61 out of 84 people found the following comment useful :- I Hate this film!, 15 December 2005
Author:
HeartCollector from United Kingdom
Soooo I ended up seeing this film at the cinema cos my half brother is
a moron who only likes bland Hollywood movies... I could have said
no... no... I won't suffer the indignity but foolishly I figured "Hey,
at least I'm not paying for it" and tagged along... but I did pay... oh
lord I did pay...
This film is basically about a middle class twenty-something
advertising executive (with a hot rich girlfriend and a really slick
car)... who is frightened of cupboards!!!!!!!! CUPBOARDS!!!!! I didn't
know whether to laugh or cry. This is apparently due to some childhood
trauma that occurs in the opening scene but to be honest I'm not sure
exactly what happened cos the sequence looked like it was shot and
edited by an epileptic who had taken an amphetamine overdose. It seems
to have become accepted in Hollywood that the best way to make a scary
movie is to direct it like a Britney spears music video... admittedly
thats pretty terrifying but not if you:
Cast bland, wooden actors... Base all your scares on tired haunted
house cliché's (The wardrobe scene was one of the most poorly executed
horror sequences I've ever seen, void of tension, void of style and the
pay off is so lame even a black cat hissing and jumping on him would
have been preferable)... Layer the most annoyingly intrusive score over
everything... Make no attempt at narrative cohesion... Drench the final
scene in childish CGI...
If this film had contained even a shred of lightheartedness about it I
might have found it tolerable but everything about it was so po-faced
and serious, I find it hard to believe anyone could enjoy this film on
any level. It's almost impossible to relate to any of the characters,
mainly because they are so miserable and unlikeable and as a result
it's impossible to CARE whether they live/die/disappear/get snatched by
a stupid purple comic book character.
I recommend that anyone who is remotely considering seeing this film
does not do so for their own well being and the sake of their souls...
Don't become like me! Don't become a bitter purple CGI freak who hides
in cupboards thinking about how much he wants to flame this film on
every website on the internet... I hate this film! AAARGH!
119 out of 219 people found the following comment useful :- Hollywood insults the audience again, 5 February 2005
Author:
Matt..377 from United States
Yep, it's official. Overproduced garbage is what Hollywood considers
horror thrillers these days. Another in the long line of generously
funded but substantially lacking horror films somehow finds
distribution, this time it's "Boogeyman".
A young man must content with his childhood fears of the Boogeyman, who
has seemingly "stolen" his father and others close to him. Without
giving anything away, that's the extent of the nonexistent plot. There
are no surprised or character development, which culminates in a ho-hum
ending.
As others have pointed out, the director must've thought he was filming
a video for MTV, which camera swoops and shakes (not to mention loud
bangs) passing for scares.
Save your money and your time and rent a low-budget horror film
instead, the reward will be much greater.
* out of ****
32 out of 49 people found the following comment useful :- Scary Effects, Promising but Empty Story, Awful and Ridiculous Conclusion, 2 November 2005
Author:
Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Tim (Barry Watson) is a young man with a great trauma: when his father
left his family sixteen years ago, in his imagination his father was
indeed taken by the Boogeyman. In Thanksgiving, while visiting the
family of his girlfriend Jessica (Tory Mussett), his uncle Mike (Philip
Gordon) calls him informing that his mother has just passed away. Tim
travels to his hometown, meets his former crush Kate Houghton (Emily
Deschanel) and advised by his shrink, decides to spend the night is in
old home to face the monster of his imagination. Along the night, weird
events happen with Tim and his closest friends.
"Boogeyman" was really a great deception for me. I saw the trailer and
I expected a promising story, exploring the fear of darkness of
children through the American legend of the monster in the closet.
(Note: in Brazil, we do not have the legend of the "monster in the
closet". The legend of the Boogeyman does exist (it is called
"Bicho-Papão"), but its location is not specified and certainly is not
necessarily in a closet). However, the story is very empty, without
explanation, and with an awful and ridiculous conclusion. In the DVD,
there is a not good alternate ending, but better and better than the
released conclusion. The scary effects and the music score are the best
this movie can offer. "Boogeyman" is watchable, not a masterpiece of
the genre, but also not among "the worst horror movies" as commented by
some users. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "O Pesadelo" ("The Nightmare")
14 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :- Directors and Producers take note !!! Learn from this movie's mistakes., 15 March 2006
Author:
Error_PC_LOAD_LETTER from United States
Let's acknowledge the fact that practically everyone HATES this movie.
Yet it had a lot of potential. What went wrong? Producers, film
students, TAKE NOTE. Its EVERYTHING BAD in a horror movie, and makes us
feel cheated, insulted, and burned.
Its the kind of movie that LOOKS like something we'd be interested in.
The trailer showed a pretty creepy scene: a slow walk to a front door
of a Gothic-style Victorian farmhouse, a scary hand on the door. The
stuff of childhood nightmares and imaginings.
Additionally, the movie had a lot going for it -- a spooky-as-hell
soundtrack, a seriously creepy Gothic farmhouse which even old-house
fanatics might shudder at being alone in at night. Small-town
stagnation and isolation. Unhelpful country people who just don't like
outsiders. The stuff of moody, haunting atmospheres.
