Add a Review

  • When a woman goes in search of her grandmother in a run down soon to be condemned apartment block she comes across the titular children and is pulled into "He who walks behind the rows" latest scheme.

    The Children Of The Corn franchise was never exactly great but at least it has character, it had originality and the further in it has gone the more convoluted the plot has become and now it doesn't even resemble its humble beginnings.

    The premise is dreadful, the script is lacking and with the exception of Michael Ironside (Who is barely in it) the cast aren't exactly doing much to improve it.

    Not the worst of the franchise but certainly close this is a further example that this is being milked into obscurity and needs laying to rest before it becomes another Witchcraft (1988).

    The Good:

    Michael Ironside

    The Bad:

    Messy across the board

    Cashgrab nothing more

    Things I Learnt From This Movie:

    The Children Of The Corn have 1 weakness, video games!
  • I expected nothing from this, except that being a fairly modern film that it would at least spare me 80s denim and bad haircuts xD I don't think I even got that.

    If it had just been total rubbish with no glimmer of potential, that would be OK, predictable and OK.

    What really gets me is that this film could have been something, it really wouldn't have taken much at all! Ordinary camera shots, kids behaving evil rather than like mannequins, a heroine character with the ability to realise she's in a horror film not some 'real life drama' and a few other things, this could have been a good straight to video/TV film, it really could have been :( Another thing which bugged me is that the film had something over many of its rivals: the picture quality really wasn't bad. Oftentimes it's this alone which betrays a shoe-string budget movie from a supposedly 'better' picture with more money. SO close to a good film, it's so annoying..

    COTC films already have the basis for a good creepy feeling, those pesky kids! It was evident here too, there was some good atmosphere when the kiddies were on the prowl, but it was messed up with some very poor direction.

    Stupid 'ghost' sounds (kids laughing in this case), silly ineffective camera cheap-shots and minutes wasted watching the heroine wander around when it's obvious she will find nothing. These annoy viewers every flipping time, yet once again they're here to annoy COTC: Revelation viewers too. These pathetic acts of film-making sloth knock the film down a few pegs on their own!

    The kids act like robots in bad threads most of the time, these are self-assured, murderous and downright evil kids from hell without a scrap of empathy. So.. why are they gimping around like second-rate zombies in goofy clothing? For God's sake. *Scowls*

    The main apartment building doesn't seem inhabited at all, a total ghost town, yet within a few shots it turns out that there's a bunch of people living there. The audience shouldn't have to be faced with such cack-handed bloopers like this. Sloppy, it jarred and brought me straight out of the film. If the crew can't be bothered to put a film together properly, how can they expect anyone to bother to watch it?

    I was glad when it was over, there's nothing worse than glimpsing what could have been.

    In short: don't rent, don't buy, don't bother.
  • lastliberal14 September 2010
    I can't say I have ever seen Claudette Mink, the star of this movie. She was a hooker in a Spenser movie in her first go, but I don't remember her. In fact, I don't recognize any of the names other than Michael Ironside. This does not bode well.

    Here she is looking for her grandmother, who apparently lived in some rundown tenement.

    Crystal Lowe also appeared in the film, and gave us a couple of skintastic moments, but she got caught up with some magic corn seeds and had to disappear.

    Nothing scary here. A little suspense, but it really wasn't worth the time.
  • The seventh entry of the unending "Children of the Corn" series -- this one titled "Revelation" -- is heavy on the story, but light on the suspense or surprises.

    With only one brief mention of He Who Walks Behind the Rows, this installment instead focuses on an apartment building in which zombie-like kids take it over... killing all of its inhabitants.

    Lacking the shared backstory of the original "Corn" movie, this one takes off only in the last 20 minutes or so. Along with parts 4 and 5, this one also lacks a menacing leader child... and it hurts the film during its climax.

    "Revelation", while attempting something different and bringing something new to the "Chdilren of the Corn" table, it lacks in other basic areas, hampering this otherwise solid effort.
  • I saw this 7th part for the first time recently.

    This one started off very well with ample atmosphere n creepiness.

