REMAKE OR SEQUEL?

Rating: 4/10 (1 March 2003)

WHAT FOLLOWS IS THE REVIEW I WROTE FOR THE FIRST MOVIE:
"The strength of FINAL DESTINATION lies in its ability to keep audiences on (to use a cliche) the edge of their seats. Or rather, to convince audiences that something is about to happen, then do a complete turn-around and have something else inexplicably happen.
WHAT AM I TALKING ABOUT?
Well, for example the death scenes. A large build-up ensues, where the movie convinces the audience that a character is going to die in all sorts of horrible ways. Then an anticlimatical drop occurs. The audience sighs, the character will be ok they think. But then - WHAM! - the character is killed in a most unexpected way. This is the power of this movie. Otherwise, the acting isn't very good; the script unsurprising; and the direction often slack, surprisingly so for John Woo.
As for the core of the movie, the characters are hastily sketched with no depth and the storyline is rather old-hat fare. There is no denying it, this is a very silly film - but it will have you hooked till the end.
Also of note: FINAL DESTINATION is a slasher movie, and the first without an actual killer - death itself stalks the protaganists instead. Interesting too is the way the movie turns everyday objects and occurences into lethal weapons, and sometimes in rather original ways. There are also some neat in-jokes throughout.
Bottom-line: Silly but with style and an ability to grip even the most reluctant viewer."

THE ABOVE REVIEW IS PRETTY MUCH IDENTICAL FOR THIS - FINAL DESTINATION 2. WHY? BECAUSE THE MOVIES ARE ALMOST COMPLETELY IDENTICAL. THIS IS A FUN MOVIE WITH SOME GREAT SCARES AND GORY MOMENTS. BUT IT IS BASICALLY A REHASH OF THE ORIGINAL. NOT A SEQUEL SO MUCH AS A REMAKE.