But, rather than play on a slow, spooky, dreamlike ambiance the house,
the terrors, the memories of the lost dad and his murder/abduction, we
get a woosh of distracting angles and wild camera swoops and flashes of
light that are neither realistic nor scary.
The eerie soundtrack is constantly interrupted by flashes of light and
noise that are supposed to 'scare' but show nothing and only interrupt
the brooding atmosphere.
And what is the Boogeyman in this movie, anyway? Balled lightning? An
explosion of distorted, computer-animated birds? a malfunctioning
transmitted cartoon image of the grim reaper? Hard to tell. Bad
computer animation spoils the image. We can't even imagine.
We certainly do NOT see any Boogeyman. Not the guy with the creepy hand
on the door in the trailer. If we see anything at all, it's like video
game graphics distorted by a glitch in the imagery.
C'mon, producers -- GIVE US THE BOOGEYMAN. Not videogenic mess.The
Boogeyman must be a CHARACTER we can see -- preferably something that
talks or has some other habit that frightens us. Freddy Krueger,
Jeepers Creepers, the Tall Man on Phantasm, Reverend Henry Kane on
Poltergeist or the chauffeur on Burnt Offerings who is too thin and
tall and has a freaky, inappropriate grin and piercing stare -- are
Boogeymen. (Jason Voorhees, Michael Myers, and Leatherface are perhaps
another type of boogyman, but their agenda is less frightening because
they exist merely to kill)
Rather than being killed or abducted by the boogeyman which we see in
the trailer,we instead see people being bounced around the walls of
rooms and hallways like rubber balls. Just one impact at this overdone
velocity would kill a person instantly, but here, we see people bounce
around the walls and get back up, unharmed, to 'fight.' and see victims
instantly wrapped in saran rap, etc. On and on it goes.
Directors, producers, please take note. It just doesn't work. Things
that move faster than the eye can see are not scary. Cheap computer
graphic effects don't work. Loud, startling noises are a cheap
substitute for brooding horror or shocking terror, and don't work.
The true 'Boogeyman' archetype that really scares the crap out of us is
a slow, menacing presence. We may only get glimpses of him or he may
torment us from the closet or under the bed as in Poltergiest, or he
may come a'calling like a traveling salesman or road menace. True
Boogeymen must be seen in closets, we see him in the mirror on closet
doors, we see him hanging like a scarecrow or hanging from a noose like
a kite caught in a tree. They come uninvited to take what they want;
they can appear out of nowhere and can seem to disappear just as fast;
they usually have personalities and voices that creep us out no matter
how many years pass; they are invincible, and they like for you to
learn of their invincibility as you try to fight them off. They love to
torment and terrorize their victims before killing/abducting/soul
eating/dragging them off to hell or whatever they do.
True boogeymen may have some weaknesses. In better horror movies and
nightmares, they can sometimes temporarily be resisted or staved off by
certain psychological or spiritual disciplines, or religious rituals
but they cannot really be destroyed. At best, they may leave us to find
an easier target, but they usually get what they want.
I was not impressed at all with this movie; I'm even more disgusted by
the fact that they had a lot of good actors/sets/technologies to work
with.
For instance, the character of Franny Roberts (Skye McCole Bartusiak),
a mysterious, attractive, but oddly troubled twelvish-year-old girl who
seems to know what's going on, was by far a more interesting character
in this film than the 'Boogeyman.' In fact, she was the most
interesting character in the movie: weirdly sad, melancholy, yet
somewhat a tomboy -- like a lost childhood friend we forgot about and
kinda miss. Why wasn't she given a bigger role?
And the protagonist Tim (Barry Watson) did a pretty convincing act of
being legitimately scared and haunted by a childhood memory. They (Tim
and the little girl, Franny) should have been the ones, together, to
thwart or vanquish the "boogeyman.' Not the guy and the ex-crush
'Kate.'
Remember, the boogeyman should be a menacing presence; a collector of
souls, a tormentor who plays games with his victims before taking them
away. Boogeymen may have vulnerabilities, but cannot really be
destroyed. Please, no more computer-animated lightning explosions and
MTV to represent the boogeyman.
Most of all, the Boogeyman needs to be a character, and not just be bad
graphics a-flashing. The boogeyman needs a voice and creepy antics. He
is an abductor of souls, the tormentor of children, he is somewhat
invincible but can be driven away, and always takes his helpless
victims to a fate worse than hell.
Remember this.
26 out of 41 people found the following comment useful :- I've Coughed Up Scarier Stuff Than This, 6 November 2005
Author:
moniker_jones (moniker_jones@hotmail.com) from south tejas
The one genuinely scary moment in director Stephen Kay's laughable
excuse for a horror film occurs during the end credits, when the
audience discovers that it actually took three professional
screenwriters to pen this abominable nightmare. The last few years have
been a golden age for modestly budgeted fright flicks. Last fall's The
Grudge proved that if you market a film well and release it at just the
right time, there's no end to the money you can make. I walked away
from that film rather disappointed, but my confusion paled in
comparison to the slack-jawed bewilderment that consumed me during
Boogeyman.
