TheBlueHairedLawyer Basically a farmer is losing his sunflower crops and puts up a freaky scarecrow, which gives him good luck but in return kills off people.Scarecrow was okay but began to make very little sense. There was a little girl who had absolutely no purpose in the movie, and they tried to cram in as many sex scenes as possible, which was disgusting and tore away from the plot.I don't recommend you spend your hard-earned money buying this movie, it is a complete waste of time. The original is better, try it instead. Scarecrow had a lot of potential but was trumped with cliché horror elements, perverse scenes and bad acting.

chris dimarino The Messengers 2 is a very prototypical low grade horror sequel. These types of movie never feature the stars that made the first and try to capture the mood of the first without stepping on it's toes too much. The idea would be to elaborate on the parts that worked and avoid the parts that didn't. Unfortunately most of them do the opposite and this entry is no different.As a full movie this isn't as terrible as some horror movies you'll see out there. There are a few interesting ideas and twists but not many. The movie is also acted well if not lacklusterly under toned.The concept of being scared of the scarecrow just didn't work for me. It never really seemed like anything other than an inanimate object. The movie kind of crawled along and was predictable as well. There was too much emphasis on the farm (which albeit is a key theme) and not enough focus on the horror. The first movie was good because it mixed the farm setting with an inherited horror and human interaction. This movie left the interaction out and elaborated on the farm.I would really only recommend this movie to farm lovers. If you loved the first movie then it's worth a watch but you'll likely be disappointed.

Argemaluco Some years ago, distribution company Ghost House Pictures acquired a screenplay written by Todd Farmer in order to make a movie about the supernatural experiences suffered by a family on a remote farm.However, when screenwriter Mark Wheaton joined to the project, he decided to substantially change the story and adjust it to the structures from Asian horror cinema.The result was the atrocious movie The Messengers.2 years after that movie, Ghost House Pictures decided to wheel out Farmer's screenplay to make a movie out of it and sell it as a prequel with the title Messengers 2: The Scarecrow.Needless to say, my expectations for this film were minimum...however, I ended up taking a nice surprise with it.It may not be an excellent film, but it is competent and it is hugely superior to The Messengers.Because of the trailers and title from the film, I expected Messengers 2: The Scarecrow to be an absurd "slasher" film with a scarecrow killing people.And, on some way, it was like that...but not on the way I expected to see.The emphasis from the movie is not on blood and deaths, but on the atmosphere of angst which generates the credible situation from the main characters.The alleged supernatural events keep their ambiguity until the end, making us to ask ourselves if there is any evil influence on the farm or if everything is due to the frail mental state from the main characters, exacerbated by their anguish and untrue future.I was surprised of finding those mature elements on a straight-to-DVD prequel.As for the cast, Heather Stephens makes a competent work, but Norman Reedus tends to exaggerate without noticing that a more subtle performance would have been more appropriate to the tone from the film.The screenplay is generally good, but the characters occasionally do stupid things, whose bad decisions make some things convenient.And the ending is not bad by itself, but it does not seem to totally suit in the context of the movie.As for the direction, Martin Barnewitz shows a good control of the minimalistic narrative, and he also made a competent work on the "jump" scenes.Finally, I liked to see the absolute absence of digital effects.If it was not for the unnecessary incursion in the horror genre the movie makes in the ending, I would consider Messengers 2: The Scarecrow as a thriller with subtle supernatural details which emphasize the drama and make the atmosphere richer.However, I cannot deny the fails from the movie, and the fact that it is not very memorable, so I can recommend it, not as a great movie, but as a competent prequel which ended up being much better than the previous film.

MovieGuy01 I found the film Messengers 2: The Scarecrow, not to be as good as the first film, It did have a lot of nice scenery in the film. I did think that it was just as creepy as the original, It is about a farmer called John Rollins(Norman Reedus) John's corn crop is being eaten up by a swarm of crows. While John is going through the barn he finds an old scarecrow is found and John thinks it may scare away the crows. The next morning his cornfield is covered with dead crows. This film had quite a supernatural and a creepy kind of feel to it which made it a good film. Although i did think the actors were far better from the first movie. 4/10