|
Directed by: Steven T. Kay Starring: Barry Watson, Emily Deschanel I went to see Boogeyman expecting stupid schlock horror and nothing else. However, it turned out to be a very intelligent film in the vein of Steven King's IT. The various plot twists kept me interested for the duration of the film, and I was quite impressed by some of the more creative camera angles and effects. For a movie about a childhood story, Boogeyman manages to be nearly free of horror movie cliches and has a couple of great death scenes. If you haven't seen the trailer yet, DONT WATCH IT. Almost all of the scares are given away. I was laughing to myself while most of the audience was shrieking. Boogeyman is a great Friday night diversion that will stick with you for quite awhile. 4.5 RATING: 4.5 PROS: Excellent cinematography, great villian. CONS: Some poor dialogue, most scares shown in the TV trailer. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0357507/
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2005 09:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 04:47 |
|
|
The entire movie was nothing but cheap scares. The type where everything is quiet and something jumps out at you. That was it. The ending was somewhat of a disappointment and anti-climactic. It's a good movie to see if you're bored and out with a date or something. Rating: 3
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2005 17:23
|
|
|
If Sam Raimi continues to produce movies like this, I am going to lose the respect that I currently hold for him. I have walked out of two films in the past few years...one was The Grudge, and the other was Boogeyman (the two films Raimi has produced with Ghost House). This movie relied on nothing but cheap scares that were horribly predictable, and overused camera tricks. Overall, it is the worst film I have ever paid to see. Rating: 0
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2005 22:41
|
|
|
Either I'm becoming desensitized, or this just wasn't that scary. The story itself was fairly predictable, and I found myself getting bored, and nearly nodding off while I watched it. Sam Raimi can do much, much better than this. But, it wasn't horrible, so I have a hard time giving it too low a rating; at least the plot was coherant. My biggest beef was with the "childhood sweetheart" character that's introduced toward the beginning. There's little done to make us feel the connection between her in the main character; with all the time spent on flashbacks, it would have been nice to see these two playing and making their first passes at romance in flashback, or within the first few minutes of the movie. It would have earned it a three, but for now, it gets a... 2/5
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2005 01:30
|
|
|
This movie was as bad as any Uwe Boll movie ever made. It was cliche crap, recycled from about every monster movie you've ever seen. There were no suprises, the bad guy was just your run-of-the-mill glorified zombie and you never found out what his deal was, why he was angry, if he had an adjenda, where he went when he disappeared, or anything. Avoid this movie like the plague, even Alone in the Dark had a better story than this drek. Rating: -1
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2005 18:23
|
|
|
Pretty cliche at the beginning with many scenes causing major  . It got slightly interesting at the beginning of the third act with a few interesting idea but overall not an incredible movie.However it is signifcantly better than Hide and Seek or Darkness. 2/5
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2005 21:49
|
|
|
Dull. All build-up with a lovely ending. A few cool shots (I liked the transition from the closet to under the bed, with the camera angle) but nothing special. 2/5
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2005 23:33
|
|
|
This movie was slow and boring while it was trying to be cool and atmospheric. Here's a hint, Mr. Director - doing a quick close-up on an object while playing creepy music does not make that object scary necessarily. SARAN WRAP IS NOT SCARY. AN ICE MACHINE IS NOT SCARY. They will never be scary. Give it up. The acting was pretty bad, and the plot didn't make any sense. I'm still trying to figure out what happened to his slutty girlfriend. Or, hell, even where the Boogeyman came from and why he started killing people. I love bad horror movies and I thought this movie was dull and stupid. The little girl was cool. That's all I can recommend. 1/5
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2005 05:05
|
|
|
This was the second worst movie I have ever seen. If you enjoy loud noises and running shadows every 45 seconds then go see this movie. None of the scares were atmospheric, just "BOO!" type crap. This movie has all the cliches of recent and past horror movies. Loud shrieking noises? Check. Quick flashes of indistinguishable images? Got it. Running shadows in the foreground? Yup. While everyone else in the theater seemed scared (read: startled from ear splitting noises)I was literally laughing at some scenes. Especially one of the last where he has to "face" the boogster. 0/5 a creepy colon fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Mar 3, 2005 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2005 04:42
|
|
|
There was nothing redeeming whatsoever about this movie. The dialogue in the movie was utterly retarded and cliche. There was no character development and no connection with any of the characters. The Boogeyman villain itself started out pretty creepy and promising, but as the movie wore on he became unbearably stupid and generic. And who the gently caress was he and why did he suddenly gain all sorts of superpowers at the end, like lightning and the ability to turn into water? The plot, for the most part, made absolutely no sense. The scenes seemed disjointed and there were annoying little flashes of "creepy" images about every two seconds. The only scene in the movie that was somewhat cool was when all the missing children appear around Tim and reach up to grab him. I really can't reccomend this unless you're really, REALLY bored. 1/5
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2005 06:05
|
|
|
Not too bad. It was nicely creepy in parts, and the camerawork borrowed heavily from the Sam Raimi school of direction (gee, I wonder why?). The main negatives were the overuse of jump scares, and how the villain loses any creep factor whatsoever after we see him in pure CGI form for more than 3 seconds. I'd like to see what they cut out of the film, especially if there's any more expository scenes and such. 2.5/5
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2005 03:44
|
|
|
Lots of jumpy parts, which I react to but really don't enjoy I had a hard time not expecting the rest of the cast of Lost to come out of the shadows The ending was BAD it would have been so much better if the girl haddn't been there so it could be assumed he was the killer and it was all in his head. I would have been much more entertained if he had a psychotic break It wasn't walk out worthy but I was disappointed. 1/5
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2005 00:09
|
|
|
.
