|
Movies Books Music Food Tv Shows Technology Politics Video Games Parenting Fashion Green Living more >

Lunch » Tags » Movies » Reviews » Husk

Husk

1 rating: -4.0
Horror film.
1 review about Husk

On the cob.

  • May 28, 2011
Rating:
-4
* out of ****

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.

What did you think of this review?

Helpful
3
Thought-Provoking
3
Fun to Read
3
Well-Organized
3
Post a Comment
What's your opinion on Husk?
rate
1 rating: -4.0
You have exceeded the maximum length.
Photos
Husk
Details
Related Topics
Sleepy Hollow

Tim Burton's 1999 horror film loosely based on Washington Ir

Nightmare on Elm Street Poster

A 2010 movie

Poster for the movie

A 1980 film directed by Ulli Lommel

Friday the 13th [Theatrical Release] 2009

A 2009 movie

First to Review

"On the cob."
© 2014 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.
()
This is you!
Ranked #
Last login
Member since
reviews
comments
ratings
questions
compliments
lists