This movie starts out so silly it almost feels like parody but it's not. It just is that stupid.
It's a group of amusing simpleton kids that go looking for a "lagoon" and end up on the property of a deranged farmer that likes turning people into scarecrows. I actually kind of enjoyed the first half of this movie. It's dumb funny, has lots of eye candy, and if you like stupid, low budget horror movies, you can probably imagine the kind of dumb fun I'm describing.
The problem is the second half. When the movie starts trying to take itself seriously and be scary, it isn't. It's boring. The humor and gratuitous skin are gone and they're not replaced with anything. The gore is minimal and the scares are non existent. They should've just kept to laughs the whole time because they don't know horror.
I was really, really struggling to stay awake through this thing.
45 Reviews
Ok watch
dawny_dawn-5163429 April 2018
The movie is by no means great, but it has some reasonable acting a few laughs.
But the story is still all the same old same old.
There was something i just liked about the movie.
I thought it was reasonably made, with descent acting.
Not your high class horror, but this was a fun watch on a sunday afternoon.
Not as bad as I anticipated.
cockadoody7329 May 2020
This is just a typical low budget slasher, but it's not as bad as you'd think.
Ok so the main four characters - four horny college kids on a road trip - are a pretty unlikeable bunch, you honestly don't care what happens to them. But they're not bad actors and they carry the movie along pretty well.
The movie doesn't actually pick up until halfway through, the first half is just teens skinny dipping, having sex and cheating on one another, then getting lost in a cornfield owned by a psycho farmhand - it's pretty boring (except for a rogue dismembered thumb and a body stashed in a scarecrow).
Second half is standard run and hide from the psycho. It's predictable, not particularly scary or suspenseful and it seems to have 'borrowed' a few ideas from other more successful horror movies. But I didn't hate it. It's not the worst way to spend 90 minutes.
Second half is standard run and hide from the psycho. It's predictable, not particularly scary or suspenseful and it seems to have 'borrowed' a few ideas from other more successful horror movies. But I didn't hate it. It's not the worst way to spend 90 minutes.
More of the Same...
Demon_Best_Friend27 April 2018
Seriously, how hard is it to make a good Scarecrow based horror movie? Here we spend the first 30 minutes or so getting some "character" development from some of the worst actors ever. The characters are unlikable and you don't care when they're all drug off one by one to become scarecrows in this God awful flick. The final minutes? Are they suppose to be suspenseful or frustrating? It's neither of those, it's just another cop out with an ending you see coming a mile away. I see some 10 star ratings here, I'd bet you anything that those came from the cast, or crew of this flick. Don't waste any money on this one, it's not worth it at all.
Scarecrows
a_baron29 November 2019
If you haven't seen this film you've certainly seen one like it: two guys and two gals go down to the woods, or in this case a cornfield and a lake,
and...Obviously the guys have the girls on their minds while something nasty is out there intent on turning them into toast, or in this case literal scarecrows.
The film is more scatalogical than most of the genre, if you can believe that, but the innuendo and sexual adventures don't last long as they are kidnapped by the faceless psychopath and dragged off to his lair. There is a bit more to it than that, but not a lot, the usual wanton sadism and the sadly predictable ending. Give this one a miss.
The film is more scatalogical than most of the genre, if you can believe that, but the innuendo and sexual adventures don't last long as they are kidnapped by the faceless psychopath and dragged off to his lair. There is a bit more to it than that, but not a lot, the usual wanton sadism and the sadly predictable ending. Give this one a miss.
Lack of story line, plot, and HORROR
haroon-1749914 August 2020
Not worth a watch
Zucroh28 April 2018
My Review Of "Scarecrows"
ASouthernHorrorFan15 December 2018
"Scarecrows" is a straightforward story that incorporates recognizable tropes. The young, dumb kids on a quest, and the psycho killer. Add to it the macabre fascination of a creepy, yet familiar rural mainstay - the scarecrow. It lacks originality but that doesn't stop it from being entertainment.
The cast is great at creating likeable characters that add both canon fodder for the killer and protagonists that you root for. The acting is acceptable, although there is some recognized moments of inconsistencies in scene delivery. But still, the quality is good and the suspense is captivating.
The special effects are equally quality work. Practical, visceral moments of blood and horror create an almost "Wolf Creek" atmosphere. My only complaint is that the violence and horror seemed restrained a bit too much. I would have liked a little more gruesome and gore. Still the film does more than enough to entertain on that level as well.
Overall, "Scarecrows" is a cool, entertaining horror movie with slasher level thrills. The cinematography is excellent, the antagonist is dominating and intimidating. There are a few minor flaws, but nothing that hurts the experience that Stone offers up to horror fans. Check it out.
The cast is great at creating likeable characters that add both canon fodder for the killer and protagonists that you root for. The acting is acceptable, although there is some recognized moments of inconsistencies in scene delivery. But still, the quality is good and the suspense is captivating.
The special effects are equally quality work. Practical, visceral moments of blood and horror create an almost "Wolf Creek" atmosphere. My only complaint is that the violence and horror seemed restrained a bit too much. I would have liked a little more gruesome and gore. Still the film does more than enough to entertain on that level as well.
Overall, "Scarecrows" is a cool, entertaining horror movie with slasher level thrills. The cinematography is excellent, the antagonist is dominating and intimidating. There are a few minor flaws, but nothing that hurts the experience that Stone offers up to horror fans. Check it out.
Don't waste your time
train10775 May 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Acting: I'm not sure if they actually practised to become such bad actors. Only positive thing is the pretty girls. Seems really stupid that the villain is an evil slow moving crocodile dundee. If you don't believe me just watch.
Music: The music is short bursts actually emphasis the scenes in the movie with the worst acting. There is a big contrast between the music and the silence, it just seems like the music not always his the right mood. Such as the silly foolish rytme when kissing jumping into silence and on...
Special effects: Surprisingly these are not as bad as the rest of the movie.
Story: Nothing new here. Teens get lost in the wrong area where a killer roams.
Music: The music is short bursts actually emphasis the scenes in the movie with the worst acting. There is a big contrast between the music and the silence, it just seems like the music not always his the right mood. Such as the silly foolish rytme when kissing jumping into silence and on...
Special effects: Surprisingly these are not as bad as the rest of the movie.
Story: Nothing new here. Teens get lost in the wrong area where a killer roams.
Great old school slasher fun
winkust10 December 2018
Was very pleasantly surprised by this as had been a while since I have seen a modern horror film that was actually entertaining but this film reminded me why I love horror in the first place. A lot of modern horror films are very drab affairs with washed out colours, jump scares and cgi galore along with a usually fairly downbeat mood and plot to them, this film was fun, looked good and was well paced.
The plot is basically a bunch of college kids go on a bit of a road trip to a lagoon , this leads them to a cornfield, the farm owner hates trespassers and turns them into living scarecrows, nice and simple no found footage, no haunted houses, no dead relatives just a nice simple straight forward plot. In a nutshell this film is a lot of old school slasher fun and definitely worth a watch.
The plot is basically a bunch of college kids go on a bit of a road trip to a lagoon , this leads them to a cornfield, the farm owner hates trespassers and turns them into living scarecrows, nice and simple no found footage, no haunted houses, no dead relatives just a nice simple straight forward plot. In a nutshell this film is a lot of old school slasher fun and definitely worth a watch.
Average horror film but with a few funny bits and genuinely scary thrills
Marcus-Aurelius909 May 2018
Warning: Spoilers
There's nothing new here folks, but I dont regret watching it. Four good looking teenagers in an isolated environment with a scary villain trying to kill them.
Yep nothing new as far as the slasher genre goes, but nothing bad either. Some of the other reviewers are exaggerating how bad this is. Think of it as a lower
budget Jeeper's Creepers without the car chase or flying above the fields camera work. The acting isn't as bad as others have said. Its a really low budget horr
film so what do you expect? There's a bit of tittilating implied sex, good looking young people, including the a girl who left half of her pants at home.
Theres' a couple of genuinely funny parts and some scaring set pieces. I got what I expected and I enjoyed it. If you liked Jeepers Creepers, you will
probably like this movie.
Entertaining
kyleallencole99 July 2019
No Trespassing
nogodnomasters3 July 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Two guys try to have sex with two girls by going to a remote and posted lake. Owners take trespassers and make scarecrows out of them. Nice car. Fix the AC.