    The building in the middle of almost nowhere, a single grocery store, the dark isolated alleys n the creepy building with its creepy corridors, all these added to the atmosphere but the conclusion isn't satisfactory n the ending seemed rushed due to the budget.

    Michael Ironside is there for few mins n he seems to be lost. His character seems to be lost too.
  • Remster14 May 2002
    Alright, the first movie was great, I've seen it several times and it managed to send chills down my spine every time. Then there was the sequel, which still had it's moments, but wasn't nearly as good as the original. Then there were four other sequels which I won't even bother discussing here and then there is part 7 : Revelation. After seeing this one I can only ask myself one question...why? It's like watching Friday the 13th 4 : The Final Chapter and then finding out there are 6 more sequels (reminding you that Jason is pure evil, thus he won't be killed that easily, at least not in a movie that's called 'The Final Chapter':)).

    What I'm only trying to say is that there's absolutely NO point to this movie whatsoever, a woman comes looking for her grandma who has disappeared, running into a bunch of evil children, some plot that makes no sense at all and even worse, this movie is so predictable it won't even scare you. In the first part we saw a big cornfield, which had something eerie, even if nothing happened, in this part we have a house with a small 'corn garden' in front of it (because there's no such thing as a Children Of The Corn movie without corn!) On top of that the acting is bad, really bad! The girl who plays Jamie isn't convincing at all, let alone the 'priest', who looks more like an escaped criminal.

    To put it shortly, don't let the looks of the cover trick you into renting (or even worse, buying) it, because that cover is the best asset to this movie, cheerio to the designer of that particular cover, he's certainly worth his money.

    Avoid at all costs!
  • What can I say about Children Of The Corn 7? Don't ever ever ever ever watch it! One, it lacks everything, acting, substance, story... I mean, sure there's referances to something I was able to associate w/ a story, but the movie was horrible. Micheal Ironsides shows up, and I'm like alright! he's gonna fill us in, he's a priest! But much to my disappointment, he just adds more confusion to the jumbled mess called a storyline. It's good for a laugh, i'll give it that... Who couldn't laugh when the Train hit the old lady? or when the Veteran Guy flipped out? i gave this movie a 1, only because i couldnt go lower! i personally suggest burning every copy of this movie. I've been a fan of the series since i was old enough to talk, and i have been very disappointed w/ every single sequel. (with a slight exception to the 5th, but is a very slight exception) My advice, see the first one... that is all...
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Children of the Corn (CotC) scripts may have never been literary masterpieces, but for some reason, CotC 6 and 7 have scripts that seem like very early drafts--or even as if they were only partially complete and the directors decided to just wing it for the rest of the film. It's a shame because both films otherwise had the potential to be quite good.

    For CotC7, a relatively oblique path was chosen (probably to the chagrin of those predisposed to purism)--it's more or less a "haunted house" film. This was promising to me, as by the time you get around to the seventh entry in a series, a change of pace is refreshing, and haunted house (really, haunted anything) films are probably my favorite horror subgenre.

    For the first 45 minutes or so, CotC7 was satisfying to me. In fact, for the first 10 or 15 minutes, it seemed reminiscent of the more recent 1408 (2007), which I loved. It had a good setting, a good premise, good atmosphere, creepy scenes, a bit of eye candy, and even a bit of odd humor.

    But right about the halfway mark, it starts to unravel. Mysterious characters (many supernatural) are never explained, and they keep growing in number. A couple scenes featured supernatural characters that don't cohere with the rest of the film--for example, one has a zombie or adult burn victim. The film starts getting choppy, and it begins to feel more like a series of pointless and disconnected "scary" set-pieces.

