Entertaining, but not as effective as the original.

Rating: 7/10 (2 February 2003)

Okay, so sequels are rarely as good as the originals, and this is yet another case that confirms this. However, the film was still somewhat entertaining to watch, so it wasn't a total loss. The original was a very well-told story that simply creeped you out. It had a dark, foreboding feeling to it, which is exactly what this type of movie should have. Also, it didn't attempt to explain very much, instead leaving much to the viewer's imagination, which is often the most effective way to approach these topics.
Final Destination 2 lacks all of the characteristics I just mentioned. The acting is so absolutely horrible, and the dialogue is lame, too. While I enjoyed how the writers tried to tie this movie to the first, the overall story was simply idiotic and flawed, mainly due to explaining more than we need to know. (And what was that crap about "a new life" clearing the list? Please!) Most unforgivingly of all, though, this movie lacks that creepy feeling the first one had. Instead, Final Destination 2 is mainly concerned with delivering the strangest and goriest deaths possible. If that is fun enough for you, then this is the movie for you.
To sum things up, here are some helpful recommendations: * If you haven't seen the original, go see it first. * If you really, really liked the original, then see the sequel. * If you didn't like or only mildly enjoyed the original, then stay away from the sequel. * If you like gore flicks, see this one. It's a little more explicitly bloody than most mainstream American films.