Watch Children of the Corn For Free

Good movie but grossly overrated

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

This movie just fell flat. Although, it does resemble the Stephen King short story more than the 1984 original, especially the ending, it is not it's equal in overall quality and creepiness. Peter Horton and Linda Hamilton put in Oscar worthy performances when compared to their counterparts here. The couple in this film have no on screen chemistry whatsoever, even for playing a couple with marital problems.The real difference between this film and the 1984 original, however, is with the children themselves. Courtney Gains and John Franklin became the gold standard for creepiness under the age of 18 when the original was released. Their mere presence on screen was enough to disturb, even before a word of old testament chanting was uttered. The children in this film are, in comparison, about as scary as parakeet. They invoke no sense of dread and look completely harmless.Perhaps the problem with this film, as well as the 1984 version, is that it is based on a short story. The tale is one of Stephen King's most disturbing and horrific. The images stay with the reader long after the short story is completed. However, there simply is not enough material to support a feature film. To get to the length of an average film, the 1984 original and this version added quite a bit of material which, honestly, watered down the original source material. The story would be better served in an anthology based film such as "Creepshow" or "Tales From the Darkside," where the source material could be given it's just due without a bunch of fluff used to lengthen the story to an hour and a half.

Another pointless horror remake. This one lacking in anything suspenseful, frightening, or unique. The title children in this one aren't as menacing or creepy as in the original. Instead the viewer is put in the bizarre position of rooting against the protagonists. I just hated this couple and wanted them dead sooner rather than later. Their bickering was infuriating to watch and listen to. I found nothing sympathetic in either character and just wanted them gone, unlike the original film where I liked and cared for the two leads. The one positive I will say about the film is that Kandyse McClure is an exceptionally beautiful woman. Unfortunately she's wasted in this shrewish part. David Anders is also wasted. I'm familiar with the work of both of these leads from television shows and they are solid likable actors when given the right material. Here they are saddled with poor parts and that's a crying shame.

This movie is very special. So special actually, I created an account just to review it and hopefully save at least one poor soul from wasting an hour and a half of their lives that they can never...EVER...get back. The movie consists of a married couple who fight and bicker so much that you actually hope they will die. The acting is horrid, so on top of hearing two people fight non-stop, its not even believable. I read that casting was only two weeks prior to production...and it shows. The children aren't scary, creepy, or anything really. They're just kind of silly. The storyline lacks any depth at all, and you find yourself praying for "the good part" but it never comes. I wasn't expecting much from a made for TV SyFy movie, but this movie didn't even live up to my very low expectations. Plain & simple, don't waste your time.

I am a horror movie buff. I am also a Stephen King fan, although his verbose, slow-paced novels tend to give me a headache. For a long time, I had been aware that a film called "Children of The Corn" was around. That is all. Stupid of me, that I never researched the movie, did not know that there were several versions floating about. Anywaz, to come back to the present version, we have this bickering couple on a highway in Nebraksa, celebrating their second wedding anniversary. Is the dude is a vet? Doesn't look the part. What was a vet doing in the killing fields of Vietnam, before he landed up in Nebraska? The point is not clear. He has a black wife, who harangues him endlessly. The wife has a cute bod, which she exposes to her advantage, and that's about all. She yells, sobs and sniffles. The dude is an inquisitive sort. He loves to pry about corn fields, ghost towns, deserted churches and whatnot. Sometimes he is scared and carries a shotgun. Sometimes, he is stupidly bold. But at the end, he is pretty ineffectual, despite his Vietnam training, when the children hoist him up like a scarecrow. While the couple are driving in a car, the children manage to follow them pretty easily on foot. Now that's your supernatural connection. These children are juvenile delinquents.. they kill adults as a sort of sacrifice, so that they will get a good harvest of corn. But how their other ends are met is again not clear. The food? The electricity supply? The clothes? The (ahem) candles? Surely a lunatic fringe group cannot exist like this for long, without the local authorities coming to know about it? Apparently, according to Mr King, they can. A sort of Manson cult.. only this time, the cultists are children. Wow!! The film blunders and flounders. There is no monster in the end. Just about everybody is delusional.. the hero, (not the heroine), and the children. A load of biblical references are thrown in.. its a wonder that the church authorities did not sue King for his deliberate misinterpretation of the Bible. A weak, stupid plot cannot be made into a masterpiece of a movie. Here, we have a terrible script, dumb actors and actresses and a dumber premise. So what can one expect? Pure corn.. what else.