DARK NIGHT OF THE SCARECROW
In a small Southern town, four vigilantes wrongfully execute a mentally challenged man, but after the court sets them free, mysterious “accidents” begin to kill them off one by one.
“Dark Night of the Scarecrow,” a chilling made-for-TV movie, premiered on CBS on October 24, 1981. The film masterfully crafts a haunting tale of small-town vigilantism turned deadly. When a young girl named Marylee (Tonya Crowe) is brutally attacked, four men jump to the conclusion that Bubba (Larry Drake), a mentally challenged local man, is the culprit. Led by the menacing Otis Hazelrigg (Charles Durning), they track Bubba to a field, where they murder him in cold blood while he’s disguised as a scarecrow. But their horror soon intensifies as they discover their mistake – Marylee survived, and the actual attacker was a neighbor’s dog. Bubba had actually saved her from the dog.
As the men wrestle with their guilt in secret, they begin to die one by one under mysterious circumstances. The supernatural atmosphere builds, hinting that Bubba may be exacting revenge from beyond the grave. But Otis is convinced that Bubba’s mother is responsible. In a shocking turn, he breaks into her house, threatening her until she suffers a fatal heart attack. Yet even with her gone, the deaths persist.
Charles Durning’s portrayal of Otis is a masterclass in evil. His character loathed Bubba simply for being different, and even after learning the truth about Marylee’s attack, he justifies Bubba’s murder by assuming he would have eventually harmed a child. While his companions are consumed by guilt, Otis lives on, seemingly without conscience. But he ultimately gets his comeuppance in a shocking finale.
“Dark Night of the Scarecrow” oozes with an ‘80s atmosphere, echoing classics like “Friday the 13th” and “The Town That Dreaded Sundown.” Though less violent than those films, its supernatural hints will have you on edge. It’s not just a scary movie—it’s a gripping exploration of guilt, vengeance, and the horrors that can haunt a small town.
DARK NIGHT OF THE SCARECROW 2
When Chris Rhymer and her young son Jeremy are forced to relocate to a small rural community, they have no idea of the past terror that their presence re-awakens.
Forty-one years. That’s how long it took writer J.D. Feigelson to follow up on the success of his 1981 cult classic, “Dark Night of the Scarecrow.” The anticipation was palpable. The excitement, however, was short-lived. With Feigelson taking on double duty as both writer and director for the sequel (Frank De Felitta directed the original), the result is nothing short of catastrophic. “Dark Night of the Scarecrow 2” is, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the most mind-bogglingly terrible films you’ll ever have the misfortune of watching.
We’ve all endured our fair share of cinematic stinkers – movies that leave us scratching our heads and wondering how they ever made it to the screen. But this… this is something different. This film is so astonishingly bad, so cringe-worthily inept, that you’ll find yourself wishing for Bubba to leap from the TV and put you out of your misery so that you can forget you ever witnessed it.
The “story” – and I use that term loosely – centers around Chris Rhymer (Amber Wedding) and her son Jeremy (Aiden Shurr), who relocate to the same small town where the events of the first film unfolded decades prior. Chris is in witness protection, having testified against a powerful crime lord, Harold Vance (Tim Gooch), and is desperate to start anew. But when Jeremy falls under the influence of their neighbor, Aunt Hildie (Carol Dines), obsessed with contacting Bubba’s spirit through Jeremy, and Vance is released from prison, Chris’s past and present collide in a way that threatens to destroy everything.
The title “Dark Night of the Scarecrow 2” is a brazen lie. The film has almost nothing to do with Bubba and instead focuses on Chris and her son. And that would be fine if the execution weren’t so mind-numbingly terrible. The acting is wooden, the writing cringe-worthy, the direction clumsy, and the technical aspects laughably amateurish. Scenes play out with the camera struggling to keep up with the actors, who sometimes wander out of frame before the cameraman can react. It’s the cinematic equivalent of a train wreck you can’t look away from, no matter how much you want to.
As a reviewer, I always strive to find the silver lining, no matter how clouded the film may be. But “Dark Night of the Scarecrow 2” defies all attempts at positivity. There’s not a single aspect – not one – that warrants praise. It’s a masterclass in how not to make a movie, a checklist of everything that can go wrong on set and in post-production.
Where the original subtly hinted at the supernatural, the sequel eschews any semblance of finesse, instead relying on a mechanical Bubba head with glowing digital eyes in a pathetic attempt to terrify. It’s a fitting metaphor for the film as a whole: a hollow shell of its former self, cobbled together with cheap parts and a dead battery.
I could dissect the myriad ways “Dark Night of the Scarecrow 2” fails, but I won’t subject you to that. Instead, please do yourself a favor: watch the original and savor its low-budget charm and effective chills. And let this sequel remain the cautionary tale that it is – a reminder that sometimes, it’s better to leave well enough alone.
Available in an Ultimate Collector’s Edition Double Feature on 4K Ultra HD™ & Blu-ray™ September 10
3.4k
20k
1.5k
1.3k