Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest (1995) Poster

User Reviews

Add a Review
79 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
Ambitious and Surprising Sequel
idlehands2k26 November 2001
After the disappointing "Children of the Corn II", the 1996 direct-to-video sequel subtitled "Urban Harvest" moves the setting from a rural Midwestern town to the Windy City of Chicago. A change of atmosphere gives the "Children of the Corn" franchise a much-needed boost and this entry is sometimes scary, often imaginative and boasts some unique special effects.

A couple (Jim Metzler and Nancy Lee Grahn) adopt a pair of abandoned teens. The older one (Ron Melendez) is conflicted with his Gatlin, Nebraska past, while the younger one (Daniel Cerny) prepares to recruit an all new batch of followers to resurrect He Who Walks Behind the Rows.

The movie is pretty tense and actually works on many levels... but the finale -- while planned out well -- looks really cheap onscreen and brings about lots of unintentional laughter.

"Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest" is one of the strongest entries in the franchise, and for the first 85 of its 91 minute running time, it proves to be a first-rate thriller.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
come on people, it's not THAT bad!
sony-66 March 1999
mostly everyone on here has been saying that this movie sucks and that the acting is bad, but the acting actually is very good. That was what made me sit through this movie, also I'm a fan of these movies anyway, I live for horror! the best performance in ths movie was given by Daniel Cerny, the worst performance was given by Ron Melendez. so, peace out.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
strangely enjoyable
snafflemonkey16 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Surely there can't be more children from Gatlin trying to find a new home? This entry changes the setting of the series from a small rural town to the big city and the change of location doesn't really work. The concept of the children killing all the adults because of "He who walks behind the rows" could work in an isolated town but in a large urban area the idea of the huge cornfield springing up from nowhere is just more laughable than anything.

Having said all that there is much to enjoy in this film - the acting is better than is usual for this sort of thing, the special effects - up until the end, are quite good and there are some effective horror moments and the running time doesn't drag.

As has been mentioned by others the monster at the end of the film is something to behold, it looks extremely fake but oddly it just adds to the charm of this sequel.

This entry is the last to really follow the storyline from the first 2 with any regard to a continuing plot until the dire part 6, so if you enjoy cheap horror your better sticking with the first 3.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
Good movie that falls apart in the last 10 minutes. !SPOILER ALERT!
LT-1031 December 1999
Warning: Spoilers
I know that there not the best movies ever made, but I enjoyed the first two movies in this series. I was thinking the same about this one but the part with the living scarecrow and the horrible special effects from the monster changed how I thought about this movie. !SPOILER ALERT! It would have been better if Eli was killed more slowly and then end it with a few flashes and stuff, throw the ministers bible in the flashes. That way the horrible monster effect could have been avoided. I didn't think Eli's step-mother should have died (I forget her name, lets call her the girl from General Hospital) It was a very good death scene but it should have happened to someone else. This movie really wasn't totally necessary, but it can be entertaining you just sit back and go with the flow.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Almost good...
...but ruined by the ending. The infamous ending of the third part of the Children of the Corn series feels like a disaster of epic proportions that kills what otherwise could be a near perfect movie. Nevertheless, this movie has many good things that are worth a watch.

The plot is a very good twist to the well-known saga of "He Who Walks Behind the Rows". After the horrifying events in Gatlin, two brothers, Eli(Daniel Cerny) & Joshua(Ron Melendez) are sent to a foster house in Chicago. Their new family is very eager to have children and gives them a warm welcome, but Eli & Joshua feel the cultural shock as they try to get used to the urban environment. While Joshua tries to fit in, the younger Eli begins to plant corn in order to bring the cult of "He Who Walks Behind the Rows" to the world.

It is indeed a very good script, and for the most part it works. It is a huge improvement over the past sequels and in my humble opinion, sometimes it even surpasses the original. Daniel Cerny's performance is outstanding and one wonders why he suddenly stopped working when he was one of the very few child actors who could give a believable performance.

