Husk

When I marked this movie to record, the 1988 Scarecrows came to mind, and made me come up with a small checklist of things which I would like to see: the scarecrow would have to have a good design (they have to look pretty decent, or no one would take this movie seriously), and a decent plot and back-story. More so, the main characters have to be realistic enough as to not make me sigh in pity for the movie. The camera angles aren't too crucial, nor the music, but they do have the potential to add to a movie. This movie had all the requirements I would have liked, though some of them could have been improved.

The scarecrows had my approval of being threatening, malevolent beings. Their make- up/costume was pretty cool, I think. The back-story behind the scarecrows was interesting, though why only the nerdy characters could see the flashback, I don't know. Also, for the most part, the actors played their parts pretty well. One of the things I think that this movie does quite well is the avoidance of the normal cliché slasher-movie characters. There's no blonde-haired girl who's messing with three guys' affections or a shy, well-behaving female who survives the onslaught. This just has four males and one female, and they all get along with each other decently well.

I found this rather nice for a change. As aforementioned, I didn't care too much for how we found out about the origin of the scarecrows (via flashbacks that only one character could see), but I can try to look past that. Also, the chess analogy with such little evidence concerned me a bit, but it wasn't too big of a plot point, so I can deal with that also. Gore-wise, this had some pretty painful-looking deaths and injuries, but as I only saw an edited version, I don't know how much total bloodshed this had to offer.

Overall, I feel that this movie is something that a horror movie fan should be able to watch without grimacing. 7.5/10, rounded down to 7 to fit IMDb.

Not entirely bad but also far from good. It's a teen-slasher, done by the "1 by 1"-formula, so it has naturally major holes in the narrative and is 100% predictable. Following well exploited ingredients play a major role: cornfield, lone house in middle west, scarecrow, scary stitches. Unsolvable mystery: a car that stops working because it rolled in a ditch. The movie is professionally done, which in this case means that it is a consumer product, not very imaginative and lacking depth in the storytelling. My guess is that it came into existence because someone wanted to make a quick dollar. If it had a message, it was well hidden.

I kind of liked the overall atmosphere. I also thought the sound was done well and the acting was not embarrassing, so I gave it 4 points. Yes, I feel generous today..

I got to watch this movie for Scarecrow killer, nails and CJ Thomason. Movie starts right away, five young people driving and suddenly... bam. Don't want to tell the whole story right away. True, the movie is full of plot holes and unexplained things and it's not realistic. But, if you are a horror fan who is not seeking for 'most rational movie award', but instead a great fright, this should do. Two things I loved about this movie are that it's very spooky and unpredictable. Atmosphere is dark and corn field, scarecrow, abandoned house and crows are just a bonus. Blood is realistic and the fear is all around. Trust me, you'll never be board. And I dare you, after you see the cast, just please tell me who's gonna be a main character. I really dare you. It's not your typical virgin, yet proud and brave teenage girl. Three main characters are easy to connect with. The acting is very good. And the killer is awesome looking. Of course that his back-story is very vague, full of unexplained things and incomplete, but at least he looks cool and kills in a very nasty ways. I think it's actually a pretty good horror movie. Not a complete movie with everything about everyone, but a really good segment what happens in an abandoned cursed corn field. Don't expect an Academy Award winning drama, but suspense is guaranteed.

As far as soil-your-pants, creepy-ass movie characters go, only the clown has a slight edge over the scarecrow (unless the scarecrow is wearing a curly wig, a big red nose, face paint and a squirty flower, in which case the scarecrow wins hands down). Husk's sack-headed monstrosities sure are unsettling to look at, but they are made even more scary by the fact that they can move like the clappers and have very sharp nails in their fingers (metal nails—the type you hit with a hammer!).

Attacking with lightning speed and remarkable ferocity, these fleet-footed frights whittle down an unfortunate group of friends who crash their car by the side of a cornfield after ploughing headlong into a flock of crows. Seeking refuge in a dilapidated farmhouse, the pals try to figure out how to get back to the road without being killed and turned into scarecrows themselves.

Killer scarecrows are nothing new in the world of horror (see Dark Night of the Scarecrow, Scarecrows, Messengers 2: The Scarecrow, Scarecrow Gone Wild, Dark Harvest), Husk's characters are two dimensional, and much of its action can easily be labelled as predictable, but writer/director Brett Simmons more than compensates for his familiar foes, cookie-cutter victims and expected developments with a rollicking pace and several genuinely clever touches.

Simmons kicks the action off almost immediately and kills off the only female early in his film, putting paid to the tired 'final girl' trope that plagues many a modern horror movie; he also introduces an ingenious plot device that ensures that only one scarecrow can attack at any given time, which gives the remaining characters a faint glimmer of hope. Another nice touch sees the scarecrow losing its power when unmasked. It's unique elements like these that go to make his film a very enjoyable and satisfyingly scary flick.

I viewed the trailer for Husk a few months back and remembered that it looked impressive. Considering there hasn't been many decent slasher releases for some time (excluding Scream 4) I was excited. So on finding the DVD at my local rental I jumped at the chance of renting it.

Plot:

A group of friends look for shelter in an old farmhouse after becoming stranded after a bizarre car crash near a vast cornfield. The teens soon discover an angry spirit haunting all those who enter the fields.

Hot or Not:

Disappointing!

Thats all I can say, the film wasn't bad, but was a let down overall. The film looked decent and is shot reasonably well and there are creepy moments, however I feel it lacked any originality, which isn't always a problem if their is a strong script however a strong script is what this film lacked.

Another problem for me was that the farmhouse just seemed to be just picked up straight from the Texas Chainsaw Massacre films, and many of the scenes also seemed borrowed especially when walking around the house walking around in the house.

I think the killer in the film although looked great, but wasn't menacing, he seemed to have a comic aspect even though that wasn't the intention. There was far too much quick editing in the corn scenes, this meant the film couldn't create the right mood and in places it was liked they were being stalked by roadrunner.

Bird and the Bees:

Nothing here, in a film that could of maybe done with some.

Acting:

Scott (Devon Graye) I hated, he was annoying and stuck up for the very annoying Brian (Wes Chatam) who played the annoying brainless meat head! The best actor and the best developed character was Chris (C.J.Thomason) I also like Natalie (Tammin Sursok) Shame her role wasn't bigger.

Overall:

This film is less than memorable and I'm yet to see a decent scarecrow film. It had potential and I do appreciate they tried to do something different with he story, but the script was week and the random flash back were very poorly shown and they felt they were just put in randomly to explain the plot.