User Reviews

I wudv rated this 3, but being an Australian i thought i'd give it an extra star as a show of support for the Aussies involved in the movie (the Mandylors :-). I had several issues. The lawlessness developed at such lightning speed (& all because of a couple of days blackout?) that i thought i must've missed a scene where they explained how many months had elapsed. I didn't understand what the basis was for everyone assuming that the blackout was worldwide (or atleast nationwide). Throughout the film there was a lack of 'thrilling' moments, but due to some of the positive reviews i was expecting a spectacular revelation at the end, but the lights just came back on. One realistic aspect was the panic buying. Overall i was irritated by this film, but appreciate the underlying message.

I get that these types of movies call for people in distress. There's has to be people to lose their ever loving minds otherwise it would make for a bland movie. But why do they always have to be whiny little girls who cry when their boyfriend's are out of their line of sight? Christine absolutely ruined the movie for me. She was moody, threw tantrums, ran off all the time...these are supposed to be college kids right? She may as well have been 5. I went the entire movie hoping she'd die off and that's when you know your character sucks. The best acting in the movie was from the escaped convicts and the mother/daughter early on. We saw 2 seconds of their story yet I cared more about them than ANY of the other characters. You could have replaced literally everyone else and it probably would have improved the movie.

I enjoy this genre, so I decided to watch this film when it popped up on Amazon Prime, despite the mediocre reviews.

Definitely has B-movie overtones: Script is a bit ham-fisted at times. Background sound effects are overdone, particularly the transitional "thunder." At volumes just loud enough to hear the dialogue, the sound effects were rattling my home theater. Definitely out of balance. Acting performances were acceptable, but it's clearly B-level talent.

On the positive side, the cinematography is excellent. Not sure where it was filmed, but the backdrops are beautiful.

Perhaps best of the film is that the screen writers depict what many preppers consider to be the expected reality for such a situation: The thin veneer of society will peel away quickly if the power goes out and stays off for more than a few days. The plot deals with this very effectively, and that alone will interest viewers who think about these situations.

The film focuses on 4 young adults hiking and camping on the Mohawk Trail in upstate NY. Meanwhile, Martin (Jordan Marder-writer, producer) and his expecting wife Julia (Lymari Nadal) return to his deceased parents' home in a plot to be developed. Frank (Bill Sage) is the local sheriff.

When a poorly explained nation wide blackout, lasting several days happens, a group of people misbehave becoming looters, rapers, and killers as if this is the end of the world and the lights will never come back on. Eventually they, as expected, confront those in subplots A and B.

That's about it. The rape is implied. The killings are not very graphic. The dialogue is boring and attempts to have a theme about light and darkness with a Genesis quote that didn't tie in that well. It didn't make me want to run out and buy duct tape and candles.

Guide: F-bomb. No sex or nudity.

There are a few things I take issue with this film, but I'll summarize it in that it involves the "realism" of the film itself; and some weird writing / narrative decisions.

First, the good: it was reasonably well acted, every actor does a commendable job considering the material they are working with. They all seem to be fairly amateur actors; too, I think some may even have a future in acting.

The bad? A lot! But mainly 2 things:

1) This isn't "how it would really go down", this is a prepper's wet dream. Now, I have no doubt at all society would eventually break down during a global power outage, but not so fast. I know it was probably a narrative decision to cause a sense of panic, but the "let's kill for fun" faze would take at least a few months. Probably more.

Likely, in a situation like this, the national guard and police would keep order a few weeks, maybe some months. If supplies truly ran short nationwide, the breakdown of society would occur once cops left to fend for themselves, again probably months into this. The film "Into The Forest" does a far better job pacing out a scenario like this.

Especially in small towns, their isolated locations would make it take longer to break down. I live in the Midwest, I've lost power regionally for a week due to storms. No looting. People helped each other. Or in parts of Puerto Rico they lost power for a year+ due to the hurricane. No mass murdering.

Again, a nationwide breakdown would speed up the panic, but 3 days? The hordes "come out of the cities" (?) after 3 days? No.

2) I know the idea for this film is viewing "every day" people dealing with a global catastrophe, but some of the subplots were weirdly unnecessary. The teens going backpacking at the exact moment the disaster starts, just so they naively wander into a camp of psychos? Huh? What the hell was with this subplot? It created really odd pacing where the story jumped back and forth between their dumb teen bliss, and the crisis, for unknown narrative reasons. I suppose they represented "innocence" or whatever. But, it was just stupid.

My biggest frustration is that with the mostly competent cast and a decent premise, this film was a wasted opportunity.