The eerie atmosphere is back and there are great moments of suspense and surrealistic imagery. This is what Children of the Corn movies should be. The direction is pretty good, and it handles the script with perfection and lets it flow with good rhythm.

If all these is so good, what can be so bad that makes the movie fail in the end? Without giving spoilers, let me just say that even when the SFX are top-notch for a low-budget movie; the ending pretends to be of epic proportions and ends up being one of the biggest SFX disasters ever.

Don't get me wrong, even with it's HUGE SFX faults, it still is better than average, but it breaks everything that was build up to that moment, the eerie atmosphere fill with suspense turns into a savage gore fest in the style of "Evil Dead" but without the talent. It just feels like a different movie.

Overall, it's worth a rent, especially for Daniel Cerny's performance who truly saves the film(no surprise that it's when he is gone that the movie falls down). It's good entertainment if you see it with a open mind.

7/10
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Best in the series! (Spoilers)
willywants21 March 2004
Warning: Spoilers
PLOT: Two young Gatling residents are orphaned after the younger brother kills their father. So, the terror of Gatling goes urban when the two boys are placed in the custody of two foster parents. The younger brother (who by this point is established as the "evil one") bought some corn seeds along for the road and plants them in the courtyard of an abandoned warehouse, bring He Who Walks Behind the Rows to the city. He winds up possessing his high school peers, and soon his older brother feels called to stop him.

DIRECTING:8/10- I was very impressed with James D.R. Hickox's direction. Lots of slow-motion shots, "28 days later"-type photography, wide shots, and more. Good job!

ACTING: 9/10- Performances are all-around excellent, especially Daniel Cerny.......What ever happened to him? everyone else does great, too.

WRITING: 7/10- The script is full of solid scares and characters, Cerny's character (Eli) is given especially memorable lines.

GORE: 9/10- This is easily the goriest entry in the series. A man gets his arms ripped-off (made me cringe), his eyes and mouth sewn shut, and is then left to die, A woman's face catches on fire than litterally melts on screen (This one will give little kids nightmares for sure), a man's head is ripped off and is left on the end of a cartoonishly long spinal in the air (Gory, but more likely to arrouse laughs), a woman's head bursts open to reveal a colony of insects, a man coughs up cockroaches then dies, a man's face is torn up by a living statue of the virgin mary, a woman falls on a spicket and is impalled through her head, bloody water flows through her mouth, A man gets a scycle through his heart, a homeless man gets his eye's gouged out by vines, and a creature at the end of the film uses tentacles to mutilate many teens. There is also mild creature violence.

MONSTERS: We get a killer scare-crow creature, a giant multi-armed tentacle monster, killer vines,a living statue, and more.

SPECIAL F/X: 9/10- Effects-nut screaming Mad George (The man responsible for the gnarly effects in "Society")cooks up the goods here, and gets an A in my book. The gore effects look excellent and painfully realistic at times. Nice!

MUSIC SCORE: 8/10- Very dark score here. Best score in the series and used to great effect.

