44 reviews
How about a little fire, Scarecrow?
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.
- hausrathman
- Jun 28, 2004
- Permalink
No Harvest for you guys...Even if its Dark....
- face_of_terror
- Dec 25, 2004
- Permalink
It was the cover!
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
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
Cheesy would be a compliment, this is not.
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.
Silly, ridiculous, idiotic "horror" movie
Rent this only movie if you're in the mood for laughs (for sheer stupidity) , as this movie wouldn't scare a bunch of kindergartners at a Halloween party! The trouble is, there is too much gore for kiddies, so definitely don't put this in your VCR for the toddlers. It starts off with a little bit of promise, giving you the impression that the box cover artist may have actually started watching this film before designing the cover, but then descends quickly into epic stupidity. The "killer scarecrows" are clumsy oafs that are about as scary as the one in the Wizard of Oz, but not quite as smart. If they'd only had a brain...? I got this movie for $1.20 at a local discount/close-out store and even so, I feel somewhat ripped off. I think with all the other comments posted here, if you actually pay to see this, you can only blame yourself.
- buddyrichfield
- Apr 23, 2007
- Permalink
Worst Movie Ever Made?
Bad script? Check. Awful effects? Check. Horrible actors? Check. Lame direction? Check.
After seeing the DVD box at blockbuster video and being a fan of the horror genre, I placed my $4.28 on the line and rented this "film." My girlfriend was out of town and I was bored so on a late Tuesday night I decided this would be a perfect time for me to watch, what appeared to be (based on the box cover art) a horror movie. What I got instead was the worst film ever made. Up until that point I had always declared "Slumber Party Massacre 3" the worst film ever made.
If you are the type that wants to see a movie because you heard how bad it is, this is for you. If you don't want to lose $4.00 and 80 irreplaceable minutes of your life, steer clear of this garbage.
An added note: I noticed a few of the "actors" come on here and post comments on the bulletin board. How can you brag about being in this film? You were all horrible. I mean really bad. If there was an American Idol for actors, you all would be laughed at in the first few episodes.
Peace.
Sutter Cain
After seeing the DVD box at blockbuster video and being a fan of the horror genre, I placed my $4.28 on the line and rented this "film." My girlfriend was out of town and I was bored so on a late Tuesday night I decided this would be a perfect time for me to watch, what appeared to be (based on the box cover art) a horror movie. What I got instead was the worst film ever made. Up until that point I had always declared "Slumber Party Massacre 3" the worst film ever made.
If you are the type that wants to see a movie because you heard how bad it is, this is for you. If you don't want to lose $4.00 and 80 irreplaceable minutes of your life, steer clear of this garbage.
An added note: I noticed a few of the "actors" come on here and post comments on the bulletin board. How can you brag about being in this film? You were all horrible. I mean really bad. If there was an American Idol for actors, you all would be laughed at in the first few episodes.
Peace.
Sutter Cain
- suttercain
- Jan 7, 2005
- Permalink
Don't waste your money
This is possibly the worst of the worst. I am a huge fan of the horror movie industry and I can believe this movie was allowed to be made. The acting was juvenile and the story completely idiotic. The camera work was also juvenile. One scene that comes to mind is outside a store. It is nighttime and you can see the moon, yet the characters all have shadows that cast on the wall. There was no street light to be seen. One character gets gutted at one point, yet manages to resurface later after removing herself from a post. Come on!!! It felt like I was watching a middle school play. I kept expecting the characters to wave to their family members off camera and mouth "hi mom". I can only give it two positive comments...it ended and it was good for a laugh. Please do not rent this movie!!!!
- kvolden3172
- Jul 1, 2006
- Permalink
A $10,000 "film"
Another stupid "movie". The quality of image is correct. Sound too. Music is middle. The guy try make music like in Halloween.
For one rare time, producer/director choose no-anorexic girls. It is cause this "movie" take one week to do and cost $10,000. Does it mean when producer have money they choose all anorexic girls? Good question.
But girls in this "movie" are physically correct. But they are not good actress. Neither guys too. But maybe it's just cause the "story" of this "movie" have no value.
I'm sure we give $10,000 to some teen who like movie, and they can create a better movie.
Don't lose your time to watch this "thing".
For one rare time, producer/director choose no-anorexic girls. It is cause this "movie" take one week to do and cost $10,000. Does it mean when producer have money they choose all anorexic girls? Good question.
But girls in this "movie" are physically correct. But they are not good actress. Neither guys too. But maybe it's just cause the "story" of this "movie" have no value.
I'm sure we give $10,000 to some teen who like movie, and they can create a better movie.
Don't lose your time to watch this "thing".
i want to harvest this DVD
I woke up and it was a beautiful day; the sun was shining, the birds were singing and i fancied getting a movie, something new, a horror movie perhaps? Like many other reviewers i came across what can only be described as a piece of poopy in a gold wrapper. The front cover is great, and the comment on the back is mesmerising - 'it will scare the crop out of you'...oh how i chuckle looking back at such naivety and ignorance.
One of the many things scarier than this movie is the acting skills of these 'actors'. I think, no, i did actually cheer when they got slashed up by these 'scarecrows', who were wearing some classic fancy dress costumes. I used to drive quite quickly past cornfields as i found them to be pretty scary at night, but having seen this movie, i nearly wet myself (through laughing so much) just at the sight.
I have seen scarier omelette's quite honestly, not mine though, i'm a dab-hand at cooking omelette's, and if anyone associates this movie with my omelette's, let's just say that i would create a situation in which they would be forced to watch this movie 3 times in a row.
If anyone has any good corn movies they can recommend, feel free to inform me. It's a great comedy if nothing else, OK it is nothing else. Enjoy, but a little advice - before pressing the play button on your DVD player, throw it out of the window.
One of the many things scarier than this movie is the acting skills of these 'actors'. I think, no, i did actually cheer when they got slashed up by these 'scarecrows', who were wearing some classic fancy dress costumes. I used to drive quite quickly past cornfields as i found them to be pretty scary at night, but having seen this movie, i nearly wet myself (through laughing so much) just at the sight.
I have seen scarier omelette's quite honestly, not mine though, i'm a dab-hand at cooking omelette's, and if anyone associates this movie with my omelette's, let's just say that i would create a situation in which they would be forced to watch this movie 3 times in a row.
If anyone has any good corn movies they can recommend, feel free to inform me. It's a great comedy if nothing else, OK it is nothing else. Enjoy, but a little advice - before pressing the play button on your DVD player, throw it out of the window.
- ianmutimer
- Dec 25, 2005
- Permalink
Junior High School effort -- Kindergarten results
Few videos in recent history have been as amateurishly produced as this one -- at least none that have been released by such a reputable distributor. Every frame of this film is a plaguerism of better films of the past. The word 'cliche' is given new meaning by a talentless writer/director who should reserve his imagination for lesser masturbatory efforts that don't victimize film viewers. Assisting in the amateur night 'horror' effort is a number of less than capable technicians who contribute poor cinematography and laughable make-up and special effects. Unfortunately, the one or two of the amateur actors in the film who display a hint of talent that will go unnoticed due to the reputation that this atrocity will produce.
- squeezeplayer2001
- May 26, 2004
- Permalink
A movie seemingly made by sixth graders, for sixth graders
I actually rate this a 1.5, and I only rate it that highly only because of the skinny dipping scene, no matter how lame it may be.
Some teen agers go to an old deserted farm house left to one of them by their dead grandfather, unaware that there had been several murders there decades earlier because their grandfather had made a pact with the devil for a good harvest- couldn't the guy have thought of something better to sell his soul for? The man's grandson and his friends are set up to be the next sacrifice, for reasons which are never explained. The stereotypical teenage son and his girlfriend, the black guy with a white girlfriend, and the two lesbians have to do battle with three killer scarecrows- but, don't be tricked like I was, this isn't nearly as much fun as it sounds. It's mostly just a lot of chit chat about ball kicking, dope smoking, and the lead actor complaining about never knowing his parents. The camera work is atrocious and shaky, occasionally panning to the wall behind the actors, instead of the actors themselves, it may have been done on a hand-held camcorder in some scenes, which maybe a good thing since the scarecrows look like they just came from some kid's birthday party, and apparently they could only hire two people to play the three scarecrows! Some of the best movies I've seen have been these low budget, independent horror movies, but this one is just pathetic. The cast and crew seems to have just been made up of a bunch of people who knew each other, had never acted before and had no intention of acting again, and had a few thousand dollars (I can't believe this movie cost $130.000 to make) and a weekend of free time on their hands- even the lesbian skinny dipping scene is lame, but, as I said, that is still the best part of this lame little movie.
I think it's amusing also, that as of this writing, there is a sequel to this film which no one has even bothered adding to IMDb.
Some teen agers go to an old deserted farm house left to one of them by their dead grandfather, unaware that there had been several murders there decades earlier because their grandfather had made a pact with the devil for a good harvest- couldn't the guy have thought of something better to sell his soul for? The man's grandson and his friends are set up to be the next sacrifice, for reasons which are never explained. The stereotypical teenage son and his girlfriend, the black guy with a white girlfriend, and the two lesbians have to do battle with three killer scarecrows- but, don't be tricked like I was, this isn't nearly as much fun as it sounds. It's mostly just a lot of chit chat about ball kicking, dope smoking, and the lead actor complaining about never knowing his parents. The camera work is atrocious and shaky, occasionally panning to the wall behind the actors, instead of the actors themselves, it may have been done on a hand-held camcorder in some scenes, which maybe a good thing since the scarecrows look like they just came from some kid's birthday party, and apparently they could only hire two people to play the three scarecrows! Some of the best movies I've seen have been these low budget, independent horror movies, but this one is just pathetic. The cast and crew seems to have just been made up of a bunch of people who knew each other, had never acted before and had no intention of acting again, and had a few thousand dollars (I can't believe this movie cost $130.000 to make) and a weekend of free time on their hands- even the lesbian skinny dipping scene is lame, but, as I said, that is still the best part of this lame little movie.
I think it's amusing also, that as of this writing, there is a sequel to this film which no one has even bothered adding to IMDb.
- Zbigniew_Krycsiwiki
- Jul 1, 2005
- Permalink
Awesome reality horror flick
I was surprised that I liked this movie. But it reminded me of a 2004 version of the first Friday the 13th. There were a number of cheesy elements, yet at the same time there were many cool ones. The story line was good--predictable if you have seen more than one or two horror movies, but full of one-liners to make it worthwhile. There are some memorable scenes worth watching. A few issues I had with the plot had to do with the continuity of the characters. For instance in the opening scene the scarecrows (which were humans on stakes, whose blood was drained to grow the crops), looked very real, but later in the film they looked more like fake scarecrows wearing blue colored masks. There were more than several gaps in the plot, and the acting was mediocre, but at least it sounded like how real people talk, unlike Hollywood movies where the dialogue is really fake sounding when you think about it. The culmination of the last scene, when the main character says "I'm not a Baker, I'm a Connell!" and lops the head off of the scarecrow is satisfying, as his friends have for the most part been killed off by these creatures at that point.
All they need is a better lighter.
Actually a well made horror. The characters were well written and believable, especially during the lake scene.
Need to acknowledge the stellar performance from B.W York who really lifted the cast with his supporting role.
The make up and practical effects were spot on apart from the trouble they had lighting things on fire, which was great to see during the creds.
- warehousereviews
- Aug 15, 2020
- Permalink
The worst movie ever
- m_jordan_jones
- Mar 13, 2005
- Permalink
Children of the Corny
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.
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.
- carolynpaetow
- Jun 1, 2004
- Permalink
"Dark Harvest" is Latin for "waste of time"
The first opening scene that lasted around five minutes showed the potential of becoming an instant classic, with moderit to good acting, good film, a story that keep the volume up, and an in the corner the of screen a spooky "did you see that!"(the scarecrow moves).
After the quick set up of history that would come into the present, it was like someone else had written and directed the rest of the "film". The next scene is a basic outline of how the film goes downhill like a runaway truck. It looks like the rest was shot in video, with crappy "porn style actors", the set design was a lawyers office with practically nothing on the bookshelves or anything in the office at all.
I remember only watching crap horror films for a chance of seeing some naked "teenage" girls, back then there weren't Victoria's Secret mags everywhere, and not watching for things that make great horror films of today like acting, terror, suspense, intregue, and so on.
It took nearly fifty minutes for the first person to die. When it did, me and and my friends were so shocked by the WORST costume of a "monster" EVER, we through our popcorn at the TV screen booing.
After the quick set up of history that would come into the present, it was like someone else had written and directed the rest of the "film". The next scene is a basic outline of how the film goes downhill like a runaway truck. It looks like the rest was shot in video, with crappy "porn style actors", the set design was a lawyers office with practically nothing on the bookshelves or anything in the office at all.
I remember only watching crap horror films for a chance of seeing some naked "teenage" girls, back then there weren't Victoria's Secret mags everywhere, and not watching for things that make great horror films of today like acting, terror, suspense, intregue, and so on.
It took nearly fifty minutes for the first person to die. When it did, me and and my friends were so shocked by the WORST costume of a "monster" EVER, we through our popcorn at the TV screen booing.
Frustratingly Inept & Utter Garbage In Every Sense of the Word
Let's begin by acknowledging that there are arguably three types of horror films: good, bad, and utterly embarrassing reels that make the entire genre suffer in every way. Dark Harvest promises big with its Artisan DVD cover, but rest assured that is where the show stops. Following a grueling opening montage, we soon discover that the film consists of a very poorly written script, extremely under qualified (even for a beginners film) acting, disastrous lighting and even worse special effects. Seriously, could no one afford anything more than a mask for the villain, or did they just think it was good enough for Jason Voorhees and Michael Myers , so it's good enough for us? Well, it did not work at all to create a scary villain. At any rate, this is one of the movies that make you check your watch, sigh and curse your own gullibility. The timing in every scene is painful, and the entire production has a middle school feeling to it (come to think of it, I have seen better middle school stage productions, right down to the special effects). I'm trying to think of some way to end this review on a positive note, so let me suggest that all copies of this train wreck be donated as drink coasters, Frisbees, wind chimes.......I'd say "go see your yourself", but that would just be cruel.
Check out the rest of this production company's reviews and you'll find the same for every one of their movies. They claim to honor the contract between film and audience (i.e. please the fans) but all they have done is chuckle and dumped a load on our heads for the cash (of which I am sure they saw very little for this).
Sorry people, the high ratings and favorable reviews are obviously posted by those either directly or indirectly connected to this travesty.
1 star out of 10 because it is the lowest possible rating. Giving it even one makes me angry.
Check out the rest of this production company's reviews and you'll find the same for every one of their movies. They claim to honor the contract between film and audience (i.e. please the fans) but all they have done is chuckle and dumped a load on our heads for the cash (of which I am sure they saw very little for this).
Sorry people, the high ratings and favorable reviews are obviously posted by those either directly or indirectly connected to this travesty.
1 star out of 10 because it is the lowest possible rating. Giving it even one makes me angry.
Deliciously Awful.
Now, I am going to do this without putting spoilers if I can. My cousin and I were renting movies the other weekend, and we stumbled across this, with the big freaking' scarecrow on the cover. It looked cool, so we rented it alongside Kungfu Hustle.
Wow... Just... Wow.
