Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.

Too much of everything

The Worst Film Ever

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Mr. Sparrow is a loser. He is more or less a sloppy, dirty, and extremely talkative and deranged version of Peter Jackson.But he is never boring. I can't remember the last time I laughed so hard watching a vampire movie. This one is excellent. I love the dark humor!There are two types of vampire movies I enjoy. One is dark and serious, like Underworld, and the other is humorous, like this one.Out of the 143 vampire movies I've seen, the following are very good humorous ones I recommend to fans of the genre:Love at first bite 1979 Vampire's kiss 1989 Dracula dead and loving it 1995 Hotel Transylvania 1-2 2012-2015 Vamps 2012 (featuring Sigourney Weaver) Bloodsucking bastards 2015They are all very good humorous vampyre movies.Summer of blood is a pleasant surprise to my collection. It is so exciting, so good and funny!I laughed hard upon hearing lines like "This is what you get for not getting your education..." I might recommend the movie to school dropouts in the future. :)

The might the first time I'be left a review on IMDb. I was just so insulted. I love the Comedy Horror category, it's probably my favorite. This was insulting to the genre and the viewers. I couldn't even get to the horror part. After half and hour of the guy whining and complaining and by uncreatively sarcastic, I couldn't take anymore. I don't care what happens to his life. I don't care that he turns into a vampire and gets laid all the time but doesn't want to eat people. It's not funny. This is torture. I had to break up with him. But for those that are this guy, unfunny a**holes going nowhere in life but still think they deserve hot girls, this one's for you guys.

The acting was very good--though I suspect that a good portion of the dialogue was ad libbed which may have been the film's strength as well as its weakness. The ad libbed riffs (if I'm right) contributed greatly to the natural feel of the dialogue and the character's reactions, as well as the give and take between the characters. The problem with this is that too much of the dialogue was constant complaining about something, or off the cuff semi-insulting childish responses to justifiable criticism that made the main character very annoying and unlikable. The best part was that the other characters ALSO found him childish, irritating and odd. In this light, the discrepancy that bugged me, is just how such a dysfunctional human being managed to hang onto his job and his girlfriend at all--and why anyone would bother giving him a second chance. Fact is, though, it happens so I can't very well fault the film for portraying a scenario that I see played out all too frequently in real life.The film needed a faster pace (the entire first half hour was pretty much NOTHING but the main character's complaining and self-absorbed existential whining (though that phrase gives it too much philosophical weight)and more variety in the dialogues (though there were some laugh out loud humorous bits, it was too monotonous overall). Once the action occurs in the middle of the film it picks up (the highlight of the movie and very well done actually--one of the more realistic vampire conversions I've seen--this isn't a spoiler, it's in the film synopsis) for awhile then goes back to pretty much the same old thing. The kicker being that while he has now pretty much gotten everything he wanted, of COURSE he's STILL not satisfied (we all know someone like that) and wants to go back to the way things were (finally recognizing what he's given up). If there is any real philosophical premise in the film it's that hindsight is always 20/20 and you don't appreciate what you have until it's gone.I really did enjoy the relationships as they were portrayed, and the film had a very promising premise with some genuine humor, but as with most vanity films (directed and starring the same person) a more critical eye was needed; less whining; and a shorter running time or livelier pace would have helped a great deal. There is a bit of a twist at the end, but nothing that you can't see coming a mile away. Still, this isn't your typical romantic lead, nor your usual vampire film--not by a long shot. If you are a fan of vampire films, you may enjoy this quirky take on the genre--or you may find it incredibly boring and the lead character overly irritating.

At least two-thirds of SUMMER OF BLOOD is laugh-out-loud funny. The reason: Onur Tukel, the contemporary Woody Allen. The script is genuinely funny, as is Tukel himself: he babbles on like Woody Allen, so self-absorbed that absolutely nothing gets between himself and his love of himself. His first encounter with a victim of a vampire is priceless: the man's bleeding out and can't talk because his throat has been ripped out. "Can you SIGN?" Tukel asks. The man begins to respond in sign language (subtitles translate the gestures)- but it doesn't really help... because Tukel doesn't know sign language. "Wow," he murmurs, in amazement: "You really DO know how to sign..." Tukel goes on to plumb the depths of life-after-death in a way that even Woody Allen could only dream of. SUMMER OF BLOOD pulls no punches and I recommend it for Onur Tukel's performance above all else.