User reviews

CHILD OF DARKNESS, CHILD OF LIGHT has an intriguing title but turns out to be a completely pointless TV movie that readily copies the likes of THE OMEN alongside ROSEMARY'S BABY. The storyline sees a priest investigating a prophecy which tells of two births: one child will be good, one evil, and he has to figure out which is which.

The movie plays out low-key for the most part, at least until the very silly ending, and this makes it a real bore to sit through. The problem with religious-themed films is that the characters are often boring and that's the case with the protagonists here. It says something that TV veteran Sela Ward (THE STEPFATHER) ends up playing the most interesting person in it, and that's hardly saying much.

There is the potential for interest here and there, with allusions to Biblical plagues and the like, but sadly these are kept off-screen for the most part in favour of the dullish detective story. Perhaps better actors would have improved this, but I doubt it; some nice location shots are all you're going to find here. Otherwise, it's completely underwhelming.

Child of Darkness, Child of Light: Not one but two Immaculate Conceptions! One will be The Second Coming, the other The Antichrist! But which is which? The Vatican sends a priest to investigate. There is also have a Prophecy of The Virgin Mary which is only incrementally revealed. Teenage bullies, vicious crows, black clad assassins on motorbikes! Even a friendly pet dog is turned savage by the powers of darkness. Not great but considering that it's a TV movie from 1991 not bad either. Entertaining and worth watching. Showing again on the Horror Channel on Monday 4th January at 11.00 AM. 6/10.

Actually, the movie is neither horror nor Sci-Fi. With a very strong Christian religious theme, this movie delivers minimal content and no suspense. Second-tier actors do half-decent jobs of reading their boring roles. The only good performance is by Sydney Penny who plays a role of a mother of ... I won't spoil the movie, it's either Christ or Anti-Christ. Avoid watching this movie unless you a Christian religious fanatic obsessed with apocalypse.

Being a non-Christian, I had to force myself to watch this movie just because I wanted to write this review. It's a pity that Sci-Fi channel had to air this movie at the peak evening time.

I like this movie because it didn't need to be anything more than the story it was trying to tell. It has it's suspense and a plot twist at the end and the stars do their job adequately well. Personally, I like Sela Ward. She's pretty and looks good out of her nun's habit. Bottom line, when you have something of value... trust no one.

You'll only find this dull and bland if you think this is going to be like the Omen or the Exorcist. Not a bloated vehicle for overblown special effects and 'the world will end by midnight' mumbo-jumbo. I see one viewer was even FORCED to watch this, so he could share his comments with us. The poor poor thing.

I guess if you are into the sci-fi and horror stuff it might be interesting. The acting was okay but not great. The two pregnant girls are supposed to be fifteen but are played by obviously older actresses who turned out to be twenty and twenty-one at the time. The plot is okay, but the story does jump around a bit, leaving one guessing whether you're in Boston or Pennsylvania. The priest seems to use warp speed between the two. The catholic church is portrayed as having a secretive sect for investigating events which only happen to those of that faith. What if the two girls had been protestant? Would the catholics of cared? Therefore some what contrived. Who knows, some day the catholic church might even learn what the Bible teaches. If you miss this one, don't feel you've lost anything.

I claim no familiarity with James Patterson's novel, but I'm very familiar with TV movies. I assume it's by adaptation into the television medium, and not a reflection of the novel itself, that this little flick is astoundingly direct in its storytelling. I mean that just not in terms of how the plot develops, but also in terms of what the film throws at us very quickly, with no evident rhyme or reason - beyond the scope of the underlying mystery - and with the apparent intent that we accept at face value what we're being told. This is a recurring issue throughout the film, for that matter: seen, for example, whenever protagonist Justin reads letters given to him, or a little less than halfway through when Justin returns to Italy and it's just flatly decided his initial investigation is done (it sure doesn't seem like it based on the story as we see it), or when the plot as it presents just jumps back and forth. And that plot as a whole, well, I'm supposing we just need to actively engage our suspension of disbelief, which I'm further supposing would be easier for those who adhere to some variety of Christianity. Moreover, presumably it's the quirks of adaptation that shred the characterizations into trite forms, and the scene writing into forthright curiosities.

I think there are actually terrific ideas here, firm foundation for a tale of supernatural horror - in the characters, in the scenes, in the story at large. In their root ideas the deepening chaos, violence, and madness make for sinister fun. In this form, however, the writing is scattered: sometimes seemingly jumbling its priorities, sometimes rushed, sometimes weak, unbelievable, or halfhearted, sometimes almost self-contradictory, and sometimes plainspoken to the point of stymieing the flow and credibility of the narrative. It's very noteworthy, for example, how the Vatican's assigned investigators seem to treat Margaret and Kathleen very differently, and the script also leans on one more heavily than the other. There's no reasonable justification for either disparity. Meanwhile, I don't think Marina Sargenti's direction is altogether bad, and it's possible she was also constrained by the demands of the medium, but the very orchestration of shots and scenes seems likewise scattered in some measure. Somewhat illustrating the point, the violence of the climax is executed rather sharply, yet the epilogue embraces a hokey, bare-faced, straightforward tack that stands in strict opposition. There's a lot to like here, but much to criticize, too.

Between the standards and sensibilities of television production in the early 90s and the difficulties of adaptation - presumably these more than any shortcoming on the part of those involved - the writing and direction feel troubled, and likewise the editing. And the rest of the viewing experience suffers in turn. There are some very recognizable and reliable names and faces appearing in the cast, and of both those I know well and those I don't, I see the acting skills that we know they possess. There's a bluntness to the performances here, however, and a feeling like the actors were restrained from wholly committing to the ideal vibrancy that any given moment should bear. With this in mind, and at least as if not more importantly, as the horror elements are ramped up in the latter half they similarly present with a frankness that dulls the intended effect. It's not as if 'Child of darkness, child of light' is a feature built on subtlety and underhanded wit, yet excepting the most bloody and gory splatter flicks, any given title still depends on a careful, nuanced touch to allow its best ideas to flourish and have impact. I don't think this picture is bad, but to have achieved meaningful success it needed a more delicate hand in most every regard.

Between the medium and the adaptation, maybe that delicate hand wasn't even possible here. Maybe I'm being too harsh; I did actually enjoy watching, and I want to like this more than I do. Other facets are more plainly admirable, like the stunts and practical effects (though post-production visuals are gauche). The production design is swell. I really do recognize that the cast are trying to do the best they can under the circumstances (however one wishes to define those circumstances). And I repeat that the underlying ideas of the story are splendid, primed for devious genre entertainment. Yet by whatever confluence of factors, the movie we got has a hard time passing muster, and can't entirely satisfy. I'm rather of the mind that this deserve a redo. Call it a remake, or just another adaptation, and bring back those cast members that we can, albeit in different roles. Heck, bring back the same folks behind the scenes. What this needed was the chance to be darker, more intense, and more full-bodied - exploring at will and without restriction all the small, insidious corners of the characters and their arcs, and the story ideas and their implications. As it is, 1991's 'Child of darkness, child of light' has worth - just not as much as it could or should have had.

Child of Darkness, Child of Light is a TV horror movie that doesn't appear to have a very good reputation. I cannot go along with the negativity though, as I think this is a pretty decent effort overall. It is a religious themed horror movie that focuses on that old staple of the genre – the birth of the Antichrist. Except there is a twist here in that there are not one but two virgin births, both of which have been prophesied to spawn not only the Antichrist but the Christ as well. A priest is sent by the Vatican to try and determine which is which.

It's pretty obviously a television production in fairness, with obvious restrictions in place regarding the content. But equally, the TV production values ensure that it's professionally made and solid on the whole. The storyline is well enough handled, with decent pacing. There are also some well-staged scenes and surprises along the way. The cast has a few familiar faces such as Brad 'Midnight Express' Davis as a doctor, not long before his untimely death and a blink-and-you'll-miss him appearance by future star Brendan Fraser. All-in-all, this is more than decent for a TV horror film; if you go into it with realistic expectations it should entertain you.

I really wish they would bring this on blu ray or dvd growing up this was one of my favorite movies. I don't know why they don't have it on blu ray or dvd they had it vhs. This movie delivers what it's supposed to and the ending wow!

This isn't going to scare the pants off you, it's a TV movie after all, but if you approach it with an open mind, anyone with an interest in horror with a religious angle will find much to enjoy here.

It's well acted, and the story is good which will help it appeal to non horror fans too.

The subject matter is treated intelligently amd in a believable manner, there's nothing over the top about it.

Wish there was a DVD or Blu Ray available.

This movie is about the apocolyptic birth of two babies to two virgins. Very big on religious themes. It's far from a great movie, but it is based on the book VIRGIN by James Patterson. I had read the book years ago, so had more of an interest in seeing the movie. It follows what I remember fairly accurately. This movie can be considered "horror" because of the sinister aspects of the visions and occurrences that the girls experience.

While driving to return to the Vatican, Father Rosetti (Paxton Whitehead) is attacked by two men driving motorcycles and they have an accident on the road. Father Rosetti survives, but stays catatonic in the hospital. His assistant Father O'Carroll (Anthony John Denison) is summoned to the Vatican and assigned to investigate the fifteen year-old Margaret (Sydney Penny) in Pennsylvania, who is pregnant but claims that she is virgin. Her agnostic Dr. Phinney (Brad Davis) confirms the state of the teenager. Father O'Carroll returns to the Vatican and is informed about a second case of virgin pregnancy in Boston, and learns that one is the son of God, and the other is the Anti-Christ and he shall find who is who. He returns to Boston to meet Sister Anne (Sela Ward) and the pregnant teenager Kathleen Beavier (Kristin Dattilo), and strange things happen.

"Child of Darkness, Child of Light" is an underrated horror 1991 TV Movie. The storyline about the birth of the Anti-Christ is the theme of many other movies, but most of them are after the birth. "Child of Darkness, Child of Light" shows the concern of the Catholic Church since there are two mysterious cases of virgin pregnancies and the Powers That Be know that one of them is the son of the devil. The several twists by the ending of the film, and the open conclusion is great. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Filho do Bem, Filho do Mal" ("Son of the Good, Son of the Evil")

"Child of Darkness, Child of Light" is a good TV Movie based on a great book, the teleplay adaptation is fine, the performances are excellent, the cinematography is amazing with creepy pale colors and the filming locations are wonderful atmospheric ones. A classic!

Two women get pregent at the same time. Problem is both of them are virgins. One will give birth to the child of God. The other one will give birth to the child of Satan. A made for TV movie that is exactly like every other TV movie. It's dull, bland and of course features a familiar face or two in the cast. It isn't really all that bad, but it isn't much of anything either. Pity.

Rated PG-13; Violence.

This movie was pretty bad and took alot of effort to sit through. It's based on the book Virgin by James Patterson but only very loosely (the book is much better). As i understand it, this was originally a made for cable (USA network) movie..which explains alot. Not only was the plot pretty ridiculous, but i..being Catholic..found many of the scenes offensive. The premise sounds great (sort of a combination of Rosemary's Baby and The Omen) but the acting and the story were laughable. The only reason i sat through until the end was because i had read the book and wanted to see how far the movie deviated from the book. It deviated alot...and not in a good way.

Two women who are both virgins become pregnant under mysterious circumstances. One of the women will give birth to the child of god, while the other woman will give birth to the child of satan. Made for USA television movie is a poor Omen / Rosemary's Baby rip off that happens to be pretty pointless, uninvolving, slow moving, and dull.

Rated PG-13; Violence and Adult Themes.