Continue with Google
>
A Field in England Reviews
Definitely not a movie for everyone but if you enjoy something different give it a go. It's beautiful shot, funny,sad, silly and unnerving.
Beautifully crafted and written, great acting. Haunting and confusing. Funny and scary. It's an intimate theater piece so don't expect a (boring) epic Hollywood story.
There is no such thing as THE worst movie ever. There are plenty of movies that sit at the very bottom of the scale and could not be worse. This is one of them. Nothing happens. I mean NOTHING. Zero stars.
Completely bizarre film in which four men stumble around in a field during the English Civil War. There's nothing quite like it!
This was a wild trip, full of gorgeous cinematography, fantastic acting, and a thrilling plot. At times it was confusing, but it all came together in one glorious finale. The underlying theme of magic and the occult was a lovely addition, giving the whole film a dark, mysterious feeling. I highly enjoyed it, and it's been on my mind ever since. At times the editing can be a bit much, and some questions weren't answered, but overall a great movie.
While it may have a name you're more likely to find on the cover of a Victorian novel than on a poster for a film containing mass hallucinogenic consumption, A Field In England is a surprisingly complex narrative with some unsurprisingly striking visuals. We've seen plenty of films which have depicted the English Civil War over the years, but usually those films focus on the battles themselves and their consequences. A Field In England is more about power; specifically, the abuse of it. We have a band of men who couldn't be more different, being forced together by a tyrannical alchemist who demands they help him look for treasure. Through a series of increasingly chaotic events, attitudes and allegiances will change, and by the time its over most of those involved have experienced their own character arc. It does hammer its points in very heavily, and its highly stylised nature renders it almost impenetrable to the average moviegoer. Few people would be willing to pay cinema prices to see a story told in this manner. It's definitely a film you admire more than you enjoy, if you even like it at all, but it demonstrates that a visual medium is the perfect way to tell a story like this, exposing the flaws of the characters by showing them to us rather than telling us about them. Not a pleasant watch, or a film you'd hurry back to, but a fascinating experience nonetheless.
Beautifully shot, and confusing.
This is a slow paced and rather dialogue heavy film - it certainly has an arty 'feel' to it but I thought it was quite interesting, with some decent characterisation and it is somewhat thought provoking. The desolation of the setting is well put across and the fact its in black and white helps with this. I thought it was interesting that Whitehead (one of the main characters) was somewhat hesitant to follow the new orders he was given - his apprehension felt somehow admirable. I liked the use of doom laden music and I'd advise that the last quarter of this film is particularly surreal/'trippy' - indeed it features strobing effects, which are mentioned in a text warning before the film starts, so be aware of that if you suffer from the relevant form of epilepsy or similar, as you may be best avoiding this film. This certainly isn't an all action war based film but it is certainly a worthwhile watch regardless, just don't expect too much to happen too quickly.
I checked out this movie with the understanding that it was meant to be some kind of subversive psychological horror. It turned out that the so-called "psychological horror" must refer to this one scene with rapidly flashing psychedelic images, and I tell you what, you don't have to be an epileptic to find such staccato assaults on the eyeballs uncomfortable. As cinema experiences go, this one is "interesting" rather than *interesting*.
Why!?!? I did manage to finish the movie but really did not want to. The movie was really slow and dull. The way the editing was done was a bit jarring. Really seems as though they were trying to go for the art movie. So don't watch unless you like that type of movie.
A multi colour hued through the looking glass of war, gnosticism, and the search for deeper truths. The film is a metaphor for alchemy and science battling amongst one and another. It's presented in a civil war in colonial Britain. The setup is rather simple but adding hallucinogens into the mix never harmed anybody, add a mysterious alchemist and a man of science, several fools to do the bidding and the search for philosophers gold. The cinematography is absolutely on point with some wide angle lens shots conveying a sense of claustrophobia in open spaces, whilst juxtaposed with the inner space of reality been renderer bent and out of shape by the fungi that surrounds the field itself. It's a feast for the senses and has an excellent pace and payoff largely due to the minimalist score, direction, and astounding acting.
Having been interested in this period of history for so many years, I was interested to see how a film maker would interpret it. Good interpretations have been few and far between. In particular, it was good to see that 21st century values were not consciously overlaid on a 17th century scenario. The same applied to Robert Eggers' 'The Witch' made around the same time. This era is interesting enough without embellishment. If you like your 'universe' explained and presented on a plate, something like Game of Thrones would be a better option. If you like to be asked questions, then give this a whirl. Reece Shearsmith is superb. In fact all the actors make us believe they are in the field with them. That's the secret of succeeding in low budget movie making. Make us believe in the story and we are with you. Well done Ben Wheatley Amy Jump and team.
A FIELD IN ENGLAND is more like an palate-adjusting apéritif to assuage the viewer's reticence at the sensory-over-story approach to filmmaking that director Ben Wheatley gleefully and unapologetically indulges. It's a film that you may loathe – or just don't even comprehend – the first time you see it. If this was your experience and it's been a year or more since your viewing, I strongly suggest you give it another chance, (and make sure you have the subtitles on; I don't care how fluent or familiar you are in the English language, since the screenplay has zero interest in hold your hand or repeating itself). The most impressive aspect of the film, (besides Reece Shearsmith's expected brilliance as an actor with such incredible range), might be the technical achievements for a project with such a modest budget. The way Wheatley is able to genuinely capture the feeling of an actual War being fought just off-screen is remarkable when you start to realize that almost every non-close-up shot is basically a massive field that is completely deserted from all signs of life – save for our handful of characters, endless acres of neglected terrain, and the psychedelic fungi that serves as its own sort of character that possesses more influence and agency than any firearm-wielding soldier. As referenced earlier, Wheatley is a director who demurs from any semblance of mainstream filmmaking. His ability to turn potential limitations into the most interesting aspects of his films is reason enough to merit a second, third, or umpteenth viewing. From the gorgeous black & white cinematography that makes you question how & why technicolor movies became the dominant standard, to the anachronistic sound design and score that is constantly fluctuating between time-period-accurate to atonal digitized staccatos, down to the third act's heavily modulated mixing – the final product easily draws a comparison to a film like "Eraserhead," which at the time of its release signaled the arrival of David Lynch, (who has only become one of the greatest directors to ever live…) I'm not certain that Wheatley has earned such high praise (yet), but it's impossible to deny that so far his trajectory (as of 2021) is soaring in the right direction, (no pun intended).
‘A Field in England' Is a Stunning and Horrifying Trip
Set during the English Civil War, a group of deserters are captured by an alchemist and forced to locate stolen alchemical secrets that he believes have been buried in a field. Having feasted on the mushroom's growing there, the world becomes increasingly influenced by what could be hallucinations or what could be magic. Bizarre and trippy (quite literally, given the magic mushroom's relevance to the plot), this is one of the more interesting horror films I've seen. Filmed in black and white (likely for budget reasons), this invokes the previous cinematic age to the film's benefit. A Field in England manages to make a single location and a small number of actors work extremely well. No big budget horror or traditional scares for those into that sort of thing, but if you want a bit of a change from the usual, you won't feel you've wasted your 1.5 hours.
Fantastic, spellbinding and hallucinatory. Like marathoning Fairport Convention and The Watersons while feasting on psilocybin. A labyrinthine but minimalist narrative big on folk atmosphere, abstract alchemical/magical references, and bizarre mystical poeticisms. Absolutely loved it. Probably not for the impatient.
What a confusing mess.