To start off, the movie was horrible. Now, the box art, opening scenes, and music was decent-to-well done, but the movie itself is horrendous. The acting is sub-par (Sean, the lead, shows hardly any emotion and/or effort in his character), the scarecrows look nothing like the one on the cover (False advertising, perhaps?), and the camera shots and angles were that of a bad wrestling event.
And trust me, I'm a wrestling fan. I KNOW bad camera angles. And honestly, this is right up there with Gigli and Pootie Tang. It's done so bad that it AMUSES me. It makes me laugh. So, somehow, this movie takes its place as a good comedy to me.
But, to be fair, it does serve as a what to do and what not to do in movies, especially of the slasher genre. I recommend that people DO watch this, just to get a good grasp of what to avoid.
Wow... Just... Wow.
To start off, the movie was horrible. Now, the box art, opening scenes, and music was decent-to-well done, but the movie itself is horrendous. The acting is sub-par (Sean, the lead, shows hardly any emotion and/or effort in his character), the scarecrows look nothing like the one on the cover (False advertising, perhaps?), and the camera shots and angles were that of a bad wrestling event.
And trust me, I'm a wrestling fan. I KNOW bad camera angles. And honestly, this is right up there with Gigli and Pootie Tang. It's done so bad that it AMUSES me. It makes me laugh. So, somehow, this movie takes its place as a good comedy to me.
But, to be fair, it does serve as a what to do and what not to do in movies, especially of the slasher genre. I recommend that people DO watch this, just to get a good grasp of what to avoid.
Probably the funniest horror movie ever.
some horror movies are SO damn awful bad, they're amusing! (SPOILERS)
- bigwhammer
- Feb 24, 2005
- Permalink
Sorry, but this is by no means scary.
- rektolfrank
- Jul 14, 2004
- Permalink
Worst Movie Ever? I think not.
Anyone who thinks this is the worst movie they have ever seen is completely naive and blinded. I can think of at least 30 movies that are endlessly worse than this film. Sure the acting is weak, the special effects aren't very special, it's cheap, etc. etc. But at least it has boobs,blood and got me to watch it for 75 minutes. I've BEEN in much more poorly made films (Feeding The Masses is absolutely terrible) and I can say it's not half as bad as some of the other direct to video stuff I've been seeing on the shelves these days. You want bad? Go check out The Fanglys or Carnivore...NOW THOSE are bad films. Listen, at least the film isn't boring. There's nothing worse than a low/no budget film that is boring. If you can handle low budget movies, there's really nothing THAT horrible about this one.
Not the worst direct to video horror, worth a cheap rental
Apparently, there are a few hundred people on this site that are going to think I'm nuts. But for a low budget, direct to video B-horror film, I thought Dark Harvest was OK. It's certainly not great, it is not very original, but for low-budget slasher fun it was worth a cheap rental.
On the negative side, the script needed a few more re-writes. The idea wasn't bad for this sort of film, but it has many of the first-time writer mistakes. The dialog was lame (though not so lame it was irritating). Dialog is often a big problem with new writers. The acting was also mediocre, but no worse than a lot of low budget indie horror flicks. And they should have ditched the cheesy sound effects during shots of the scarecrows up on their poles. That was just stupid.
On the positive side, the directing and lighting were actually competent. Not great, but just basically competent. I could see this as a Film student's senior project that got a B-. Note that I did NOT say a filmmaker with his Masters making his second or third film. This director needs to study the horror and drama genres more, but this was an OK first effort. With a little more study and experience, he could evolve into a very good director. And I thought it delivered what a low budget slasher film should deliver in terms of kills.
If you're curious what I think a really bad film is, see "The House That Screamed" or "Meat for Satan's Icebox" or "Satan's Cheerleaders" or either of the sequels to this film. My idea of the best in low budget horror, see the original "Night of the Living Dead", the original "Halloween" or the original "Black Christmas" (or if you're in a particularly sick mood, "Basket Case"). And bare in mind, I see a lot of low-budget direct to video horror films and I'm pretty forgiving of B films. I'm sure the other reviewers here would say I'm too forgiving in this case.
