Tuesday, March 13, 2012
During the beginning stages of the film, I had to take multiple breaks and pause it every once and a while to cleanse my pallet of this flick. From the get go, the co-star of the film, Kandyse McClure (who plays Vicki), was getting on my fucking nerves, making me want to turn this off and send it back to the Netflix warehouse by express mail. She was acting like such a bitch to the character of Burt (played by David Anders of "Heroes" fame) that it was bordering on overacting.
Up until the ending, the film pretty much follows the original, begging the question as to why the filmmakers felt they had to remake this film. Yeah, they put a couple of touches here and there, establishing the children taking over the town already and giving us a shot of the leader. This time around, however, it’s not the man who looks like a child playing Isaac, but an actual child. Usually, that’s a mistake when you put such a young child in a heavy role like this one and seeing how the film was going thus far, I’m sure that was the case there.
On the plus side, when the couple are driving on their way into the town of Gatlin, Vicki lightened up for a while. But then she reverted back to her previous bitchiness when she found the corn crucifix and Burt didn’t want to throw it out.
It makes me angry that original movies are insulted like this. Why does anybody think it can be done better? Children of the Corn of 1984 wasn’t considered a classic by the masses or an award winner in any sense, but it had a cult status among fans of the genre as well as fans of Stephen King adaptations. The stars of the original film didn’t give the performances of their lives, nor did they stand out in the film. What was memorable about 1984’s Children of the Corn was the actors who played Isaac and Malachai, John Franklin and Courtney Gains respectively. Not only did they both stand out, but it was ingenious casting to have Franklin take on the role of Isaac. He was 25 years old when that film was released, yet he was playing the part of a boy in his pre-teens. The actor had GHD (Growth Hormone Deficiency), so he looked and sounded years younger than he actually appeared. Because of this fact, he appeared to be a boy with extraordinary intellect and vocabulary, nailing the part perfectly.
Overall, I guess it wasn’t that bad. But then again, it wasn’t that good either. It’s just another testament that this trend of remaking films has got to stop. Let’s go with fresh ideas, let’s try to come up with ingenious ways to create sequels to the favorite movies of our time. Why do we constantly accept remakes? Even the filmmakers these days are tired of using that nomenclature. Instead of using the already tired term of remake, filmmakers are now injecting the word “reboot” into the mix.
I’m not going to go into this particular movie too much, only just to say it’s another forgettable remake of an original film that had, like, ten sequels, dooming this reboot from the start. Every time I ventured into a Blockbuster or Hollywood Video, I’d see a few of these sequels on the shelves and I just felt pity.
Anyway, what’s my final “bit” on Children of the Corn? Seeing that the film was a cable TV event, that tells you a lot. It wasn’t good enough to make it to theaters and in my opinion, it shouldn’t have made it to DVD as well. It’s just another remake that should be filed away with all the remakes released so far and all the remakes that are on the horizon to be filmed. This one is forgettable and not really worth a watch, but if you do, you’ll neither be disappointed nor impressed. It’s nothing to recommend, but it’s not like someone will hate you for doing so. Skip it…or not.
at 2:08:00 PM