iReviewFilms

The first Final Destination (the one with the plane) was a very original piece of work that had most of us enjoying some horror and gore in a novel and new way. By the time the second came out (the motorway pile up) in 2003 it could still be classed as a popcorn movie but they really raised the ingenuity of the death scenes making it a reasonable way to waste an hour and a half. By number 3 (roller coaster) and 4 (Nascar) I didn't see the point in them anymore as you had to sit through an identical plot for 5/6/7 death scenes that, if truth be told, were not great. So when I heard the announcement of a fifth, I really didn't get it. Perhaps they are jumping on the 3D bandwagon like everyone else?

As expected it duly delivered not a lot in the way of entertainment. In Final Destination 5, a group of co-workers set off for a weekend of team building exercises. However on the way to their destination, a bridge that they are crossing collapses and kills all of them. Unbeknownst to the audience this was just a premonition of the event (ironically I never saw it coming...) and after a commotion Sam (Nicholas D'Agosto) manages to convince some of his fellow employees to get off of the bus. The bridge then collapses and their lives are saved. Over the next few days though the survivors start to die in strange circumstances as Death tries to restore order to the world.

The only way I thought it might work as a rehashed concept was if they immediately got into the story of the survivors trying to live but it is a good 20 minutes before the bridge collapse and even longer before they realise that Death is stalking them. The trailer also hints at if they kill someone else then they will steal the time their victim had left and balance out the books. Unfortunately although playing its part in the plot, so much more could have been done with this idea and it felt rather wasted.

The problem is that with no story to tell due to its appearance four times before (and lets face it if you are going to watch Final Destination 5 then there is a strong probability that you have already seen some or all of the prequels) the film is relying on the death scenes to drag it to above average movie status.

This film leaves me asking myself what's the reason for watching it? I already know what's going to happen and I basically know how it is going to end so the only reason to go and watch the film is purely for the death scenes which are a mixed bag. On the positive, they do remain a challenge to work out how the characters might die with Steven Quale throwing in many varied possibilities and it also leaves you with a bit of suspense and that cringe worthy 'ooo that looked like it hurt' feeling coursing through your body. However the scenes never live up to the standards set in previous films and I don't think any would make my top 10 Final Destination death scenes list. Given that you have to sit through the writers setting up the movie and trying to make us care about the characters, it hardly seems worth it. Why not just give us a 10 minute film with all the deaths to save wasting more time than is necessary.

It is clear that the 3D factor was a large reason in the return of this movie and it certainly goes over the top during the film especially in the opening credits which are 3 minutes of things being throw at you. As a person who does not yet see the point in this 3D malarkey, the effects based around this concept are pointless when watching it in 2D which I think will be a large contingent of the audience so why do it?

It never captures the enjoyment or even black comedy (think BBQ death at the end of the second) factor that the first two had and when compared to 3 and 4 well, they are all as equally poor so the less said the better. If you feel like going to watch this then may I recommend choosing something else to save you from wasting your time.

PS. Has Death never heard of a heart attack?

For further reviews feel free to check out: http://www.ireviewfilms.com

Finally my prayers to the Hollywood top dogs for a bit of originality have been answered in the form of Cowboys & Aliens, a sci-fi thriller (which puts me in even more of an optimistic mood due to it being one of my preferred genres of choice). Yes it is based on a graphic novel and yes technology in the wild west has been implemented before but this isn't a sequel/prequel and as a concept is very fresh.

Daniel Craig plays Jake, a cowboy who wakes up in the middle of nowhere with no recollection of who he is, where he has been or how he got there. In fact the only clue given to him is a strange metallic bracelet that he is unable to remove from his arm. After making his way to the nearest town he soon makes himself known to the locals and is identified as a dangerous and wanted man guilty of several crimes including stealing gold from local rancher Woodrow Dolarhyde (Harrison Ford). After being arrested and readied for transport, alien spaceships appear out of nowhere and start snatching people away and blowing up the surrounding countryside. Jake's bracelet transforms itself into a weapon and he is able to drive the aliens away.

Now forced to work together to save the people who were kidnapped from them, Jake and Woodrow team up with the other remaining survivors from the town and set off to find out how to put a stop to their common enemy.