This film is a decent Halloween time horror film. It's not the best direct to video film I've seen, but it's far from the worst.
P.S. WARNING: Typical stupid horny guy comment ahead.
I don't usually watch horror films for nudity, so a little T&A goes a long way for me. But I have to say that Jeanie Cheek and Jessica Dunphy are pretty women who have really hot bods and beautiful breasts and I hope they read this. But as another reviewer wrote, there's is not enough nudity to be worth renting the movie just for that alone.
On the negative side, the script needed a few more re-writes. The idea wasn't bad for this sort of film, but it has many of the first-time writer mistakes. The dialog was lame (though not so lame it was irritating). Dialog is often a big problem with new writers. The acting was also mediocre, but no worse than a lot of low budget indie horror flicks. And they should have ditched the cheesy sound effects during shots of the scarecrows up on their poles. That was just stupid.
On the positive side, the directing and lighting were actually competent. Not great, but just basically competent. I could see this as a Film student's senior project that got a B-. Note that I did NOT say a filmmaker with his Masters making his second or third film. This director needs to study the horror and drama genres more, but this was an OK first effort. With a little more study and experience, he could evolve into a very good director. And I thought it delivered what a low budget slasher film should deliver in terms of kills.
If you're curious what I think a really bad film is, see "The House That Screamed" or "Meat for Satan's Icebox" or "Satan's Cheerleaders" or either of the sequels to this film. My idea of the best in low budget horror, see the original "Night of the Living Dead", the original "Halloween" or the original "Black Christmas" (or if you're in a particularly sick mood, "Basket Case"). And bare in mind, I see a lot of low-budget direct to video horror films and I'm pretty forgiving of B films. I'm sure the other reviewers here would say I'm too forgiving in this case.
This film is a decent Halloween time horror film. It's not the best direct to video film I've seen, but it's far from the worst.
P.S. WARNING: Typical stupid horny guy comment ahead.
I don't usually watch horror films for nudity, so a little T&A goes a long way for me. But I have to say that Jeanie Cheek and Jessica Dunphy are pretty women who have really hot bods and beautiful breasts and I hope they read this. But as another reviewer wrote, there's is not enough nudity to be worth renting the movie just for that alone.
- degan001-1
- Sep 27, 2009
- Permalink
Harvest of Blood
***SPOILERS**** Revenge horror movie where the avengers are the ones who get burnt by the person thats the object of their righteous vengeance not the other way around. And those who the avengers kill are innocent bystanders to this whole bloody mess.
After Elijah, Paul Burgeliski, is shot and killed by the Deputy Sheriff, Jeff Wilson, after he shot and killed the Sheriff, J.P Linkous, it's found out that Elijah was using his hired hands at his farm as scarecrows after he murdered them. Elijah did all this to chase away the birds and incests which allow his farm to yield bumper crops year after year during those terrible depression years in the early 1930's.
It turns out that Elijah made a deal with the devil to use his farmhands as dead scarecrows to have him survive in his ability to have a money making crop while his fellow farmers starved and went broke as their farms turned into arid deserts. Now with the harvest, or blood moon, rising this evening the scarecrows are going to leave their posts and wake revenge against Elijah's descendant, Sean,(Don Digiulio) for what he did to them.
This story is told to Sean Elijah's grandson in 2002 some 70 years after Elijah's death by Maggie, Booty Chewning, a local resident of Carson County. Sean has just inherited the farm and the area around it from his dad who's put him up for adoption when he was a child. Sean together with some of his friends are going to spend some time at the farm to party and have an all around good summertime bash.
