User reviews

The acting,camera/cinematography,sets,costume,score/music and sound was all well done. For me, what brought the suspension of disbelief to screetching halts were several little things in the building of the STORY. I personally didn't care for the special effect of the cornman... I'm of the old school where slow and creepy can be more frightening than abrupt and obvious. The other special effects tho, were well done.

Not even a NOD towards the original story teller, Stephen King.

Most impressed with the acting and camera work.

I didn't HATE this movie. And You can tell a lot of money went into the making of it. I think the screenplay is where it went wrong.

It was just a leeeetle bit less than a "meh" for me.

The kid actors are better here. The original movie is fondly remembered by fans due to the outstanding performance by John Franklin as Isaac, but a lot of people aren't aware of the fact Franklin was actually an adult when he played the role - he was 24 years old at the time of filming. This time around the role of mini cult leader goes to an actual child in the form of Kate Moyer as Eden and she absolutely nails it!

Check this one out for yourselves. It's got some inventive kills, decent pacing and the leads do a substantial job of keeping you invested all the way through. The ending might be the weakest element of the entire movie but as remakes go, I've seen worse and this one is a lot better than people are giving it credit for.

Don't even know where to start on this movie. I remember reading the guys from Riff Trax said they could never do 50 Shades of Grey because it was already so ridiculous and laughable on its own. This movie is like that.

Nothing makes sense, and I mean nothing. The adults never fight back in any way whatsoever. The logistics of how anything at all is done is never shown. I love horror so am an expert at suspending disbelief, but this was to another level of illogical.

No character is likable and the storyline is basically nonexistent. I already had my expectations set really low and this was even worse than I thought it might be. At least I figured I'd get a couple laughs but there is nothing.

This is the tenth iteration of children of the corn since the original, and God this is by far the worst. The acting is appalling, the special effects anything but and the score just as bad.

The whole thing feels like a kids lazy attempt at movie making over the summer holidays.

The story makes no sense whatsoever, the writing is shambolic and the acting is laughable.

Several scenes have actors looking for the camera, and those that find it look dazed and confused, which is apt for the movie.

I'd advise everyone to stay well away from this pile of garbage, and I beg the production companies of the world to please, please stop giving Kurt Wimmer money to make these abominations.

If anyone ever tells you that this isn't bad, they are either lying through their teeth or they have the worst taste in the world and you need to disregard them entirely! This has to be one of the worst films that I have ever had the displeasure of trying to sit through.

It's acting is bordering on being unwatchable, the story revamps are laughably bad and it just drags on endlessly... getting worse and worse by the second.

It's so bad that it's not even comically bad. It's just not at all worth watching! Stay far away from this horrid piece of crap.

I'd rather watch a bowling ball coming to crash into my Nuts at 200 mph than ever sit through this awful mess again.

Ever since Stephen King started to publish his novels in the 70s they had been adapted to the big screen. While some of them are successful (Carrie, Misery, The Shining, IT) and even considered classic horror films a few of them doesn't have the same response (FireStarter, Graveyard Shift). In 1984 the first adaptation of King's short story Children of the Corn was released and while that version wasn't well received at the time, today it can be considered the best entry of this failed franchise. Every entry in the franchise is worst than the other making the original look as a good 80s horror movie.

This new remake, that also feels like a prequel, spend three years waiting for been released and it should have been stayed like that. Sometimes bad horror films can still be liked by the audience by their entertaining story, silly dialogues, and decent gore. But not even that happens here as the only salvageable thing about this movie is Kate Moyers' performance as the kid's leader Eden Edwards. But, that's not enough to save this film from being an unjustified addition to the franchise. The worst part of this film can be the CGI and portrayal of "He Who Walks" that resembles Marvel character Groot but with corn. This new version only proves that this story and franchise has no salvation and should be forgotten.

Man, that was bad. Not that the previous ones are masterpieces, but some of them are decent enough or high-end mediocre. This one is in my bottom ranking for the series.

