Children of the Corn

Rating:
Summary: A underrated but terrific horror movie.
Review: This 1984 cult supernatural horror classic from Stephen King and New World Pictures tells the terrifying story of a couple who drive into a town where a group of demon-worshiping children sacrifice adults to aplease a demon from hell.

Much-magligned but underappreciated film with a horrifying vision of youth against their elders, this is one of my favorite horror movies, check this one out and have fun.

Rating:
Summary: Violence against children?
Review: OK. It's silly. I still like this film for it's flaws. Linda Hamilton & Peter Horton are reliable as the adult leads, and I'm usually appalled by bad kid-actors, but there are so many of them that I had a good time. One kid actor, Anne-Marie McEvoy (as Sarah) was believable. This film starts out well, and really grabs you; after a while, the kids appear and make it a crazy exposition of silliness. The bland setting of Nebraska (actually, filmed in Iowa) adds to the initial interest. Credit must be given to director Fritz Kiersch for his great use of sets and creating a certain tension, and the music of Jonathan Elias (reminiscent of Jerry Goldsmith's THE OMEN) was effective. Still, there's no forgiving the performances of John Franklin (Isaac) and Courtney Gains (Malachi, who looks like a cross between Alfalfa & Eddie Haskell). They were so atrocious, but, mixed with all the other horrible kid-performances, it becomes a laff-fest. One kid, Amos (John Philbin), looks like a young Tom Cruise, and goes to his death with a toothy smile that's borderline corny (forgive the pun). The film is entertaining, as long as you don't take it seriously. It is based on a 15-page Stephen King story, but it kind of takes on a mystique of its own. The DVD version has a slight LBX which adds to some of the beautiful landscapes. Don't write this off; it's fun.

Rating:
Summary: Corny is the word
Review: Children of the Corn isn't a bad movie, but it is certainly not very scary. When I was young and this movie was new, my conception of the movie was wrapped in an aura of fright, but now that I have finally watched it, I don't know where that aura came from. The theme of the movie is nothing new, really, but it has real potential by its very nature. In Gatlin, Nebraska, there are virtually no adults; the children, led by the young and powerful Isaac with the help of head goon Malachai, murdered all of the adults in the name of religious mania. He Who Walks Behind the Rows made himself known to Isaac, and that is where all the trouble started three years earlier. Only two children are not active participants in the twisted religion of Gatlin children-Job and Sarah. Sara has the "gift of sight," oftentimes revealing future events in her crayon drawings. Now two strangers have come to town, having run over an already murdered youngster who had tried to escape through the corn fields. The fate of adults in town is not really a deep secret, but our heroes stumble around idiotically, wising up only when the children have made their move.

John Franklin gives an impressive performance as the young prophet Isaac, adding a real sense of realism this movie had to have in order to work. Courtney Gains plays his character Malachai very well, but unfortunately the "farm implement of death"-happy Malachai is one of the most annoying characters in the history of moviemaking. Our unsuspecting adult "interlopers" are OK but not outstanding; Peter Horton gives a credible yet unspectacular performance, and a pre-Terminator Linda Hamilton serves the necessary function of generating sympathy for the grown-ups. The children Job and Sarah are likeable, but the fact that Job serves as the film's de facto narrator gives a part of the story away fairly early on.

One is left with any number of questions after viewing the film. Since the murder of the town's adults took place three years prior to the arrival of the interlopers, why do even the youngest kids look exactly the same? Why do some seem too old to be children to start with? Who plants all this corn, anyway, and why wouldn't the ill-fated runaway choose to escape during winter, when the corn would presumably be much easier to navigate? Why are the two adults so slow-witted? The movie begs many more questions than it answers. One is also hard pressed to figure out what exactly He Who Walks Behind the Rows really is. The special effects witnessed at the concluding moments of the movie are unspectacular and unilluminating, and the conclusion does little more than simply bring the movie to a close. The adults' reactions to events are often inconsistent and seemingly peculiar, at times making the plot sound as weak as it sometimes is. I won't blame Stephen King for the faults of this film adaptation of his work, particularly given the fact that it takes great liberty with his original short story. This isn't a movie to avoid, but it basically serves as a diversion rather than a gripping horror story to the would-be viewer.

Rating:
Summary: very good short story/HORRIBLE attempt at film adaptation!!!
Review: I saw this film years ago and thought it was just about the stupidest and most dull 'horror' film I had ever seen!!! It is a mockery to the horror genre and plays more like a lame-o drama. The only time you might open your mouth is when you are taking a big relieving YAWN!!!! As with all of STEVEN KING film adaptations the BOOK is A GAZILLION times better than the film and there are VERY few folks out there who can adapt his books to film well... ZERO STARS it just stank... PHEWWW!!! If you read the story you will find hollywood changed the ending so we could have that oh-so heart warming feeling at the end... what a rip!!!...STEVE'S BOOKS ARE GREAT BUT LANDED IN THE WRONG HANDS SOME IDIOT GOES AND MAKES A MESS OF IT... just read the short story since it is MUCH more satisfying!!!!

Rating:
Summary: It happened everywhere in Gatlin that day...
Review: I saw this movie when it came out in '84 and have had some strange connection to it ever since.

What's to like? Well, what has always struck me is how well the children are adapted to the surroundings. I actually BELIEVE that these children lived in Gatlin "before" the filming of the movie. They seem very at home and the small town feel is somehow legitimate. The sound is very good for an older flick, being given the 5.1 treatment, and the score itself is practially worth seeing the movie for... I just love that chanting "Omen-ish" score, always have. The transfer I'd say is above average, though in places it falters a bit, there is also a handsome insert book that comes with it which is unusual for a rather lowbudget movie. I really like all the leads here, specifically the look on young Sarah's face when "Vickie" is taken out to the clearing, she honestly looks to be in fear, I almost feel sorry for the young actress.

What's to hate? Well, aside from the odd smalltown feel there really aren't many chills from a horror movie standpoint. Also, I've never really liked the end, often turning it off b4 the poor CG ending, but hey, this is '84 afterall.

If you have a few dollars and are looking for a somewhat surreal look at small town life, you could do worse than giving Children Of The Corn a look.

Rating:
Summary: This is horror?
Review: I recently read a review by hucklecat03 on this movie. I have to say it made me laugh when he says that "you'll be more entertained by eating corn that watching Children of the Corn". It made me laugh because he is SO RIGHT. This movie is not scary and it's not good. As a fan of Stephen King I have to say I was extremely disappointed at this laughable attempt for a frightfest. I'm just wondering how a bunch of young punks can take over a whole town. I just thought the movie was stupid, plain and simple. don't waste your time, effort or money watching this movie. This movie is actually horror if you put the two words together that make the word horrible. It's HORROR BULL.

Rating:
Summary: Can I Give This Zero Stars?!!!
Review: What a pitiful, feeble attempt to make a horror movie. Where is the horror in this film? Maniacal children sacrificing there own to a demon in the cornfield? HA!! HA!! I laugh at that.

A couple gets lost along the cornfield. While looking at the map they strike a child with their car. They search for help and find out the child was already mangled when they hit him. Peter Horton plays the man(I forget his name) and Linda Hamilton(forget her name too, as the whole movie is forgettable)plays the woman. They meet these two young children who aren't like the others. They let the copule know what is going on. Upon finding this "vital" information out, they devise a plan to burn down the corn field. Let's hear it for brilliance!!

The actors give laughable performances, there is no climax, there is no story and there is no point in watching this film. I thought this was a horror film. Where's the scare? Where's the blood? Where's the fright? If you are a horror fan, such as I, please, please stay away from this monstrosity. You'll be entertained more by eating corn then watching Children of the Corn.

Rating:
Summary: A mistake from begging to end
Review: ...This movie is such a waste of time, the story presented ...stinks, the gore is pathetic, the acting looks like the they killed and then resurected bad TV comercial Actors, and for the most part every aspect of this movie stinks... To make matters worse this spawned 5-6 sequels. ARGH!!

LEts start with the story. A young couple on vacation get lost on a side road along a corn field, they accidentally hit a kid along the way, only to find out he was already dead. They take him to the nearest town, which is deserted and soon are attacked by fanatic cultist that are kids ranging from Infacy all the way to 17 (at 18 you must enter the corn). They think God lives in the corn (but the average movie goer already knows it's a demon) and thus we set the setting for a complete waste of time.

It gets worse. This was based of a truely disturbing, yet highly entertaing short story by Stephen King. This is yet another piece of work completely ruined by Hollywood. Don't rent or buy this, it's not even worth a penny.

Rating:
Summary: The best movie ever made!
Review: This movie is the best.This is one of King's best stories.I recommend this movie to every one who likes grusome films.The actors fit their parts.If you want a great movie to watch one night,then Children of the Corn is that movie.

Rating:
Summary: This Movie Rules
Review: Children of The Corn is probably one of my favorite films based on Stephen King books. It has everything we'd expect from a great novel turned into a better film and it didn't need visual effects. I recommend this to any fan of Stephen King.