WasAnnon Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Juana what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Kayden This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

ben hibburd Wow...I'm utterly speechless, I don't even know where to begin with this review. Ben Wheatley's metaphysical art house masterpiece is a raw, intense, surreal visual feast for the eyes. A Field in England is a what I consider to be a pure cinematic experience. Set during the 17th century English civil war four world weary deserters come across an alchemist (played with menacing gusto by Michael Smiley) who's looking for buried treasure in a field that may or may not have supernatural powers. I'm not going to talk much about the plot, firstly because this film works better going in fresh, and secondly it's completely irrelevant to what the film is truly about.Ben Wheatley is an incredibly divisive director, you either love or hate his work and this might be his most divisive material yet. As someone who's a big fan of his work this film was everything I could've hoped for. I'm not someone whose main focus on a film is the plot, film in my opinion is first and foremost a visual medium, and therefore the first thing I look for is how good is the visual experience. Most films are 'pretty' to look at, which is fine, but then there are those rare films where the visual storytelling is so powerful it evokes emotions in you. This film had that through it's entire run-time, I never took my eyes off the screen. I was transfixed by this incredible piece of work. (the last time I've been physically moved by film/TV was the atomic bomb episode of Twin Peaks) It's not something that happens often, so when it does it's a testament to how effective the film was.Whilst i'm on the subject of Lynch this film seemed like it was heavily influenced by Lynch's early works such-as Eraserhead. There's one scene in particular, a three minute tracking shot of a man walking out of a tent in slow motion, that was hauntingly beautiful whilst being deeply unsettling and that's the best way to summarise this film. The film is also accompanied by Jim Williams score, which is one of the most impressive, atmospheric scores I've heard in a very long time.The screenplay is expertly written by Wheatley's wife and long time collaborator Amy Jump. It's a film that works on multiple levels depending on what you take away from the film. It's a story that can be easily explained, essentially the characters take mushrooms and go on a bad trip, which works on a surface level. However there's deeper symbolism and metaphors to be found, are the characters in purgatory? Are they going through the nine circles of hell, as they take on 'the Devil' as Smiley's character is constantly referred to as being. It's a film that allows you to take any explanation you want based on the experience you have with the film.A Field in England is a provocative surrealist masterpiece, that solidifies Wheatley as one of the most impressive, creatively bold directors working in cinema today!

nlamalindblom A Field in England is Directed by Ben Wheatley and is about four deserters in the English Civil War being forced to look for a treasure in a field by an alchemist.Ben Wheatley's Movies have always been out there and strange and A Field in England is not any different. The film manages transport us to the English Civil War with authentic dialogue and monochrome cinematography that is beautiful and really adds to film's psychedelic atmosphere. The acting is great as they all manage to dig into their character's insanity. The sound editing/mixing is very unique and is realistic with explosions and gunshots being really loud and certain sequences having a really unique sound that I've only heard in this film, the soundtrack also is really good and fits the movie.However the film's main problem is its execution. I don't think the film is meaningless unlike a lot of other people, I just think that a lot of the scenes have no meaning. The film has a central theme but it doesn't use these strange sequences to expand on it, they just make the movie weirder and make it feel more pretentious (plus there are a lot of these scenes in the movie so it makes it a bigger problem), also some of the dialogue at the end of the movie is kind of meaningless and just sounds philosophical for no reason.Overall, the movie is a strange and unique experience, but it could've used its strangeness the further its themes 6/10

r_massey I couldn't make it through the first half of the film.Even after 30 minutes I was wondering whether it was worth carrying on towards the end.With most movies, I'll watch until the end credits roll, even when the film is bad or average, just so I can form a full opinion.With "A Field In England", however, the novelty and enjoyment wears off quite quickly due to the very slow pace and it's hard to see the kind of direction this film wanted to go in. Having turned off the movie halfway through and watched , I had to look up the plot summary to see what I had missed, which, in the end was just a very ambiguous finale.I'm glad I didn't force myself to sit through the whole runtime but also disappointed that I couldn't seem to pluck anymore enjoyment from the film and didn't have reason to watch to the very end.Sure, "A Field In England" may have a hidden subtext or meaning, but it's way too buried for anyone to see and extrapolate how it would come to fruition in a way that's purposeful and makes sense.

paul2001sw-1 'A Field in England' is exactly the film it tells you it's going to be: set entirely within said field, it tells the story of a group of soldiers from the English Civil War going mad from a combination of (the 17th century version of) shell-shock, their own religious beliefs, and an unhealthy dose of magic mushrooms. It's brilliantly acted, imaginatively shot and scripted, and yet, having watched it, I find it very hard to say what it's actually about. Stylistically, and atmospherically, it's coherent; yet its artistic success is, apparently intentionally, not supported by logic. I think it does what it sets out to do; but what exactly that is, it's harder to say.