Dark Harvest

I am one of those people who will seek fulfillment in the viewing of hard to obtain trashy low budget films deemed so bad that they're good... however, under no circumstance can I even begin to describe how bad this film really is... for it was so bad that I now reside in the relatively safe practice of paint by numbers, all because I mentally could not bear to see another mistake like this. Please don't feel you must now go and watch this film simply for what is been said here, because I mean every word... if you feel you must, then consider this! You may want try eating raw putrefying entrails instead, simply because you will gain much more satisfaction from this, than enduring this utterly harrowing lethargy of motion pictures.

It was my own fault! I felt I had to see it through to the end, thinking somehow that I was hardcore, It was a self-inflicted punishment, I believed I could handle it.... And now its too late, almost 90 minutes of my life is truly gone, and i'll never get it back.

Save yourself from this, learn from my mistake.... do the ironing, or inflict paper cuts on the webs of your toes, JUST Don't DO IT....

A septet of young adults go on a hiking / horseback riding excursion in the desert, led by a guide named Alex (Cooper Steve Anderson). Wouldn't you know it: the locale they're travelling through includes a former Indian burial ground, and those places are always ripe for freaky things in the horror genre. The group will end up menaced not only by local rednecks, but by the murderous scarecrows proliferating in the area.

The first two thirds of this minor genre item are actually not as bad as you'd think, given that this particular obscurity was of the "SOV" (or shot on video) variety. Writer / director James I. Nicholson does go out of his way to try to flesh out his characters, and make them more than one dimensional cannon fodder. The actors are also reasonably likable, and Nicholson does subvert expectations in terms of who will be the last characters standing. Since the budget for this was probably next to nothing, expect the cheapest possible visuals and makeup effects. But you can *also* expect some fairly decent atmosphere, and the occasional guffaw when the scarecrows pop up and utter a one-liner. Yup, Nicholson is not taking his little film *that* seriously.

Where the film ultimately descends into typical "so bad it's good" cheese and camp is in its final third, when the killings finally begin in earnest. Then the performances, and the dialogue, become ever so much worse.

Some of the characters do become insufferable, like Tom (David Zyler) and Jude (Tracy Vivat). Then you become impatient, waiting for them to get theirs. Sex and violence are doled out adequately, with some of the ladies taking off their tops, and the scarecrows gleefully enjoying their own acts of sadism.

Not bad entertainment for fans of the entire SOV genre.

Five out of 10.

Blowing through Intervision movies one by one and I got to this one. I saw bad reviews and was worried it was going to be another Things or Sledgehammer. I was wrong. This movie is misunderstood and is a great fun little scarecrow movie with surprisingly good actors and some freaky scenes. A great movie to watch on an autumn evening if you have the chance.

First of all I absolutely adore horror movies about killer scarecrows for example William Wesley's "Scarecrows" is an classic of B-movie horror."Dark Harvest" plays like an unofficial sequel of it.A broken down van strands a group of college students in the middle of the desert.Forced to hike their way out they unwittingly enter a sacred Indian burial ground.There is a bloodthirsty scarecrow on the loose that promptly starts killing them...Very bad and amateurish horror flick with some of the worst acting I have ever seen.The action moves at snail's pace,the film drags relentlessly and the killer scarecrow looks poor.There is a bit of nudity for anyone interested.It's no surprise that "Dark Harvest" aka "Bloody Harvest" is completely obscure.Death reaps what you sow.Yeah,right.3 scarecrows out of 10.

I've seen my fair share of terrible films, most of the time I actually really enjoy them. I thought for some time that Hostel (2005) was the worst film I have ever seen. But good Lord, This movie is an insult to the art of film. To start, I have a huge horror bing with me and my brother, this was somehow on here, I never even added it, so we we're dead confused on what this film is, we discovered that there's a remake trilogy of this film, which I just need to ask why anyone would ever remake this. So watching this I was confused, but when it finished... I was mad! It was a complete insult to movies, especially horror movies. The film felt more like a porno then it did a film, there was too much sex in this film to be classified as a film, or even an NC-17 film. The acting was horrendous, it was the worst acting ever, not a single memorable line, even Manos had memorable lines. The characters were flat, the only thing we knew is that they were all friends and couples, and the old man sucked too. The main villains, the scarecrows, looked so bad it was laughable, like I was laughing harder at this more than a comedy. Then I remembered it was a horror film and got mad. Also why would there be scarecrows in a desert? I know the elderly man said all the wheat got swept away, but like, that is such a terrible explanation, at least the remake took place in a corn field. Also, the characters had nothing, because they were in a desert, no weapons or locations. So the movie became really boring. I had to watch this film at 2x speed because of how slow it was, there was almost no horror in it at all. AT ALL. Also, the quality was horrible, it seemed like it was from the 60s. It was on par with Manos: The Hands of Fate or the Beast of Yucca Flats in quality! The one redeeming thing about this "movie" is the soundtrack, it's okay. All in all if IMDb let you give a 0/10, I would give that. Because this deserves a 0.