Scott LeBrun
This movie attempts to show us what would happen if you took some children *away* from the corn, as two Gatlin "siblings", Eli (Daniel Cerny), and Joshua (Ron Melendez), end up being adopted by a Chicago couple, William (Jim Metzler) and Amanda (Nancy Lee Grahn). The results are completely predictable. While Joshua, the older one, is the more innocent of the two (he's not *from* Gatlin, but moved there (!) with his father after the evil kids took over), the maniacal child preacher Eli takes control of the formerly apathetic student body at their school, and arranges for various adults to meet grisly ends. Naturally, it's up to Joshua to save the day.The first movie in this unlikely series sure wasn't any "good" to begin with, and this is no better. In fact, it's pretty laughable, but it's also pretty entertaining as far as *this* kind of genre entertainment goes. A bunch of serious looking actors gamely go with the flow as things get nutty and gory. Screaming Mad George supplies the decent makeup effects, although when he attempts to actually visualize He Who Walks Behind the Rows in the form of a cheesy monster, the movie *really* goes downhill quickly. Refreshingly, there are not too many characters here that are worth anybodys' sympathies. William, for example, proves to be sleazy and ambitious when he realizes that Eli is contriving a simply beautiful strain of corn in an unlikely environment.What makes this entry in the series worth watching is young Cerny. He won't make you forget John Franklin (Isaac in the first movie) anytime soon, but he's quite effective in the role of this evil kid. There are supporting roles and cameos for the likes of Johnny Legend, Yvette Freeman ('E.R.'), and Michael Ensign ("Ghost Busters", "Titanic" '97), as well as a super sexy leading lady in the form of Mari Morrow ("How to Be a Player", 'Family Matters').If you want fun horror that doesn't have to be *quality* horror, then this one might fit the bill.Seven out of 10.
bowmanblue
If you've watched the first two Children of the Corn films, you'll know that they were basically the same plot. In fact, it's pretty hard to make a Children of the Corn film which doesn't revolve around a bunch of 'corn-worshiping' kids killing adults in a field.Here, however, they try to breathe new life into the franchise by changing the setting to Chicago! Gone are the cornfields of small-town America, replaced by - er - cornfields in the middle of a major US city. Yes, two orphans from the original films are relocated to foster parents in Chicago and start planting corn in the back alleys in order to bring the cult of 'he who walks behind the rows' to the masses.It could be terrible. It nearly is. First of all the film is (semi) saved by the lead youngster, who, in my opinion, is the best actor to take on the part of a demonically-possessed psychopath with supernatural powers the series has produced yet. It's kind of worth watching for him alone.The other (again, I use the word 'semi') standout point is the ending. It's weird. Seriously, if you're watching this film and you hate it - fair enough - skip to chapter 15 (I think that's the one before the last) and just watch it from there. It gets totally weird. It's like they've tacked on the ending from another horror movie. If nothing else, I'll bet it gets a laugh out of you! In short: Children of the Corn (1) was the best and most original. Part 2 was so bad it was laughably brilliant (and my favourite simply because it was so dumb). Part 3 does its best to be different. It succeeds in some places and fails miserably in others. Know that you're never going to get an Oscar-worthy epic with this one.
gavin6942
Two brothers, formerly of the murderous children's cult of Gatlin, Nebraska, are taken to Chicago by an unwitting couple.Others point out this was the film debut of Charlize Theron, which is pretty cool. Although, being that she has no lines and is not credited, it is unfortunately not much of a start. (Though it does give this film some indirect prestige it probably does not deserve.) I am sorry to pick on a kid, but the actor playing Eli (Daniel Cerny) is terrible. Maybe it is partially because he was given some awful lines to work with, but I just felt like every scene he had, the film went immediately downhill.There are some good things -- Josh playing basketball in his farm clothes, the decent effects on the death scenes (the water pipe, the burning face). I believe Oscar-winning Mark Bridges worked on the costumes (although this is far from his best work).
leandros
Apart from the Texas-sized loopholes in the script, this film is one of the corniest horror films I have ever watched. Stephen King is credited as one of the writers, and this is surprising to see as it is unclear if he has actually contributed to the script or this film was inspired from King's initial novel. The acting is quite mediocre, but the special effects are of record tackiness, with human puppets of the amazing quality of voodoo dolls. The gore factor is satisfying, even unexpectedly high. The reference to environmental issues as a contemporary premise to any evil we see on screen is flimsy and ephemeral. Overall, spare a few bucks to rent this on a Saturday night in with your friends and pizza.
AD
