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.
44 Reviews
It was the cover!
trey33320 July 2006
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
No Harvest for you guys...Even if its Dark....
face_of_terror26 December 2004
Warning: Spoilers
The movie starts off as we see a footage of a huge drought back in the 30's in America. Then a short story is shown about a creepy - looking farmer Elija who made a deal with Satan , to get good harvest. Elija hired young men to work in his garden , killed them , and used as scarecrows. He also fed the ground with their blood. Some time after 2 cops come to visit him. One of them gets shot by Elija , another one kills the farmer himself... After that , the present day is shown , and some guy named Sean is told that he has an old farm left as inheritance. He decides to go there with some friends to see what's up. Little did Sean know that the next night is the "Payback Night".....
As for me this movie had a good story for a horror flick , but low budget and poor special effects just ruined it. "Dark Harvest" is a perfect example of lazy film making. For example we see a scarecrow (a usual guy wearing a funny , cheap mask) chasing a girl. When he raises his hand we get to see a normal human skin below his glove, instead of some rotting flesh. The gore is not very impressive as well. There are some nasty killings by our "lovely" scarecrows but everything is very cheap and unrealistic. Surprisingly the acting is somewhat OK in this flick , or i better say its believable. Some nude scenes are presented as well for the fans (even a lesbian scene) ,but those scenes don't save it.
Verdict : Good music, good story, solid acting. But awful effects , cheap gore and plot holes slow this movie down. Not really recommended.
As for me this movie had a good story for a horror flick , but low budget and poor special effects just ruined it. "Dark Harvest" is a perfect example of lazy film making. For example we see a scarecrow (a usual guy wearing a funny , cheap mask) chasing a girl. When he raises his hand we get to see a normal human skin below his glove, instead of some rotting flesh. The gore is not very impressive as well. There are some nasty killings by our "lovely" scarecrows but everything is very cheap and unrealistic. Surprisingly the acting is somewhat OK in this flick , or i better say its believable. Some nude scenes are presented as well for the fans (even a lesbian scene) ,but those scenes don't save it.
Verdict : Good music, good story, solid acting. But awful effects , cheap gore and plot holes slow this movie down. Not really recommended.
Cheesy would be a compliment, this is not.
RaziaK30 October 2004
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
buddyrichfield24 April 2007
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.
some horror movies are SO damn awful bad, they're amusing! (SPOILERS)
bigwhammer25 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
DO not take this film seriously, rent it with some folks who want to play Mystery Science 3000, and you will probably laugh your butts off. The evil guys are so not scary, it's funny, it's like some dude from 7th grade with a sickle in a scarecrow get up. The acting is hilarious. I love the occasional self torture with a poor horror film and this really had me giggling. I recommend it on that basis. Of course recreational drugs will enhance the experience. Oh, there is a naked group swimming scene, that will allow for some star dust on the 5 star system. The token black male gets injured badly, but continues his joking as well as using the injured body part quite readily throughout. Enjoy this complete and utter disgrace to films.
The worst movie ever
m_jordan_jones14 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS. This movie was the worst movie ever. I couldn't even watch it all it was so bad. This film is actually worse than scarecrow slayer which is saying a whole lot. This was worse than terror toons which at least terror toons was funny at times. Not even the gore in the film was good. The shootings were fake and the acting was worse. Please do yourself a favor and skip this one. If you see it at the rental store then run the other way. There is nothing good about this film at all. If you want to see a good scarecrow movie then watch Night of the scarecrow or pumpkin head. If you want to see an OK new cheesy movie then watch Scarecrow. I rate this movie a 0.2 out of 10. That's how horrible this film really is. THE WORST MOVIE EVER.
Probably the funniest horror movie ever.
f1f7y_0525 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
pardon my spelling. This is probably the funniest horror movie that ever existed. Think evil dead * 1000. The acting is horrible, you can see the makeup line on a certain lady's face. there is a lesbian scene, which makes no sense at-all. And the ending, haha ohhhh the ending... be prepared to have your stomach hurting from laughter. Now if you watch this film for more then 5 minutes and are still expecting something, take a look at your self, and ask what the hell is wrong with you. This is a very bad movie, meant to laugh at and enjoy for its pure silliness.