    Worse, there was a stable of interesting human characters who were never explored enough--we're just teased with them and then they're usually quickly dispatched with relatively generic horror film deaths. And the crux of the story--Jamie's (Claudette Mink) missing grandmother--remains murky through the end. The biggest tragedy is that the ball was dropped. With just a bit more work on the script--another two or three drafts, maybe--this could have been one of the better entries of this uneven series.
  • We didn't need cheesy Christian overtones did we? No, we didn't need that. This is easily the weakest of the whole franchise. Technically, it tried to be better than the third one but it was far less fun. It was just in one apartment building the whole time with like clichéd nightmare hallucinations. The cult is no more with this nail in the coffin. The worst in a long series of bad horror movies.
  • The seventh and final (thank you) entry in the seemingly never-ending "Children of the Corn" franchise finds those pesky little rascals stalking (stalking, get it?) a woman whose grandmother has disappeared under mysterious circumstances. It turns out that the decrepit building where-in granny lives was once the grounds of the original children of the corn and through the course of the film, the residents of said building find themselves at the mercy of the sadistic children and their thousand yard stare.

    Director Guy Magar (whose career was apparently killed with the making of this movie) gives the film a slick look and feel, but the end result can't help but feel like the lame direct-to-video fare it was always meant to be. On the upside, this installment is less insulting to the intelligence than previous entries in the franchise, and seeing as how the original "Children of the Corn" wasn't that fantastic from the get-go, it's fair to say that the bar was never that high to begin with.

    80's cult icon Michael Ironside has a bit as a priest in the film, but his moments are so sparse that his presence is barely felt, and incidentally, his character serves no real narrative purpose. Even still, it's nice to see the guy getting work. Claudette Mink gives us someone to root for as the main character, and actually turns in a pretty decent performance. The effects are painfully bad, however, and the deaths in particular are bloodless and -- save for the stripper in the bath-tub scene -- uninteresting. Those who have already wandered through the previous rows of corn (read: prior sequels) could do much, worse though. Even though there are no revelations in this corny sequel, it still manages to kill an hour and a half rather painlessly.
  • HorrorEnjoyer18 July 2009
    4/10
    Dull
    Warning: Spoilers
    Dull I really liked first 30 minutes of this movie, it kinda reminded me an old-school horror adventure game – the chick comes to creepy place, where her grandmother is supposed to live, but she can't find her, so she goes around collecting clues and meeting strange local people, while witnessing strange events and meeting some strangely looking kids and the acting is actually not bad up to this point, but after the 30th minute movie kinda falls apart. Death scenes are lame and not scary to say the least and the scariest thing you see would probably be some little kids playing evil dead – a video game on a machine. Children laugh effect sounds extremely fake and not threatening. As for the story it stops really developing after 30th minute too. Nothing gets accomplished, except from local people being slaughter and it's just down the hill from there. It would probably be safe to say that this movie would better stand alone with some different plot elements because COTC aren't really that important here. I would've loved the movie if it could've sustained the atmosphere of the beginning, but it failed to do that. Failed big time. The ending is lame and very unsatisfying too. If you're going to watch this movie I recommend to shut it down after that magical 30th minute I keep mentioning. Unless you want to be bored to sleep that is. Good stuff lasts for about 40 % of the movie so I give it 4/10.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    There you really lose the thread and loosen the plot of the saga. We are dealing with a young woman who comes to Gatlin to find her grandmother and when she arrives she finds a very strange situation in the ancient block of flats the grandmother lives in and the grandmother is nowhere to be found. But it all started with the grandmother, Hattie Soames, waking up in the middle of the night, the victim of a dreadful nightmare and she races outside her apartment and the building into the night wondering where someone is, calling for him.

    Jamie arrives finds her grandmother missing, goes to the police where she meets a certain plainclothes officer Armbrister who does not react really. The following day, Jamie goes back to Armbrister. who has been doing some background checks on Jamie's missing grandmother. He has learned that sixty years ago, Hattie Soames was a child involved with a children's cult known as the Agents of Satan. The cult committed mass ritual suicide during a tent revival by setting themselves on fire. Hattie was the only one to survive. Jamie finds an old picture of her grandmother as a little girl with the cult leader, Abel. Armbrister agrees to accompany Jamie back to the apartment.

    Some time and sequences later, one little boy drowns a stripper, Stephanie, three other little kids decide to kill one of the other tenants, a cranky wheel-chair-bound man and push him off the landing into the staircase shaft. Then they go ripping around the hallways playing in his wheelchair, when an older boy, Abel, appears and gets them under control. No more laughing, and no please, and no smile.

