On the surface Final Destination appears to be a straightforward teen movie, released in 2000 by James Wong, who will be familiar to some as one of the producers of The X-Files. Indeed, the film bears much in common with a stand-alone episode of The X-Files, and despite the jaded appearance lent to it by the increasingly clichéd 'teen cast' device, the film is worth viewing, particularly if you're a fan of Wong's previous (or indeed, later) works.
Unlike most horror films, there is no personification of the 'evil' within the plot; it's simply a logical consequence of having reached the end of one's lifespan. The basic premise concerns the logistics of death, that there is a time at which each individual is supposed to die; death will, basically, get you in the end. Yet having beaten the pattern once because of Alex's peculiarly gory visions, the cast are left to spend the rest of their lives trying to beat the system one more time. Most of them fail, of course, leading to a series of spectacularly grotesque deaths.
The premise is good, and the philosophical questions it raises are intriguing - superficially, at least. But there is no doubt that the characters are designed to complement each other perfectly: there's the confused male with peculiar powers, the attractive, kooky girl and the dumb high school jock complete with girlfriend-who's-not-prepared-to-put-up-with-much-more. The appearance of Seann W Scott is more unsettling than anything - seeing Stifler from American Pie in a horror film is slightly incongruous. By the end, also, the amazing co-incidences on the part of 'death', while clearly designed to show that fate is pretty difficult to wriggle out of, have become almost unbelievably convenient for the writers.
There are, despite the niggles, some genuinely great moments in the film - at least one death is so unexpected it rivals Samuel L Jackson's moment of shark-devoured glory in Deep Blue Sea. The producers must have spent half the budget on gore, as well; just about every scene is drenched in blood. What would have made it better? Less teen actors and a bit less formula, perhaps: how many mortuary assistants (Ex-Candyman Tony Todd, no less...) do you know who find kids creeping around in the dead of night but take the time out to helpfully explain the logistics of existence? ('You can't cheat death.' - Deus ex machina plot crowbar, anyone?) That said, on the whole Final Destination is a pretty good evening's entertainment. If you're thinking of seeing it, though, do yourself a favour and see Donnie Darko first. It'll make less sense, but ultimately it'll be far more enjoyable. Alternately, the sequel Final Destination II is considered by many to be superior to the first movie, although it maintains its own set of minor flaws.
Cast: Devon Sawa (Idle Hands), Ali Larter (The House on Haunted Hill), Seann W. Scott (American Pie), Kerr Smith (Dawson's Creek), Kristen Cloke, Amanda Detmer, Chad E Donella, Brendan Fehr, Daniel Roebuck, Roger Guenver Smith, Tony Todd (Candyman), Barbara Tyson
Director: James Wong
Screenwriter: Glen Morgan, James Wong from a story by Jeffrey Reddick
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
13 February 2010
20 January 2010
Astonish Yourself: 101 Experiments In The Philosophy Of Everyday Life
101 Experiments In The Philosophy Of Everyday Life: A book with an undeniably great title, at least until they shoved 'Astonish Yourself' in front of it and republished. Still, it incorporates that magical number, 101, and (more importantly) incorporates that other magical word: philosophy. A scary word, in truth, to the uninitiated, but at least it's tempered here by the words everyday life. One of those new, and currently fashionable, popular philosophy texts, the emphasis is on experimentation and fun, eschewing completely the idea of relating the book to established schools of philosophy. This will either thrill you, or disturb you, depending on whether you feel philosophy can, or indeed should have a more frivolous aspect. I suppose, on reflection, it may leave you entirely unmoved; who can say?
Each of the 101 experiments is presented in the same, simple manner. Duration, required props and the intended effect are followed by a short exposition on the experiment itself. The tasks range from deep and meaningful experiments on the relation of oneself to the universe (See The Stars Below You, in which one imagines oneself to hang above the infinite depths of space.), through to the more whimsical or potentially perverse: Watch A Woman At Her Window.
