Amazon has been a wonderful source for finding horror and thriller movies to review. If you missed the announcement, I will now be reviewing them on Imdb.com as well. I find it is incredibly relaxing and is another way to show the love I have of writing and blogging. Also, in case you missed another bit of news, I now have a blog on Wordpress dedicated to my love of Gardening, Sustainability, conservation, baking and much more. I invite you to follow The Oaken King. If you haven't already, why not subscribe so you never miss a post! Without further ado, let's get to the review. Movie Info:Release Date: Jul 21, 2009 Director: Martin Barnewitz Writer: Todd Farmer Studio: Sony Pictures Home Entertainment Major Cast: Norman Reedus (The Walking Dead), Heather Stephens, Claire Holt, Darcy Flowers, Richard Riehle Genre: Horror, Supernatural Rating: R Running Time: 94 minutes Synopsis: In this prequel to the Pang Brothers' terrifying English-language debut, the eerie backstory of farmer John Rollins plays out in all its bone-chilling glory. Doing what he believes must be done in order to save his family and livelihood, John places an odd scarecrow among his crops and promptly reaps the benefits. The thing is, his luck probably won't last for long. Produced by the celebrated Ghosthouse Pictures (30 Days of Night, Drag Me To Hell) and penned by Todd Farmer (the screenwriter behind the 2009 remake of My Bloody Valentine), this is one hayride best not taken alone. Review:The story follows John Rollins (Norman Reedus) who has a farm with a corn field growing in the back yard. It is clear when the movie first opens that the family has fallen on hard times. They are in debt, having trouble paying a loan, and cannot seem to get their fields to provide a harvest strong enough to be profitable due to a variety of problems. While looking through his barn, Rollins finds an old - albeit ominous - scarecrow. Rollins' son warns his father not to put it in the fields. However, out of desperation, Rollins avoids the boy's warning and mounts the scarecrow in the fields anyway. It is soon learned, in mounting this eerie figure, Rollins finds himself in good fortune but it comes at a great price. The cast of characters appeared very flat to me and a bit oblivious. At the beginning of the film, the wife seemed supportive and indicated she stood by her husband no matter what hardship may come their way. The children didn't even appear to have a purpose and popped in and out, which, as an author, indicated to me that they were characters capable of being omitted in their entirety. This showed a small amount of weak writing since all characters need to remain pertinent to the script. The characters themselves, excluding Rollins, remained oblivious to blaring obvious signs something was wrong. In modern horror, what makes it powerful is when the characters themselves become aware something is wrong and remain consistent unless signs are not as transparent. In this movie, one could not ignore these signs, yet the wife blames her husband and breaks the promise of "support" despite what he tried to tell her. As I said, this would not be a problem if the supernatural signs weren't so easily noticed. If the wife truly knew her husband, she would know he wouldn't have murdered the lover she clearly pushed away. The son would stand with his father and try to tell his mother about the scarecrow since he was the one who noticed the trouble in the first place. Many little things like this broke believability and created a massive inconsistency. Many horror movies I've reviewed utilized different filters, such as in Dawn of the Dead and Dark Was the Night, to really bring out the mood of the movie. Messengers 2: The Scarecrow did not do this. This lack of lens filters does not crucify the tone since the mood of the family and the condition of hopeless and helplessness was there. However, adding something, even the smallest of filters might have helped unify the different components and might've made it more appealing to the eye. For this movie, as with My Bloody Valentine, I found myself not truly immersed in the environment due to this lack. Even Stephen King's It and Pet Sematary (2019) utilized this most basic of cinematography to unify the tone. Now, I enjoy the scarecrow as a figure of horror. I believe it is often under-used since the figure itself is bathed in a plethora of dark folklore. But, this movie, I feel under-used this rather powerful symbol in the aspect of horror. While I enjoyed the design of the scarecrow itself, the fear of it appeared to lack in many of the movie's aspects. The use of dreams and visions during the later part of the film really amped up the tension but I would have liked to see and feel this all throughout the movie. The ending of the movie ruined it in its entirety for me. I enjoy the "faceless terror" and "cursed object" themes very much so bringing the scarecrow to life shattered these things for me. The ending scene itself was ridiculous. That kid on the tractor showed a level of cheesiness typical of B-type horror unnecessary for this feature. Rollins burned the creature and it remained unharmed, yet being run over by a tractor and pulled apart managed to stop it for the time being? Doubt it. All in all, this movie disappointed me. Norman Reedus is someone I expected more of since he has done so well with Daryl Dixon in The Walking Dead. I do not recommend this movie unless you like typical cheesy horror or are a fan of scarecrows in general. Have a movie you want reviewed? Let me know! I am always on the lookout for new horror and thriller movies to review. For book reviews, go here.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
August 2019
Categories |