Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, January 30, 1993 TAG: 9301300234
SECTION: EXTRA PAGE: 3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: MIKE MAYO CORRESPONDENT
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
`CORN' SEQUEL DOESN'T HAVE A STALK TO STAND ON
Why does "Children of the Corn II" exist?What could have induced producers to invest money in a sequel to a 1984 also-ran? Has the original been so popular on home video that someone thought they could squeeze a few more bucks out of the title? If that's the case, why release this incompetent little snoozer in theaters? It falls far short of the level of entertainment provided by most video originals.
The film appears to have been a local production made somewhere in the Midwest with a few professional actors in the leads and enthusiastic semi-pros filling out the cast. There are no surprises in the connect-the-dots script or the non-special effects.
For those who don't remember the first film, it was about these farm kids who killed their parents to appease a god they called "He Who Walks Behind the Rows." In this one, most of the kids are still around, though they've been moved to a neighboring town. A tabloid reporter (Terrence Knox), with rebellious teen-age son in tow, shows up to find out what happened. You can take it from there.
The attempts at humor - most curiously playing off "The Wizard of Oz" - are lame, and the repeated shots from the corn's point of view, apparently meant to be frightening, just don't work. Director David Price lets the action bog, but then there's nothing original here. At their best, low-budget horror movies are unpredictable and bizarre. This sequel is tedious and ordinary.
"Children of the Corn II" isn't actively bad. Instead, it's boring, and that's much much worse.
Children of the Corn II The Final Sacrifice: *
A Dimension release playing at the Valley View Mall 6, Salem Valley 8. 93 min. Rated R for strong language and bloody but unpersuasive effects.