Husk (AD Originals)
| release date | January 28 2011 |
| studio | After Dark Films/Lionsgate |
| director | Brett Simmons |
| writer | Brett Simmons |
| starring | Devon Graye, CJ Thomason, Wes Chatham, Tammin Sursok |
| trailer 1 | Trailer #1 |
ad
-
Most Popular
Most commented on articles over the past 7 days.
Featured Stories
Top Stories From Bloody Disgusting
-
3 Comments
Just watched this on SYFY Channel and it was terrible!Plot was pointless and full of holes.Acting was ok.Barely any gore worthy of praise.Cool looking scarecrows but once again The Night Of The Scarecrow is still the only good Scarecrow flick.Watch for free if you must.Be prepared for a lame attempt at a Supernatural Slasher.The very end was the only cool part.
wasn’t terrible. i liked it a little. it had some good things going for it like the scarecrows claws but the story wasn’t the most incredible but for a scarecrow slasher it was pretty good. i also thought the end was like a lot of other horror movies so cant give it that originallity but still worth a watch
I dug it. No, it was not up to Dark Night of the Scarecrow standard (let’s face it… DNotS is THE definitive, near perfect scarecrow horror film!), but Husk is a solid flick, with an adequate plot, nice eye for cinematography, and some genuinely creepy moments. Husk is definitely above par for After Dark Films… Not as good as The Hamiltons, but far, FAR, better than Unearthed, Crazy Eights, or Nightmare Man! I ended the viewing without feeling cheated out of two hours of my life… But, gotta admit, I’m glad I DIDN’T travel to see this last week. If I had spent $20 on tickets and shelled out for hotel, etc., I’d've been PISSED when it aired on SyFy tonight…
This movie was not as bad as Harley made it out to be and definitely not worthy of only 1 skull. It was nothing special, but it was well done for what it was and a good time. They treated the premise seriously and played it straight with no over the top acting. I enjoyed it for what it was. Definitely worth checking out.
I watched this last night. Let me say I was extremely disappointed. I was ezpecting a good old fashion horror movie that was both bloody and creepy. What I got was an extremely boring and repetitive film. I was so excited for a scarecrow movie to come out. Now I have to wait for another one because this one did not do anything for me. The beginning was decent but then it went downhill. It feels as if the film repeats itself just to make it 90 minutes. The 2 creepy scenes were the same exact thing. The transformation scenes in the room upstairs is the best part of the movie. The scarecrows look extremely scary and creepy but the movie itself is not. It had all the infredients right there in the film to be scary and entertaining, but the director did not take advantage of it. The back story was poorly done and could of been much more effective. Over all, a movie with alot of potential but no execution. I would skip it.
Entertaining, but nothing new.
Husk (2011)- Really good syfy movie, i really enjoyed it! but i did hate the no ending in the movie.
They could of made the Scarecrow look a least a bit scary however it was kinda scary when it was attacking the victims.
I liked this movie better Messengers 2: The Scarecrow (2009)
Don’t remeber much about that movie.
Five friends, driving on a trip to a cabin are driven off the road by a flock of crows. When they come to, one of them is missing, with signs that he might have made his way into the adjacent corn field.
What I truly appreciate about Husk is that it really doesn’t ever try to get too heavy. The movie essentially begins right away with the car crash. There is not too much exposition and the film clocks in at barely over 80 minutes, a sweet spot for most horror films.
Having grown up in the country and likely traumatized by children of the corn, I found this setting particularly chilling. Clearly director Brett Simmons took advantage of and perfectly captured the isolation and claustrophobia that comes about when lost in a corn field.
I can say that the acting is functional and that it gets the job done. It is certainly better than many of the After Dark Horror Films of the past few years. Because it is a short film and because the Director kept the character exposition down, don’t expect to develop any sympathy for the characters, much less care about what happens to them.
I get the impression based on a few scenes, particularly with the girlfriend of one character, as well as her interactions with another friend, that they had more character interaction and drama filmed, but simply cut it in order to keep the film moving forward. No doubt this was a good call.
The Scarecrows were creep, then again I have always found Scarecrows creepy, I feel like they could have shown them more. I would have liked to have seen more stalking of the kids going on, although there were a few scenes of figures moving swiftly through the corn that kept me going.
Perhaps it is a case of lowered expectations, but I enjoyed Husk. It wasn’t a great film, but it was an entertaining one. The film looked nice, the effects were decent and it really didn’t scream cheap, low budget movie like many of After Dark’s productions have. So at the very least, give it a rental it does the trick for a quick viewing.
Didn’t have very high hopes for this and I’m very glad I didn’t too. Not very good at all. I’m still waiting on a very good killer scarecrow movie in the vein of Scarecrows. It did it’s best but just fell short of it’s goal. I’ve seen worse but it’s still not very good.
Let’s face it, After Dark hasn’t released the most impressive slate of films, so I went into this flick with low expectations. I also think it’s important to note that AD Films are shot on a micro-budget and at a neck-breaking pace (I think 19 days give or take.) Given those limitations, I actually think Brett Simmons pulled off a pretty damn good horror flick! Sure the mythology is a bit convoluted, but if I’m looking for high-brow fair, I ain’t going to an After Dark film in the first place. This is a fun little horror flick with a great cast, slick cinematography and wonderful production design. I can’t believe I’m saying this about an AD film, but I’m a fan!
i’ve seen worse but not really a surprising and catching story.
After Dark Horrorfest has released some good movies into the world, such as “Frontier(s)” and “The Gravedancers”. When I first heard of After Dark Originals, I was skeptic, and upon seeing “Husk”, I guess this reaction was the correct one. I say this because, unlike some of the best films from each After Dark Horrorfest, “Husk” is just a poor horror flick in general. It’s not scary, it’s not creepy, and frankly, it really sucks.
