Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice

1992

Action / Horror / Thriller

12
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten 22%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Spilled 20%
IMDb Rating 4.3 10 7417

Synopsis


Uploaded By: LINUS
February 22, 2016 at 04:39 AM

Director

Cast

Sean Bridgers as Jedediah
Aubrey Dollar as Naomi Johnson
Terence Knox as John Garrett
Christie Clark as Lacey Hellerstat
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
673.33 MB
1278*720
English 2.0
R
23.976 fps
1 hr 32 min
P/S 2 / 6
1.4 GB
1904*1072
English 2.0
R
23.976 fps
1 hr 32 min
P/S 3 / 1

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by Platypuschow 4 / 10

Children of the Corn II The Final Sacrifice: On par with the original, but thats not saying much

I was underwhelmed by the original Children of the Corn (1984) film, I expected something a lot more impressive and walked away very dissapointed.

It took 8yrs before it got a sequel and the movie more or less picks up from the last. All the corpses of the residents have been found but the psychotic religious fanatic children haven't changed at all and once again set about purging the adults.

It comes down to a reporter and his son to stop them, but though it makes for an interesting follow up the movie itself isn't very interesting.

A couple of decent deaths and a passable premise don't make up for just how generic it feels. Nothing stands out, everything feels rather copy and pasted.

The Final Sacrifice tries to flesh out the mythology and background of "He who walks behind the rows" but in doing so kind of damages what they'd already built. Sometimes simplicity is the key.

If you liked the first I'd say this is essential viewing, if you didn't then take into consideration that this is more of the same.

The Good:

One death scene was great

Follows on nicely

The Bad:

Simply fails to entertain

Squanders potential

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

Rifling through a persons belongings left in a car is suitable small town etiquette

BINGO!

Reviewed by Eric Stevenson 4 / 10

Still corny

This was the last "Children Of The Corn" movie to be released in theaters. Professional movie critics are certainly glad, although there are some who review direct to video stuff. Anyway, the original at least had Isaac in an entertainingly stupid role, but this really has nothing. I think the only decent actor is the Native American guy. The plot is that the kids are killing the adults again and sacrificing people. Yeah, pointless as that's what happened in the first movie.

This woman mentions that her husband disappeared 15 years ago and that's why she's moving. Why didn't she move 15 years ago? As far as I know, Stephen King isn't a critic of religion, but this did come off as anti-religious. We get stupid ways for people to die like an old lady who crashes through a window after being hit by a car. It's as silly as it sounds. There's just nothing new and it's a shame this series went on forever. *1/2

Reviewed by Mr_Ectoplasma 4 / 10

Generally flat followup

"Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice" follows a reporter and his estranged son from New York who are traveling through Nebraska in the aftermath of the first film's events; naturally, he wants a story. The price? Perhaps his life.

The original "Children of the Corn" installment is not what I'd call high art exactly, but it is a fairly well-put-together horror film from a rather disreputable company (New World). This film picks up immediately where the first leaves off, shifting to new characters. Cue mysterious children, a "normal" girl-next-door love interest for the teenaged boy, and a few outrageous and violent death scenes (including one grand guignol scene in a church ceremony).

"Children of the Corn II" is at its core a fairly unoriginal film, but worse, it's actually quite dull and aimless. The script takes a hard right turn in the final act with a rather absurd ecological explanation for the events taking place, which itself is wrapped up in commentary on indigenous peoples and European settlers. The problem is that none of these things really seem to cohere as the film clunks toward its finale. Terence Knox seems bored, as does most of the cast here, and there is a fair amount of soap-opera acting throughout.

It's not entirely bad, though—I do think genre fans will find some amusement here with the death scenes and early-nineties stylistics. As a time capsule and a kitschy slasher oddity, it's amusing; as a sequel, it's unexciting, and dare I say anticlimactic. Oddly enough, I may prefer the successive sequels that followed it. 4/10.

Read more IMDb reviews

0 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment