Customer Reviews

Children of the Corn [UMD for PSP]

5 star:		(49)
4 star:		(27)
3 star:		(26)
2 star:		(14)
1 star:		(20)

 

 

So how did such a mediocre film warrant six sequels (here's a hint...it's all about the money)? There's the original. Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice (1993), Children of the Corn III (1995), Children of the Corn IV: The Gathering (1996), Children of the Corn V: Fields of Terror (1998), Children of the Corn 666: Isaac's Return (1999), and Children of the Corn: Revelation (2001)...that's a lot of corn, or as the Native Americans call it, maize...I've seen the original, but not the subsequent sequels...my gut instinct tells me to avoid them. Children of the Corn, aka Stephen King's Children of the Corn (1984), directed by Fritz Kiersch (Tuff Turf, Gor) features a solid cast including Peter Horton ("thirtysomething") and Linda Hamilton (Terminator 2: Judgment Day). Also appearing is R.G. Armstrong (Dick Tracy), Courtney Gains (Colors, The 'burbs) and John Franklin, who appeared 1991 film The Addams Family, along with its' 1993 sequel, as the very hairy Cousin Itt.

The film, which primarily takes place in the small farming town of Gatlin, Nebraska, begins with a flashback, relating a particularly gruesome incident in where the children depopulate the town of nearly all adults through a good old fashion bloodbath. Fast forward three years to the present, and we have Burton (Horton) and his girlfriend Vicky (Hamilton) traveling through the Midwest as Burton has recently graduated from med school, and has been offered an internship somewhere...but that's neither here nor there as the pair get lost, have an accident, and soon find themselves looking for aid in Gatlin...but guess what? Gatlin appears all but deserted...except for the children, who've formed some kind of weird cult, led by the incredibly creepy man-child Isaac (Franklin). Initially their idolatry seems to be centered on the corn, but later we learn it's not so much the corn as what lurks under the corn. Burton and Vicky soon find themselves in a world of trouble, as the corn is thirsting for holy sacrifices, and they're at the top of the list (I wouldn't mind initiating a religious ceremony with that Linda Hamilton...that is the soft and sexy Linda from the original Terminator movie, not the bony and intensely scary Linda from T2: Judgment Day)...

The film is based on a Stephen King short story taken from his book Night Shift, which I've never read, but I have read a number of his other books, many of which were later adapted to film, with varying degrees of success...anyone else besides me sit through Maximum Overdrive? Okay, Children of the Corn isn't as bad as that was, but it is lacking something...it's not the acting...Horton, whom I despise for no other reason than he was on that TV show `thirtysomething' was actually pretty good. As far as Linda Hamilton, well, I think she's a good actress, provided she's given something to work with, and that wasn't the case here. The real fun is watching the performances of Franklin and Gains, as Isaac and Malachai, respectively. Franklin is extremely disconcerting as the leader of the group, mainly because his appearance is that of a child, but a closer look would make you think twice as his face and voice seem to indicate some much older. Turns out Franklin, who suffered from some sort of hormone deficiency, was actually much older, like 23 at the time of the film's release. As far as Gains, he presents the most intense performance as Isaac's enforcer and right hand man, but I felt like he got into it just a little too much (in the featurette Gains speaks of his craft and how he brought his character to the screen...I do appreciate it when actors give to the screen, but I think Gains took his modest role a bit too seriously, trying to make more of it than it was...but since the production in general was pretty bland, this overacting wasn't necessarily unwelcome). These two guys come off really good as the antagonists, mainly because they're so completely annoying I wanted to beat them both to a pulp (wait for the scene when Malachai is walking down the center of the street calling for Burton to come out, yelling `Outlander!"...you'll understand what I mean by annoying). As far as the direction, I have no real complaints, as Kiersch seems capable...in the featurette he speaks a lot of what he was trying to accomplish with regards to the sense of direction, and in some areas I think he met his goal, but others I think his aspirations extended beyond his capabilities. So what's the problem with the film? It's the story...well, not the original story, but the adaptation of the story. As I said, I'm familiar with many of King's works, and I know he takes a lot of time to craft his tales, utilizing detail like it was going out of style. I think one of the things that makes his story so popular is his ability to paint a visual using words...and he also seems to do this in terms that are accessible to an extremely wide audience. And I think this is a main factor that ends up hurting many of the films that are adapted from his novels...they lack the focus on what's important to the story. I think this is why we are seeing his more recent works produced as television mini-series...because more time can be spent developing the story and presenting the details, in my opinion.

