I got this film from Makeflix on Blu-Ray. Included on the Blu-ray that's worth mentioning is a commentary track that is not synced with what the commentators are viewing at all. What's on screen for the viewer is about 5 seconds behind what the commentators are commenting on. Is this a nitpick? Yes, but it's distracting when you realize they're talking about stuff that hasn't happened yet on your end.
Also included on the Blu-ray is an alternate version of the film, a Rough Cut. I kind of wish they had a DVD version of the film instead of the Blu-ray, just so I could rip the film and the Rough Cut onto my PC. Why? Because the amateur editor that I am craves to trim this film, rearrange scenes, and simultaneously include some of the scenes that were deleted and left in the Rough Cut. I don't think I could do the film any justice, but I feel like I should at least give it a shot.
Before I dive into this film anymore than I already have, I want to make it clear that despite my gripes with the film, this is one of the better made entries of the franchise. It's sad for me to say that, considering it's still nowhere near the levels of entertainingly bad of the original two films and Within The Woods. It's unique that this franchise's entries are all bad, but almost all of them are bad for unique different reasons.
This film does not tediously try to cross the 60 minute mark like in 3, 4, 5, 666 or Ghost of Camp Blood, with numerous padding techniques and flashbacks to previous films, or flashbacks to its own scenes earlier in the film. Albeit it does have some flashbacks to 666 and 7, but not excessively like other films would.
It's not using someone's garage as a cabin like in 7. Nor is it using someone's house as a Rehabilitation Center like in Children of Camp Blood. Nor is it using a Community College building as a TV Studio like in Ghost of Camp Blood. This film had access to actual cabins at an actual campground, and what appears to be a real bar, albeit a closed real bar. If this were other films, the bar would just be someone's kitchen, or a bar that they have in their basement or garage.
All of the actors did their best with the material that they were given, although at times it seems like some of them were either camera shy or didn't fully grasp what was supposed to be happening in a scene; maybe they weren't given proper direction to fully understand how to perform certain sequences.
Lead Actor David Perry seemed to be the most camera shy at the beginning, but you can see throughout he becomes more comfortable on camera, and has quite a few good moments with actors Jamie Morgan and Tim Hatch. These three together not only bring good performances, but also help enhance the performances of one another.
Best performances, outside of those three, have to go to Erica Dyer, Jen Elyse Feldman, and the film's writer Julie Anne Prescott. Especially with Erica Dyer's yelling during one scene, although it clearly caused the audio in that scene to clip and distort briefly.
The film's main issue is similar to the issues I have with a Friday the 13th fan film titled Vengeance. Both films have too many characters and too much going on that the plot feels TOO stuffed, the editing feels and IS choppy, and it kills the overall pacing. And above all that, it feels like not enough development was given in certain areas to make the film feel complete.
It took the film 18 minutes to finally introduce the main characters with Stu and his church group. In other films that are feature length or above the 90 minute mark or even close to the 120 minute mark, its not that big of a deal. But we are 53 minutes before the credits come to an end at this point, and the main characters JUST arrived. If some scenes were rearranged, the main characters would arrive a little bit earlier.
It took me two viewings of the film to finally kind of grasp what was happening, the second viewing being the Rough Cut. I still don't even think I grasped what was happening in the film entirely. So much happens in this film with almost 20 characters that once you stop and try piecing everything together, you realize how not so well the story comes together.
**Wrap Up**
The Final Cut of the film is 1 Hour, 11 Minutes, 14 Seconds, with opening logos, opening and closing credits, and a few title cards.
The Rough Cut of the film is 1 Hour, 19 Minutes, 44 Seconds. Just the one Title Card, no opening credits or logos or ending credits.
With this information, you would think that the film just trimmed down a few scenes, and maybe took out a scene or two to remove 8 minutes and 30 seconds of film, but no.
The final cut has about 6 Minutes and 43 Seconds of additional material that was not in the Rough Cut, including the opening logos, opening and closing credits, and title cards. Some of it is videos fans/indiegogo backers sent in to be a part of the film, but other segments that were removed in their place gave context to certain scenes, characters and plot developments.
