the movie warned the more squeamish audience-members to look away. A bit like Scorsese's crosses in the Departed (yes I know they're originally from Scarface).

Later the series incorporated more twist endings, 3D effects and an overdose of morbid humor.

It’s always fun to see a movie series find its footing instead of wandering off into some unknown direction. 

If the series keeps on going on long enough I'm certain we'll have had a death scene involving Lego bricks.

7. More fun to be had.

If we all took death a little less seriously we'd all live a lot longer.

The original Final Destination was intended to take itself far too seriously; all about inner peace,  sacrifice and reincarnation. It was only after the test audience's reaction that the moviemakers decided to focus more on the 'fun of death' -as far as you can call it that.

So with part II the movies were all about killing creatively and being less serious. The movies never left that blueprint, and why should they.

Final Destination is a bit too bloody at times for my taste – but they do tell you exactly what you need to know simply by reading the title: everyone is going to die. How? Sit yourself down in the theatre seat and find out –you’ll never guess how they’ll do it.