Other experiments invite you to Kill People In Your Head, in case the less serious Run In A Graveyard doesn't appeal. Whatever your state of mind, however you feel about philosophy, there is something in Roger-Pol Droit's book that you can do, whether you wish to go wild in public and Tell A Stranger She Is Beautiful, or you'd rather stay at home and Make A Wall Between Your Hands. The effect of those, if you're interested, is to induce fireworks of some description, and to cause a sense of 'doubleness'.
Roger-Pol Droit produced the original work in French, a fact which has caused at least one reviewer to dryly comment on the humorous qualities of the book, as though a Frenchman should be incapable of such wit. There is, you see, a large dose of humour involved, but however bizarre the notions are, however foolish one may feel carrying them out, the potential for philosophical thought is undeniable. It may be that the only effect is to have you thinking why, but at least that's a start. At least half of the experiments are whimsical, and to a large extent involve the utter desertion of what is considered normal behaviour. A further quarter are sinister beyond words; visualising a pile of human organs (Effect: pitiless) does not come naturally to the majority of us. Nevertheless, trying an experiment and then reading Droit's dry, insightful prose is a delightful way to indulge in a little popular philosophy. You may not agree with Droit, of course, but that's all part of the experience...
You may well be among those who have found popular philosophy to be a life-changing experience. Alain de Botton's books may crumble in your hands due to excessive re-reading (though I doubt it). It's unlikely that this will do the same, regardless. It's a wonderful book, well worth a dip into, but it's hardly a guide to living. Of course, you may be one of the enlightened few who realise that this is the whole point of popular philosophy. On the outside it's designed to appeal to the 'common man', whomever and wherever he might be, and on the inside it's supposed to afford miraculous effects with minimum exertion. Treat 101 Experiments In The Philosophy Of Everyday Life as an entertainment and you'll be fine. Expect miraculous, life-affirming experiences, and you're heading for disappointment.
Each of the 101 experiments is presented in the same, simple manner. Duration, required props and the intended effect are followed by a short exposition on the experiment itself. The tasks range from deep and meaningful experiments on the relation of oneself to the universe (See The Stars Below You, in which one imagines oneself to hang above the infinite depths of space.), through to the more whimsical or potentially perverse: Watch A Woman At Her Window.
Other experiments invite you to Kill People In Your Head, in case the less serious Run In A Graveyard doesn't appeal. Whatever your state of mind, however you feel about philosophy, there is something in Roger-Pol Droit's book that you can do, whether you wish to go wild in public and Tell A Stranger She Is Beautiful, or you'd rather stay at home and Make A Wall Between Your Hands. The effect of those, if you're interested, is to induce fireworks of some description, and to cause a sense of 'doubleness'.
Roger-Pol Droit produced the original work in French, a fact which has caused at least one reviewer to dryly comment on the humorous qualities of the book, as though a Frenchman should be incapable of such wit. There is, you see, a large dose of humour involved, but however bizarre the notions are, however foolish one may feel carrying them out, the potential for philosophical thought is undeniable. It may be that the only effect is to have you thinking why, but at least that's a start. At least half of the experiments are whimsical, and to a large extent involve the utter desertion of what is considered normal behaviour. A further quarter are sinister beyond words; visualising a pile of human organs (Effect: pitiless) does not come naturally to the majority of us. Nevertheless, trying an experiment and then reading Droit's dry, insightful prose is a delightful way to indulge in a little popular philosophy. You may not agree with Droit, of course, but that's all part of the experience...
You may well be among those who have found popular philosophy to be a life-changing experience. Alain de Botton's books may crumble in your hands due to excessive re-reading (though I doubt it). It's unlikely that this will do the same, regardless. It's a wonderful book, well worth a dip into, but it's hardly a guide to living. Of course, you may be one of the enlightened few who realise that this is the whole point of popular philosophy. On the outside it's designed to appeal to the 'common man', whomever and wherever he might be, and on the inside it's supposed to afford miraculous effects with minimum exertion. Treat 101 Experiments In The Philosophy Of Everyday Life as an entertainment and you'll be fine. Expect miraculous, life-affirming experiences, and you're heading for disappointment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)