FINAL VERDICT:"Children of the corn 3" is the best in the series, case closed. The performances are fantastic, the direction is stylish, the effects, for the most-part, are excellent (With the exception of a giant monster at the end), the score is dark and moody, and it's a good change bringing the dried-up plot to Chicago. Recommended! My rating for "Children of the corn 3"--7.5-10.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
3/10
epitome of tacky horror
leandros1 May 2009
Apart from the Texas-sized loopholes in the script, this film is one of the corniest horror films I have ever watched. Stephen King is credited as one of the writers, and this is surprising to see as it is unclear if he has actually contributed to the script or this film was inspired from King's initial novel. The acting is quite mediocre, but the special effects are of record tackiness, with human puppets of the amazing quality of voodoo dolls. The gore factor is satisfying, even unexpectedly high. The reference to environmental issues as a contemporary premise to any evil we see on screen is flimsy and ephemeral. Overall, spare a few bucks to rent this on a Saturday night in with your friends and pizza.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
A notch above your average straight-to-tape flick
Bronis23 September 1999
COTC3 is not that bad. Seriously. It is a gory, silly, watchable horror flick that, despite being a third in a series (that never should've started anyway), is a notch above your average B-horror film. I recommend it because it's got a lot of clever gore and some freaky scare scenes. Infinitely better than the last two, this one's a lowest common denominator entertainer. GRADE: B-
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Best Sequel Of The Series!
movies2u15 February 2003
Children of the Corn 3- Urban Harvest was the best sequel of the Children Of The Corn movies! Daniel Cerny is one of the best child actors I have ever seen. This movie had a great and interesting story,and as very entertaining. There were many clever deaths, including the stepmother's death. The special FX were great for 1994, except for the ending..... I wanna slap the FX editor across the face! Towards the ending when the monster grabs the girl, you can totally see that it was a minitaure version of her like a barbie doll, you could tell by the way she moved and just the look of her, she looked like plastic! But other than that, it was great! Just watch out when she stabs the monster, and then right when she drops the scythe, close your eyes for 5 seconds. Then you won't have to see that horrible FX job. All in all, it was really good other than that. I give it an 8 out of 10.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
Best Of The Series
danthewrestlingmanorigin19 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This film has been unfairly slammed on here. It's no classic, but still it was an entertaining ride. First off the Eli kid was creepy, and not annoying, as many child stars tend to be nowadays. The kills were solid, malcolm's was nasty, and the mother's death was well done, with the water coming out of her mouth. The Corn series is not that good as a whole, but this one is very entertaining, and deliver's on the gore. The Corn monster at the end was a little cheesy, but the carnage, and kills it inflicts are off the hook. I rate all movies differently, but as horror sequels' go, I can't think of two many bad things to say about this one, the gore was here, the acting was solid, and I was never bored.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
4/10
Corny Sequel Gets a Pass for Delivering Some Cheap Fun.
Mr_Censored3 February 2010
"Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest" is a somewhat tacky and unnecessary sequel to the moderately successful Stephen King adaptation and its slightly under-rated sequel.

In the film, two youths from Gatlin (the setting of the first two films) are taken in by a yuppie couple in Chicago. The older of the two fits in relatively well, but the younger has plans of his own. Planting a corn field in the abandoned property next door, he creeps out his adoptive parents and eventually converts the entire teenage population to his maze worshipping cult.

Despite a predictable plot that seems to be missing chunks (at what point did Eli win over his peers?), dodgy special effects and wooden performances by its relatively unknown cast, the film is moderately enjoyable for what it is. If you want to see some brutal and over-the-top death scenes committed by vegetation, then "Children of the Corn III" hardly disappoints. Elsewhere, however, the film comes up short, and that's all there really is to it.

The film was dumped in theaters briefly in 1994 before being thrust into complete oblivion, making room for four direct-to-video sequels and a made-for-TV remake. Look closely, and you'll spot Charlize Theron in her very first role as an extra.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
10/10
Eek!
Seth Nelson27 February 2006
It's "Children of the Corn III," the third part of the "Children of the Corn" movie series (a novel written by quite possibly one of the most twisted men in novel writing, Mr. Stephen King!). I have seen bits and pieces (yes, real bits and pieces, LOL) of the first movie on television and it sure looked scary! And with part three already made, then that means that the horror is three times more scary than in the first one! Ahhh! What I liked the best about "Children of the Corn III" is that, being the very last of these movies, everything all suspenseful and stuff winds on down to the end - and with a mighty big finish, might I add! If you need to sit on down to a really great and exciting horror movie, look no further to the genius of horror - Mr. Stephen King, whose works always get 10 stars.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Silly but enjoyable horror sequel-IF you're a fan...
marcleroux14 September 2005
It's a rule, especially with horror movies, that the sequels are never as good as the original-particularly when the original was such a cult hit. So it's no surprise that 'Children of the Corn III:Urban Harvest' is no where near the quality of the original movie, in terms of production or plot.

However, it is better than 'Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice'.