The Divimax edition, released by Anchor Bay Entertainment features a really sharp looking wide screen (1.85:1) print, enhanced for 16 X 9 TV's, and the audio is exceptionally clear and crisp. Special features include a new 39 minute documentary titled Harvesting Horror, an audio commentary by the director, the producer, actors Franklin and Gains, trailer, poster and still gallery, screenplay, storyboard art, title sequence art, and a mini reproduction of poster for the film inside the DVD case.

Cookieman108

"Children of the Corn" is the 1984 adaptation of a Stephen King tale that turns children into monsters. Following in the tradition of "The Bad Seed" and "Village of the Damned," "Children of the Corn" sets out to shatter our notion that childhood is a time of innocence. The opening scene grabs us right away. In Gatlin, Nebraska, a small farming community, the good citizens follow church on Sunday with breakfast at the local coffee shop. One morning, however, the town's children rise up against the adults, poisoning their coffee and slashing their throats in a violent, horrifying sequence. Skip ahead three years. Burt and Vicky (Peter Horton, Linda Hamilton) have a bad accident outside Gatlin and walk to town, searching for help. But they find no adults. Eventually, they discover that the children of Gatlin have formed a religious cult around an evil entity, "He Who Walks Behind the Rows." Though far from a classic, this film has an enormous following and has inspired six sequels, five released directly to DVD. Its appeal lies partly in the performances of the two young leads. John Franklin plays Isaac, the nine-year-old prophet who organized the cult, and Courtney Gains portrays the odd-looking and unsettling Malachai. Bonus extras include the featurette, "Welcome to Gatlin: The Sight and Sounds of Children Of the Corn;" an interview with Linda Hamilton; audio commentary by director Fritz Kiersch and actors John Franklin and Courtney Gains; and the documentary "Harvesting Horror: Children of the Corn."

I just bought this film around last Halloween. I'd never seen 1984's "Children Of The Corn," and as a lover of Old School horror, I was anxious to watch it. I've seen horror films much, much gorier than this, but you really don't need a lot of it to have yourself a good horror flick. Sometimes just the power of suggestion is enough to scare the heck out of you. This film shows you just the right amount of both and it is an enjoyable movie for the 80's horror fans. It may be a bit too tame for the hardcore horror fans, but it's a pretty good film based on Stephen King's novel.

Welcome to the sleepy town of Gatlin, Nebraska......maybe a little too sleepy.....like a dead sleepy. Indeed the town is ghostlike, save an evil religious cult of kids who have brutally slaughtered all the adults and left deranged satanic paintings and trails of cornhusks all over town. Cornhusks? Yes, cornhusks. This violent group of evil holds their main base in a huge cornfield in the lazy Nebraska flatlands. Lead by Isaac (John Franklin), a preacher who spreads the word of "He who walks behind the rows," and Malachai (Courtney Gains), Isaac's pawn who carries out the deity's wishes in the most gruesome of ways, the cult has taken Gatlin as their own and goes out to "spill blood" of any "outlanders." Oh yes, and that includes any members of the cult who decide to betray the corn deity. But this cult is strictly for youthful beings. According to "He who walks behind the rows": "And a child shall lead them."

Vicky (Linda Hamilton) and Burton (Peter Horton), are two unfortunate adults who have traveled to this pitiful Nebraska town, as Burton is preparing for a job as a doctor. After getting caught in a horrible accident on the vacant road near the corn, the two decide to venture into Gatlin to seek help. They quickly find that people keep a little too much to themselves in Gatlin and all they find are shops littered with the sacrilegious corn creations and a bunch of strange youngsters wielding blades. The only bright spot they find is two little kids who have not yet been sucked in to the beliefs of the cult; Job (Robby Kiger) and his psychic-drawing sister Sarah (Anne Marie McEvoy). Together, the four of them work up a plan to escape from the horrible corn cult members and find a way to banish the evil deity from the cornfield. Can you say, "burning stubble?" But it won't be easy. Isaac's preaching easily contaminates the minds of those around him, and Malachai's thirst for slashing and blood dominates his every waking hour. It's a powerfully evil combination that makes a cult of kids a true hellish nightmare.

Personally, I thought the overall acting was mediocre at best when I first viewed "Children Of The Corn." After seeing it a few times more since, I've narrowed it down to two people. Linda Hamilton's acting as Vicky can be downright annoying with her persistent "Can we leave now?" "I don't think this is a road," and "Just tell me where we are." And that birthday song she sings for Burton at the start of the movie makes me grit my teeth with pain. Her acting could have been a lot better if she put a bit more feeling into her lines. It just seemed flat to me somehow. I didn't think Peter Horton as Burton was too bad, although his mocking of the religious speeches on his car radio was less than amusing. His acting was a little flat at times too, but not as bad as Hamilton's. He has an earnestness about him during the more intense scenes when he's confronting the cult of kids, trying to get Sarah to talk to him, and working with Job to cast away the evil deity. It comes across as fairly genuine and he actually sucked me into his character. John Franklin was incredible as Isaac! His eyes are dark and evil and he can do a mean twisted smirk. When he preaches, he puts that umph behind every word; demanding.....earnest.....insistent.....just like a true fire and brimstone preacher desperately trying to get his point across. Courtney Gains as Malachai was probably my favorite though. That guy was just downright disturbing with his evil, narrowed eyes, devilish grin and warped scowl. His voice is seething, intense and loud, as if stretching every vocal chord in his throat. The sight of him with a blade was unnerving. The little kids, Job and Sarah were fairly well cast. They really capture the youth and innocence, not to mention normality that used to be in Gatlin, and really help contrast this with the evil that they are surrounded by. This bipolar tension makes the movie good.

The music fits this film so well. During attacks that are about to reach a climax, we hear a loud church-choir like group speak/sing in melodic, intense religious chants. It is absolutely awesome! And again there is the sweet tension there; the religious chants, which are supposed to be good, being sung while evil is being done. The main title theme features high haunting vocals from youth; no words, just notes. It really captures the intensity of the film that much more.

I guess I should get to my favorite scene, huh? Well, I actually have two. I'm a fan of horror, so I like intensity. Two of the most intense scenes come in the first part of the film when the cult slaughters the adults in the café and when Malachai sends Joseph to his maker while he's trying to escape. The attack wounds look pretty real and the makeup is very well done. The props are great too; all the cornhusks and evil drawings in the stores, and I also need to mention that dusty town of tumbleweeds, corn fields, old farms and empty rat infested stores. The feeling of isolation in a sleepy town with nothing but evil to come get you, just screams at you. Included in this film is also the original theatrical trailer. Nothing major, but still a kick to watch, and the narrator of it has a voice made for horror.

Well, I think I've said all I need to say about "Children Of The Corn." Whether you want a fairly disturbing scare, a nostalgic trip back to the 80's horror days, or just a plain old horror film for Halloween, grab up 1984's "Children Of The Corn."

There's just something about a movie that has children killing adults and running the show that freaks everyone out. I guess it plays on the same kind of fears that movies that have bee's taking over the world do. We treat children like they're a nusance, so they rise up against their aggressors, adults, and most likely succeed because adults discredit kids. Huh......
Well that's at least what I got from this movie.

When I watch a horror movie I look for three basic things. First, is the acting up to par and is the movie well made? Second, how are the special effects and the death sequences? Finally, does the end of the movie deliever and wrap things up?

In the first category this movie does really well. You can tell from the beginning that the movie was probably made on a very small budget, but the camera work, and everything else was done extremely well. The acting is also pretty good for such a low budget movie. Terminator girl does a terrific job, as well as all of the kids, especially the leader. Malaki, or the red-headed bully stumbles over his lines, but he does a half decent job. So yeah, the movie delievers here.

* Oh, something to watch for. When the main character is running away from the children who are chasing him, and calling him lap lander, or excuse me OUT-lander, he runs into the barn. It is dark in the barn and he "hits" his head on a beam. It's incredibly hilarious because you can sooooo tell, he fakes it.

Secondly, does the movie have decent special effects and death sequences? Yes and no. Yes because some of the special effects are pretty good, but there isn't that many of them, nor killing sequences. The kids go on a rampage in the beginning and then, that's pretty much it. There is a lot of suspense in the movie, which does creep you out, but no real need for crazy special effects. The special effects are okay. At the end they look pretty cheesy, but hey low-budget movie so what are you going to do?

Finally does the ending wrap the movie up? This movie certainly does. It takes all the elements of the story and wraps them up into a neat pacakage at the end. Like I said, the special effects are a little cheesy but alright. It's nothing you can't see coming, but it has some little twists which keep you watching.

So all in all, this is a pretty good movie. It's gotten a bad wrap for some reason, but there will always be a book versus movie battle for every book they turn into a movie. I never have read the book, so I can't throw my two cents in here. Anyway, it would be worth the buy at Walmart for 6.50, rather than renting it.

I would like to know if John Franklin (Issac) is still doing movies? I thought he was the only actor in this film to ACT. He was the only element in this film that actually made you want to watch. I know he did another CofC film...but has he done anything else.
The movie is good to watch with your girlfreind on the couch.

What is it about farm country? As we drive past the fields, we see nothing but green with the occasional rooftop or silo in the distance. What goes on deep in the fields? Who is out there? What is out there? Is that person or thing religious?

This is classic horror. The movie takes not just things we have looked out before, but things we have never really seen. We hear religious fundamentalist all the time on the TV and radio. We see corn fields often enough. But we never really think much about them. This story jumps into the imagination and makes the ordinary terrifying. This is a good story.

The movie takes the farm country and religious fundamentalism and wraps them together with a twist. A child, Isaac, gets visions, which tell him to create a new religion, killing all the adults. Further, no adults shall be suffered to live. His religion has some fundamentalist undertones, but also some bizarre rituals and ideas. Oddly enough, this movie doesn't actually insult religion, but seems to ask the question, "What if what they said was real?"

By no means is this movie worthy of an Oscar, but this movie was never intended to be. It was meant to thrill you a bit by showing you a slight twist to reality by playing with something we see every day. This is a must for horror fans.

This film actually begins quite well, although the little kid narrating it kind of made it lose the creepy feeling you had in the opening credits. The movie is actually fairly entertaining until after our two main characers enter the house of our youthful narrator and his sister. Up until this sour turn in events, it's a fairly noble adaption. And then the story is wrecked, from the, al I can think of is: "toned down" ending, tothe lame interpretation of "He who walks Behind The rows". Why do screenplay writers feel they must always change the master of horror's story around? Everytime they do it trashes what could've been a promising film. I've seen it in Dreamcatcher and The Tommyknockers, although this sucked already anyway. It also brings to mind: Why did they feel inclined to make a sequel? Hollywood sickens me sometimes.

I admit when I was six years old, this movie was a little creepy and made me think twice before passing a cornfield. Now, I look at it and wonder how I even made it past the second scene without falling asleep. The only tense scene in this movie is when Joseph is running through the cornfield. Other then that, it's a movie to watch when you're bored and having nothing better to do. It's not scary, and Isaac's ranting and raving can get on your nerves after awhile. If you want good horror, then read the short story by Stephen King.

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.

People give this movie a hard time because the special effects dont compete with the ones of today. The fact is though, is that this movies plot was original. It was not just another vampire, werewolf, slasher, etc. movie. It brought something new all together to the world of horror. As for the sequels, there a different story.