Picture this: a legendary filmmaker declares a horror sequel his top pick for 2025, turning heads and sparking heated debates among cinephiles. But here's where it gets controversial – is this really a masterpiece, or just cleverly packaged trash? Dive in as we unpack John Waters' bold choices and why one film stands out in a year of cinematic surprises.
Cult favorite John Waters has unveiled his annual roundup of the year's standout films through Vulture, and guess what? An unexpected horror installment has snagged a prime spot near the top of his list. We're talking about Final Destination: Bloodlines, which the self-proclaimed Pope of Trash has crowned his second favorite movie of 2025. That's right – this one edged out a whole slew of acclaimed titles to earn such high praise.
Waters didn't hold back in his enthusiasm, describing it as 'The best sequel to the coolest cinematic franchise ever.' He went on to rave about its 'ferocious, fractured, and filled with so many scary, twisted surprises' nature, claiming it pushes boundaries into 'a new realm of exploitation art.' For those new to Waters' quirky world, think of him as the king of subversive comedy and shock value – someone who loves films that challenge norms and push viewers to their limits. His take suggests Final Destination: Bloodlines isn't just a jump-scare fest; it's a bold evolution that blends gore with clever storytelling, much like how classic exploitation films from the 70s used sensationalism to critique society. But here's the part most people miss: Waters' affection for 'trash' often reveals deeper cultural insights, turning what seems like lowbrow entertainment into high art.
Leading Waters' 2025 favorites is Ari Aster's satirical pandemic western thriller Eddington, which he jokingly championed with, 'If you don’t like this film, I hate you.' It's a wild ride that mixes conspiracy theories with genre-bending twists, proving Aster's knack for provocative narratives. The rest of his top picks include Dag Johan Haugerud’s Oslo trilogy, Oliver Laxe’s Sirāt, Mathias Broe’s Sauna, Dennis Cooper & Zac Farley’s Room Temperature, Alain Guiraudie’s Misericordia, François Ozon’s When Fall Is Coming, Mariska Hargitay’s My Mom Jayne, and Bruno Dumont’s The Empire. Each of these films brings something unique to the table – from introspective dramas to experimental storytelling – showcasing Waters' eclectic taste for boundary-pushing cinema.
Now, zooming in on Final Destination: Bloodlines, this sixth entry in the long-running horror series follows a college student tormented by a brutal, looping nightmare. In a desperate bid to save her family from a horrific fate, she returns home to seek out the one person who might shatter the deadly cycle. It's classic Final Destination territory: intricate death traps, escalating tension, and that signature 'cheat death at your own peril' vibe. Directed by Zach Lipovsky and Adam Stein – the duo behind the cult hit Freaks – and penned by Guy Busick (who worked on Scream 2022 and Scream VI) alongside Lori Evans Taylor, the film amps up the scares with fresh takes on familiar tropes. For beginners dipping into the franchise, imagine it as a puzzle where every 'escape' leads to a crazier confrontation, blending suspense with dark humor.
The cast shines with talents like Kaitlyn Santa Juana in the lead, alongside Teo Briones, Richard Harmon, Owen Patrick Joyner, Anna Lore, Brec Bassinger, and the late Tony Todd, whose iconic presence adds a layer of nostalgic terror. And talk about box office magic – Final Destination: Bloodlines smashed records as the series' highest-grossing film, raking in over $315 million worldwide. That's a testament to its broad appeal, drawing in both die-hard fans and casual viewers with its relentless energy.
But here's where the controversy kicks in: And this is the part most people miss – is Final Destination: Bloodlines truly a 'new realm of exploitation art,' or is Waters' praise a nostalgic nod to over-the-top horror that some argue glorifies violence without substance? Critics might say it's just another entry in a formulaic franchise, recycling jump scares for profit, while fans see it as a triumphant return to form. Personally, I lean toward Waters' view – it feels like a smart subversion of slasher clichés, but I'd love to hear your take. Do you agree this sequel deserves such acclaim, or is it overhyped? And bigger picture, how do we define 'exploitation art' in today's cinema? Drop your thoughts in the comments – let's debate!
Looking ahead, the franchise isn't resting on its laurels. A seventh installment is already in the works, with Michiel Blanchart (director of Night Call) reportedly in talks to helm it, building on a script by Taylor. It's exciting to see how the series evolves, potentially introducing even more twisted surprises.
What do you think? Is John Waters' pick a game-changer for horror, or does it say more about his quirky preferences? Share your opinions below – disagreement welcomed!
