u/Dry_Flounder_819

Hello Everyone!

So I have a theory that has been on my mind for quite some time now. You see, throughout the franchise we have had numerous characters try to figure out any possible ways to permanently beat Death. So far, Willliam Bludworth (RIP) has brought up to two methods that were somewhat proved successful, the "Kill or Be Killed" method (introduced in FD5) and the "New Life" method (introduced in FD2). But what if there was another way that even Bludworth, a highly experienced man who studied Death his entire life, completely missed out on but just so happens that a high school teenager managed to figure it out and it just went passed our heads?

In FD3, Ian McKinley proposed a theory to Wendy and Kevin during the Warehouse scene, where he explains Issac Newton's Third Law of Motion that states "for every action force, there is an equal and opposite reaction force." This means whenever one object exerts a force on another, the second object exerts a force of equal magnitude but in the opposite direction on the first. A simple example of this would be placing a book on a table. The book’s weight pushes down on the table (action), and the table pushes up with a normal force (opposite reaction). Ian then comes to the conclusion that if Death were coming after them in a specific order of how they were originally meant to die thus acting like a "chain", then the only way to break it is to have someone die out of order. He basically suggests that Wendy should kill herself (action) in order to save everyone else (opposite reaction).

Obviously, this guy was just saying this to be edgy and a jerk, but what if he was on to something? What if this was secretly the third way to cheat Death again? That's why I will provide two pieces of evidence to help support this theory, as well as a counterargument. Although each of them comes from alternate endings, so they are definitely not canon but it's still important to point them out.

Evidence 1: In the alternate ending of FD1, Clear and Carter survive after Alex sacrifices himself to save Clear and she ends up giving birth to his baby. Now, this ending suggests that Clear and Carter survived because of the method that giving birth to a child that was never meant to exist breaks the chain. But since this theory was proven false in FD: Bloodlines (ugh), the method is now deemed non-effective. However, what if it actually wasn't the birth of Alex's baby that saved Clear and Carter but rather Alex's death that did? Now, I think this is just a matter of perfect timing. Even though Alex was next after Clear, he technically died out of order when the car exploded to save Clear since it was supposed to kill her and not him. It would be pretty cool to see if Clear, Carter, and the baby were still alive because this theory was proven correct.

Evidence 2: In the "Choose Your Fate" special feature of FD3, one of the alternate endings you get comes right before Ian's cherry picker death where you are giving the decision to make him go either right or left. If right, Ian gets bisected, flips off Wendy, and the movie continues as normal, but if left, he gets completely crushed and the movie ends with Wendy, Kevin, and Julie alive and well. So, let's assume that the cherry picker was supposed to be for Wendy but killed Ian instead which wouldn't have happened if Wendy and Kevin didn't save him from getting impaled by the fence wood like he was supposed to. Now, you may be thinking, "Why does the "Left" ending guarantee's Wendy, Kevin, and Julie's survival, but not the "Right" ending?" Well, this might be a matter of perfect timing yet again, hear me out. Remember, by the time Kevin saves Julie and Wendy saves Kevin, the death order now goes as follows:

Wendy -> Ian -> Julie -> Kevin

In the "right" ending, after Ian gets bisected, he still has a few seconds of life left to flip off Wendy before dying of blood loss. Now, I think that Death (being the slick mofo that he is) quickly circled back to Ian's turn before he eventually passes. Which now the order goes as follows:

Ian -> Julie -> Kevin -> Wendy

I think this is why the "Left" ending ended with Wendy, Kevin, and Julie surviving because Ian died instantly, much like Alex dying instantly to the car explosion to save Clear. And mind you, this ending is actually used in the FD3 novelization to further prove my point. So, I guess you can say that Ian got an ironic death this way since it did help proved his theory correct.

Counterargument: Now, I wouldn't be a good theorist if I didn't provide a piece of evidence to contradict what I have explained. In the alternate ending of FD4, Nick tries doing the same thing by sacrificing himself to prevent the mall disaster and save everyone, including Lori and Janet. He throws himself out of a window while carrying a propane tank and lands on a car, killing himself and causing an explosion to alert a fire emergency and evacuate everyone. But Lori and Janet still die after being crushed by a falling A/C unit that was being carried on a crane. This ending proves the theory doesn't work.

In conclusion, this is something that I have thoroughly thought about for quite some time in case you haven't notice. I'm a huge fan of the franchise and I have been meaning to tell other fans about this. I have also read another Reddit post of here that suggested how Death doesn't really crave a body count, it craves order and wants to act like a God, which could also further prove my point.

So, what do you guys think? Could the theory be proven correct despite most of my evidence be considered non-canon? Would you like to see this be explored much further in a future movie? And is there anything I might have missed regarding this? Let me know.