Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood : According to the films timeline the year should be

According to the films timeline the year should be

At least in the 2000's in this movie. Ok the first movie is clearly stated to be set in 1980, then its 5 years later in part 2 which makes the year 1985, and parts 3 and 4 are just 2 days after the events of part 2. So in The Final Chapter the year is 1985 which is almost accurate to the time part 4 was made in.

And Tommy looks to be at least 10 in part 4, part 5 the character appears to be about 17 which puts it about 6 or 7 years after the events of part 4 so we should be in 1992 in part 5. In part 6 Tommy is clearly older i would say he's in his early 20's so the year should be at least 95 or 96.

Now in this movie Jason has been underwater so long they've got rid of all the cabins and have put homes on the camp grounds. Then we have a little girl who's about 10 or so kill her dad and it fast forwards til shes about 17. So that should put the year around the early 2000's.

Lol this film does a big leap into the future yet the year looks as if it stays the same. I just find it funny how this film jumps at least 7 years down the line even after its clearly been a few years after part 6, but we're still in the 1980's.

Thats what i love about these high school girls, i get older they stay the same age.

Re: According to the films timeline the year should be

I responded to your post on the Part VI board, but I'll also respond here, with a little more detail.

Firstly, I honestly think that your latching on to a small plot point that doesn't really matter. Let's entertain the idea that Part VI takes place in 1995 and Part VII in 2001. Now, given that premise, how exactly do you suggest the directors/producers of a low budget horror movie go about creating the illusion that it's a few years into the future? A few points I want to make:

1. It would be impossible for the creators of the films to accurately predict what the fashion and musical trends would be in the future, therefore it would also be impossible for them to insert these trends into a movie before they even happened. Characters will not be walking around in flannel and listening to Nirvana because the director, script writer, and wardrobe did not know that would be a trend. Props would not be able to use cars from the late 90s, because they had not yet been made! No one uses laptops and flat screen TVs because they had not been invented!

2. The science fiction genre goes out of the way to stylize the setting as the "future" because, most of the time, science fiction movies rely on futuristic setting as a plot device. For example, technologies in science fiction are often beyond our wildest imagination. This is an unnecessary trope in horror films because the unfolding of the plot is not dependent upon such gimmicks.

3. Even in many of the classic sci-fi movies, little attention is paid to fashion and music as an indicator of the future. This is not the case all of the time, but most of the time. Watch Aliens, A Clockwork Orange, Terminator, Sunshine, Blade Runner,Gattaca, etc. These movies are set in the future; sometimes even the distant future. The characters wear everyday clothes, and listen to every day music. They are not much different from you and me.

4. Take even one of the most powerful, important sci fi movies of all time - 2001: A Space Odyssey. According to your theory, Part VII is taking place at the same time as 2001. Do you fault 2001 for not being able to predict that, realistically, all the characters should have been walking around with cell phones? And, when it really gets down to brass tacks, Part VII actually portrays a future that was waaaay more in line with the way we actually lived and operated in the early 2000s than 2001 did. This, of course, is because Part VII is a simple horror film that doesn't need to take the viewer "out of the movie" by inserting some sort of silly gimmick that indicates the setting as the future.

Now, all of that said, your timeline is a few years off:

Screws fall out all of the time. The world's an imperfect place.

Re: According to the films timeline the year should be

Really? So you're posting this exact same thing on all of the Friday boards? Dude, it's not a damn sci-fi movie. What do you expect?

Re: According to the films timeline the year should be

Part 4 actually takes places in 1984 because Pamela's headstone says 1930-1979.

Re: According to the films timeline the year should be

Tommy is twelve in Part 4. Were you not paying attention when they said his age? It's also said again he was twelve at the time in Part 5.

As for the timeline thing itself, Parts 5-8 are never intended to be set in future years. They are all set in their perspective present years of release until the next installment rolls though and there's a big time gap. That movie would be in the present, and you're left shifting all the previous movies back in time to earlier years. This is evident by not only the fact that the look of the films clearly says 1980s and they don't even set it in a future year, but in Part 8 (released in 1989), it references Jason's 1957 drowning happening "thirty years ago". This movie is anywhere from 22-25 years after the original film. Technically speaking, the movie should be happening in the 2000s, but as it's set in 1988 we have the original movie now happening in the 1960s. The only sequel that actually has to happen in a future setting is the ninth movie since while originally set in 1993, Freddy Vs. Jason clearly picks up shortly after it but is set in it's year of release, 2003. Seeing as Part 8 happens in 1989, that now puts a fourteen year gap between that and Part 9 instead of the original four year gap.

Re: According to the films timeline the year should be

Friday the 13th took place in 1979 since Mrs. Voorhees was killed around that time. Alice "disappeared" two months after that in the same year. Friday the 13th Part 2-4 was in 1984. Friday the 13th Part 5-6 was in 1987-88. Part 7-8 was in the early 90's. Jason Goes to Hell was in 1994. 10 years after rose up from the lake.