SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Micitype Pretty Good

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

GL84 Arriving in Gatlin, Nebraska, a news-reporter and his son get wind of a story about the youth in the town murdering their parents finds that a series of brutal murders are revealed to be worshipers of the corn-stalks and try to stop them before they carry out their plans.While not a completely worthless sequel, it does have enough to make it interesting without being all that terrible. One thing it does do right is play around with the supernatural better than expected and did have some good moments to it featuring this. The very first attack in the cornfield is really fun as the howling wind and strange lightning blasts befalling the reporters while they're in the corn rows before the huge tree falls into the area, while other really good action moments are packed in amongst the other supernatural occurrences here as house-falling sequence and the scene in the church provide some fun since they involve a great amount of suspense. There's even a few other really good scenes that come from the different meetings held among the corn-stalks, and a really tense moment later on where a couple make a particularly gruesome discovery among the corn that provides a good shock that comes out of nowhere. Even better than that is where the remaining adults are trapped inside a burning building, which is one of the better scenes in the film with the fire and the panic providing plenty to like.The last big plus is the finale, which is just all sorts of good cheesy action-packed fun, some wonderful ideas and an overall really great way to end the film. All-in-all, this is just cheesy good fun. This one wasn't that bad, but there were a few problems. The most obvious one is the flaw concerning the back- story. It's implied to be a continuation of the first one, where the survivors are bused into foster homes of a neighboring town, yet that raises a few problems. Firstly, it's never stated whether or not this was true despite giving plenty of evidence that this was the case. The events of what happened there were well-known, yet the children here are allowed to go away without being questioned, as well as having a method of still getting in touch with each other quite easily which simply makes their rampage later on seem all the more out-of-place when it echoes what happened before in the the other town. Those doesn't make any sense at all and are quite annoying. There's also the fact that the pacing is a little off, as the romance angles cut into the middle of the film when the mysterious stuff starts happening, and way too much times goes by before anyone thinks anything is going wrong. The biggest one, though, is that it's way too cheesy. The film's concept and several of it's big action scenes do reek of cheese, and the film as a whole does reflect this. These really keep the film down somewhat.Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, Brief Nudity and mild sex scenes.

Leofwine_draca This film follows directly on from where the first CHILDREN OF THE CORN left off. In the opening moments, we see police discovering all the remains of the dead adults which is quite a disturbing image - these grey corpses look as lifelike as possible. It's the same with the scene in a cornfield where a couple discover even more strewn human remains scattered around. The special effects are good, definitely, but the plot? Oh dear.Essentially, it's just a remake of the first film but with better special effects and less suspense/atmosphere. Unfortunately for us, the special effects are indeed the only things which have improved, for the first film had superior acting as well. This cast look like they have walked straight out of a television movie - the father and son heroes also have an ongoing feud, which culminates in some sappy sentimentalising at the end of the film where they make up - as if we couldn't guess. It's true, the acting is extremely poor in this film, nobody is remotely realistic and the camera is more interested in lingering on the physiques of the female characters rather than exploring their, well, characters.Another fault lies in that they had to add a totally irrelevant subplot in - something about growing toxic mould on the corn and selling it - which almost ruins the whole story. This is about supernatural stuff, not some underground crime scheme. It's just cliché after cliché - a Native American turns up, and, surprise, surprise, talks about mankind harming Mother Nature and the rest. We've heard it all before, pal, and we're just not interested. They try to make some scenes spooky but the child actors are poor and unrealistic - especially the lead, who is no match for Isaac from the first film.And so, as I am finding with so many '90s horror movies, the special effects are the only worthwhile things in the whole film. There is a high gore level here, and the violence is surprisingly sadistic - witness one old man being stabbed to death with needles in his legs. Of course, if we cared about the characters these gory moments might have been powerful and moving, but as it is they're just wince inducing. One man bleeds spontaneously as a kid stabs a wooden effigy of him in the film's bloodiest moment, and another guy has a piece of corn impale his throat (as ridiculous on screen as it sounds here). The biggest disappointment, though, is the boring, predictable ending where we don't even get to see the monster (only some rip-off PREDATOR POV shots). Just some people fighting and burning. Was this the end of the franchise? Well, maybe it should have been, but CHILDREN OF THE CORN III: URBAN HARVEST followed shortly afterwards.

Vomitron_G "Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice" is pretty much an okay sequel, staying in sync with the events that happened in the town of Gatlin 8 years earlier, but I'm not sure if I can actually call it better than the original. It's a bit difficult to compare the two movies, since the original definitely wasn't aiming for gore or spectacular kills. The first "CotC" tried to build a bit of mystery and played it a little more creepier. Sure, by today's standards that might very well translate to 'a little more goofier'. But truthfully, upon re-watching "CotC II", I couldn't help noticing it also has its fair share of (unintended) goofy moments. Like the two old sister characters, whose deaths are more funny than terrifying, really (one gets crushed by a house on pillars, the other gets catapulted with her wheelchair into a room full of Bingo-players). And where did that Indian mumbo-jumbo explanation all of the sudden come from? Christie Clark was an enormously cute teen-babe at the time; just thought I'd mention that.After this first sequel, 4 others followed each other rapidly throughout the '90s, so "CotC II" is much more responsible for starting up the whole franchise than the original was. And all sequels are pretty much on par with what all other sequels from other franchises were being cranked out those days (the '90s installments of the "Amytiville" series, for example). Hardly great horror movies, but they always managed to entertain me, trying to come up with some original & amusing kills time after time or desperately hoping to bring a new twist to tired concepts.Noteworthy is that Bob Keen & Gary J. Tunnicliffe did the special effects on "CotC II". But then again, it's not exactly their most impressive work ever. At any rate, I did have fun re-watching "CotC II". I like the musical score by Daniel Licht also. He's a talented composer, though people hardly seem to know which (horror) movies he was involved with.

robinsonmatt92 For a sequel to "Children of the Corn" i wasn't expecting much of a movie. If you are one of the few who enjoyed "Children of the Corn" and like classic gory movies that are strange you will like this movie. i remember watching it as a kid than looking for it. when i found it i remembered why i loved it. the story has only changed some, children killing adults but it takes place after no. 1. when the neighboring town Hemmingford finds the children and the adults. then the children are moved out and live in new home, but they still meet to discuss their cult and worship, Micah one of the children is possessed by "He Who Walks Behind The Rows" and starts to kill the adults again. but a reporter and his son move into the town to investigate, the father goes to great lengths to find out exactly what happens, the son falls in love and joins the cult, after the cult kills some adults the reporter and a friend he met find poisoned corn and it explains why the children were acting the way they were, the children take the sons lover and a hotel manager to sacrifice but the reporter saves them, and kills Micah, ending the children's reign of terror. what i liked the most about it was how it was nothing like the original. it was cleaver and had some great kills (the guy in the church) and was very interesting to watch to an ultimately satisfying ending to me. thats why Children of the Corn II the Final Sacrifice gets an 8/10