The film describes the events leading up to, and including, the massacre of the adults of a small town in Nebraska by their children, after the adults' irresponsibility ruins the crop and th... Read allThe film describes the events leading up to, and including, the massacre of the adults of a small town in Nebraska by their children, after the adults' irresponsibility ruins the crop and the children's future.The film describes the events leading up to, and including, the massacre of the adults of a small town in Nebraska by their children, after the adults' irresponsibility ruins the crop and the children's future.
Alyla Browne
- Angie
- (as a different name)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
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.
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.
I'm going to start off by saying that I did not like this film. But then, I didn't like the original film either. Some reviewers seem to compare this film unfavourably to the original effort, but honestly, that wasn't any better.
The good: The acting is, for the most part, pretty good. Kate Moyer, in particular did a brilliant job. Her character, eden, is smug, arrogant, and contemptible, but all of that is down to her ability to portray such a character, and she does it brilliantly. The acting from the remaining cast is fine, though many of the actors essentially played emotionless zombies, so it's hard to rate.
The bad: There are a number of scenes that really push the boundaries in terms of the audience suspending their disbelief. There are a lot of blatantly obviously bad decisions characters make that it's hard to let go. And, the final scene is appalling; a cringe-inducingly feeble attempt at a final scare that doesn't even qualify as a twist.
What others have said: I've already mentioned that this has been unfavourably compared to the first film. I really don't think that was any better, though nostalgia has maybe altered some people's views.
I've also seen a lot of reviews lambasting the CGI. It certainly won't win any awards but it's nowhere near as bad as some of these reviews would have you believe. The same is true of the plot, which many reviews seem to regard as non-existent. There is a definite story told here, albeit imperfectly.
The main reason I disliked this film was the absolute ineptitude of the protagonists. There were so many opportunities to disrupt what was going on. I know the film wouldn't have worked if these things had been easily stopped, but it seemed like lazy writing to not out real, insurmountable barriers in the way.
Overall, not a bad film, but not one I would recommend either. If you're curious though, give it a shot and don't be dissuaded by the overly-negative reviews.
The good: The acting is, for the most part, pretty good. Kate Moyer, in particular did a brilliant job. Her character, eden, is smug, arrogant, and contemptible, but all of that is down to her ability to portray such a character, and she does it brilliantly. The acting from the remaining cast is fine, though many of the actors essentially played emotionless zombies, so it's hard to rate.
The bad: There are a number of scenes that really push the boundaries in terms of the audience suspending their disbelief. There are a lot of blatantly obviously bad decisions characters make that it's hard to let go. And, the final scene is appalling; a cringe-inducingly feeble attempt at a final scare that doesn't even qualify as a twist.
What others have said: I've already mentioned that this has been unfavourably compared to the first film. I really don't think that was any better, though nostalgia has maybe altered some people's views.
I've also seen a lot of reviews lambasting the CGI. It certainly won't win any awards but it's nowhere near as bad as some of these reviews would have you believe. The same is true of the plot, which many reviews seem to regard as non-existent. There is a definite story told here, albeit imperfectly.
The main reason I disliked this film was the absolute ineptitude of the protagonists. There were so many opportunities to disrupt what was going on. I know the film wouldn't have worked if these things had been easily stopped, but it seemed like lazy writing to not out real, insurmountable barriers in the way.
Overall, not a bad film, but not one I would recommend either. If you're curious though, give it a shot and don't be dissuaded by the overly-negative reviews.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaFilmed during the 2020 lockdowns. Was able to avoid production shutdown due to being financed from an indie production.
- GoofsWhen she uses the cigarette car cigarette lighter to ignite the gas stream to blow up the silo; by the time the lighter popped out, the talking they did, walking to the back of the car, and more talking: the lighter was still glowing hot. it would've been cooled to the point it wouldn't have been able to light the gas.
- ConnectionsFeatures The Twilight Zone (1959)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Діти кукурудзи
- Filming locations
- Rylstone, New South Wales, Australia(As fictional town, Rylstone, Nebraska, USA)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $10,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $325,583
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $263,128
- Mar 5, 2023
- Gross worldwide
- $575,179
- Runtime1 hour 33 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39:1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content

Top Gap
What is the Brazilian Portuguese language plot outline for Children of the Corn (2020)?
Answer