The film is rendered nearly unwatchable due to a distinct lack of chills and atmosphere. The flick tries, tries, and tries; but can’t achieve, achieve, achieve. Of course, this is how most horror movies are, and while “Husk” may not think it’s generic, it really is.
I feel no need to name the characters. They’re not the center of the story. The center of the story is, in fact, a creepy old farmhouse in the middle of a corn-field; in which there are creepy scare-crow demons that hunt our “characters”, who just happen to crash their car nearby these fields. The film attempts to be some super-cool paranormal venture, and I admit; it’s a decent idea. I would have loved to watch a movie about evil scarecrow demons, but then again, I would have only loved it if it were good.
The thing just isn’t engaging. Cinematography is decent, and it’s the only thing keeping “Husk” from being the worst thing ever, but it’s still a god-awful movie with nothing to prove and nothing new to show fans of the genre. Perhaps this is why it was direct-to-video; because it’s not well-acted, because it’s not well-made, and because it’s not a good movie.
What were these people thinking? Did they think that such bad execution of such a decent concept would fare well with cinephiles and horror fans alike? Who was this made for? Horror fans are the only ones who will give this flick a chance, and as I like to imagine, they shall be gravely disappointed. “Husk” does stuff, but it’s never anything that we give a shit about. It’s a fast-paced thrill-ride that embraces boredom through poor directorial skills and story-telling.
Some people like to watch these films for laughter induced by pure boredom. Sure, I get that; I mean, that’s probably why I watched “Husk” in the first place. But when the movie bores you without making you laugh…that’s just sad. There’s just no fun- and not even guilty fun- to be had in this horror movie. Its blood, gory, and violent, sure; but also dumb, relentlessly draggy, and lame, lame, lame. Of course, there are much better direct-to-video films; with better ideas, better filmmakers attached, and better everything that “Husk” does not care to possess. And if you really love this genre, you will avoid the thing.
Worst horror reviewers on the planet, http://www.bloody-disgusting.com. Expect a horror flick to be horror flick, not a damn Oscar worthy drama movie. This was enjoyable you dumbasses.
CREAMED BY THE CORN
Husk was an enjoyable and original film.
Call it Night of The Living Scarecrows if you will.
There are some flashback scenes that explain why and how the events are taking place.
The explanation was no big revelation or anything groundbreaking but other than that it was fun and original.
If you like the idea of Zombie Scarecrows with nails hammered through their fingers as a weapon then you will like this.
Even though there wasn’t non stop action I was still entertained,the acting was top notch and the story pulled me in.There were a few genuine scares as well,It had a very creepy somewhat old school feel to it.
There isn’t any gore to speak of, but there is quite a bit of blood and slaughtering going on.That said, most of the gruesome details are left off camera and to your imagination.
I liked it and thought it better than I expected.
I wasn’t fond of the abrupt ending but all in all a very good effort for this killer scarecrow flick.
After clowns and creepy dolls, scarecrows are next on the list of things that most creep me out. This movie delivered in that it was genuinely freaky most of the way through. But they beat the idea to death. They’re scarecrows, they’re evil, I get it. And the ending, which could have been the saving grace, petered out when it had the potential to have been EPIC. But no, and I have no idea why they did it.
A solidly entertaining little scarecrow-slasher that pretty much delivered what I expected:
teenies, cornfields and killer scarecrows
It’s pretty thrilling and atmospheric, especially in the first and the last third, thanks to some well-built tension, unpredictable twists and a few quite suspenseful scenes. The plot is cool and Brett Simmons’ tight script is well-written and -paced – there wasn’t a single moment where I got bored.
Ok, the characters are all one-dimensional and cliché-ridden, but at least the 5 teen actors did their best to give convincable acting performances.
Best of all, “Husk” is a really stunning-looking movie. The simplicity of the setting (an old farmhouse and some cornfields) is highly effective and works absolutely brilliant. Furthermore, camera work and photography are just fantastic (loads of beautiful shots, great camera panning…).
Highlights:
The creepy scarecrow design, all the flashbacks, some great gore, the eerie sewing room, and the interesting and unexpected ending.
Recommended to fans of movies like “Scarecrows” or “Hallowed Ground”
I don’t really know how I feel about this movie, some parts I thought were quite enjoyable, others just really annoyed me and the dude that wouldn’t let them leave just needed to be punched. I only really liked one of the characters and I wish more time would have been spent on explaining everything. I thought the scarecrow looked pretty cool and creepy but I wouldn’t have high expectations for it.Â
Need a bit more Scare in the Crow, man. The scarecrow is fast like a flash and likes to scratch, but there just is just no thrill or chill to it, which is disappointing. Good production values, but scareless scarecrow attacks and some stretches of the senses (chessboy seeing psychic portals into family farm history…?) take a bite out of the horror. There are some positives: liked the ending, dig the smileface scarecrow mask, and the scenes in the farmhouse with the initiated sewing their own has some cool creep factor, for sure. Watchable but very avg horror.
Had wanted to see this for a while and had put this on my Lovefilm list of rentals, but then it appeared on Sky Movies, so set the box to record and was not disapointed.
Firstly, the performances were good, which was unusual for a film with such a base premise and could easily have been copy/pasted from any number of teens at full pelt horror you care to mention, but the acting was good enough.
I was especially impressed with the way that what little characterisation there was, was focused on the characters that will make it out alive and then subverting the cliche so that it became a free for all.
As for the scares, it had me, a seasoned horror fanatic jumping, in the right places and kudos for the sound design, dropping the soundtrack completely before getting right in my face with an excellent scare.
It certainly is the best horror film ever made, but like other late night, curiosity, horror films, Splinter for example, it does the job just nicely.
Comment