Talk:Children of the Corn: Revelation

"Best of the sequels"
Have removed these two claims made by 70.17.189.179 about this film being "generally considered the best of the sequels" because every site I've visited contradicts this: If someone can find a reliable source that claims it is the best of the sequels, then by all means add it, but it's not "generally" considered the best of the sequels. Somno (talk) 03:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * "It's not as bad as a few of the previous sequels, but it does still kinda suck."
 * "Children of the Corn 666: Revelation is a horrible sequel just like most of the other instalments..."
 * "Spooky ghost" take on the Corn series leaves us with a bore job instead of a gore job."
 * "This movie is certainly not the worst in the series." (Still doesn't mean it's the best!)

Changed "Gatlin" to "Omaha", as the movie took place in Omaha... Not Gatlin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.216.53.66 (talk) 23:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Plot
I'm just going to copy across the same text I just wrote on the Talk page for Children of the Corn: Revelation. I have tried to contact the editor directly but they seem to be on a different IP address every time they edit, so never receive my messages.

I appreciate the amount of work that's gone into expanding the Plot section, but please spell-check what you enter and make sure it makes sense. Also, the Manual of Style for WikiProject Films recommends that plot summaries are 400-700 words long, and the current plot summary for this film is nearly 980 words long, which is completely unnecessary. Please try to keep to these guidelines. It's supposed to be a summary of the plot, not an exact description of every small occurrence in the film. Thanks. Somno (talk) 07:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

'Bitches'??
What's this bit mean? (Albert Mond (talk) 06:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC))