[Mac Hiavellian]

Originally Posted by Jords

I think he was being sarcastic because they all follow the same idea.

Sounds good, guess thats gonna be collapsing!

Lol, I like to be literal.

I liked that in the first film you never exactly saw why the plane crashed, you just witnessed it all going awry and got the explanation later. I think that's where films 2, 3 and 4 are different because they spent time following a lot of careless obstacles. In particular, the fourth one wasn't just one car flipping in to the audience, it was the weak fence, the slippery oil spillage, the wrench, the poor woodwork, the weak concrete etc. It just seemed too unsafe to be real. Atleast the first one, and second, were a bit more subtle.