So overall, this is a film that probably should've been at least 1 Hour 25 or 26 Minutes. Hell, I'd argue it should be even longer to flesh scenes and story out. This film had 15 overall minutes chopped off just to keep the runtime low at just above 1 hour and 11 Minutes.
And because so, as mentioned before, it feels like a film that is choppy, filled with TOO many characters and storylines going on at the same time. It feels like an incomplete film. And that is supposedly the case.
Unless the director misspoke on the commentary track, or unless I'm misremembering, the film was shot over the course of 4 days, and that the completed script was 111 to 112 pages long.
Going by the logic of 1 minute per page, that's 1 Hour 52 Minutes. These people tried to film an almost 2 hour film in the span of 4 days. And I'm going to assume, based on the final cut and the rough cut feeling like scenes are missing from both, they only managed to shoot 3/4ths of the script by the time production ended.
I'm also going to assume, based off of what is mentioned in the commentary, certain scenes were either deleted or not filmed not just because they ran out of time to film it, but because certain actors had to leave the shoot earlier than expected, so they had to film scenes of them being abruptly killed off just to explain why someone like Jeff who barely had any development or lines even is now missing.
Yet despite all of this, they had to trim it all down because of runtime concerns? Aren't feature films supposed to be above 80 to 82 minutes to be classified as feature length? Why is 71 minutes the cut off or the average for all of these films in this franchise? I'm sure there were at least a couple of these films that went over that 71 Minute limit.
And yet despite trimming the film down to a mere 1 Hour and 11 Minutes, some of the stuff they left in felt like it needed to be removed while other stuff they removed felt like they needed to be placed back in. And overall, the film lacks context in certain parts as to what exactly is happening.
Is it the worst film ever made? No, I'd say the worst FILM is still A Haunting on Gabriel Street. Is it the worst Camp Blood film? No, that title would go to Camp Blood 3, 4 and 5 collectively; I'm hesitant to even call those FILMS as I type this. Is it the best Camp Blood film? No, the original three films remain at the top of the crap barrel, on the rim, while everything else in this franchise is in the barrel.
Similarly to 7, Ghost and Children, this film tried to tell a story and have it connect to a previous film. But this film is marginally better than 7, Ghost, and Children for having actual locations to shoot at. It's on the surface of the crap in the barrel, just slightly poking out trying to reach the brim to join the original two films and Within the Woods.
Also included on the Blu-ray is an alternate version of the film, a Rough Cut. I kind of wish they had a DVD version of the film instead of the Blu-ray, just so I could rip the film and the Rough Cut onto my PC. Why? Because the amateur editor that I am craves to trim this film, rearrange scenes, and simultaneously include some of the scenes that were deleted and left in the Rough Cut. I don't think I could do the film any justice, but I feel like I should at least give it a shot.
Before I dive into this film anymore than I already have, I want to make it clear that despite my gripes with the film, this is one of the better made entries of the franchise. It's sad for me to say that, considering it's still nowhere near the levels of entertainingly bad of the original two films and Within The Woods. It's unique that this franchise's entries are all bad, but almost all of them are bad for unique different reasons.
This film does not tediously try to cross the 60 minute mark like in 3, 4, 5, 666 or Ghost of Camp Blood, with numerous padding techniques and flashbacks to previous films, or flashbacks to its own scenes earlier in the film. Albeit it does have some flashbacks to 666 and 7, but not excessively like other films would.
It's not using someone's garage as a cabin like in 7. Nor is it using someone's house as a Rehabilitation Center like in Children of Camp Blood. Nor is it using a Community College building as a TV Studio like in Ghost of Camp Blood. This film had access to actual cabins at an actual campground, and what appears to be a real bar, albeit a closed real bar. If this were other films, the bar would just be someone's kitchen, or a bar that they have in their basement or garage.
All of the actors did their best with the material that they were given, although at times it seems like some of them were either camera shy or didn't fully grasp what was supposed to be happening in a scene; maybe they weren't given proper direction to fully understand how to perform certain sequences.
Lead Actor David Perry seemed to be the most camera shy at the beginning, but you can see throughout he becomes more comfortable on camera, and has quite a few good moments with actors Jamie Morgan and Tim Hatch. These three together not only bring good performances, but also help enhance the performances of one another.
