Escape the Field

I could tell after watching the trailer this film had the potential to be pretty bad. But because I like some of the actors I decided to give it a shot. Bad idea..That was a total waste of time. About an hour in I couldn't take anymore and turned it off. Dont make the mistake I did. Watch something else.

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 don't understand the people who down vote new movies immediately.

I had a fun time and didn't make an instant connection to movies that I already love, such as "Cube".

This is worth watching, great acting and mystery. An hour in, I had assumptions, but didn't know exactly where it was going.

I've had more fun watching Escape the Field than big "blockbusters" recently. The only exception I can make, was watching Elvis (2022).

The only rotten tomatoes I see, are the early reviews! Too many people rate movies with ridiculously low scores. I'd probably rewatch this movie again. Here is my personal rating system for movies:

1-Won't watch again 2-Horrible, but I've seen worse 3-Didn't like it, may have something decent 4-Bad, but not terrible 5-Indifferent 6-Good, I might rewatch it 7-Solid, probably going to it watch again 8-I liked it, will watch again 9-Loved it, will recommend and watch again 10-Favorite of all time, will watch again and again and again and again and again.

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.