The Fields

source: The Fields

Tells the story of a young boy (Joshua Ormond) and his family who are terrorized by an unseen presence. I went into this with intense hesitation, thinking that Tara Reid would ruin just about anything she touched. But the creators were smart -- they put her in a supporting role, limiting her screen time while also using her "star power" to get the film attention. Cloris Leachman has a much bigger role and while I would hate to say she shines here (she dimly glitters), she gives an interesting performance and plays against type. The biggest problem with this film is how slow it is. The pacing is good, but the overall story drags, and the suspense borders on the tedious at times. Few of the suspenseful moments have payoffs, which only adds to the aggravation. The general concept -- putting a creepy hippie story against the backdrop of Charles Manson's parole possibilities -- is an interesting idea, and the inclusion of public domain movies in the background was well-played. Both "Carnival of Souls" and "Night of the Living Dead" paralleled their scenes nicely. Was this really based on a true story? I have no idea. But it works regardless.

The Fields is one of those independents that engages and almost enamors you at the beginning. You suffer through Tara Reid giving a performance about as impressive as one of the corn stalks in the titular fields because you know Cloris Leachman is going to appear shortly and make it all better. And she does, for a while. Her brash, obnoxious, yet troubled and anxious grandmother character has depth and subtlety that's well worth seeing. But as time goes by you start to get the uneasy feeling that the writer had no real sense of where they were taking the story. By the end of the first hour you're pretty certain that the film is going to continue turning in aimless circles and then just fizzle out... but by then you figure you've already invested an hour, you might as well see it through to the end just to see if you were right... Half an hour later you look at the fizzled out remnants and say to yourself "yep, I was right". It's easy to see what The Fields was aiming for - a slow burn, southern Gothic drama with horror undertones - and most of the components are solid. The direction and cinematography is nice, the acting (Reid excepted) is outstanding (even from the kid), and the score is fittingly creepy. However, as with all things the strength of the whole is dependent on the weakest link and in this case the weak link is the screenplay, and it pulls the rest of an otherwise good movie down into oblivion with its meandering trajectory.

I kept watching this movie, because it didn't have one stupid thing in it that would have made me say, "Just another dumb, contrived movie..." There were no scenes where the hero was tied up, and then miraculously escaped, no stupid rock songs ruining the atmosphere, etc... It would go under the slice of life category of film, and living back as a kid in 1973, I found it pitch perfect. There were creepy hippies back then who were probably stoned half the time, that tried to weird you out by doing all types of strange things. They were usually older than you, and were going through some weird phase that the may or may not have snapped out of. The acting, direction, music, cinematography, all captured the atmosphere of a creepy little rural town quite well. I explored the links to the reviews by magazines, blogs,and papers, and most of them recognized the intelligence of this production, as opposed to some of the reviews on the IMDb...

Love this film. I love it the way I love THE CURSE OF THE CAT PEOPLE (Frisch/Wise, 1942.) I shouldn't gush, but this film took me completely by surprise. I watched it on Hulu+ yesterday, April 24, 2015, for the first time; and, then, with my husband, watching, again, today. Today, it resonated even more anticipating what I knew about the plot, characters, and climax. Today, I was able to enjoy details I missed of which there were many. The thing is: I knew, when I watched THE FIELDS for the first time, that it's a special film. It's not easily categorized. When Gladys says, "It's not the dead you have to be afraid, it's the living," or something to that effect, she basically gives the story away. But this film has been poorly described and promoted. Truly, here is what the Hulu+ summary says of the film: "Steven is sent to live in the countryside with his grandparents while his parents work through their troubles. Though his grandparents are happy to host him, they warn Steven not to enter the cornfields next to their house. When he does an EVIL awakens." That's garbage. No "EVIL awakens." This is the trouble with this film, particularly here at IMDb where I can only conjecture that the low-rating for this film is due to the fact that viewers approach this film with expectations that, most definitely, are not fulfilled. There are no zombies, vampires, devil children, or alien grays here. There's something worse. There's the living; and, beyond even that, there is the notion that not all "in-breds" are chainsaw-wielding former-meat butchers turned cannibal murderers. Having been almost the exact age of Steven (Joshua Ormand) in 1973 and remembering the aftermath of the Manson murders as seen through the evening news...staying up after 11:00 pm with my parents and watching the Detroit-area television premier of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, perhaps in 1973...watching CARNIVAL OF SOULS (1963) on Saturday afternoon horror film programs...having relatives like Gladys--chain-smoking, cuss-like-a-sailor, kind and gentle and crazy funny--and,in retrospect, remembering how the "Summer of Love" turned sour, how there were Manson admirers and "hippies" really freaking out and becoming something of terrorists...suffice it to say, I "get" the horror of this film. Then there are the references to folklore--the cornfield, the raven leading Steven into it for the first time, the stick hurled out from the corn like an elf-shot. There are the references to classic films and television with clips of DRAGNET and Webb mentioning a tragedy involving a grandmother and her grandson; CARNIVAL OF SOULS with Candace Hilligoss's Mary Henry coming upon "Saltair" for the first time and foreshadowing Steven coming upon "Bushkill Park"; and, NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD with its human-flesh eating, recently deceased attacking the farmhouse stronghold (remember the vulnerable back door of that black and white farmhouse kitchen?) foreshadowing the eventual attack on the farmhouse stronghold protecting Hiney, Gladys, and Steven. Then there is Manson and gang looming over all. If you lived during those early days of the 70s, no matter if in a rural area or a suburb, and you remember stories about LSD-tripping babysitters roasting their chargers and just happened to have a grandmother who loved horror movies, you'll "get" this film. If you didn't live back then, no worries but just don't think that this a film along the lines of CHILDREN OF THE CORN, whatever-that-awful-movie-with-aliens-and-Mel-Gibson-was, or some new tread on Texas CHAINSAW MASSACRE because it just isn't. On the negative side: The dark, metallic filter so commonly used and Tara Reid's wigs.