The plot is simple: two young boys from Gatlin, Nebraska, wind up adopted by a naive, well meaning couple in Chicago. Once there, the youngest, Eli, begins to resurrect the bloody, sacrificial cult of 'He Who Walks Behind the Rows...' The acting in this movie is almost as good as that in the original. Young Daniel Cerny in particular pulls of a masterstroke in portraying both the evil and the innocence of the manipulative Eli.

The slow building of tension and suspense mirrors the nerve wracking atmosphere of the original movie, while the ignorance and naivety of the parents, creates a cruel feeling of vulnerability within the viewer.

This movie does, however, have two main faults. Firstly, the plot, whilst simple and effective, is somewhat stretched-the bloody cult of a corn god in Chicago? Secondly, the ending is somewhat silly and fantastical, leaving the viewer either laughing or lamenting.

My advice to fans of the genre and the original, is to watch this movie. It's not that bad, and for the most part is outright enjoyable. But be under no illusion-those who loathe the cliché's that sometimes creep into horror movies, should probably avoid this movie, and see the original instead.

I gave this movie a 7 out of 10. It's mostly fine, good for a sequel, and for fans of horror it's a fine movie. The young lead is brilliantly acted, the plot simple. But for most of you, this will be a waste of your time and money.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
10/10
Children of the Corn III is a awesome movie!
Fire_angel_blunt_0210 March 2005
Children of the Corn III is a great movie, I think that it was a great idea to kind of go back to the first Children of the Corn, having the one kid kind of taking control over all the other kids. It really had you leaning forward in your seat to see what would happen next. I also rate it a 10 because it had a lot of scary bloody scenes. And that is how a scary movie should be. Some people say that sequels are never as good as the original one, but I disagree, with the Children of the Corn series, the sequels prove to be as good if not better than the original. The actors in this movie were great, they really got into their characters. Especially Daniel Cerny, he's such a hottie, and he's a great actor. He really got into his character or so it seemed. I wish that he would do more movies. In this movie and in Demonic Toys he played an evil little kid, yet in Doc Hollywood he played a innocent little boy trying to stomp on a spider, so cute. So in my eyes Children of the Corn III and the rest of Children of the Corn movies are all 10's,I'll never dislike any of these movies. FOr anyone who likes blood and scenes that make you jump, check out the Children of the Corn movies.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
5/10
Fairly Decent... Until the Last 10 Minutes.
Mr_Ectoplasma2 January 2005
"Children of the Corn III: Urban Harvest" is the one of best Children of the Corn sequel of them all, in my opinion. It is about two brothers, one good and one evil who worships "he who walks behind the rows". The brothers are sent to a foster home in the big-city Los Angeles, which is an entirely different setting than what the kids are used to. After they move in with their foster family, bad things begin to happen, and people start to die in mysterious ways. And it's just a little strange that a cornfield is seeming to grow in an abandoned factory lot next door to the house...

I thought this film had some creative moments and some good things to offer. Particularly, I loved the death scene of the mother, Amanda. I won't tell you how she dies, but it was creative death scene and was very original. This is a decent movie, but it begins to drop way down within the last 10 minutes. The monster at the end was so horribly fake looking, it was extremely poor CGI effects. Also, when the monster lifts the girl up into the air, you can clearly see that it was a miniature doll that was used (it looked like a Barbie). The whole monster thing was completely ridiculous, and it's effects made the whole premise even worse.