Not much in the way of a back story. Needed a back story to tie into the film so the final girl can use that skill to get away. Didn't happen.
Guide: F-word. Implied sex. Brief body double nudity.
Not much in the way of a back story. Needed a back story to tie into the film so the final girl can use that skill to get away. Didn't happen.
Guide: F-word. Implied sex. Brief body double nudity.
Full of Cliché Troupes and Unrealistically Vapid Characters!
icocleric20 January 2022
Warning: Spoilers
This film is painfully dull, and unoriginal. With a weak plot even by horror film standards, with characters that are unlikeable, and unrealistically vapid. Then add the torture porn, and all the clichés!
The bad guy has a "motivation" of trespassers accidentally killed his wife. So I'm going to make living scarecrows that attract the birds to my crop field just because, and then murder my own son??? That's the entire plot. All of it.
The bad guy has a "motivation" of trespassers accidentally killed his wife. So I'm going to make living scarecrows that attract the birds to my crop field just because, and then murder my own son??? That's the entire plot. All of it.
No survive
saptesh78620 November 2018
Just seen this movie because I loved horror movie. But this is a disappoint watch.
Only a few scenes to frighten you. Ending is not interesting, only torture and murder from beginning to the end. There is no hope to survive from bad man and no one can dare to fight him. A straight telling story. As me such movies must have some turning points. But not here. Not recommended much. See your own risk if want a horror entertainer without meaning. Hot situations only for attracts viewers.
Summer of nightmares
TheLittleSongbird17 June 2018
Was drawn into seeing 'Scarecrows' with a cool poster/cover, a very intriguing if not creative premise and as someone with a general appreciation for horror. That it was low-budget, which from frequent personal experience is rarely a good sign due to that there are so many poor ones out there, made me though apprehensive.
'Scarecrows' is a film it doesn't do enough with its potential (although there are far bigger wastes of potential in film) and could have been much better. 'Scarecrows' is very weak with a lot of big problems. It certainly could have been far worse, considering the large number of films seen recently being mediocre at best and terrible at worst.
Lets start with the positives. The setting is atmospheric and spooky and 'Scarecrows' is surprisingly well shot and easy on the eye, was expecting a cheap looking film and to me that wasn't the case here.
'Scarecrows' has some suspenseful and creepy moments and it started off on a fun and intriguing note.
Albeit, there is nothing new here, it's all familiar territory and executed in old-hat fashion. While the first half is better than the second, the goofiness became more grating than fun and the second half feels like a completely different tonally and takes itself far too seriously. The creepiness is not sustained all the way through, with the horror and tension being nowhere near enough. Things start not making much sense and gets silly. The acting entertained at first because there was the sense that they knew what kind of film it was but the over-the-top campiness got very annoying and excessive.
Further issues are that it was clear that it was written in haste. There is a very rushed and careless feel to the story, especially in the second half where confusion and choppiness can be found in editing and narrative, and the underdeveloped and scrappy script likewise. The characters are flimsily developed, annoying and bland, the direction lacks focus and the music and sound editing are far too intrusive and obvious.
In summary, weak. 3/10 Bethany Cox
'Scarecrows' is a film it doesn't do enough with its potential (although there are far bigger wastes of potential in film) and could have been much better. 'Scarecrows' is very weak with a lot of big problems. It certainly could have been far worse, considering the large number of films seen recently being mediocre at best and terrible at worst.
Lets start with the positives. The setting is atmospheric and spooky and 'Scarecrows' is surprisingly well shot and easy on the eye, was expecting a cheap looking film and to me that wasn't the case here.
'Scarecrows' has some suspenseful and creepy moments and it started off on a fun and intriguing note.
Albeit, there is nothing new here, it's all familiar territory and executed in old-hat fashion. While the first half is better than the second, the goofiness became more grating than fun and the second half feels like a completely different tonally and takes itself far too seriously. The creepiness is not sustained all the way through, with the horror and tension being nowhere near enough. Things start not making much sense and gets silly. The acting entertained at first because there was the sense that they knew what kind of film it was but the over-the-top campiness got very annoying and excessive.
Further issues are that it was clear that it was written in haste. There is a very rushed and careless feel to the story, especially in the second half where confusion and choppiness can be found in editing and narrative, and the underdeveloped and scrappy script likewise. The characters are flimsily developed, annoying and bland, the direction lacks focus and the music and sound editing are far too intrusive and obvious.
