Rating: 
Summary: Creepy
Review: This movie is extremely cheesy, but who cares it was entertaining. A classic horror film. It is very suspensful. Not that good acting though by the actor who plays Isac. The movie starts off very exciting. This is a good movie to watch with some friends and just chill.
Rating: 
Summary: So Unbelieveably Bad
Review: This is corny as hell. Pardon the pun. Who the hell could call this a great, scary horror film and still keep a straight face when they call themselves horror fans?. This is stomach churning drivel. So god awful is it, that you just wonder what Stephen King thought when he saw this monstrosity. The acting is of high disgust caliber. The effects and make-up are cheesy and half cocked. The score was lame and the kids were terrible. One of the worst of all time. If you think this is great, you must be one of the brainwashed kids. This film should never of been made.
Rating: 
Summary: Corny But Fun.
Review: Children of the Corn, I shall freely admit, will not win any oscars.But like all Grade-B films, it is not meant to. It is designed for people who like to sit back, munch on chicken wings, and enjoy themselves. With that in mind, I openly admit liking the movie. Yes, its missing footage should be added back in, and yes, its "climatic" confrontation scene involves one of the most corniest (get it, corniest? Corny? Children of the Corn? I gotta million of 'em!) speeches imaginable, but who cares. It's fun!!!
Rating:
Summary: Back to the '80s
Review: Before watching this movie, remember you are going to see an adaptation from a few-pages-long story by Stephen King, performed during the late eighties, when horror movies were the main attraction to young teenagers.
The movie is ridiculous, even if the story is pretty interesting. There are few moments of suspance, but actors aren't really there. It's a kind of a B-movie, with a solid background and incredibly low quality effects.
Anyway, it's interesting to see and to have, as the sign of a very different age.
The DVD is quite well mastered. Images are very noisy because of film grain, but otherwise consistent. Contrast is quite low, and this makes colours a bit washed out.
The sound is a multichannel remix from Chase, encoded in DD 5.1. Anyway dialogues are quite dated and so are the effects. Basses are too boomy and the soundfield collapses too often into the center channel.
The extras are very limited: there's a small booklet and a trailer. That's it.
Rating: 
Summary: A gory and scary movie.
Review: This movie is good. it's scary. I've seen some of it on tv.
It's bloody. Don't listen to the bad reviews. Listen to the good ones like mine. Buy the DVD. I own it.
Rating:
Summary: Silly attempt at horror
Review: Being a fan of Stephen King's works, I was willing to give this movie a try. I was severely letdown. This ranks as one of the worst horror movies I've ever seen. The story begins as all the kids in the town of Gatlin murder all the adults. Then two adults stumble across the town and soon find themselves stalked by the sickle-toting children. I found the movie impossible to be believe. This movie is just not scary. I can't seem to figure how Linda Hamilton got through this movie with a straight face. I read in Stephen King's biography that Stephen King declared this one of the worst movies ever made. Enough said.
Rating:
Summary: Oh my God!!
Review: Don't be fooled by the previous reviews which tell you how great this movie is. Bad acting, no horror, bad effects. I played this DVD for my friends and now they won't talk to me. Stay away from it...
Rating:
Summary: Ugh.. a dissapointment
Review: Maybe I'm a little biased after reading the excellent King short story upon which this movie is based... or maybe this movie just really sucks. Whichever, by the goofy climax of this wanna-be horror flick, I was feeling more than a little let down. Why is it that so many King adaptations fail so miserably? I can understand the difficulty in translating King's superlative prose into a feature film, but why must the acting be so bad. And why why why does the creepy atmosphere of the story have to be completely destroyed? I'll give you an example: in King's writing, the great creature at the end (He Who Walks Behind the Rows) is a genuinely frightening entity (I won't give away too much). However, in the film, this beast is portrayed as a stupid, hokey "force" (probably due to budget restrictions)... I dunno.. maybe I'm taking it all a little too seriously, and if I am I apologize. Still, I'd reccomend seeing the film before you read the story. That way can enjoy it's senseless violence without feeling a longing for King's true ability.
Rating:
Summary: One of the scariest - ever!
Review: One word for COC? Creepy! Almost 20 years later this movie is still terrifying. The premise is absolutely terrifying. Children taking over a community in some warped religious backdrop. But why is it so scary? That kid who plays Malachai! Pure evil. Even Christopher Walken would shudder!
Rating:
Summary: He Who Watches This Will Smile
Review: Don't be discouraged by bad reviews of this movie adapted from an original story by Stephen King in NightShift.In fact, grab some popcorn and watch this wonderful gem of a movie.Children of the Corn will grab you from the beginning with an easy going sense of small town story. I was easily caught up in the two adult characters and their journey into this Nebraska town.Small surprises, funny lines, and interesting (yet oddly strange) villains create a memorable movie. It's not a movie to analyze, just a fun horror flick without much gratuitous nudity or language--refreshing these days.
| 
