TheLittleSongbird While it was not a great or perfect film (particularly in the dialogue, ending and some of the acting), the first 'Final Destination' was entertaining and effective (especially with its terrific opening plane sequence and the creative deaths) with a fascinating idea done well.'Final Destination 2' gets my vote as the best of the four sequels and generally it's just as good as the first film. Like its predecessor it's patchy and uneven, but 'Final Destination 2' takes a bigger and bolder approach and executes it just as cleverly and effectively. Horror sequels have a patchy history, 'Final Destination 2' is one of the better examples. Structurally, the story is a re-tread basically except with cars rather than a plane but has enough freshness to stop it from being repetitive and the novelty from wearing off.Visually, 'Final Destination 2' may not be quite as stylish as its predecessor. It is all the same still as slick and atmospheric, with the special effects still being pretty good in particularly the opening sequence. The music has a suitable haunting eeriness.David R Ellis' direction shows a genuine understanding of the concept and the horror genre, breathing atmosphere, fun and freshness into a tried and tested formula. To me, he is second only to James Wong for the first film when it comes to ranking the 'Final Destination' films directors.Although there is a little too much of an over-reliance on gore, not all of it necessary, the death scenes are bolder, more elaborate and more creative. The film is never dull and much of it is fun, suspenseful and creepy. The highlight is the terrific opening car pile up, which is as high in the terror stakes as the opening plane sequence in the first. Liked the irony in some of the dialogue.The acting is very variable however. The best performances come from returning Ali Larter, providing a nifty link to the first, and a creepy Tony Todd. AJ Cook had her moments, but did overdo and underact some scenes, that she is so much better in 'Criminal Minds' is an understatement.Michael Landes looks uncomfortable the entire time and Jonathan Cherry is irritating. Again the characters are generally one-dimensional and not developed much beyond that which doesn't always make it easy to care for them.Excepting some nice irony and that the exposition isn't as clumsy, the dialogue doesn't flow particularly well and reeks of cheese. The ending is contrived and illogical.Overall, enjoyable if imperfect. 7/10 Bethany Cox

GL84 When a vivid premonition stops here from participating in a massive accident, a woman tries to convince those she's saved that the strange accidents they're involved in are a matter of death insuring his plans are carried out and tries to stop them.This one was an immensely enjoyable sequel that really rivals the original. Among the better qualities here is that this one manages to really portray a truer sense of dread and suspense about the situation as this one really gets a lot of great facts about the surroundings really affecting everyday life. This one really bridges that concept from the first one even further here by making the accidents seem so far out of of logical realms that they're simply, truly accidents brought about through actual, honest coincidences which makes for a rather tense time throughout the first half b building this through the repeated visions, the first few deaths and the call-backs to what happened in the original. This is compounded by the tendency here to showcase the warning signs rather well here as the suspenseful nature of these supposed encounters is some incredible foreshadowing on what's going to happen, and the fact that there's some rather creepy moments from these issues makes this quite fun. The film's best feature, though, is based off the most impressive part of the story here in it's really freaky action-packed encounters here starting with the film's high-point of the opening car crash. There's a fine piece of spectacle to be had here in seeing the kind of high-impact mangling of cars, vehicular stunt- work and continued continuations that not only provide this one with plenty of suspense building up to the crash, action with all the different spectacle encounters as well as the gory deaths along the way. Other big scenes here, from the insanely tense encounter in the doctor's office with several close calls here with the different traps with the electrified water almost getting here and the different false reactions here to the eventual death, the scenes in the apartment are really fun with the false scares followed by the actual kill in the lobby following the revelations found earlier and the absolutely fun encounter in the field makes for a great scene with the splendid set-up in the care beforehand which ties their fates into the original as well as showing another big crash and the fun, over-the-top kills that are present here makes this one incredibly fun. These here are the film's good points which manages to hold off the few flaws here. It's all in the finale here which really seems to meander around with numerous side-plots, rather middling suspense scenes and the rare occasions where the traps just seem contrived and the whole affair seems to be quite the letdown from what came before it. There's also the small factor of this one going for the same route the original in terms of how the story's paid off, but it's not as big a deal here. Otherwise, this one was quite the impressive enough sequel.Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, Brief Nudity and drug use.

