Clown in a Cornfield Swings Big but Misses the Mark for Modern YA Horror
- Travis Brown
- May 8
- 2 min read

We’ve long celebrated how YA horror has the ability to spark conversations and redefine the future of the genre. But let’s be honest—YA horror has always been part of the DNA of slashers. The small-town setup, the high school outcasts, and the looming terror stalking the youth—it’s all baked in. That said, Clown in a Cornfield, based on the popular novel by Adam Cesare, is a frustrating misfire that fails to do justice to either the book or the YA horror potential it’s built on.
Directed by Eli Craig (Tucker & Dale vs. Evil) and starring Katie Douglas as Quinn Maybrook, this adaptation follows the familiar beats: a teen girl moves to a new town with her father (Aaron Abrams), trying to escape some unknown trauma. She meets a quirky crew of misfit friends, and soon they’re all in the crosshairs of a killer clown named Friendo. But while the concept sounds ripe for a midnight slasher romp, the execution leaves a lot to be desired.
Let’s start with the central character, Quinn. Douglas shows flashes of range, but the writing gives her little room to develop. One moment she feels like a curious teenager, the next like a jaded adult. The inconsistency is jarring, and it hurts the emotional weight of her arc. This isn’t about her acting chops—it’s about the script doing her dirty. This character just doesn’t land.
Then there’s the town itself, which leans hard into outdated tropes. We get a semi-satirical sheriff, clunky small-town politics, and yes—some weirdly performative queer representation that feels more like a checkbox than a meaningful thread. Worse, the Black character is dispatched early in the film, as if we’re still clinging to those lazy genre conventions. If this is YA horror meant to inspire the next wave of filmmakers, it shouldn’t be stuck in the past.
The biggest disappointment is Friendo. As someone who lives for clown horror—from Pennywise to Art the Clown—I wanted to be into him. But Friendo never clicks. I won’t spoil why, but trust me: the reveal doesn’t help. It undermines everything the film could have built.
What does work? The kills. When the film goes full slasher, it’s gory, mean, and occasionally inventive. But we’ve seen that done better—and with more cohesion—in films like Terrifier, Fear Street, and even The Babysitter. This just doesn’t earn its place among them.
If YA horror is going to thrive on screen the way it has in books, we need stronger adaptation efforts. Look at what Netflix pulled off with Fear Street. That was a blueprint for how to honor source material while still delivering something cinematic and bold. Clown in a Cornfield feels like the opposite—lukewarm, uninspired, and slapped together without much thought for what made the book matter.
If this is what the fear of AI screenwriting looks like—worried that machines will replace passion—let me ask you this: how did this get made? Two and a half out of five. And that’s mostly for the gore. YA horror deserves better than this.
Score: 2.5/5
How much of the film's failure stems from the adaptation process - was it a poor Block Blast Game translation of the book's themes, or was the source material itself too difficult to adapt cinematically?