Maggy looks like she just was exhumed from her grave but Sean is either too drunk or unconscious to notice it. Later that day he finds her headstone on the farm that he just inherited. That night, just like Maggie said, the scarecrows went wild as they went after Sean to avenge what his grandfather did to them. But in the end they only killed most of the friends that were with him at the farm . Hacking them to death with their sickles axes and pitchforks. Sean not only got away but ended up burning them, the vengeful scarecrows, to a crisp, now thats justice for you.
Predictable movie that has a number of gruesome hacking killings as well as having all the attackers,the scarecrows,burned to a cinder. There's a really good skinny dipping scene, just before the massacre began, that really had nothing at all to do with the story. But a lot to do with keeping the audience watching the movie before the sun went down and the moon went up and the slaughter began.
You also got an added bonus at the end of the film "Dark Harvest, with the ending credits as we saw a number of out takes of the carnage in the movie and how it was done by the movie makers of the film that lasted almost ten minutes.
After Elijah, Paul Burgeliski, is shot and killed by the Deputy Sheriff, Jeff Wilson, after he shot and killed the Sheriff, J.P Linkous, it's found out that Elijah was using his hired hands at his farm as scarecrows after he murdered them. Elijah did all this to chase away the birds and incests which allow his farm to yield bumper crops year after year during those terrible depression years in the early 1930's.
It turns out that Elijah made a deal with the devil to use his farmhands as dead scarecrows to have him survive in his ability to have a money making crop while his fellow farmers starved and went broke as their farms turned into arid deserts. Now with the harvest, or blood moon, rising this evening the scarecrows are going to leave their posts and wake revenge against Elijah's descendant, Sean,(Don Digiulio) for what he did to them.
This story is told to Sean Elijah's grandson in 2002 some 70 years after Elijah's death by Maggie, Booty Chewning, a local resident of Carson County. Sean has just inherited the farm and the area around it from his dad who's put him up for adoption when he was a child. Sean together with some of his friends are going to spend some time at the farm to party and have an all around good summertime bash.
Maggy looks like she just was exhumed from her grave but Sean is either too drunk or unconscious to notice it. Later that day he finds her headstone on the farm that he just inherited. That night, just like Maggie said, the scarecrows went wild as they went after Sean to avenge what his grandfather did to them. But in the end they only killed most of the friends that were with him at the farm . Hacking them to death with their sickles axes and pitchforks. Sean not only got away but ended up burning them, the vengeful scarecrows, to a crisp, now thats justice for you.
Predictable movie that has a number of gruesome hacking killings as well as having all the attackers,the scarecrows,burned to a cinder. There's a really good skinny dipping scene, just before the massacre began, that really had nothing at all to do with the story. But a lot to do with keeping the audience watching the movie before the sun went down and the moon went up and the slaughter began.
You also got an added bonus at the end of the film "Dark Harvest, with the ending credits as we saw a number of out takes of the carnage in the movie and how it was done by the movie makers of the film that lasted almost ten minutes.
The first 3 minutes were good
Terrible acting...how would you react if you just received an inheritance from the biological father you never met? For the guy in this movie it was as though the milk he just poured on his cornflakes was white. Bad special effects, good setting, and a skinny-dipping scene. That about sums up the movie...the truly irritating part is the story appeared to have potential in the first few minutes.
One of the best parts of the film comes during the credits. The film crew cannot figure out how to get fire from one place to another. They have fire on the ground...and it stays where it is. A stage hand comes over with lighter fluid, and sprays a lot of it on the ground in the direction the flame is supposed to go...then he goes to get another bottle of lighter fluid, and the fire finally reaches its destination. With special effects geniuses like that, it is no wonder the movie was so awful.
One of the best parts of the film comes during the credits. The film crew cannot figure out how to get fire from one place to another. They have fire on the ground...and it stays where it is. A stage hand comes over with lighter fluid, and sprays a lot of it on the ground in the direction the flame is supposed to go...then he goes to get another bottle of lighter fluid, and the fire finally reaches its destination. With special effects geniuses like that, it is no wonder the movie was so awful.
- bsc_charlemagne
- Feb 2, 2005
- Permalink