Stephen Kings Kinder des Zorns

I was able to get to the end of this movie, but... only because I wanted to see how this version differed from the 1980s version, and to also see if this version was any truer to the original Stephen King story.

The two main characters were definitely more true to the original short story. Their bickering was pretty nasty, but the woman was overdone in her acidic nastiness, to the point of straining the boundaries of disbelief. Anyway, their acting was sincere and created a believable tension where the events that followed had their opening.

The movie was better in many ways than the 80s version, all except for one main glaring error. The casting of whoever played Isaac, the child leader/preacher. His line delivery was slush-mouthed and weak, words trailing off too quietly, with no believable passion. For the casting of a evangelical preacher, this particular child was an absolutely terrible choice. Every time he had any screen time or lines, I just kept saying "nope, no, nuh-uh, NOPE" in my head. I just couldn't suspend my disbelief and the obvious failure in the casting choice just kept bringing me out of the story.

The casting of Malachi was too much a mimicry of the 80s version.

Its difficult to cast children for TV movies, I assume, but at least get some kids who don't speak as though they've been novacained.

If you're a Stephen King fan, this might be worth exploring. If you were a fan of the original movie adaptation, well maybe then, too. Otherwise, there are much better choices.

A bickering couple (David Anders and Kandyse McClure) driving to California suffer more than marital woes after they accidentally run over a small boy. They discover the boy's throat had been cut and, putting the body in their trunk, head to the nearby town of Gatlin, Nebraska, only to discover it looks like it has been a ghost town for the last 12 years. Outside of a prologue and a few short added bits (exploding car!), this is an accurate scene-for-scene adaptation of Stephen King's short story (King co-wrote with director Donald P. Borchers, who produced the original). And therein lies the film's problem as the 27 page story in itself isn't enough meat for a 90 minute movie. To their credit, the writers does maintain the story's darker ending that the original abandoned. Another major problem is the acting, especially from McClure (BATTLESTAR GALACTICA), who looks a lot like Tyra Banks and possesses the same acting talent. Seriously, I haven't seen a performance this bad in a long, long time. She is woefully miscast and some of her delivery is hilarious (her performance after they hit the boy and she rails on her husband is cringe worthy). I actually prefer the original 1984 film because the villainous kids are actually menacing and dirty. Here, they look like they just stepped out of an Amish fashion catalog.

Of all the Stephen King books and films, I find the movie Children of the Corn to be about the most interesting. As a fan of horror movies, I think films with children as villains seem to work for me. Poltergeist and Insidious are two quality horror movies that involve children and families. Village of the Damned was another and this spawned others. Children of the Corn is one of the most interesting of these films because of it's originality, atmosphere and it involved many kids, not just one. This series had some sequels with the first one coming out in 1984 with mixed reviews. The most recent in the series was a remake on the Syfy Channel in 2009 eight years after the last one.

This remake uses most of all all the same ideas of the original including corn fields in Nebraska and kids with religious views who have killed their parents and looking to strike again. This time the victims are an argumentative couple who were on their way to a honeymoon trip in California.

As a creepy kid film, it is very important that there are good performances from the child actors. Here, I was disappointed in the child characters. Other than the Isaac character (Preston Bailey) just about every kid plays their part like extras. At the same time, these characters are not creepy and don't work well as villains.

Even though you could pick at it a little and get maybe something, there isn't much of a plot here. I do like the leads of David Anders and Kandyse McClure but they aren't given much to do and they really mope around a lot. There are some interesting sets here but the kill scenes are not particularly good. There are some beneath the surface ideas that do come into play here. and these include the idea of race, spiritual aspects of the corn and religious overtones throughout.

Of course you can't take any of this story too seriously, but obviously there is no way something like this could happen in our country with our government. A town full of killer kids and young pregnant girls would be responded to quickly by the police and military and would be a CNN headliner for weeks. A minor flaw maybe but still hard to overlook.

I found Children of the Corn to be disappointing and a movie with an hour and half plot that ran too long at two hours. This is a TV film that feels like a tornado stringing things and ideas around with no purpose and really just wasting our time.

Being true to its source does not always make a better movie. If you compare the original to this then you can see why they changed it up and made a better movie to begin with. The remake ignores the original's way and sticks close to the original short story by Stephen King. The couple are bitter, the unhappy ending and no shot whatsoever of he who walks behind the row. The roles are miscast-ed left and right. The kid playing Isaac is the biggest blunder I have seen in years. He simply is not right for this part. Take away any kind of threat and you just have a bunch of overly religious kids who do not like adults and have a twisted religion. There are many things that backfire in this movie from the miscasting to the changes to keep in line with the original story and none of them work for the better. Stick with the original which is a all around a better movie.

Look I been meaning to see the original for quite a well, haven't yet. I happened to get my hands on this version first. I thought the concept is superb, I imagine the book to be real good, and apparently the original film is effective. But to be honest I found this one rather terribly done. First and foremost, please, enough of those stupid boo fright snappy effects for nothing, that's cheating and we all getting a wee bit immune to it, it makes the film look lousy to begin with, that ain't no way to create a sickening atmosphere. Some crappy acting all over, or should I blame the script? I dunno, but kids included, I can see the parents helping them memorize those parts as though for a school play. The extras were awful too, I'm sorry boys and girls. Some really obvious spoon feeding annoyed me, like the new testament ripped out the bible and there are many stupid mistakes in this film, particularly in the chase, and then when the plants start going against the guy on the run, that's just too much. All this is a shame because I am aware of the impact the leader's words are supposed to have on me at the end when he shouts "SCARECROW!" but forget it.