Why? Well, it's a somewhat remake of the original one. Nothing bad with that. The plot and dialogues are similar to that. But the editing and the VFX are terrible, so terrible that it's in your face. It looks amateur fan-made movie. It's 2020, why would you edit it like that - terrible constrast with bad lighting, terrible color tones for the most scenes ... it looked terrible. It looked like someone in the editing room had a broken monitor and didn't set the colors right.

Acting is plain bad. To be fair, acting in the whole series is bad.

With one exception - the main little girl has very good acting for her role and age. Way better acting than the rest of the crew combined. But that's not nearly enough to make it better.

And of course, the worst part, HE WHO WALKS... that vine-corn-plant-thingie they made out of CGI is yuck. In the original, due to limitations they used only dirt moving, not visible demon or whatever it is. But the unknown was part of his scary charm. Here they show you how it looks, and it looks bad.

Last scene is... even worse.

I don't know how do you write 10M budget , when i see no such money spent here. Bad cheap CGI, bad acting with unknown actors, you clearly did NOT spend 10M on it.

And well it's mr. King's short story , which they turned into a soap opera, no surprise it's bad. You can't just turn 50 pages into 50 movies :D.

This was a hard one to get through. I don't even know what to say about this abomination. As other reviewers have said nothing makes sense the entire thing is just so unbelievable and laughably bad. Not that the original was great but it being the 80s I can forgive it, I don't know why they made and remade it a dozen times but I guess enough people watched them to make it profitable or maybe at least a tax write off but this one is beyond that. The writing is terrible, the acting isn't much better and the lead girl is just an annoying little punk who no one would ever follow. I watch enough horror to know they like to have ridiculous plots which I can forgive but an entire town of grown men, (farmers who aren't exactly soy boys) who somehow get taken prisoner and killed off by a group of 10 year olds and not a single one fights back lol nope. I never read the book so don't know how it works there but this was just stupid. Please retire this franchise.

I will keep saying this, do not take everyone's review and run with it, watch it and judge for yourself. It was not the best to be honest, but, it sure as crap ain't the worst. The acting was good for kids of their ages, the cinematics was good, look the movie is alright. Does it have some questionable scenes yes, however as I said before watch it for yourself. I watched it and when it comes to horrors I am quite picky as these days horrors aren't like they use to be, but, this definitely did more than some of the other crap for horrors out their. I gave it an 8 cause again these kids acted really well, especially the two main characters. I hope they use them again in more upcoming films cause their acting was 10/10.

The original story by Stephen king was different than even the 1984 movie that I grew up watching. A lot of liberties have been taken with this story which is why I suggest reading it for yourself and coming up with your own opinion. The TV movie that came out after the movie on SyFy was the closest I've seen to the original story.

This new version takes quite a few liberties with the classic story. First, the events leading up to the adult massacre are told from a prequel standpoint. Nothing has happened yet but the kids are starting to arrive to where King's story picks up at. Second, the antagonist is a young girl who leads the pack of psycho kids. Third, our hero is a high school school student and not some adult or even the Blue man from the 1984 movie.

The movie relies heavily on the turmoil relationship kids have with their parents. They become alienated by the adults who are supposed to care for them. So they turn to a young girl who begins to convince the kids it's time for them to rise up and slaughter them. After all, if you can't find love in your own family home then beware of those who will manipulate children into finding love somewhere else.

I'll admit, it's not perfect but I did enjoy this interpretation. The retelling or reimagined storyline may turn off some folks but it's not as bad as people may think. There's character development here as to what builds into the events of the actual story we know and remember. Stanley Kubrick revisioned Shining with characters, I see the same thing happening here with this version of children of the corn.

There are going to be people who will try and tell you this movie isn't so bad...I don't know, maybe the reviews are written by Wimmer himself...but, please believe me, it is.

The acting is atrocious, the plot makes no sense, it differs from the source material is just about every way and, did I mention, the acting makes you want to gouge your eyes out.