    The last surviving tenant, Stan (note how his name sounds like Satan, and yet he is as harmless as a fly on a piece of cake), finds Jamie and warns her to get out of town. Stan then goes down to the basement where, surrounded by children, he is terrified out so much that he falls over dead.

    The kids catch up with Jamie and take her down to the basement. The preacher child, Abel, and the rest of the brood come out to confront her. The ghosts are now seen with various burn marks and scars and one of the ghosts is Jamie's grandma Hattie. (A summary vastly edited from Headhunter's Horror House Wiki).P AGES The only Biblical character is the Child-preacher Abel and this reference has little to do with the previous films, except that he is bound to be killed, destroyed, annihilated, like any respectful Abel by some Cain, though the film has no one close to this character. But let me retell you that story from the Bible.

    Genesis 4: 1-16 (King James Version) "1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. 2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. 3 And in process of time, it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. 4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: 5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. 6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? 7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him. 8 And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him. 9 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper? 10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground. 11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand; 12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. 13 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear. 14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me. 15 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him. 16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden."

    With such a Biblical heritage Abel can neither be a terrorist nor have any prone inclination to be violent, not to mention be a killer. And the only one who had a gun and could maybe kill some of these kids who are nothing but ghosts after all, or living dead, if he has special quicksilver cartridges or silver bullets. But he does not have none of neither (Holy Trinity of negatives), but the ghosts or living dead probably can't do too much damage, except frighten him to death. A good old heart attack to take care of him.

    After that Jamie, note it is the feminine form of James, and James, Jesus' brother, ended very badly in the hands of the High Priest of the Jerusalem Temple, and that is a real horror story: to be thrown over the walls of Jerusalem, to be forced to undress completely, then to dig his own tomb or so, in which he is buried up to the neck and then finally to be stoned to death and abandoned to be a petit-four for the roaming dogs or wolves or whatever other night-time wild animals. Jamie is nearly getting there when she finally reaches the ground floor and the lobby of the apartment block in her hectic descent. Maize grows instantly everywhere and blocks her. She manages to extract herself from the lobby but it is not better outside She is nearly strangled by the Maize when Officer, or rather Detective Inspector Armbrister comes up and saves her from that horrible end.

    To find corn that dreadful and menacing, there must be something wrong in the minds of spectators. Corn is absolutely harmless. To make it a monstrous cannibalistic vampiristic ghoul seems to plunge the roots of this fear in some very old culture that has nothing to do with good western, banal, European culture. This is normal since Maize is an American plant that only arrived in Europe relatively recently and definitely after the 16th century, just like potatoes in the 18th century. But the destruction of the nest of this ghostlike living dead cult is performed in a rather more effective way/ it is blown up systematically by the natural gas for the cookers in the apartments, one after another to the very last.

    But the last touch on this Obsessive-Compulsive sequel of this mythic and cultish "Children of the Corn" story is the fact that train-tracks are running something like fifty yards from the entrance, and trains are regularly going by, and we are in the middle of nowhere. Who would accept to have luxury apartments or condominiums there? Probably insane people. And somewhere on the lower floors, there is a nursery growing with artificial light all kinds of vegetables. It was a little bit too early for marihuana, but I am sure in one corner or other there might have been some, well hidden under a table or behind leeks and pumpkins. Then high drug-addicts would not mind the trains if they could even hear them

    Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU
  • "Children of the Corn: Revelation" is the seventh sequel in this never ending horror series, and was one that I actually really enjoyed. This film is about a woman named Jamie, who arrives in a small rural town to visit her grandmother, Hattie. When she arrives at the dilapidated Hampton Arms apartment building, which is incidentally located in the middle of a cornfield, she discovers that her grandmother has mysteriously disappeared.

    After having a strange encounter with some children at a small-town market nearby one evening, Jamie begins to get a little creeped out. She goes to the police to report her grandmother missing, and the strange children keep on appearing to her on many occasions around the building as she awaits any news of her grandmother's discovery. Then the other residents of the building begin to disappear one by one, and the many children who are lurking around seem to be behind it...

    This one really isn't related to the rest of the movies, but I think that's why it prevailed in my eyes. The same plot being rehashed over and over in this series was a little annoying, and I found "Part 6: Isaac's Return" to be godawful. I liked the atmosphere this movie set up; the building was creepy and the bizarre children that pop up all over the place were surprisingly unnerving. The film had some fairly decent scare-scenes and the actors did a fair job here. The ending was a little abrupt though.

    Some of the CGI corn effects (especially the ones used in the finale) were a little overdone and corny (yes, pun intended!), but it was nothing to pine over. I also found the bathtub scene to be kind of funny and ridiculous, but what can you expect? It's number seven in a horror series in which 90% of the films have straight-to-video releases. If you suspend your disbelief, this is an entertaining, reasonably creepy little flick.

    While it isn't cinematic brilliance, I found "Children of the Corn: Revelation" to be a decent sequel, and probably my favorite of this horror series. It had a somewhat original story, some good scares and creepy imagery, and stands as something marginally fresh in the recycled series. Worth a watch, even if you haven't seen the previous installments. 7/10.
  • ewestrup16 December 2001
    Do you know how long I have waited to see this movie??? I've been waiting to see Children of the Corn 7 since I saw the 6th one probably a year or two ago. Well, I was totally disappointed. Unlike many Children of the Corn fans, I enjoyed COTC 6. It had suspense, good characters, good plot, and excitement. Number 7 was totally lacking in every aspect. It was pointless, the children were too cute to be creepy, and it had absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the series. By far, the worst one yet. If you are a COTC fan, you have to see this movie no matter what, but you will be utterly disappointed. 0 out of 4 stars.
  • Ok, a priest, a stripper, a pot-head & a granny walk into a row of corn... No it's not the start of a bad joke, just a insipidly bad movie. In this seemily up-teenth corny sequal, a woman goes to an evicted building looking for her granny where she meets the children of the... oh forget this, just know that I watch crap like this so you don't have to.

    where i saw it: Showtime
  • Whilst the rest of the world is giving us films like Dog Soldiers and The Ring we still keep churning out this genre crap - I mean does anyone really need a sixth sequel to a film no one liked in the first place. I mean who watches these...oh wait a minute I did. Shame on me.
  • When calls for her eccentric grandmother go unanswered,Jamie Lowell is shocked to discover that her grandmother's last known address is a condemned tenement building overrun by murderous children.But as Jamie slowly uncovers the truth behind her grandmother's mysterious disappearance,she merely disturbs a powerful evil that now seeks to destroy Jamie as well!First of all I'm not a fan of "Children of the Corn" series,however the description on the back of my tape sounded good enough to watch this film.Guy Magar's "Children of the Corn:Revelation" lacks gore and scares and is filled with huge plot holes.Still the location sets are suitably atmospheric-the hallways are dark and slimy looking.Unfortunately the ridiculous climax truly got on my nerves.Overall,this isn't the best in the "Children of the Corn" franchise,but it sure is better than horrible part 6.
  • I was at the video store and while I swore off seeing any more of the Children of the Corn sequels, I have to admit that I was intrigued when I saw the cover of Children of the Corn: Revelation, it looked like an actual scary movie. Who knew? It might've been, right? I think somewhere on it's own, it might have been a good horror flick, but it got to be too cheesy and the lines were just silly and predictable.

    A girl, Jamie, is looking for her grandmother, since she hasn't returned her phone calls and has moved into a condemned building. But when she bumps into two creepy looking kids, she begins to wonder what's going on. She goes to the police, but they tell her to wait a day to make sure her grandmother isn't just out, she does so, but ends up finding out more with a certain cult and it's mysterious murders going on in the building she's living in.

    It was very predictable and incredibly corny, if it didn't have the Children of the Corn title, it could've worked a little better, because the cornstalks were just a little too tacky. But I think some horror fans might get a certain kick out of it, or not, judging by the rating of this film, I think everyone else agrees with me.