In summary, weak. 3/10 Bethany Cox
Backwoods murder
BandSAboutMovies13 December 2018
Warning: Spoilers
While on a hike to find a secret lagoon, a group of friends must pass through an evil looking cornfield. Little do they know that the owner of that cornfield turns any trespassers into living scarecrows that rot in his fields.
This film goes from teenagers on vacation to stoner comedy to backwoods slasher pretty quickly in its hour and twenty-five-minute running time. It's the first film I've seen where an insane farmer sews peoples' mouths shut and hangs them as living scarecrows that get their appendages bitten off by birds. So there's that.
Directed and co-written by Stu Stone (Ronald Fisher from Donnie Darko), Scarecrows works best when it moves away from comedy and becomes pure horror. It has nothing to do with 1988's Scarecrows other than its title. However, there are some decent practical FX and some pretty intense lighting and mood during the film's torture scenes.
This film goes from teenagers on vacation to stoner comedy to backwoods slasher pretty quickly in its hour and twenty-five-minute running time. It's the first film I've seen where an insane farmer sews peoples' mouths shut and hangs them as living scarecrows that get their appendages bitten off by birds. So there's that.
Directed and co-written by Stu Stone (Ronald Fisher from Donnie Darko), Scarecrows works best when it moves away from comedy and becomes pure horror. It has nothing to do with 1988's Scarecrows other than its title. However, there are some decent practical FX and some pretty intense lighting and mood during the film's torture scenes.
Disappointed
akd-974-77408119 August 2018
Instead of cabin-in-the-woods horror, it's cornfield-in-the-woods
Wuchakk21 March 2021
Two teen couples in a rural area outside Toronto search for a hidden lagoon amidst the cornfields to par-tay. Unfortunately for them they disregard the 'No Trespassing' sign.
"Scarecrows" (2018) takes the plot of "Wolf Creek" (2005) and throws in elements of "Husk" (2011) and "Scarecrow" (2013). Sure, it's low-budget, formulaic and predictable, but it's well executed, morbidly beautiful and includes at least one genuine surprise. Meanwhile the score & soundtrack are worthy. I think it's better to do the same-old/same-old effectively than try to reinvent the wheel and epically fail.
Director/co-writer Stu Stone knows how to make the most of a limited setting & cast for some aesthetically pleasing cinematography, including numerous jaw-dropping shots of Maaor Ziv, who plays Devon; winsome Hannah Gordon too, but less so. As for the guys, Mike Taylor (Farbsie) is reminiscent of a younger, shorter Chris Pine. Umed Amin (Ely) is also on hand.
The film runs 1 hour, 26 minutes, and was shot in Markham & Goodwood, Ontario, both just northeast of Toronto.
GRADE: B
"Scarecrows" (2018) takes the plot of "Wolf Creek" (2005) and throws in elements of "Husk" (2011) and "Scarecrow" (2013). Sure, it's low-budget, formulaic and predictable, but it's well executed, morbidly beautiful and includes at least one genuine surprise. Meanwhile the score & soundtrack are worthy. I think it's better to do the same-old/same-old effectively than try to reinvent the wheel and epically fail.
Director/co-writer Stu Stone knows how to make the most of a limited setting & cast for some aesthetically pleasing cinematography, including numerous jaw-dropping shots of Maaor Ziv, who plays Devon; winsome Hannah Gordon too, but less so. As for the guys, Mike Taylor (Farbsie) is reminiscent of a younger, shorter Chris Pine. Umed Amin (Ely) is also on hand.
The film runs 1 hour, 26 minutes, and was shot in Markham & Goodwood, Ontario, both just northeast of Toronto.
GRADE: B
story overruled by unbelievable incompetant cast
joshistirgendwieschwul27 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I was lured into this movie by the one line description on top here.
Furthermore I didnt recognize any of the cast members. Better research wasn't possible, nevertheless it tried to enjoy.
But because of the incompetant cast, my pleasure was ruined from the beginning and waitin for the first (little) excitement took me half the movie... Unless you are easy to catch by boy-girl & boobs games in a lake surrounded by crop fields. All wasn't my thing since the bad acting spoiled all my good taste. One good feeling I kept till the end: it's impossible to survive as scarecrow.