When I bought UK DVD of 'The Fields' I had some expectations, not much but some(plus 3d cover is great I have to give them that!). It's being promoted as a horror movie although some websites claim It's more of a psychological trailer. Well It's not much of a thriller in my book and certainly there is no horror at all. I should know better that Cloris Leachman would not participate in a horror movie about haunted cornfield but hey I gave it a try. 'The Fields' turned out to be one of the most boring movies ever made. And I have seen a lot of boring movies where nothing happens but this flick beats it all. Acting is obviously solid with Miss Leachman as Grandma and Tara Reid as mother(but she only appears in the beginning and ending of the movie). There is no thrills, suspense, gore or anything like that. The only thing they do in the whole movie is talk. Talk, talk, talk, sometimes they shout and that's it. I also have to say that the kid playing the lead is extremely annoying. I don't see any reason to give it more than 1. It's obviously bigger budget movie with good technical aspects(although editing is crappy many times) in it but It doesn't matter when the movie is so boring, characters one dimensional and nothing, absolutely NOTHING happens during the whole movie. Watch it on your own risk if you are looking for a long nap, because the only thing this movie actually delivers is sleep.

What appears to be the dichotomy between the positive and negative reviews with regards to "The Fields" is that you have those looking for "scare the crap out of me!" horror and those that see this film is truly full of horror elements. It is not dull, boring, nor uneventful. In fact there are many different things going on here in this period piece that is very well executed and is highly worth viewing, in my (and many others') opinion. We know that film reviews are subjective: not everyone is going to like the same thing, this goes without saying. The Fields really covers so much ground and truly disturbing yet also interesting and "good" moments that it would be very unfortunate that one would not watch it based on some poor reviews. Be wary of those telling you not to waste your time. I almost heeded their words and would have missed out on this complex and realistic gem.

A long and winding road leading nowhere, The Fields is a mish-mash of disconnected set pieces with no real plot. While the desaturated cinematography and moody design set a general tone of gloom, and much of the acting is solid, The Fields focuses on fragmented back story, rather than a beginning, a middle, and an end. There's no connection between Steven's parents' domestic disputes and Steven's meanderings around the farm. So why did the producers even follow that storyline? Of course, one could ask the same question about any aspect of this "mystery," and ultimately, about The Fields itself. 5 points for competence, but -2 for making me waste my time.

******WARNING CONTAINS SPOILERS******** The acting was terrible and I think the filmmakers must if realised this because they credited the chicken also. This is probably because the acting itself was about as dynamic as the chickens as Tara Ried acting was about as convincing as a pair of fake breasts . The only decent actor was the dead girl that the corn fields and thats probably because she didn't have any dialogue. this movie doesn't know if it's coming or going they actually lost the plot in the literal sense of the word. It's a really slow burner the only reason I carried on watching it was because I believed it was building up suspense but if anything makes you wanting the child to die because of the ridiculous and easily avoidable situations he puts himself in. Don't waste your time there so much better thing you could do with your time...

This is advertised as an horror movie but is not. I look back in horror as my own perseverance in looking at this drivel. "The fields"as the pretencion of a film but is not. I should have seen immediately that is was a cheap collection of filling scenes and no substance. One is supposed to be scared by the sight of a cornfield because is there. A child find a dead body there and nobody cares. Entire families seem to live in squalor, affected by some form of genetic mental retardation and nobody cares. When an elderly couple is harassed by mysterious nightly break-ins, nobody cares. The scriptwriter, the director and the actors play a string of unexplained and discontented episodes and nobody cares. There is over all this mess the horror of the tedium that still await, endlessly. One remains with the impression that after watching it we have not cared for ourselves either.