Escape the Field

Escape the Field (2022) is a Lions Gate Picture that was exclusively released to Peacock. The storyline follows a group of people who mysteriously wake up in a corn field. The cornfield is a maze/puzzle combination the people need to figure out before something in the field kills them. Meanwhile they will try to figure out if any of their last memories can explain how they got here to begin with.

This movie is directed by Emerson Moore in his directorial debut and stars Jordan Claire Robbins (The Umbrella Academy), Theo Rossi (Sons of Anarchy), Shane West (The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen), Tahirah Sharif (The Haunting of Bly Manor) and Elena Juatco (Schitt's Creek).

This movie felt like Escape Room without the cool effects, interesting subplots and unique settings. This picture thought the corn field setting would be creative and creepy but it didn't work. The cast delivers solid performances and tries to carry the movie, but there are no good kills, no quality gore and no real memorable circumstances or scenes. The ending twist isn't as creative as they hoped and there's definitely no need for a sequel.

Overall, this tries to put a unique twist on films like Escape Room, Saw and Cube but fails. I would score this a 3.5-4/10 and recommend skipping it.

I would probably give it more of a 5 to 6, but I rated higher to compensate for some of the terrible reviews. I actually found it interesting. It reminded me of a dangerous outdoor escape room. The main issue I have with it was the ending. They could have done so much more with it. If you do watch it, be aware that there is one of those hidden final scenes at the end after a few credits. I could tell by some of the reviews that not everyone stayed on and saw it.

This is newb producer, writer and director Emerson Moore's second film (with only one prior short), and it wasn't as bad as all these wannabe critics and their one's. Clearly it was a low budget B film, and all things considered, I've seen worse big budget Hollywood A-films lately.

Moore's directing was actually impressive, with some great aerial shots, unexpected jump-scares, and fairly decent cast direction. Cinematography was spot-on, but it was the score - especially for a B film, that was perfection. This is a rarity in B films, where the score is always loud, overbearing, constant and unfitting. Even the pacing was decent for the 89 min runtime.

There was however a huge missed opportunity with the writing; of the three writers, had one of them been somewhat a seasoned writer, the story could've been more cohesive. Although a refreshing and original take on the "escape room" genre films, there were some elements that could've been omitted, such as the red vile-filled dart and what followed, and other elements than needed more attention, such as a better narrative structure and more character development. I don't mind films that leave unanswered questions, but a little more clarity would've gone a long way. The ending wasn't bad either, but also had potential to be much more.

Rookie mistakes aside, I still enjoyed this one, and it's a well deserved 7/10 for the newb filmmaker. I hope Moore takes advantage of the door he left open for a sequel.

I actually enjoyed this more than In The Tall Grass, which isn't saying much, but I had read the story that was based on and was disappointed in the film adaptation.

This was more interesting to me and just isn't as bad as a lot of these reviews claim it is, so I felt the need to give my two cents as a counterpoint to all the undeserved negativity. This is no masterpiece, but it kept me entertained and watching till the end.

Ever seen the Canadian cult sci-fi thriller Cube?

How about Netflix's adaptation if the Stephen King story In The Long Grass?

Well, imagine the story of the first, but the setting of the second. That is what you have here.

And that's it. There's nothing new, nothing imaginative; just "Cube, but in a field".

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't bored at all, but everything just seemed too familiar. But there were other problems.

Some parts where painfully predictable. Others where the most over-played of clichés (the ex-soldier still haunted by how he let his platoon down, anyone?).

At one point, a character makes reference to something they couldn't have known about. It seems like a really clumsy hint that this character is not to be trusted, but it's never followed up, so why include it? Either the film-makers thought it was a clever way of second guessing the audience (it's not, because it makes things even more nonsensical) or they were not aware of their own continuity.

How about the "Impassable door" that totally blocks our heroes, only for one of them very shortly later to pass through (off camera and without any explanation or reference) with no apparent difficulty. Twice!

As I said, despite all the criticisms, I can't claim I wasn't entertained. The pace was good, and the acting largely fine (though a few of the characters were so 2D they would hardly have been missed however well acted).

It's just that, at best, it offered nothing new and, at worst, fell prey to all manner of clichés and plot-contrivences.