Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: FINAL DESTINATION 3-D (2009)

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews » FINAL DESTINATION 3-D (2009)

Author

Topic: FINAL DESTINATION 3-D (2009)

Claude S. Ayakawa
Film God

Posts: 2738
From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 09-18-2009 02:48 PM

I was interested in seeing the latest FINAL DESTINATION film in 3-D because I wanted to see how it compared to the previous three other films in the series and felt the added depth made the film more exciting to watch. Because yesterday (9/17/09) was the last day of it's 3-D engagement before it made way for CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS today at the Kapolei 16, I made the time to see it. The Kapolei is equipped with Dolby Digital 3-D and I was very impressed with the presentation. Picture brightness was very good even with the glasses on, All of the exterior shots were excellent in 3-D especially the raceway sequence but I felt most of the interior shots in medium and close up was rather shallow. The scenes at the raceway during the accident where more than 50 people are killed was fantastic in 3-D. I remember blinking a number of times during this movie when objects was heading straight towards my face and it was fun. The last time I remember this happening was the paddle board scene in HOUSE OF WAX and other 3-D films in the fifties.

The film itself was the same old rehash of the original film when all of the survivors of the original accident eventually get killed one after the other. The first in the series as most of you know was about a 747 blowing up shortly after take off killing everyone aboard except a lucky few who got of the plane when one of them had a sense of impending doom and tried to do something about it and get kicked of the plane with some of his friends. The 2nd involved a automobile pileup on a freeway and the 3rd film was about a roller coaster. The latest film in 3-D involved an accident at a raceway park. In all of the films, there were a few who were not involved in the accidents that was going to happen because like the first film they avoided them in time because one of them knew about it in advance but they all eventually get killed in a terrible way during the movie. Although the current film in the series had a plot like the others, it had fantastic 3-D and a nice T & A scene that made it fun to watch. [Smile]

3 out of 5

-Claude

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 10-04-2009 01:59 AM

I agree with Claude -- the 3D here was stunning. The race track sequence was a thrill to watch. The multiple crash pile ups and the cause and effect choreography which was a hallmark of the franchise -- this thinkamabob hitting that widget which knocks over the other thing which rams thru the chest of this guy with the tip winding up 3 inches from your face -- that in and of itself is as clever as it is fun. Really some ultra WOW moments in 3D which make this the best of the lot.

And sure the plot is fairly mindless, but no more so than any list of romantic comedies. But if you just go with the premise that all these poor fools are going to get butchered in the most clever ways, then it's just a matter how cleverly they are going to do it.

Seeing the depth in the scenes reminded me why I love 3D. In 3D you FEEL the perspective as well as just seeing it as you do in 2D. That dimentional feeling is something unique and quite separate from the sense of sight. You can close one eye and what you SEE remains the same, i.e., the image is exactly the same, but when you open both eyes, you are not "seeing" anything additional, but you FEEL the depth as something very real and palpable which is missing with 2D. And I love it. It is like hearing the space in a stereo recording as opposed to hearing the same sound mono. You are not hearing anything more with stereo, you are just feeling the space as something very separate and apart from just the sound.

In FD, the 3D composition is very conservative -- most of the film is shot with the convergence from the screen back into the distance. The director and cinematographer wisely ask you to converge in front of the screen judiciously for a limited number of scenes and these were well integrated where they didn't go from converging from something in the extreme far distance then to an extreme close convergence which is what gives people eye strain. I loved the 3D in this film and it was a great reminder of what the D in 3D stands for....it is dimension and you can truly feel it here and with human beings instead of cartoons.
4/5

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.