    2/10
  • Come on now, this movie has actually very little to do with the previous entries. Not that that necessarily is a bad thing though, since the previous entries also exactly weren't brilliant, tense, frightening or original enough movies.

    But also on its own right, this movie is a pretty poorly done one. It's story is quite bad and it just pretty much fails to take off. The movie its movie remains a mysterious one till pretty much the very end of the movie. Not that it contributes much to the movie its tension or anything, it just comes across as some very lazy and simplistic writing.

    All we have here in this movie are a bunch of mindless looking and moving kids, who every now and then start to laugh annoyingly. The movie seems to be without any real good ideas and instead grabs onto some simplistic and formulaic horror moments, that besides are not handled or executed too well into the movie.

    It's not really the type of movie in which you care a lot about anything. The characters are just flat and uninteresting and you don't care if they survive or not and if they will be able to solve the 'mystery'.

    With this all it also doesn't help much that the story is filled with some distracting plot-holes and just elements that don't make sense in the overall story. Like I said, the movie has some very lazy and cheesy writing and the movie its story should had basically never turned into a movie. I just don't get it why some scripts get even turned into movie. Surely when you read a story like this you'll known beforehand that the movie won't be anything too spectacular or even original to watch.

    I also just don't get why Michael Ironside is in this movie. His role is so totally pointless and besides also far too small to make a relevant impression. He is an actor that deserves far better really but oh well, everybody needs to do some work to pay the bills and maintain their swimming pool and mistresses.

    Doesn't as too much to do with the Children of the Corn-series or how it started all out once with Stephen Kings' short story but also a stand-alone picture this one is far too formulaic and without any good ideas of its own.

    4/10

    http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
  • The first film was very good, the second one was average but decent story line. After that all the other COTC sequels have been below average but this film is probably the worst overall.(Other than the terrible CGI junk monster in Urban Harvest). I don't see a reason for another film but now they are talking about a reboot...... Totally not needed.
  • They keep taking this CotC series and sending it another direction - something very far away from the original. This film basically is a film that has very, very little to do with the original. They already killed this film series with "The Gathering" (Part 4) and took it where no corn child has gone before in this 7th movie. UGH! Now I do understand why this film (Part 7) does NOT take place in Gaitlin. Part 3: Urban Harvest explains this (and it was not set in Gaitlin). Basically the corn seeds are spreading all over the world.

    In "Revelation" why are these kids 'ghostly'? The original film there were NO 'ghostly' kids. Just real human kids who started listening to and was influenced by Isaac! It's "He Who Walks Behind The Rows" that is the supernatural element and Isaac's relationship & contact with "He".

    Hey at least in this film the kids are wearing the older style clothing again (conservative religious look). If that counts for anything. I say this because I hated the way they were dressed in "Isaac's Return" - looking modern and way off base of the original story.

    Anyway, if you view this film as just another supernatural creepy kid film then it's easier to enjoy than to try to think of this one as a part of the CotC series.

    3/10
  • BA_Harrison13 October 2023
    Part 6(66) marked a steep decline in quality for the Children of the Corn franchise, but part seven sees the blight well and truly taking hold, leaving the series withered and lifeless. No longer do the films deliver a bounty of gory kill scenes; instead, we get pedestrian direction, weak plot-lines, lame deaths, and zero in the way of suspense or scares.

    This one has Jamie (Claudette Mink) paying a visit to her grandma in an old apartment building that has been condemned, only to find that the old woman is missing. Turns out that grandma was the only survivor of a child cult that carried out a suicide pact and the dead kids aren't happy that she escaped. For some inexplicable reason, the vengeful spirits also kill off the other tenants in the building before finally setting their sights on Jamie.

