Scarecrow

Oh dear lord. This movie... It was horrible. I am a HUGE fan of horror movies. And most of the time, horror movies other people say are bad, I like. The actor who played 'Scarecrow' was amazing, I will say that. But this plot was awful. It made no sense! It had way too much gore, and an unnecessary (and revolting) sex scene at the beginning. I do believe the director was trying to be 'shocking' or whatnot, but it just came out awful. To add to the pile of festering crap they called a plot, the actors (besides 'scarecrow') we're awful, and I cared so little about them that I soon forgot who was who. In conclusion, this movie made me sick. If you can avoid watching this movie in anyway, please do.

This is a silly movie from french director with silly script too and all shoddy acting with many idiots actors, most notably from "Scarecrow", It's a really bad , So bad film.

always I like to watch about killer scarecrow movies, but with this Scarecrow the matter so different with the more recent Scarecrows, specially when I have read the french director "Emmanuel Itier" that claims he has been influenced by the Italian director "Dario Argento" ! I confess here that almost the Scarecrows-Movies has certainly been designed by professional crews, but sadly, we can't say the same meaning anymore for new-scarecrows movies .

1 out of 5

This movie could be used in film classes in a "How Not to Script a B-Movie" course. There are inherent constrictions in a B-movie: Budgets are tight, Time is precious (Scarecrow was apparently shot in 8 days) and the actors are often green and inexperienced. The one aspect you have complete control over is writing the best script you can within the limitations set before you. Scarecrow's script seems to have been written in a drunken haze. I could go through about fifteen examples of the nonsensical scripting of this movie, but I'll just mention one: The Gravedigger. The character of the gravedigger is introduced about an hour into the movie. He seemingly has no connection to any of the other characters already in the movie. He is shown with his daughter, who also has no connection to anybody else in the movie. The gravedigger is given a couple scenes to act surly in and then is killed to pad out the body count. Why give the Gravedigger a daughter? Why give the daughter a boyfriend? Why introduce them so late in the movie? Why not try to make them part of the ongoing storyline? Scarecrow doesn't seem to care.

The "story" of Scarecrow goes something like this: Lester is a high school kid (played by and actor who'd I'd peg to be in his early 30's) who is picked on by the other kids. He is an artist who draws birds and has a crush on a classmate named Judy. His mom is a lush and the town whore. One of her reprobate boyfriends makes fun of his drawings (by calling him a "faggot" for drawing birds instead of "monsters and cowboys." If you have a high school student still drawing cowboys I'd think him to more likely be gay than a high school student who draws crows) and later, kills Lester, in a cornfield, under the titular scarecrow. Magically, Lester's soul goes into the scarecrow. Somehow, this transference changes Lester's soul from that of an artist into that of a wisecracking gymnast (I know some reviews have called the scarecrow a Kung-Fu scarecrow. I disagree. The scarecrow practically does a whole floor routine before jumping onto the truck during the climax of the movie). The scarecrow then goes on to kill those who tormented him, those who smoke pot in the corn field, those who dig graves, boyfriends of daughters of gravediggers, pretty much anyone who showed up on the movie set.

The bonus feature on the DVD should be mentioned. The director (a Frenchman) does an impromptu version of rap music, admits he enjoys not having executives around on set so he can screw his wife while working and gives a quote to live by (and I'm paraphrasing): "Life ez a bitch, but et has a great ass"

Number of Beers I drank while watching this movie: 5 Did it help: No Number of Beers needed to enjoy this movie: Whatever it takes to get to blackout drunk level.

scarecrow.

wow.

this is maybe the most awful movie i have ever seen. (and that statement comes from a person who very much enjoys bad movies) the real problem here is that it wasn't so bad it was funny...it's just so bad that it's bad.

scarecrow is the story of a 35 year old high school kid who gets picked on by a bunch of 27 year old high school kids (who inexplicably call him 'scarecrow'). anyway the kid (lester) has a miserable life, is a bad artist, and i'm thinking is mildly retarded.

everyone hates him and makes his life rough except for judy (really the only good thing about the whole movie--and not for her acting ability). lester gets upset and is seen for a brief disconnected moment hitting a scarecrow that looks like a person in a plastic suit, yelling "i whish i was like you so i didn't feel anything." why did he do this? because apparently all the kids in this town hang out in cornfields with scarecrows...who else was he to take his frustration out on?

