The horror landscape could have been profoundly different had James Wong opted for an alternate ending in the original Final Destination. The film focuses on Alex Browning (Devon Sawa), a teenager who experiences a chilling premonition of a catastrophic plane crash. His forewarning enables him and several others to escape their fateful demise, only for Death itself to pursue these survivors, eliminating them one by one. The film navigates their desperate struggle to outwit Death’s design before it’s too late.
With its intriguing premise and iconic death sequences, Final Destination sparked a successful franchise that has expanded to include five films, with a sixth installment titled Final Destination: Bloodlines on the horizon for 2025. Each film introduces new protagonists ensnared by Death, progressively elaborating on the overarching franchise rules. However, the original film’s ending, if executed, could have drastically altered the future installments of the series.
The Actual Ending of Final Destination
Death’s Inescapable Grip
In the film’s conclusion, Alex takes a perilous step to save Clear Rivers (Ali Larter), seemingly managing to alter Death’s predetermined order. Fully embracing the belief that they have escaped their grim fate, Alex, Clear, and another survivor, Carter Horton (Kerr Smith), begin their long-awaited journey to Paris. However, dread ensues when Alex realizes he miscalculated the sequence of deaths, and thus, his invincibility was illusory.
As Alex attempts to leave, he finds himself on the brink of death, only to be saved by Carter at the last instant. Unfortunately, the movie’s final shot foreshadows tragedy: a large neon sign crushes Carter, reinforcing the central theme that death cannot be evaded. This implausible triumph over death sets the stage for the sequels, where characters continue to believe they have outsmarted Death, only to face grim reality.
Unpacking the Alternate Ending of Final Destination
Cheating Death: A New Perspective
If the alternate ending had been realized, Alex would have met his fate after Clear exited the vehicle. As she leaves, Alex’s car ignites, leading to his demise. Yet this event transitions to months later, revealing Clear in a hospital giving birth to their son, Alex Browning II.
Clear and Carter supposedly managed to elude Death’s design using two pivotal methods: the emergence of new life and the elimination of the individual designated to die last in the original sequence. The notion of new life as a means to cheat Death didn’t emerge until Final Destination 2, when Clear suggests this possibility. The original creators likely reserved this concept for future explorations rather than introducing it in the first film.
While the final cut omits Clear’s pregnancy and childbirth, she seemingly possesses the knowledge that this new life can benefit future survival efforts. Introducing this mechanism would have potentially derailed the franchise continuity, especially concerning the timeline explored in Final Destination 5. With the upcoming Final Destination: Bloodlines, it’s plausible that similar themes may re-emerge.
The Flaws in Final Destination’s Alternate Ending
The Strength of Independence
The alternate ending would have hindered the overarching Final Destination timeline, confusing the narrative thread by presenting the idea of Carter and Clear—as well as Alex II—surviving. This could complicate their involvement in future sequels like Final Destination 2. The notion of introducing a character born from Alex potentially leads to a focus on the Browning family lineage rather than the core themes of unavoidable mortality.
This shift could subsequently transform the series, diluting its emphasis on death being inescapable. Moreover, revealing effective methods of outsmarting Death too early in the franchise would eliminate the suspense and mystery that fans enjoyed, reducing the impact of future sequels, which independently developed unique survivability concepts while introducing complex rules surrounding death.
The overarching consequence of this alternate ending could result in a predictable narrative arc that always revolves around the Browning family rather than sustaining the franchise’s ability to introduce fresh perspectives, such as Final Destination 5, which cleverly served as a prequel. The alternate ending’s implications would necessitate key characters’ constant returns—Alex II, Clear, and Carter—while potentially anchoring the franchise in a less dynamic plotline. Death’s design and rules may have rigidified within the established lineage, undermining its ability to thrive with original narratives.
Despite the allure of newly introduced concepts, the alternate ending risks disrupting the successful formula that Final Destination maintained for over two decades. The creators ultimately made the right decision in preserving the finale as it stands, allowing the franchise to continually captivate audiences while evolving with each new installment.
Exploring Other Alternate Endings in the Series
Cameos That Almost Came to Be
Final Destination 3 also flirted with a different conclusion than what audiences experienced in theaters. While the original ending of Final Destination presented major challenges, the alternate ending of the third installment would have addressed one of the franchise’s lingering plot threads.
The theatrical conclusion depicts Wendy (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) moving on from her traumatic experiences, momentarily believing she outsmarted Death. However, her world falls apart when she encounters fellow survivors Kevin (Ryan Merriman) and Julie (Amanda Crew) aboard a subway, leading to a chilling premonition of their collective demise. The movie concludes with the implicit promise of death lurking as they attempt to avert disaster.
Interestingly, there was a proposed alternate ending wherein Wendy would reunite with not just Kevin and Julie but also Final Destination 2’s Kimberly Corman (A. J.Cook) and Thomas Burke (Michael Landes).This setting would culminate in the ultimate irony where the remaining survivors finally face Death’s wrath together.
While this idea could have delighted fans, producer Craig Perry explained that actor scheduling conflicts prevented its realization, stating (via Digital Spy):
“They were going to die to tie the whole thing up to Final Destination 2. I loved the idea and we had it scripted and were going to try it. We were able to get one of the two actors who were available, but the other one wasn’t. If we couldn’t do it all the way, we decided it was best not to do it. To have just one of them leaves an open ending which would make no sense in Death’s overarching plan.”
Leave a Reply