If you ever run out of King books, movies and shows, there are actually 11 movies for Children of the Corn! There are 4 Carrie movies and one in development. There are two Firestarter movies and one in development. Sometimes They Come Back Again has 3 movies. Pet Sematary has 3 movies. The Mangler has three movies. There's a sequel to The Lawnmower Man. There are two Creepshow movies. Tales From the Dark Side has episodes of short-stories. There's a Hindi version of IT called Woh.
FOUR Carrie movies?! I was only able to find three, but I do not doubt that a 4th exists. I'm purposely avoiding the multitude Children of the Corn movies. I just can't bring myself to do it. Same with Sometimes They Come Back, and all the other sequels that aren't written by King. I will be covering both Creepshow movies though. I am curious about that Hindi IT though....
Honestly, I like the short story, but I do not like this movie, its boring as hell, and the special effects are very, very bad. Also, why in the holy mother of flaming fuck sanwiches did anyone think it was a good idea to make so many sequels? Money, of course, but still, even by a moneymaking standpoint, why would making a bad sequel by a bad movie any good? And honestly, I'm fine with u not covering the sequels, there's just so many, and we all know they all are bad
Turns out the reason all those bad sequels got made was an issue of retaining the rights to the COTC name. When a business or individual buys the filming rights to a name/franchise, they retain those rights for ten years. If they don’t do anything with those filming rights in ten years, they lose their “retainer” on those filming rights. But every time they use the rights the clock starts over and they get their ten years back. So instead of making one film and allowing the rights to lapse, they will often churn out cheaply made trash movies in order to retain the filming rights.
Yeah, but if u ask me, I think they should've just let go of children of the corn after the first one. If you're not gonna make good movies of it, what's the point of continuing to hold on to it? Movies are made for money, and u can't make money if its not good. So, by a moneymaking standpoint, whats the point of holding on to children of the corn, if all its movies are laughably bad? And yes, I know there are so bad they're good movies, but children of the corn ain't those movies
100% agreed. These people hold onto intellectual properties and bleed them dry AND they def never made any money from a single one of the COTC sequels. At least not enough for it to matter.
John Franklin also played cousin it in 90,s the Adam's family movies
I didn’t realize that!
If you ever run out of King books, movies and shows, there are actually 11 movies for Children of the Corn! There are 4 Carrie movies and one in development. There are two Firestarter movies and one in development. Sometimes They Come Back Again has 3 movies. Pet Sematary has 3 movies. The Mangler has three movies. There's a sequel to The Lawnmower Man. There are two Creepshow movies. Tales From the Dark Side has episodes of short-stories. There's a Hindi version of IT called Woh.
FOUR Carrie movies?! I was only able to find three, but I do not doubt that a 4th exists. I'm purposely avoiding the multitude Children of the Corn movies. I just can't bring myself to do it. Same with Sometimes They Come Back, and all the other sequels that aren't written by King. I will be covering both Creepshow movies though. I am curious about that Hindi IT though....
I really enjoyed this film Linda Hamilton was good I have never watched any of the sequels and I never will
Definitely don’t watch any of them lol
I didn't rate this, a few creepy scenes but Issac annoyed the hell out of me.
Lol that’s how I felt about Malachi
Honestly, I like the short story, but I do not like this movie, its boring as hell, and the special effects are very, very bad.
Also, why in the holy mother of flaming fuck sanwiches did anyone think it was a good idea to make so many sequels?
Money, of course, but still, even by a moneymaking standpoint, why would making a bad sequel by a bad movie any good?
And honestly, I'm fine with u not covering the sequels, there's just so many, and we all know they all are bad
Turns out the reason all those bad sequels got made was an issue of retaining the rights to the COTC name. When a business or individual buys the filming rights to a name/franchise, they retain those rights for ten years. If they don’t do anything with those filming rights in ten years, they lose their “retainer” on those filming rights. But every time they use the rights the clock starts over and they get their ten years back. So instead of making one film and allowing the rights to lapse, they will often churn out cheaply made trash movies in order to retain the filming rights.
Yeah, but if u ask me, I think they should've just let go of children of the corn after the first one.
If you're not gonna make good movies of it, what's the point of continuing to hold on to it?
Movies are made for money, and u can't make money if its not good.
So, by a moneymaking standpoint, whats the point of holding on to children of the corn, if all its movies are laughably bad?
And yes, I know there are so bad they're good movies, but children of the corn ain't those movies
100% agreed. These people hold onto intellectual properties and bleed them dry AND they def never made any money from a single one of the COTC sequels. At least not enough for it to matter.