The greatest emotion I felt while watching this was one of indifference, mainly directed towards the plot and structure of the movie. Favreau couldn't be more obvious with his intentions for the film as hinted at by the title. Cowboys & Aliens merges the two separate worlds of the wild west with gun-slingers, bandits and Indians with the technologically advanced alien species resulting in no more than a series of confrontations between the two which climaxes in, well, a final confrontation between the two. Where is the interest for the audience with this concept that can only be taken so far?

The story never developed and just had the characters running around with horses doing cowboy things leaving them to remain as two dimensional as the drawings they once were. This is despite the best efforts of Ford and Craig to draw me in. The most impressive part being that as well known for other characters (Jones and Bond) as they are, the two are still able to make you forget this fact and make the characters their own, even when Ford dons a Indiana-esque cowboy hat.

This is a perfect example of the money men of big studios backing the concept rather than the actual story. I'm sure like most of you initially this film sounds like a movie with promise but come the end I didn't feel as though I had been taken on an adventure more rather led from scene to scene as a means to an end. In addition, the CGI could have been better when considering the other films that have already been released this year and the budget that Cowboys & Aliens had to play with but instead they also fail to impress.

I can't emphasise how disappointed I was with this. Given the plethora of talent in the writing department (Orci, Kurtzman, Lindelof etc. think Star Trek, Iron Man, Children of Men, Lost (TV)) for this movie it came up well short of what it should have. Turns out originality may not have been what I was looking for after all! Rating: C-

For further reviews feel free to check out: http://www.fanaticalaboutfilms.com

It's been 10 years since the last Planet of the Apes film and looking back, it is fair to say that the years have not treated it too well- the ape costumes are verging on amusing rather than scary. This latest reboot brings us an origins story painting a picture of the beginning of the end for the human race and the start of dominance for the apes on Earth. They have brought back this franchise again with a movie that isn't really part of said franchise. All other Planet of the Apes movies are set on a mystical planet whereas this is set on present day Earth and as such, although I understand why they did it (money money money), would have been better to disassociate with the Planet of the Apes brand.

Will Rodman (James Franco) is a researcher for a pharmaceutical company working on a cure for Alzheimer's- a disease close to his heart due to his father's (John Lithgow) battle with the disease. When his leading test subject breaks free and 'goes ape' she is put down along with the rest of the project. However Will discovers she was only protecting her newborn child who he takes home and raises as part of his family. It soon becomes apparent that the drugs subjected to the baby chimp's mother have been genetically passed on to him gifting the ape with extremely high levels of intelligence.

I'm not sure what I was wanting going into this movie and I'm not sure if what I saw was what I was expecting either. The success of the film hinges on the baby ape Caesar and his transformation from a curious and innocent ape to an older one who realises that no matter what his intelligence, he will never truly be accepted as more than an animal to those around him. As such, most of the film is based on the apes and Caesar's plight which puts the human cast into the background. This muddies the waters giving the film no clear answers as to who it wants you to get behind and support- the apes or humans.

Its been a long time since the love story of any film wasn't pushed and for once this has been achieved. So much so that I'm not really sure of the purpose of Caroline (Freida Pinto) at all. Tom Felton aka Malfoy lands a role so similar to his last that I was surprised he was not handed a cape and wand. If he was trying to shake his old persona this was not the way to achieve it. Ironically the one character I connected with and believed was the ape Caesar. Andy Serkis (aka Gollum, King Kong) has once again shown that body movement and facial expressions can trump speech any day and you really end up getting behind his story.

The movie links into the older franchise briefly and comes neatly to an end so why did it leave me longing for more. Not a longing in the sense that it was so good I needed my next hit but rather it felt as if it came to an end prematurely or at the very least they could have packed in a bit more humans Vs. ape action. The title in this sense is misleading. I would have gone for 'Minor Nuisance in a Local City District of the Apes' not quite as catchy you'll agree but certainly nearer to what you can expect. What I'm getting at is the film builds and builds and builds just to the point when your leaning on the edge of your seat then 5 minutes later the credits start rolling.

I feel like I've been left with a bit of a quandary as on the one hand I did enjoy the film, it was well acted, the script was very strong and the CGI exceptional but on the other it left me feeling somewhat unfulfilled that more was not done with the storyline. If a second movie follows then that's what I was expecting this one to be and it will certainly be near the top of my wish list for the future.

For further reviews feel free to check out: http://www.fanaticalaboutfilms.com