|
|
Cryptorchild
|
Posted: March 9, 2007 at 11:13am
I have a special place in my little heart for this movie. It was the first horror movie I ever saw, and I loved it the first time I saw it. I'd give it a 8.5/10.
|
Crispy
|
Posted: February 10, 2012 at 4:43pm
Like I've said numerous times before, it's amazing Children of the Corn has the legacy it has considering it was such a bad movie. As a testament to how bad it was, in the sequel-happy time of the '80s, it took filmmakers a whopping eight years before part two hit theaters.
Don't let the release date fool you, The Final Sacrifice begins about a week or so after the first movie. After Burt and Vicky tell their story to authorities, the police from nearby Hemingford investigate and discover the bodies of the slain Gatlin adults. With Isaac and Malachai both dead, they figure the rest of the children are harmless, merely misguided by a twisted leadership, and adopt them. Obviously, it's a media frenzy, and among the reporters is John Garrett and his son, Danny, who take up a room at Angela's inn, along with Micah, her adopted Gatlin child. Micah who He Who Walks Behind the Rows has chosen to replace the fallen Isaac. With a new-found direction, Micah reorganizes the kids and begins his preparations to thank the citizens of Hemingford for their hospitality, Gatlin style.
Children of the Corn II fits in quite nicely with the first movie; it's an incredibly unremarkable affair. While it wasn't a painful hour and a half, it's not one I'd be inclined to revisit either. It's just there, and given my poor review of the first film, you might think that this is a step in the right direction. However, while part two is a bit more consistent, there's no denying that the first Children stands head and shoulders above its sequel with both a tighter plot and in terms of suspense and characters. Children 1 was all highs and lows, Children 2 is a flatline. Pick your poison. And just for the sake of saying it, The Final Sacrifice is not only a stupid subtitle, it's not even relevant to this movie. They should have stuck with the original plan of Deadly Harvest.
And on top of that, there's some seriously cheesy deaths on display here. Sure, one guy gets his throat slit by a corn stalk somehow, but that's the good kind of cheesy. No, we've also got one elderly woman being thrown through a window, wheelchair and all, and another who gets crushed by her house; just as it's coming down the last few inches she yells "What a world!" and just manages to get her lower legs out from the foundation. Oh, and her name was "Ruby." And her sister, Mrs. "West" drops by demanding "Who dropped a house on my sister?!" And at least three other references. Sure, Wizard of Oz was a great movie, but let's calm down a bit here. With all that said, the voodoo doll kill was exceptionally nice.
As the new kids' new leader, Ryan Bollman doesn't come close the bar that John Franklin set. Between his voice and sharp facial features, he would have a hard time convincing people he wasn't a leader of an evil cult hiding from the world. On the other hand, Bollman appears to have been taken from a Marilyn Manson concert. As the troubled father and son duo, Terence Knox and Paul Sherrer were also on the wrong side of par. In truth, we got the best performances from the supporting characters, Ned Romero in particular doing a lot in a short time as a local Native American. John Bennes' Reverend character was also a lot of fun. And Christie Clark is....well, she's hot and doesn't hurt anything. What more can you want from this kind of movie?
At the end of the day, I think I liked Children of the Corn II a bit more than the first, but don't get it twisted, there's really nothing worth watching here either. 3.5/10.
|
benloveshorror
|
Posted: February 11, 2012 at 10:38pm
Isn't this an old review? Why is it showing up on the new reviews page?
|
Chad
|
Posted: February 11, 2012 at 10:48pm
It's a brand new review for an old movie.
|
|
