Titreenp
SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?
Whitech
It is not only a funny movie, but it allows a great amount of joy for anyone who watches it.
Nicole
I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.
Stephanie
There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes
Platypuschow
1984 was an amazing year for movies, being the nerd that I am I pay attention to my analytics and 1984 is the 3rd greatest movie year at time of writing.Being a huge horror fan the fact I haven't watched the Children Of The Corn movies is remarkable especially when you take into consideration how much I love Kings work and how I've seen every other adaptation of his books.Off the top of my head I've seen the remake (2009) and one of the later sequels and have to say (And I never say this) the remake is better. Being that this is the original cult classic I expected so much more but instead found a disjointed lifeless effort that failed to impress.I'm not saying it's bad, but its mediocre at best. If the cult classic original is of this quality I'm concerned what the long list of straight to vhs/dvd sequels are going to be like. Time will tell!One of the weaker Stephen King adaptations.The Good:Still has the Stephen King vibeConcept is strong enoughThe Bad:Far too shortWastes a good storyThings I Learnt From This Movie:Linda Hamilton cannot singFor a religious man Stephen King really craps on religionThe only thing more obnoxious than a religious person is a religious childKids are evil, been saying it for years
jacobjohntaylor1
This a great movie. It is one of the scariest movie I have seen. It is very scary. It has great story line. Great acting. It is scarier then The Shinning. It is one of scariest movie you will see. It is a great movie.
thelastblogontheleft
This was another re-watch for me and I said the same thing this time that I did after the first viewing: I just don't think kids are that scary. I know lots of movies try to pull of the whole "creepy kid" thing and it just doesn't do it for me.Ultimately, I think this movie starts off really strong and it gave me high hopes. The whole chaotic scene at the diner, with the kids watching as the adults are poisoned and murdered
awesome. I mean, they put a dude's hand through a meat slicer and that creepy music with the kids chanting is playing and you can see beady-eyed Isaac (played awesomely by John Franklin) peering through the window, very pleased at what's going on, and you think hell yeah, I am in for a fun ride.Then we cut to Burt (Peter Horton) and Vicky (Linda Hamilton), who are on their way to Burt's new physician job. They're driving along, cornrow after cornrow whizzing by, and BOOM, out lurches one of the children, half dead from these tiny cult members. It's an intense scene, with a closeup of the kid rolling under the tires, and you can almost feel their sense of panic and confusion. Again, hell yeah, we're on the right track here. We even get an awesome jump scare when Vicky drifts off in the car while waiting for Burt to return from looking for help.But then
I don't know, things get a little silly. They try to find a phone to no avail — the town is abandoned, with corn leaves strewn all over — what? Are the kids just constantly covered in corn leaves and accidentally leaving them places? Is it some kind of calling card?There's some transfer of power with Malachai (Courtney Gains), the brain of the operation — who is by far the scariest looking kid — insisting that Isaac be sacrificed. The whole thing is way too easy, the kids need NO convincing whatsoever, and then boom, Isaac is up on a cross. But He Who Walks Behind the Rows (admittedly a super creepy moniker, but not actually creepy in reality since it just kind of burrows its way under the dirt) is not very discerning, apparently, and takes Isaac despite his pleas. The special effects are shockingly, laughably bad. I want to say maybe it's charming — it was the mid-80's after all. Burt tries to talk some sense into the kids and tell them they're worshipping a false god (which is also VERY easy to do), and then Isaac comes back as a sort of zombie-Isaac and kills Malachai. Wheee!They gather the kids into a barn and realize they need to destroy the cornfield to stop the evil, and they figure the best way is to burn it all up. They do so, and there's a LEGIT SAD FACE IN THE SMOKE AS IT BURNS. I COULDN'T EVEN HANDLE IT WHAT? WHAT??Then everything is hunky dory and Burt and Vicky are leaving (with Sarah and Job in tow) and it's kind of implied that the kids are going to stay with them?? And then one of the evil kids is hiding in the car and attacks them but Burt just kind of annoyedly stops her and they're on their way. SO FREAKING WEIRD.I don't know, I wanted to like it — it's based on a Stephen King story after all — but I think the rest of the movie couldn't even try to compare to those first couple scenes. It has its few very brief moments but nothing else to really grab you. Womp.
Rainey Dawn
These are some of the brattiest and most terrifying "creepy kids" ever on film. IDK who is worse: Malachi or Issac? Issac is the (evil) reverend that started it all but it is Malachi that has the strongest lust for blood - murder or umm sacrifices "to He Who Walks Behind The Rows"" and will even defy Issac to kill.This film is a classic horror in it's own right. It's a part of the 60's through 80's horror classics that many of us grew up with. The film is downright terrifying at times. It's a supernatural horror film that has stood the test of time - quite a good one if you ask me.I've never read Stephen King's novel (technically short story) but even if I did I could not compare the film to the book - it's unfair. They have to make some changes sometimes in order to translate things to the screen and for time allotment. There are various reasons for the changes from book to film - so it's never fair to compare the two I don't think. Even when I read a book then see a film I rate the film as Hollywood entertainment and the book as a good or bad book separately.9/10