    1.5/10, very generously rounded up to 2 for a realistic looking severed head, gratuitous nudity from Yan-Kay Crystal Lowe as stripper Tiffany, and a brief turn by the great Michael Ironside as a priest who has absolutely no bearing on the plot.
  • This is better then the first 6 movie of Children of the Corn. The first 6 movie of Children of the Corn are very scary. This is scarier. THIS THE BEST CHILDREN OF THE CORN MOVIE I HAVE SEEN. it has a great story line. IT ALSO HAS GREAT ACTING. If you are looking for really scary horror movie SEE THIS ONE. IT IS ONE OF THE SCARIEST MOVIES EVER.
  • Searching for her grandmother, a young woman arrives in a small-town only to find her missing and sets out with some locals to find out what happened, eventually finding that she was heavily involved in a fanatical cult that has come back taking revenge for the past, forcing her to race to stop them.

    This here wasn't that bad at all and actually had some good stuff to it. One of the biggest pluses is the film's collection of rather impressive and freaky confrontations sequences with the kids throughout. These here provide the film with some solid action throughout here, as the first big one is the attack on the one victim in the bathtub, which is great with the corn-stalks appearing through the bubbles shooting out and wrap around the clueless victim. This is in itself an impressive visual but with the added bonus of supplying nudity and a fun-looking kill as well really starts this off on a fun note, leading into the quick flash-cut visions out in the cornfields which are a lot of fun The big one is the main dream sequence where the whole backstory is spelled out quite nicely, from the events that show what happened to the grandmother to the somewhat suspenseful chase up the twisting, darkened stairway that leads to a very creepy denouement reveal, it's all a very fun scene and definitely gets the most out of these types of scenes. With the resolution of the burning stoves and the last-ditch effort by the possessed corn-stalks coming into play quite nicely, these here are all incredibly fun scenes that make the finale really blow right by and feel like a fun film. That it's always hard to tell what's featured during them is another factor, and the glimpses offered aren't that bad at all and some are downright freaky, most notably a scene of them taking out a victim through the goggles of a night-vision camera dropped in the attack. Armed with some good kills in here, these here make the film watchable as there wasn't a whole lot of stuff here that didn't work. One of the main flaws was the film's constant child's laughter playing throughout the whole film. It got off as a rather nice tactic that makes the children appear as constant forces within the town, only as time went on it grew irritating to hear the exact same thing playing in the background of nearly every scene within the apartment complex and wore out it's welcome quite early. The very boring beginning doesn't help all that much, as this one just spends a large amount of time just showing her walking around the apartments meeting everyone and trying to get the information needed, but it's just not that interesting the way it plays out since it just consists of her meeting up with people who have no impact in the story and then going on to someone else to get the same thing. Rather than trying to make it seem like it's a conspiracy at work, it just drags the beginning out and could've been done in a recap or montage effort since most serve no purpose. The last flaw is the question regarding the confusion over who the priest character is. It's not explained at all who he is, what his connection is, and the only amount of information gathered is that he's here to warn her, despite this coming at the end of the film and his unspoken presence seen throughout. It's quite confusing, but these are the film's only flaws.

    Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language and Nudity.
  • With this seventh movie in the franchise, I was not particularly having any hopes or expectations to the movie, as I sat down here in 2023 to watch it for very first time. And with the franchise sliding off track ever since after part II, chances were that "Children of the Corn: Revelation" would hardly be a redeeming movie.

    But since I hadn't already seen it, of course I opted to watch it and give writer S. J. Smith the benefit of the doubt.

    However, the storyline in "Children of the Corn: Revelation" was not outstanding. In fact, it was very much akin to what you get in parts III through VI. So it is not a movie that takes the franchise back to the roots. Nor is it a movie that particularly had the spirit and feel of the first two movies to it either. I mean, long gone are the rural settings and vast corn fields, and instead we have an apartment complex with a small corn field at the back of it. Yeah, that was the extend of what you get here.

    The acting performances in "Children of the Corn: Revelation" were fair enough. The only familiar face on the cast list was Michael Ironside.

    "Children of the Corn: Revelation" was watchable, but it was by no means a memorable or outstanding foray into the franchise, nor a particularly great horror movie.

    My rating of director Guy Magar's 2001 movie "Children of the Corn: Revelation" lands on a four out of ten stars.
An error has occured. Please try again.