Anyways, I enjoyed this sequel to the "Children of the Corn" series. It's stylish and has some good moments in it, but the last 10 minutes of it were a little too much for me and almost ruined the entire movie. If you are a series fan, check it out, but the horrible special effects may bring the movie down. 5/10.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Great movie, 4 stars
fireangel83_0230 July 2004
Children of the Corn 3 is an awesome movie, it was way better than part 2. Daniel Cerny is a great actor, and played the part well. Those who say that the movie sucked have no taste in horror movies whatsoever. I give this movie 4 stars. Daniel Cerny is also a very hot guy. The only part in the movie that was kind of corny was the monster at the end of the movie, everything else was fine. The first Children of the Corn was a little bit better, but not by much. He plays a good evil person. I hope to see more movies with him in it. Overall, if there is anyone out there who has not seen this movie, you should go rent it, you wont be let down, it's a great horror flick. I was raised on horror movies, and this movie is scary and keeps you guessing as to what is going to happen next.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Good Performance!
Bstevens12178723 May 2002
This movie is pretty much weird, but the performances were well. Daniel Cerny who plays Eli did a well job. The movie deals with pure evil it seems like. The gore parts are rather weird as well and have no purpose, to me killing people and worshiping a harvest or corn is rather spooky. But since I've seen scary movies this one came out to be rather weird and not so much disturbing just really. I know I say weird a lot in this review, but some of the graphics were weird too. I'm surprised they made a whole bunch of sequels to Children Of The Corn based upon the Stephen King novel "Children Of The Corn".
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Pretty Decent
ric-2911 December 1998
This was a pretty good little spooker with nice special effects. Moving the characters and the basic premise of an agricult into an urban setting made what could have been a tired rehash into an interesting and enjoyable flick. I enjoyed this movie more than the two previous entries in this series.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
surprising
lindentravers-213 March 2000
I have seen all of the "Corn" movies and I hated all of them, except this one was pretty damn good! I especially loved the good cast and action with the girl's hedge clippers and how she almost died and then she tripped backwards and died and the water/blood splurted out of her! Very enjoyable, if there is one "Corn" flick you want to see, see this awesome one!
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
5/10
Fun For the Whole Family!
I_can_get_you_a_toe11 May 2011
Warning: Spoilers
The movie opens in Gatlin. Hello Gatlin! It's nice to see you again. Oh, hi corn! Glad you're here too.

A man comes out of a trailer, drunk and holding a scythe and starts chasing his son through the corn – for what I can only assume is to chop him up into little pieces and then eat them, or maybe sell them for money. I don't know. Son runs to his little brother who's half his size and gets him to deal with it.

This is how we are introduced to the hammy acting skills of Eli and his brother Joshua. Two brothers, who like all kids of Gatlin – kill their father. Thus sending Eli and Joshua to Da Hood.

They move in with their foster parents, Eli bringing corn with him – and it's all magic corn that kills people.

Eli and Joshua attend school and find themselves starting to grow apart, they're still sharing a bed mind you, and as Joshua proves himself on the Basketball court (where EVERYTHING counts) and makes new friends. Eli gets angry at his brother asking why he's not with him anymore and that he loves him so much and needs to be with him all the time and to never ever leave him. Well he doesn't exactly say that – but his eyes told me that's what he was feeling.

So apparently Eli is all evil and I think the movie was trying to push across that he was the devil? They really need to stop coming up with convoluted and over-reaching explanations when crazy religious kids who worship some corn demon works just fine.

My favourite death was of the foster mother, who tripped over a pole and impaled her skull with a piece of pipe. Awesome. The ick factor goes up slightly when you think that one of her last memories on earth were of her super young foster son tonguing her ear. Nice.

As Eli starts to convert the city kids to his cracked way of thinking and to start killing off their parents – Joshua heads back to Gatlin (Yay! Gatlin) which must be just around the corner from Chicago, to save the freaking day.

While no where near as crappy as Children of the Corn 2: Final Sacrifice, this only rates slightly above in terms of inventive deaths and gore. And really, set in the city? It's about CORN movie people; a 3 row corn 'field' at the back of an abandoned warehouse is not creepy at all. It's weird.

Charlize Theron is an extra in this movie. She must be so proud.

Next up, Children of the Corn 4: Space Corn.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Watch At Your Own Risk
elpaz7990321 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I saw this boring installment long ago when it first came out on video. After finally seeing the He Who Walks Among The Rows, I was like, this is the idol those kids worship, and ticked off at the stupidity this movie tried to pass off as scary. To me it looked like a five year old wrote the script and the people over at Dimension were desperate for money. Don't bother with this movie, unless you are a Definite fan of the first movie. For me being a horror movie buff, I would recommend watching only the first part and forgetting about the other sequels because man this movie and the second part really stunk to high HECK.

1/10 Stars
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews