I liked this film (decently creepy, good deaths, Naomi Watts is daaammmn fine) but it had nothing to do at all with the series, why call it Children of the Corn? Actually come to think of it, they probably would have been sued for ripping off the COTC films due to the setting (small town with kids killing their parents and living in a cornfield).
Anyways one of the better ones of the series...
I agree. I always put this one up there as being one of the GOOD entries in the series, right after the first two films. 666 is descent ONLY because John Franklin came back.
Everyone's entitled to one good scare...
I personally hated 666, definitely the weakest in my eyes, after Fields Of Terror (although Eva Mendes... wow... and the exploding head scene).
Part 8 is coming out in August, called "Genesis"... advance reviews have been positive so far.
I completely agree; I couldn't stand part VI, although I understand why fans of the series liked it (because of the return of John Franklin).
--
My IMDb vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur5998197/ratings
Fields of terror was the best besides part 1. Revelation and Isaac 666 were the worst.
shareI like both this film and Halloween III. Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest is my favorite of the sequels, but this one is still pretty good. It was cool to see Karen Black in a Children of the Corn movie. She is one of my favorite actresses. And the backstory of Josiah was pretty interesting. I love all the Children of the Corn movies. It is such an underrated horror franchise.
Death lives in the Vault of Horror!
[deleted]
I like COTC IV a little more than back in the day, but still not crazy about it.
shareHalloween III was great! This film is fine but not as good as Urban Harvest.
share[deleted]
Then you must have not seen revelation. So boring!
share