MC Hawking fucked around with this message at 08:25 on Jun 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2005 18:53
|
|
|
Too many cheap jumps for my taste. The annoying thing was that so many of them were false alarms. There would be all this atmospheric music and creepy sounds then... Oh no! A mirror! This would be fine but there were just too many in the place of an actually scary story or plot. They would have the jumpy loud noise when I didn't even think it was supposed to be scary. I only gave this 2 points because I thought some of the special affects were kinda neat and I liked the concept of how the boogeyman was destroyed at the end. In addition, at one point in the film, when the main character is told to just close his eyes and count to 5 to make bad things go away, he counted very slowly to 5 and I swear to god my friends cellphone started vibrating and it freaked the hell out of him. We joked around that it would be a text message from the boogeyman just saying "6" or something. 2
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2005 06:09
|
|
|
I thought Boogeyman was just awful. There was almost no plot and the editing was so quick you couldn't even tell what the hell was going on 90% of the time. So far this is the worst movie I've seen in 05.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2005 13:44
|
|
|
This was honestly one of the worst movies that I have ever seen. The plot was non-existent. I only went to appease my girlfriend, and it was a mistake. I don't know where to begin with this movie: The acting was horrible. I guess the only saving point to this movie was the very few times that something would jump out at you and make u jump. Pros: None, to think of Cons: Everything, bad acting, bad directing, BAD SCRIPT. This movie should not have been released. 1/5
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2005 02:03
|
|
|
poo poo-rear end terrible movie, it just pissed me off that the whole movie hinted that the boogeyman may be his psychological problems or whatever with no real foreshadowing as to what else it could be... ...but then it is a zombie that moves around really fast and can seran-wrap people, then changes into a lovely CG thing that turns into a bunch of mother loving bats and is killed by means of a voodoo doll. No explanation or conclusion at all afterwards either, I hated this piece of gently caress, it wasn't even funny to mock except for "Because... we're the only ones who believe." I've seen alot of crap since this movie (AvP I'm looking at you) and I would still without a doubt rate it as one of the worst I've ever seen all the way through or in part. 0/5 vulgarghost fucked around with this message at 05:25 on Jul 28, 2005 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2005 05:19
|
|
|
Judging by the reviews, this movie's pretty goddamned underrated. Then again, I seem to be the only person in the United States who liked "Wrong Turn," so take my opinion for what it's worth. It's not that bad. Granted, the end fight is cheesy, but there are some pretty good psychological scares outside of the jump scenes (proof that the sudden appearance of old women isn't scary in just "The Shining" or "The Others," him rolling over to find his decaying mother in bed is pretty loving creepy), and I really like the idea of a network of closets and crawl spaces as portals for the monster. Considering how little horror films in general have made sense recently, I don't think it's fair to fault just "Boogeyman" for a couple of inexplicable red herrings. Hell, with the prevalence of twists these days, I half expect all horror/thriller plots to be just dream sequences anyway, so I'm no longer really bothered by the nonsensical poo poo and I prefer to just enjoy the ride, plot be damned. That's not to say a good plot doesn't change a horror movie—a good plot could change a workmanlike movie such as "Boogeyman" into a genere-busting Great Movie like "Jacob's Ladder"—but as it is it's a simple, moderately effective horror movie with few thrills and no twists. Not too shabby. 3/5
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2005 22:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 04:47 |
|
|
There was way too much "staring at doors" in this movie for my taste. And that's too bad, because the movie had a lot of potential, and a lot of elements that could have really distinguished it from other horror movies (like the origins of the Boogeyman's appearance and the pursuit of him through the different doors). But it just wound up being your stereotypical "guy has something horrific happen to him due to some supernatural presence, no one believes him for years causing him to doubt his own experience and his sanity, until he finally gathers the courage to face his fear and prove to the people that he loved that he wasn't crazy." Seriously, I'm pretty sure this movie was called Darkness Falls, and then called Them. And those were crappy movies. 1.5/5
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2006 23:34
|
|