Best performances, outside of those three, have to go to Erica Dyer, Jen Elyse Feldman, and the film's writer Julie Anne Prescott. Especially with Erica Dyer's yelling during one scene, although it clearly caused the audio in that scene to clip and distort briefly.
The film's main issue is similar to the issues I have with a Friday the 13th fan film titled Vengeance. Both films have too many characters and too much going on that the plot feels TOO stuffed, the editing feels and IS choppy, and it kills the overall pacing. And above all that, it feels like not enough development was given in certain areas to make the film feel complete.
It took the film 18 minutes to finally introduce the main characters with Stu and his church group. In other films that are feature length or above the 90 minute mark or even close to the 120 minute mark, its not that big of a deal. But we are 53 minutes before the credits come to an end at this point, and the main characters JUST arrived. If some scenes were rearranged, the main characters would arrive a little bit earlier.
It took me two viewings of the film to finally kind of grasp what was happening, the second viewing being the Rough Cut. I still don't even think I grasped what was happening in the film entirely. So much happens in this film with almost 20 characters that once you stop and try piecing everything together, you realize how not so well the story comes together.
**Wrap Up**
The Final Cut of the film is 1 Hour, 11 Minutes, 14 Seconds, with opening logos, opening and closing credits, and a few title cards.
The Rough Cut of the film is 1 Hour, 19 Minutes, 44 Seconds. Just the one Title Card, no opening credits or logos or ending credits.
With this information, you would think that the film just trimmed down a few scenes, and maybe took out a scene or two to remove 8 minutes and 30 seconds of film, but no.
The final cut has about 6 Minutes and 43 Seconds of additional material that was not in the Rough Cut, including the opening logos, opening and closing credits, and title cards. Some of it is videos fans/indiegogo backers sent in to be a part of the film, but other segments that were removed in their place gave context to certain scenes, characters and plot developments.
So overall, this is a film that probably should've been at least 1 Hour 25 or 26 Minutes. Hell, I'd argue it should be even longer to flesh scenes and story out. This film had 15 overall minutes chopped off just to keep the runtime low at just above 1 hour and 11 Minutes.
And because so, as mentioned before, it feels like a film that is choppy, filled with TOO many characters and storylines going on at the same time. It feels like an incomplete film. And that is supposedly the case.
Unless the director misspoke on the commentary track, or unless I'm misremembering, the film was shot over the course of 4 days, and that the completed script was 111 to 112 pages long.
Going by the logic of 1 minute per page, that's 1 Hour 52 Minutes. These people tried to film an almost 2 hour film in the span of 4 days. And I'm going to assume, based on the final cut and the rough cut feeling like scenes are missing from both, they only managed to shoot 3/4ths of the script by the time production ended.
I'm also going to assume, based off of what is mentioned in the commentary, certain scenes were either deleted or not filmed not just because they ran out of time to film it, but because certain actors had to leave the shoot earlier than expected, so they had to film scenes of them being abruptly killed off just to explain why someone like Jeff who barely had any development or lines even is now missing.
Yet despite all of this, they had to trim it all down because of runtime concerns? Aren't feature films supposed to be above 80 to 82 minutes to be classified as feature length? Why is 71 minutes the cut off or the average for all of these films in this franchise? I'm sure there were at least a couple of these films that went over that 71 Minute limit.
And yet despite trimming the film down to a mere 1 Hour and 11 Minutes, some of the stuff they left in felt like it needed to be removed while other stuff they removed felt like they needed to be placed back in. And overall, the film lacks context in certain parts as to what exactly is happening.
Is it the worst film ever made? No, I'd say the worst FILM is still A Haunting on Gabriel Street. Is it the worst Camp Blood film? No, that title would go to Camp Blood 3, 4 and 5 collectively; I'm hesitant to even call those FILMS as I type this. Is it the best Camp Blood film? No, the original three films remain at the top of the crap barrel, on the rim, while everything else in this franchise is in the barrel.
Similarly to 7, Ghost and Children, this film tried to tell a story and have it connect to a previous film. But this film is marginally better than 7, Ghost, and Children for having actual locations to shoot at. It's on the surface of the crap in the barrel, just slightly poking out trying to reach the brim to join the original two films and Within the Woods.