one night lester's mother's new boyfriend gets mad and kills him in a cornfield right below that same scarecrow. some zappy camera effects occur and lester is reincarnated as the scarecrow. --and i could be wrong here, but the whole killer scarecrow thing seems like it was done before...oh yeah in jeepers creepers 2.

anyway, lester (as the scarecrow) comes to life every once in a while and does acrobatic flips and then kills people. it would make sense that he should kill all the people that wronged him while he was alive, but rather he kills just random characters that have nothing to do with the story.

as a matter of fact, they introduce characters like the gravedigger and his daughter's boyfriend (who have no ties to the story whatsoever) just to be killed.

interestingly enough the really old high school kids all of a sudden are not in high school, the town "has a sinister evil," and somehow these things lead the world's worst sheriff to the conclusion that lester is the scarecrow.

too bad he dies before that could even matter.

unprovoked the scarecrow attacks judy (the only person who was nice to him while he was alive and the only person who went to his funeral), blaming her for his death. there is a short and crappy final fight scene here, taking place on and in a pickup truck that i'm pretty sure isn't actually moving at any point. and then there is a surprise ending that makes even less sense...coming as no surprise at all.

what is really striking about the whole thing is that this film was made completely straight faced.

watch the 'making of' featurette.

the whole cast is talking about effects and acting and plot points as if this movie is to be admired for it's technical prowess. the only thing that makes sense is when the director babbles lloyd kaufmann's name...

now this is by no means up to the caliber of a troma film, but at least i can see where they were going...(how could tiffany shepis be in this movie?) at least troma movies are funny and clever in a sort of tasteless way, this was just miserable.

the acting was terrible, dialog atrocious, editing uber-crappy, effects nearly non-existent....but worst of all this movie was boring. and that is a b-horror movie sin.

i think the icing on the cake though, was the fact that this abomination was dedicated to dario argento, george romero, stephen king, wes craven, and more.

if any of these people ever saw their names at the end of scarecrow, they'd kill themselves just so that they could roll in their graves.

this movie makes roger corman look like alfred hitchcock.

If you are not a fan of low-budget, micro-budget or zero-budget movies then stay away. Stay FAR away!!! If at the video store you see a box with a creepy looking scarecrow holding a sickle and you read the back of the box, don't expect a masterpiece.

I am a rabid horror fan...always have been. And yes, I tend you beat the hell out of most of them when I review them. Hell, I write these kinds of films (see TOWER OF BLOOD - that's one of mine). However, I appreciate the time and effort that is put into making these types of movies.

SCARECROW is by far and large a bad movie. Laughable script, 1-dimensional plastic characters, poor & sloppy direction...this one has it all.

What saves this movie? The photography! The DP (director of photography) does an excellent job shooting this movie. Several angles and at times how the scarecrow is shot are really creepy. Kudos to him! Also, the editing ain't half bad either! What I did not like, besides the direction and plot, is the scarecrow! To me, horror films should not be comedic! That isn't' to say that you can't have a good Comedy/Horror flick! Trust me, I've been plenty - but done much better than this. That is, however not to say this was purely a Comedy/Horror...I think the director was trying to make a straight horror film. Did he fail miserably. The wise-cracking, somersaulting, gymnastics crap was ridiculous!!! With most movies like this, there was so much potential that was lost because of directors such as the one behind this mess. If you watch the making-of on the DVD, you will hear the director name-drop like there ain't no tomorrow. He says he draws his inspiration from some of the greats in horror history (Wes Craven, John Carpenter, etc.) and Dario Argento....wait, what? Yup, he even dedicated this film the the Italian Horror Legend! I wonder how Mr. Argento would feel about this? Now, Mr. Argento is on my list of all time greats, but I don't see the connection to his films to this one. Oh well! While the director is busy dropping these names, no where does he explain how they inspire him. Nor does he cite references to these greats filmmakers and what about them inspired him.

Overall, a down-right piece of schlock which should not be taken seriously. Just enjoy some of the inventive death scene and gore! Don't walk away being upset cause you wasted your time...You knew what you were getting in to when you rented it!