Opiniones de usuarios

"Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest" is the one of best Children of the Corn sequel of them all, in my opinion. It is about two brothers, one good and one evil who worships "he who walks behind the rows". The brothers are sent to a foster home in the big-city Los Angeles, which is an entirely different setting than what the kids are used to. After they move in with their foster family, bad things begin to happen, and people start to die in mysterious ways. And it's just a little strange that a cornfield is seeming to grow in an abandoned factory lot next door to the house...

I thought this film had some creative moments and some good things to offer. Particularly, I loved the death scene of the mother, Amanda. I won't tell you how she dies, but it was creative death scene and was very original. This is a decent movie, but it begins to drop way down within the last 10 minutes. The monster at the end was so horribly fake looking, it was extremely poor CGI effects. Also, when the monster lifts the girl up into the air, you can clearly see that it was a miniature doll that was used (it looked like a Barbie). The whole monster thing was completely ridiculous, and it's effects made the whole premise even worse.

Anyways, I enjoyed this sequel to the "Children of the Corn" series. It's stylish and has some good moments in it, but the last 10 minutes of it were a little too much for me and almost ruined the entire movie. If you are a series fan, check it out, but the horrible special effects may bring the movie down. 5/10.

I first saw this in the mid 90s on a vhs. Kinda hated the film then cos they moved the settings from the rural town to a city. Revisited it recently n had a good laugh at the cheesy monster. Some of the creature films from the 50s r better than this lousy jumbled mess.

This is the third film in the Children of the Corn series and not a continuation of the previous two. Two brothers are adopted from a rural town after their father is murdered in the corn fields. The brothers r brought to Chicago by their new parents.

This one is not at all scary, ther is no tension or atmosphere. The acting is awful but it is a bit gory. This lame horror film has Charlize Theron in her first non-speaking role.

This third part of the franchise see's two children from the original town massacre adopted and moved to the big city. One takes to his new surroundings well and begins to make friends while his younger brother continues his loyalty to "He who behinds behind the rows"

For a start I was glad of the new setting, however it quickly became apparent that they really weren't going to utilize it.

Eli becomes yet another child preacher and alike those before him is obnoxious and plays his well really well.

The film itself plays out basically exactly as you'd expect. Religion, a few deaths and an "Ultimate showdown" at the end.

Not good, not bad, just more of the same when by all rights it should have been really quite different.

The Good:

Follows on quite well

The Bad:

Nothing exactly stands out

Some ropey sfx at the end

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

Corn cross, corn bible, whole things getting a bit corny

After the disappointing "Children of the Corn II", the 1996 direct-to-video sequel subtitled "Urban Harvest" moves the setting from a rural Midwestern town to the Windy City of Chicago. A change of atmosphere gives the "Children of the Corn" franchise a much-needed boost and this entry is sometimes scary, often imaginative and boasts some unique special effects.

A couple (Jim Metzler and Nancy Lee Grahn) adopt a pair of abandoned teens. The older one (Ron Melendez) is conflicted with his Gatlin, Nebraska past, while the younger one (Daniel Cerny) prepares to recruit an all new batch of followers to resurrect He Who Walks Behind the Rows.

The movie is pretty tense and actually works on many levels... but the finale -- while planned out well -- looks really cheap onscreen and brings about lots of unintentional laughter.

"Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest" is one of the strongest entries in the franchise, and for the first 85 of its 91 minute running time, it proves to be a first-rate thriller.

"Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest" is a somewhat tacky and unnecessary sequel to the moderately successful Stephen King adaptation and its slightly under-rated sequel.

In the film, two youths from Gatlin (the setting of the first two films) are taken in by a yuppie couple in Chicago. The older of the two fits in relatively well, but the younger has plans of his own. Planting a corn field in the abandoned property next door, he creeps out his adoptive parents and eventually converts the entire teenage population to his maze worshipping cult.

Despite a predictable plot that seems to be missing chunks (at what point did Eli win over his peers?), dodgy special effects and wooden performances by its relatively unknown cast, the film is moderately enjoyable for what it is. If you want to see some brutal and over-the-top death scenes committed by vegetation, then "Children of the Corn III" hardly disappoints. Elsewhere, however, the film comes up short, and that's all there really is to it.

The film was dumped in theaters briefly in 1994 before being thrust into complete oblivion, making room for four direct-to-video sequels and a made-for-TV remake. Look closely, and you'll spot Charlize Theron in her very first role as an extra.

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.

When you come out with a something as naff as COTC2, you're under no pressure coming out with a better second sequel. That's good because it's B-movie time again folks, let's spend another 90 minutes with that guy who hides behind the rows. This time he's decided it's about time to show his face, even if it is for just two minutes. A bit like one of those "Magic Exposed" shows.

Not unlike the previous outing in this dreadful series, two Amish kids are adopted by an American family. One (Eli) is a member of the weird cult - you have to hate those kids, because it's not cool or clever to hang out in cornfields son. Proper kids play basketball, swear and do high-fives like your step-brother. You also lose man-points for kissing your mother.

After about ten minutes the deaths are in fast and thick. There are some good ones in there, but the money shot is with the single most funny vomit scene in movie history. Never have I seen a cockroach make a grown man vomit tomato soup.

With that odd behaviour in mind, Eli's stepdad announces he's going to make a company out of Eli's odd corn-growing habits. I doubt that corn's healthy considering it appears to be growing on moisture from blood in an abandoned factory.

Even with all the stupidity I still managed to enjoy COTC3 up until the last five minutes. Why? Because He Who Walks Behind The Rows is far too ugly to be a likable god. In 1995 you expect him to move at more than five frames a second.

...but ruined by the ending. The infamous ending of the third part of the Children of the Corn series feels like a disaster of epic proportions that kills what otherwise could be a near perfect movie. Nevertheless, this movie has many good things that are worth a watch.

The plot is a very good twist to the well-known saga of "He Who Walks Behind the Rows". After the horrifying events in Gatlin, two brothers, Eli(Daniel Cerny) & Joshua(Ron Melendez) are sent to a foster house in Chicago. Their new family is very eager to have children and gives them a warm welcome, but Eli & Joshua feel the cultural shock as they try to get used to the urban environment. While Joshua tries to fit in, the younger Eli begins to plant corn in order to bring the cult of "He Who Walks Behind the Rows" to the world.

It is indeed a very good script, and for the most part it works. It is a huge improvement over the past sequels and in my humble opinion, sometimes it even surpasses the original. Daniel Cerny's performance is outstanding and one wonders why he suddenly stopped working when he was one of the very few child actors who could give a believable performance.

The eerie atmosphere is back and there are great moments of suspense and surrealistic imagery. This is what Children of the Corn movies should be. The direction is pretty good, and it handles the script with perfection and lets it flow with good rhythm.

If all these is so good, what can be so bad that makes the movie fail in the end? Without giving spoilers, let me just say that even when the SFX are top-notch for a low-budget movie; the ending pretends to be of epic proportions and ends up being one of the biggest SFX disasters ever.

Don't get me wrong, even with it's HUGE SFX faults, it still is better than average, but it breaks everything that was build up to that moment, the eerie atmosphere fill with suspense turns into a savage gore fest in the style of "Evil Dead" but without the talent. It just feels like a different movie.

Overall, it's worth a rent, especially for Daniel Cerny's performance who truly saves the film(no surprise that it's when he is gone that the movie falls down). It's good entertainment if you see it with a open mind.

7/10

As I sat down to watch the 1995 horror movie "Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest" here in 2023, it was actually for the first time. Yeah, I didn't really have much of an interest in this franchise back in the 90s, so I never really got around to watching any of them, aside from the original 1984 first movie.

So as I had just sat through parts I and II, of course I opted to continue on and watch part III as well.

