Husk

Horror, I find is the one genre, where the bad films are more popular than the good ones. Something about people wanting to hate that they love them or something. So while they're busy spending hours on end watching brain-eating zombies and giant insects, good ones like 'Husk' are often neglected. I'm a huge fan of the genre and hadn't even heard of this flick, until it appeared on my suggestions column.

'Husk' is a film that mixes elements of monster horror and ghost horror, that I appreciated for a change. Because on their own, they often tend to become a little predictable and ultimately, not scary at all. 'Husk', however had it's spine chilling moments, and few that made me jump. Clearly not a very high budget film, it makes good use of it's resources. There were no major effects on screen and no real gore either. It was done tastefully.

The characters were quite one dimensional, but I appreciated that the underdog was given the main focus, rather than the hot chick or the jock. In addition to this, Husk successfully maintains a level of mystery throughout the flick and it wasn't a very obvious twist. However, the one issue I had with the film was the climax. Compared to the rest of film that explained every little detail and left no loose ends, the ending was a huge question mark. If it was meant to be one of those 'you decide' kinda moments, then it was done poorly. It felt abrupt and was a little disappointing compared to how well executed the rest was.

Overall, it was a good flick, especially if you're someone who misses old school horror and good old scary scarecrows and mass murderer ghosts!

Five friends on a road trip crash into a ditch in remote farmland, and on passing through a cornfield to get help at a nearby house blunder into a ghostly trap.

The action sparks off with minimal set up - no beating about the bush as they ... beat about the bush. The cornfield setting is effective, the house adds to the claustrophobia, and the whole thing is brought home in a well judged run-time.

Characterisation is poor, but the acting is tolerable. A lot of frustration with characters' choices, especially their insistence on not sticking together for safety. The group should have had a coherent dynamic, but they're little more than a random selection, and the dialogue is bog standard. Also the cheesy insistence on splashing gasoline on the ground but then oddly not setting it on fire - you raise a loaded gun, you better use it.

The story is saved by a coherent mythology that adds depth and allows a plausible twist to bring about a satisfying end. Helped along by the pacey sound effects and music.

Overall, basic concept that's well executed.

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.

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.