Dark Harvest

Set in a nonexistent West Virginia county, this pseudo-shocker rings as appropriately hollow with nonexistent direction, acting, and cinematography.

Its requisite motley gang of protagonist post-teens includes an interracial couple and two lesbians (shock!)who indulge in gratuitous and graphic skinny-dipping (shock, shock!). A viewer could easily imagine pre-teen boys taking dad's digital camera and filming this silly, purulent piece to show in secret to their cronies. (And, of course, they wouldn't use the real name of their resident county, or grownups might find out just who the culprits were!) Worst of all, there's no scare in the scarecrows, the cornfields, the rural darkness, or anything else that better efforts have achieved.

Dark Harvest is about a group of friends that go to a farm(it belongs to one of the friends relatives or something) for a getaway. But there are killer scarecrows lurking there(there was something about a curse in there too but I forgot what that was about).

The acting in this movie is awful, I don't know what the director was thinking when he was casting actors and actresses. The script is the same story as the acting "awful"(this statement coming up is very obvious but..) if there was better acting and a better script this could have turned out "okay".

The directing stunk too, I see no potential in this guy's future. After all these negatives this movie still maintains a "fun" factor that bumps it up to a two. The last plus is they don't use CGI! My overall thoughts on this film are it's bad, real bad, but so bad it's "fun" so it gets a 2/10

A young man, who never knew his birth parents, receives an old farm in an isolated section of West Virginia upon the death of his natural father. He visits his property with a cross-section of potential victims including the comic relief black guy and a trendy lesbian couple. (Hmm, will there be skinny dipping? Take a guess.) Unfortunately, the party comes to an end when the spirits of drifters killed by his evil great-grandfather and used as scarecrows come back for revenge. This film starts out well. An artful montage of depression-era photographs and phony newspapers set against a speech by FDR - this, I believe, is his first appearance in a killer scarecrow movie- establishes the mood. I developed some hopes for the film, which were partially realized. The story was serviceable enough. The setting was sufficiently bucolic. The photography was mostly in focus. The acting, while no great shakes, was slightly above par for horror movies in this budget range. The film might've actually worked within the narrow demands of the genre if the scarecrows were scary. But they weren't They looked cheap. They weren't frightening at all. The better the monster, the better the movie. These scarecrows wouldn't scare Dorothy, let alone Toto.

This movie is proof that Alliance Atlantis do not review every movie that they distribute. I want my $5 back. The acting was horrendous, the lines were clichéd, and the camera shots were just like someone's home made video. The movie started out interestingly enough with the murders. The first two minutes was the only good part. The remainder of the film was fragmented with a stupid storyline and annoyingly bad actors. The costumes looked like something out of Superstore. At least put some thought into the costumes, man! The cover art on the DVD looks so scary, like Jeepers Creepers. But it is deceiving! I've seen Bollywood movies with more style and substance than this sad attempt. I couldn't believe Alliance Atlantis distributed this movie.

I picked up this flick because the cover interested me. Boy was I mistaken. For a low budget movie it started out OK. Your standard group of horror movie teens go to a isolated house and get hacked up. At some points I thought that this film would come up with something new. No chance of that. Not even the skinny dipping scene could save this flick.

I knew it was a bad omen when I saw that the writer was also the director, OK that's not the bad part. Some writers work good as directors of their own work(this isn't one of them). The bad part is that the costume designer and I think the director of photography both share the last name of the writer/director. Now I'm all for using family on a film if they can do the job but come on. First of all the scarecrows looked as if their masks were bought at the local costume shop and weren't even scary(more like laughable). Second the camera work was really bad. In the first scene in the present day, when the lawyer gets up the shake the kids hand the camera stays in place and shoots his torso for a moment. Come on.

On the plus side(not a lot of plus's). The gore FX were not bad. Their is a nice shot of a scythe coming threw a door and threw a guy's shoulder. Hey, if you want a laugh watch the end credits, they show all the bloopers(which is what the whole movie seemed to be to me). The "hero" with his tragic past tries to come across with some cool one liners but they just made me laugh.

Somewhere in this flick was a good story but I couldn't find it. In the end I felt that I wasted $2.00 and 90 minutes that I won't get back.