It can't be a coincidence that Stephen King's name is not in the credits, I'd want my name removed from this rolling turd too.

I'd list the numerous faults individually if I could but it would take too much time.

Avoid at all costs. Seriously...watch LITERALLY anything else. You've been warned.

This was an awful remake of the original. I can see why Shudder is going under, they keep creating horrible movies. Everything they do turns into trash. It was a bad retelling, bad change and the little girl who replaced Isaac was very annoying, she reminded me of Greta Thunberg for some reason. He who walks was also a joke, they should have called this something else not children of the corn. It was more accurate to how adults today think in regards to children in these days, giving them too much power when they still need to mature and grow. A huge climate crisis public service announcement. Hey Shudder, stop making movies and just show other peoples.

Another abomination in the Children of the Corn franchise. I am struggling to find anything redeeming in this version. The acting was so robotic, the CGI shocking and the storyline pathetic.

How hard can it be to make a decent Children of the Corn film?

Nothing will compare to the original version. They need to just stop now.

The kids were not even creepy in this film. As for Eden the young girl cult leader, she just makes you want to smash her across the head. There is nothing remotely scary about her.

Well, at least I can't say I am disappointed, because I wasn't expecting it to be good in the first place.

Children Of The Corn (20) is the third movie in the series to bare that title and surprisingly isn't as bad as i thought it would be going in.

Most of the good work is down to the performance of Kate Moyer as Eden. Eden is the first cult leader since Isaac to give off a creepy vibe while also convincing as a menacing presence.

All the beats of a typical COTC film are here and that is sadly where the movie fails. Every corn movie feels the need to show some pathetic CGI creature towards the end and here is no different. He Who Walks is ridiculous and would be better served not shown at all and simply left to the imagination.

The real kicker for the movie is the last couple of minutes. It appears out of nowhere and is just a redundant jump scare (if you could even call it a jump scare) and even more bad special effects.

COTC Rankings: A very bad series with few highlights.

1. Children Of The Corn (84) 2. COTC II: Final Sacrifice 3. COTC IV: The Gathering 4. COTC III: Urban Harvest 5. Children Of The Corn (20) 6. COTC V: Fields Of Terror 7. COTC: Genesis 8. COTC 666: Isaac's Return 9. Children Of The Corn 10. COTC: Runaway 11. COTC: Revelation.

I can't believe that this is the result of rebooting this movie. The story itself is a complete mess on how it handled itself and is poorly put together. I mean, the motive is pretty ridiculous, with then getting revenge on all of the adults due to them wanting to destroy their crops to receive crop subsidy. The movie makes us hate on the adults due to the opening and how all of them are complete jerks that do work but are poorly executed. It feels like there's a lack of build-up due to things happening way too quickly, like the cult is formed quickly and them getting all of the adults in a jail cell. There's no interesting things that happen in the movie and are pretty bland on how it does it. Also, the movie is easily predictable. The climax itself feels like it drags on too long and isn't that exciting at all. And the ending itself sucks a lot. I have nothing to say about any of the characters because most of them lack any development to them and aren't that interesting. And I found the acting to be poorly done on how no one can act in this movie. Also, there's a monster that appears that looks pretty bad due to the CGI and design of it. The movie contains pretty bad CGI effects in it.

Children of the Corn isn't the worst in the franchise, but it feels like the movie is rushing itself to finish it quickly and is poorly put together.

The only good Children of the Corn movie was the 1984 original and the only one that had decent box office returns and home video sales. All the sequels (including this) were straight-to-video crap.

This garbage ''reboot'' - if you can call it that - has the production values of a home movie and I congratulate anyone who managed to sit through this until the end. You have my sympathy.

It's not scary, it's boring as hell. There's nothing whatsoever to recommend it, which makes you wonder why they even bothered to make it to begin with, considering there are so many better low budget horror films around. Avoid like the plague.