Don't forget to watch all the outtakes after the movie, you can see just how low budget the whole thing really was. All in all this movie is a rare gem in demonstrating the pure and udder lack of talent/care/ability/money/ and anything else you would ever need to make a successful film. But its definitely worth watching.
Don't forget to watch all the outtakes after the movie, you can see just how low budget the whole thing really was. All in all this movie is a rare gem in demonstrating the pure and udder lack of talent/care/ability/money/ and anything else you would ever need to make a successful film. But its definitely worth watching.
Sorry, but this is by no means scary.
rektolfrank15 July 2004
Warning: Spoilers
I was in Blockbuster and I saw a film called "Dark Harvest". The cover art looked great, the plot wasn't that bad, and the tagline (You reap what you sow) made the movie look pretty good. But I was dumb that day, because I did something I should have never done. I rented a "Straight To Video Independent Horror Film" Walking out with my much better rentals, I went home, popped Dark Harvest in the DVD player and it began. I figured I would watch the trailer after the film was done (BAD IDEA) but went ahead and watched it anyway. NOW to the review.*POSSIBLE SPOILERS* First off, the acting by the "kids" sucks, and the scene when the 2 (main characters) are talking, the lighting sucks, and the buildings even look fake! Now they go to this house, where Sean Connel's (I think he's the main character, I don't care) relatives lived there. All of a sudden one by one, they all start getting killed by...(gasp) A KILLER SCARECROW!!!! AHHH!!!!! The scarecrow is obviously the definition of low budget, and the scenes where the scarecrow is computerized looks so fake it's hilarious. It makes dinosaur noises and everything! And then at the end...they shoot the scarecrow with a gun (that is red for god's sake and looks like it was purchased at a local family dollar) and it pauses for a while and then.....(gasp) BLOWS UP!!!!!!
Save yourself some time, I'm telling you this movie sucks. if you need to pass an hour and a half, look at the wall, because looking at the wall is A+ fun compared to this disaster. It is quite funny though.
Overall Grade: F If there was anything lower **F-** Than I would give it that.
Save yourself some time, I'm telling you this movie sucks. if you need to pass an hour and a half, look at the wall, because looking at the wall is A+ fun compared to this disaster. It is quite funny though.
Overall Grade: F If there was anything lower **F-** Than I would give it that.
Don't waste your money
kvolden31722 July 2006
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!!!!
Junior High School effort -- Kindergarten results
squeezeplayer200127 May 2004
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.
Awesome reality horror flick
jpv-430 August 2004
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.
warehousereviews16 August 2020
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.
Deliciously Awful.
fryza154 November 2005
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.
Children of the Corny
carolynpaetow2 June 2004
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.
"Dark Harvest" is Latin for "waste of time"
efini22616 November 2004
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.
A $10,000 "film"
vincentga9 July 2006
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".
Frustratingly Inept & Utter Garbage In Every Sense of the Word
mtess-112 August 2004
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.
Worst Movie Ever Made?
suttercain8 January 2005
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
wow, what an amazing waste of $$$$$$
normbatesjr-115 November 2004
According to the budget information given on this web site Dark Harvest had an estimated budget of $130,000. Where this money was spent I'm not exactly sure. Let me see....costumes...no...location and sets...hmmm, think not....special f/x...NOT...acting lessons...ah, no. Dark Harvest tells the epic tale of a young man who inherits a family farm in the hills of West Virginia. His girlfriend talks him into taking their friends up there to check the place out. Once there our intrepid hero learns that his great grandfather used a unique method for getting his crops to grow and now it's revenge time. Killer scarecrows out for revenge!!! Ewww scary. Well no, not really. We all know there have been some terrific movies made with very little money but this is not one of them. This film contains pretty much some of the worst acting and dialog I've ever seen. Terrible clichés with terrible delivery. All in all do not be fooled by the half way decent cover and avoid at all costs. I'd like to give the film makers at least a D- for trying but I'm afraid they didn't even do a good job with that. GRADE: F
i want to harvest this DVD
ianmutimer26 December 2005
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.
Harvest of Blood
sol-kay17 January 2005
***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.
Not the worst direct to video horror, worth a cheap rental
degan001-128 September 2009
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.
Worst Movie Ever? I think not.
deathdunt3 September 2005
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.
The first 3 minutes were good
bsc_charlemagne3 February 2005
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.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