Nitzan Havoc After finally getting to watching the first film, I've just watched this one last night, hoping it's as good as the first. Let's start off by saying it's not. I did have plenty of criticism for certain aspects of the first film (especially to do with the work of director James Wong), but unlike the first film - this one was never going to be as groundbreaking, original and inspiring.Not unlike the first film, the story kicks off with a group of youngsters on their way to to party somehow somewhere. During the drive, Kimberly (the driver) has a vision which makes her pull over, ultimately saving the lives of the people stuck behind her on the highway. When the survivors begin dying, Kimberly seeks out Clear Rivers, one of the survivors of the famous plane explosion from the first film, in hopes that she could help her and her new friends "break the pattern" and "beat death's design". The only original addition is new information shared by the creepy mortician (always great to see Candyman Tony Todd, eerie and unnerving as ever).Besides the obvious lack of originality or even the slightest attempt to offer something new plot and story-wise, Final Destination 2 suffers from two obvious shortcomings (in my opinion of course): First, any attempt to compensate for a lacking story with over-intensified gore scenes is low class in my book; and second, the deaths seem too supernatural, much more than in the first film. Where in the first film some water leak, causing the victim to slip - this time the amount of "coincidents" leading to each "freak accident" feel too much like divine (or unholy) intervention, too deliberate and too far fetched. Not as convincing, not as reasonable, not as good.The small attempt at a plot twist towards the ending isn't successful, and the ending itself is far too comical (again, not unlike the first film). All in all, as a standalone film the film is average at best, and as a sequel - not more than good. It's still a lot of fun to watch after the first, and it definitely isn't a bad film or a reason to quit on the anthology, it just very obviously could have been better.

Jarek Gunther After the financial success hit of the first Final Destination, a sequel had to be thought up. And seeing how the first movie creates potential for a sequel, it seems fitting that another one had to be made and we get Final Destination 2. Yep. Death is at it again. But the question is did they clean up their mistakes from the first film? Did they decide to make the deaths more serious? Are more things explained in this movie as a sequel should do? The answer to the last question. YES. More things are actually explained! That's right. I really liked this movie. I mean, okay yeah, it's not a masterpiece. Miles from it, in fact. But I think it's a very loyal sequel with more things to offer.Here's the story. Kimberly, played by AJ Cook, is taking a road trip with her friends on the interstate. But an eighteen wheeler carrying a bunch of logs passes by. The logs fall off and crash into countless cars, causing a massive pileup, killing many innocents. But this turns out to be a vision of Kimberly's and she blocks the ramp to the interstate to stop several motorists from entering the interstate. The pileup ensues and Kimberly, along with those who were meant to die in the pileup survives. Kimberly believes that all of this is the same thing as the events of the first film in which Death is now after the lucky ones. Desperate to find answers, Kimberly goes to the only survivor of the first film, Clear Rivers, played by Ali Larter. Yeah, Alex died in between films due to… offscreen syndrome. Clear Rivers decides to help Kimberly and the others to find a way to stop Death and find more information about why this is all happening.As you can see, this movie has a very strong connection to the first film—as a sequel should. And more things are explained, like how Death is doing all this. I like how Kimberly goes to Clear Rivers for answers. I like how they demand answers from the mortician, who was very knowledgeable from the first film about how to defeat Death. I like how the survivors become more and more concerned as the deaths excess. Yeah, I think the characters are better in this movie. I mean, yeah, they're stupid in their own way, but I like how involved they get near the end, even the cop. Yeah! A cop actually gets involved in the horror movie and you know what? He believes Kimberly and immediately tries to find answers after the pileup and ends up helping the survivors early on. There's even a deleted scene where the mortician explains how Death works to bring balance in the universe. I just found that really fascinating.Okay, so what's the not so good stuff? Well...like the first film, the deaths are still stupid. In fact, in retrospect, they're goofier in this one. Yeah, they're Loony Tunes territory and more far-fetched. Also, another big change in this film in contrast to the first one is that this movie seems to be leaning towards a little bit of comedy. I guess you can say that since the deaths were ludicrous in the first film, they decided "why not? Make it somewhat comedic. Taking it too seriously would make it even goofier." And the direction they take with the movie just makes it…well, fun. But they don't make it where it's completely a comedy; there's still some suspense in the mix when they try to find more information. Yeah, it's not scary. Just fun.I guess I'm a big sucker for this movie, but seeing how they treat this movie, they really did try to make it a true sequel. Is it stupid at times? Oh yeah. Are the deaths any better? No. But as far as story and characters go, I think it's an advance from the first movie. I know this had a mixed reaction from people, so you can say I'm a fan of this movie. I liked it, despite its mistakes. Next time it's on TV, give it a shot and see for yourself. Just…not while driving.