The "You-Don't-Need-Gore" crowd have made this movie out to be a lot more than it is. With so many reviewers citing this as one of the best horror movies made for TV, I was expecting something like John Carpenter's TV work or some of the BBC's classic ghost stories. Something genuinely atmospheric and creepy.
This is one of those Specials that networks used to make around the holidays that are just vaguely seasonal and don't really commit to any particular genre. It's an "autumn story", not a horror story, and bland enough for grandma. Scarecrow was very competently made. It makes the most of a virtually non-existent budget. I was impressed with the pacing and tightness of the script. But it's a "scary" movie made by people who aren't horror fans, and those movies never work. The first act set-up is engagingly snappy, but once the story starts, it's a by-the-numbers formula piece that moves way too slowly.
The story is one we've seen a million times. A small group of people think they've gotten away with murder until they start dying "accidentally" one by one. Once the first victim died, I immediately knew how the rest of the movie would progress right up to the end. The only mystery was whether the murderer would turn out to be the little girl or a ghost, and either/or mysteries aren't very mysterious. (And what are the chances that a family-friendly prime time special is going to reveal a revoltingly "sweet" little girl to be a serial killer in the final act?)
To me, a horror/suspense movie that does not even attempt to surprise its audience is betraying that audience. It's bad-faith storytelling not to anticipate audience expectation and work to thwart it. And that's where I have to call out the anti-gore crowd. Special effects are the only thing that could have lent a story this bland an element of surprise.
For kids under ten around Halloween, this movie will be scary. For anyone else, it will be mildly diverting in a I-wonder-what-else-is-on kind of way.
This is one of those Specials that networks used to make around the holidays that are just vaguely seasonal and don't really commit to any particular genre. It's an "autumn story", not a horror story, and bland enough for grandma. Scarecrow was very competently made. It makes the most of a virtually non-existent budget. I was impressed with the pacing and tightness of the script. But it's a "scary" movie made by people who aren't horror fans, and those movies never work. The first act set-up is engagingly snappy, but once the story starts, it's a by-the-numbers formula piece that moves way too slowly.
The story is one we've seen a million times. A small group of people think they've gotten away with murder until they start dying "accidentally" one by one. Once the first victim died, I immediately knew how the rest of the movie would progress right up to the end. The only mystery was whether the murderer would turn out to be the little girl or a ghost, and either/or mysteries aren't very mysterious. (And what are the chances that a family-friendly prime time special is going to reveal a revoltingly "sweet" little girl to be a serial killer in the final act?)
To me, a horror/suspense movie that does not even attempt to surprise its audience is betraying that audience. It's bad-faith storytelling not to anticipate audience expectation and work to thwart it. And that's where I have to call out the anti-gore crowd. Special effects are the only thing that could have lent a story this bland an element of surprise.
For kids under ten around Halloween, this movie will be scary. For anyone else, it will be mildly diverting in a I-wonder-what-else-is-on kind of way.
Tell Your Friends