Scarecrow

It might not be on the same level as bigger productions of the same genre. But thanks to it's consistent and equal quality in all aspects of the movie, it manages to not be as terrible as some other low budget movies. If you're having a day where you don't mind investing 90 minutes of your life and you're in the mood for a nice, easy, horror flick then I can recommend it. The VFX was actually much better than expected and elevated this movie visually which made every scene with the scarecrow in it quite enjoyable. The creature itself is quite scary and the way it manifest hasn't been done like that before so it felt fresh and interesting. 5 out of 10 for me.

While Scarecrow is left wanting somewhat, for SyFy it really isn't so bad. There are some good things. Scarecrow is one of SyFy's better-looking recent movies, the scenery is good and atmosphere and it is slickly shot. The quality of the scarecrow design is not bad at all, in fact apart from some too-smooth movements, which for SyFy is saying a good deal. The score does have some eeriness, and the beginning sets things up nicely. The acting is better than average also, Lacey Chabert and Robin Dunne fare the best and they are good. The direction is of the kind is that is never inept or adept, competent is the best word though it could have been with more crispness and character in the latter part of the movie. There are failings in Scarecrow though. The biggest failing is that it doesn't convey its horror elements very well. There are some moments in the first half, but much of it suffers from being too been-there-done-that quality, from not knowing when to end, from having a lack of build-up or suspense and that the fear and danger levels are quite low. The story is refreshingly simple to begin with and starts promisingly, sadly it is also the kind of story that later on becomes too simple and runs out of ideas too early. There is also too much down-time and exposition, coupled with the lack of scares there are too many of tediousness. The dialogue could have done with being tighter, and with less of an over-serious and simplistic approach. The exposition scenes are particularly bad in this regard. And while the scarecrow is good in look, it also doesn't have much of a personality and is severely under-utilised. In conclusion, not bad, could have been worse but it's nothing particularly great either. 5/10 Bethany Cox

This was typical fare of something evil lurks and teenagers are on the menu. But with realistic gore and terror scenes, frightened actors and creepy settings, it's at least an enjoyable seasonal movie for Halloween, (it was aired on the Sy-Fy channel in October) and for TV movie horror fans alike. Mild enough to air on TV, it is fairly safe for younger teens and pre-teens, but engaging enough for the adults to watch, too. The monster was interesting yet vaguely familiar (think Jeepers Creepers) and yet kept me intrigued for the entirety of the story. Some twists and turns helped move the story along, despite the predictable characters and storyline. Overall, not bad. Not wonderful, but not bad.

I find it kind of odd that people are overly negative about this movie. Sure, it is a SyFy Channel original movie, so you shouldn't get your hopes up in the likes of major blockbuster multi-million dollar glamorous Hollywood productions. But every now and again SyFy Channel does manage to hit a Homerus - and they did so with "Scarecrow".

The story is about a town that celebrates the 100th annual scarecrow festival, and apparently there is a grim tale about an animated scarecrow on a local farm. This turns out to be true, as a group of people come face to face with a grotesque and murderous entity.

Storywise, then "Scarecrow" was actually enjoyable, it had just the right amount of fun and thrills, though it wasn't a particular scary movie, unless you are easily scared, of course. But still, the story proved to be entertaining and well enough thought through.

As for the acting, well people were doing good jobs with their given roles and it was fun to see Lacey Chabert in a movie such as this. She did carry the movie well.

The effects in "Scarecrow" were actually quite good. Sure, this wasn't a CGI galore such as those over the top Hollywood productions, but the effects proved effective to what they were supposed to do. The scarecrow was nicely animated and had some great details, and it didn't actually look fake at any one point throughout the movie.

If you enjoy a good monster flick, that doesn't necessarily require much thinking from the audience side, then "Scarecrow" is a good choice. "Scarecrow" managed to squeeze a 6 out of 10 stars rating out of me.

This film begins with two teenagers by the names of "Chad" (Keenan Tracey) and "Marcy" (Lanie McAuley) walking through a cornfield with the idea of spending some time together in a nearby barn while they wait for some schoolmates to meet up with them within an hour or so. Unfortunately, they realize to their horror that there is a monster lurking nearby and it kills the two of them in a most gruesome manner. The scene then shifts to six high school students reporting to a teacher named "Aaron Harris" (Robin Dunne) to atone for earlier misbehavior. To that effect, they have all been tasked to set up a display for the 100th Scarecrow Festival being nearby and as part of their punishment they are required to dismantle-and then reassemble in town--the scarecrow hanging in that same exact cornfield. What none of them realize is the horror that is waiting for them when they finally arrive. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was one of those movies that had plenty of action and CGI to please audiences who enjoy things of that nature. It does not, however, have enough character development or background material and the absence of these two ingredients gives this film a rather shallow aspect overall. Additionally, the longer the film lasted the more the action scenes tended to resemble each other to the point that it became quite tedious after a while. In any case, although I didn't consider this film to be terribly bad necessarily, the faults just mentioned were still much too apparent for me to rate it any higher than I have. Slightly below average.