The storyline in "Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest", as written by Dode B. LEvenson and Matt Greenberg, was somewhat different from the previous two movies, as in this taking place within an urban setting. Did it work? Well, both yes and no. Yes, in the sense that the movie was corny - pardon the pun - enough to actually be watchable. And no, because it didn't really feel like the previous two movies given the chance of scenery and setting.

The acting performances in "Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest" were fairly okay. I wasn't familiar with the majority of the cast ensemble, aside from Michael Ensign and Ed Grady.

Visually then "Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest" was okay. The effects are aging and it shows, but it worked out well enough, adding some cheesy charm to the movie.

However, I didn't really find the storyline all that great, to be bluntly honest, and thus my rating of "Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest" lands on a four out of ten stars.

The movie started out pretty good and I was enjoying the heck out of it. But they really dropped the ball at the end. The "Monster" was horribly mechanical to the point it was comical. And how about the rescue scene? I mean the guy is chopping at the throat of the monster with a sickle right over the spot where his girl friend is located and yet when he manages to pull her out, there's not a single wound to her.

Nope, just a huge let down to what could have been a darn good movie. Better luck next time!

Most horror movies are downright awful, but this one is even worse than Cabin Fever!!! The acting is horrible, the deaths are predictable and nonsensical...and there's even a scene with a VERY VERY fake doll being used, when the plant monster grabs the girl. It's impossible to miss it. The only thing remotely enjoyable about this movie is the very brief cameo by Nicholas Brendan(Xander on Buffy The Vampire Slayer) as one of the basketball players. All in all this movie sucked. The concept sucks. The franchise sucks. I really don't understand how movies like this keep getting made...especially sequels. My advice is to avoid this at all costs, unless you're really simple minded or you're in the mood to tear something apart.

Abused as children and following the death of their father, two teenage brothers by the names of "Eli Porter" (Daniel Cerny) and "Joshua Porter" (Ron Melendez) are adopted by a man named "William Porter" (Jim Metzler) and his wife "Amanda Porter" (Nancy Lee Grahn) and taken from rural Nebraska to Chicago. At first, neither Eli nor Joshua seem to fit in at school, however, when Joshua begins to make some friends his younger brother Eli becomes quite jealous and subsequently takes matters into his own hand by planting a garden with a special type of corn in order to summon the monster known as "He Who Walks Behind the Rows". And it's then that the real terror begins. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that even though I liked the initial premise of this film the longer it continued the more ludicrous it got. I especially didn't care for the preposterous ending. That said, I don't consider this to be nearly as good as its two predecessors and for that reason I have rated it accordingly. Below average.

Children of the Corn III is a great movie, I think that it was a great idea to kind of go back to the first Children of the Corn, having the one kid kind of taking control over all the other kids. It really had you leaning forward in your seat to see what would happen next. I also rate it a 10 because it had a lot of scary bloody scenes. And that is how a scary movie should be. Some people say that sequels are never as good as the original one, but I disagree, with the Children of the Corn series, the sequels prove to be as good if not better than the original. The actors in this movie were great, they really got into their characters. Especially Daniel Cerny, he's such a hottie, and he's a great actor. He really got into his character or so it seemed. I wish that he would do more movies. In this movie and in Demonic Toys he played an evil little kid, yet in Doc Hollywood he played a innocent little boy trying to stomp on a spider, so cute. So in my eyes Children of the Corn III and the rest of Children of the Corn movies are all 10's,I'll never dislike any of these movies. FOr anyone who likes blood and scenes that make you jump, check out the Children of the Corn movies.

COTC3 is not that bad. Seriously. It is a gory, silly, watchable horror flick that, despite being a third in a series (that never should've started anyway), is a notch above your average B-horror film. I recommend it because it's got a lot of clever gore and some freaky scare scenes. Infinitely better than the last two, this one's a lowest common denominator entertainer. GRADE: B-

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).