Good ol'90s feel horror.
spinningalb1 October 2018
Original concept
filmnerd-6415810 March 2020
Wishes it was 90s horror
takato052419 February 2021
4 white kids go on an adventure the summer before college. Nothing happens in the first 30-40 minutes but bad acting and terrible music. They try so hard to be like scream it's shameful. No character is likeable, and they look like children so you can't even say they're hot or not. The rest of the movie is classic horror/slasher done terribly and you'll probably doze off.
I really wanted to like this
RealisticCritic24 March 2020
Warning: Spoilers
I really did. But I just finished it and there were things that just killed it for me.
There were some good things. The premise is fine. The beginning started out.... ok. Then for some reason, stranded with no food and water (yet walking through a cornfield and just coming from a "lagoon"... *facepalm), and one guy hurt, the gf of the hurt guy decides to go down on the other girl's bf.
Then it takes its dark turn. The guy playing the killer worked. He had the look and the demeanor. Reminded me of WWE's Undertaker, actually. The setting, lighting, mood, fine. The guy's kid was a good character and the actor played him well.
But the main protagonist character. Ugh. The way she was written. She's in hiding, but jumps out and tells the guy to stop. Sure. I can almost buy that one. But then later the kid tells her to run. She stands there.
Then she's free and running through the cornfield (but didn't think to try to take the car). Ok. But does she just keep going, hoping to get away and bring back some help? No, gotta stop at every scarecrow to see if they're her friends. Never mind even if she frees them she can't get them away. What's she gonna do, carry them? They're also too weak to make it on their own.
Then the ending. This is what utterly killed it. She crawls (even though one leg is still fine. Could've hopped, could've pushed with her good leg. But nope, slow crawl) to a parked car that has a guy getting "serviced" by his gf. She's right at the door. She's reaching up to try to open the door. Fiddling with the door handle. Doesn't work, gets dragged back away.
You're right there. Pound on the side of the door. Seriously. Who wouldn't just pound away to get the people's attention? Ugh.
That's just off the top of my head. Sorry, but this sucks because of those stupid, cliche tropes. Cmon. Not to mention not much in the way of back story. A tiny summary from the kid, but no details of the incident.
I gave it a three because of atmosphere, the mood, the concept itself, the creepiness of the killer which was pretty much what I'd expect a creepy farmer/redneck to look like, and the actor who played the kid's performance. That's about it.
There were some good things. The premise is fine. The beginning started out.... ok. Then for some reason, stranded with no food and water (yet walking through a cornfield and just coming from a "lagoon"... *facepalm), and one guy hurt, the gf of the hurt guy decides to go down on the other girl's bf.
Then it takes its dark turn. The guy playing the killer worked. He had the look and the demeanor. Reminded me of WWE's Undertaker, actually. The setting, lighting, mood, fine. The guy's kid was a good character and the actor played him well.
But the main protagonist character. Ugh. The way she was written. She's in hiding, but jumps out and tells the guy to stop. Sure. I can almost buy that one. But then later the kid tells her to run. She stands there.
Then she's free and running through the cornfield (but didn't think to try to take the car). Ok. But does she just keep going, hoping to get away and bring back some help? No, gotta stop at every scarecrow to see if they're her friends. Never mind even if she frees them she can't get them away. What's she gonna do, carry them? They're also too weak to make it on their own.
Then the ending. This is what utterly killed it. She crawls (even though one leg is still fine. Could've hopped, could've pushed with her good leg. But nope, slow crawl) to a parked car that has a guy getting "serviced" by his gf. She's right at the door. She's reaching up to try to open the door. Fiddling with the door handle. Doesn't work, gets dragged back away.
You're right there. Pound on the side of the door. Seriously. Who wouldn't just pound away to get the people's attention? Ugh.
That's just off the top of my head. Sorry, but this sucks because of those stupid, cliche tropes. Cmon. Not to mention not much in the way of back story. A tiny summary from the kid, but no details of the incident.
I gave it a three because of atmosphere, the mood, the concept itself, the creepiness of the killer which was pretty much what I'd expect a creepy farmer/redneck to look like, and the actor who played the kid's performance. That's about it.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