The film's opening sequence features a man being ravaged by an unseen
monster while his son observes helplessly. Fifteen years later we
discover that Tim (Barry Watson) has never properly dealt with his
father's sudden, grisly death. After learning that his mother has
passed away, Tim returns home for her funeral. While in town he decides
to face his fears by staying overnight in his unusually creepy boyhood
home.
A series of muddled, incomplete ideas figure their way into the plot,
but ultimately the story is nonsensical and just plain stupid. As with
most recent horror films, Boogeyman provides no real terror, and
instead attempts to startle the viewer by adding abrupt, loud noises to
the soundtrack. The final straw is the title character itself, revealed
briefly during the film's climax to be nothing more than a ridiculous,
computer-animated mess. Avoid this moronic snoozefest like the plague.
Rating: D-
53 out of 95 people found the following comment useful :- What the heck?!!, 5 February 2005
Author:
windjockey from United States
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
SPOILERS BELOW!!
Apparently very little continuity is required to bring a movie to the
screen these days. This is one movie that would have benefited from a
massive ground-up screenplay re-write. Boogeyman begins in the
childhood bedroom of our hero, Timmy. It is here Tim witnesses his
father being brutally...um...what? Killed? Abducted? Sucked into
another dimension? I guess we will go with killed for now, killed by
something in his closet. Why do we not see the assailant at this time?
Because of the stunning plot twist later that reveals the horrifying
truth as to the identity of the true killer? Actually no.
Flash forward fifteen years and we have a psychologically unstable
Timmy (Barry Watson-or "Matt" from 7th Heaven) living a door free
lifestyle in the city. Staying with his girlfriends parents he is
visited(?) by his mother in a vision yelling at him to look at her?!
What?! Why!? Huh??? The reason for this event will be revealed later in
the movie. Wait, no actually it will not.
His mother had just died and Timmy decides to go back to his childhood
home, the one with the killer closet, to settle family affairs. Here is
where stuff gets weird. While at the house he is visited by a young
girl with a basic understanding of what is going on.(she may be the
only one) She is found with a backpack full of missing children posters
which Timmy open and rifles through. These missing children suddenly
appear around our hero clamoring for him.(?) It is later suggested
these are all the children that were abducted by the Boogeyman. Why
these children are able to visit Timmy and explain what is going on-yet
his father cannot, is important and will be revealed later in the
movie. Wait, no actually it will not.
Later Timmy leaves the house and stays at a motel where his girlfriend
is abducted (not killed!?) by the Boogeyman. Here is where Tim finds a
'portal' in the closet at the motel that leads back to the house.(?)
Later in a suggested time warp(?) Timmy finds the Boogeyman fighting
with his still alive(?) girlfriend and begins to pursue the evil entity
in earnest.(it is at this time the film abandons the fear of the
unknown and show us the boogeyman, making this film just a little less
thrilling) After destroying all his childhood trinkets in his room, the
Boogeyman is sucked into the closet for good, never to return .What?!?!
What happened to his girlfriend? Is his father and uncle still alive?
In the epilogue the nature of the Boogeyman and the fate of those taken
by him will be fully explained. Wait, no actually it will not.
Roll credits.
With a myriad of unanswered questions still lingering, one understands
the true importance of a complete plot. Which is why this movie needed
a severe re-write. The acting was good enough and the cinematography
and direction was typical for a thriller. But the damn thing just did
not make sense. Childhood fears coming to deadly fruition can be a
great concept if fleshed out with complete ideas and good direction.
You wont find that here. For a well done 'monster under the bed' type
movie, check out this classic from your video store.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0084516/
92 out of 173 people found the following comment useful :- Skip this one., 15 February 2005
Author:
jade_fine from California
Something I've noticed lately is that horror movies make for great
previews. When I saw the trailer for BOOGEYMAN I was thinking, "This
film is gonna rock!" WRONG! This is another terrible Hollywood scare
flick that couldn't scare a 12 year old. I jumped more at the preview
than the movie. The worst part is the story is so heavy handed that it
steals any fun out of this convoluted mess. Let's remember what were
making here, guys, it ain't no Oscar contender. Too bad the movie
wasn't just a shade worse so it could enter that so-bad-it's good
realm. This one is just bad.
There are a lot of great horror movies out there these days so skip
this one!
8 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :- Not sure why everyone hates this movie, 28 December 2006
Author:
dcwebman from United States
I watched this movie first on DVD with the lights turned off, no
distractions, and was surprised at how thrilling the movie was. So much
so that I had to buy the DVD. I came to IMDb to see some particulars of
the cast and was amazed at all the people that did not like the movie.
I have certainly seen my share of horror movies starting back when
Halloween first opened and through all the slasher flicks of the early
80's and the Japan-based horror movies of today. There have certainly
been scarier movies than Boogeyman, but I sure got my share of thrills,
jumps, and scares out of it.
Sure, there are some unanswered questions at the end but I find that
often in this genre like stuff that doesn't make sense, why did that
happen, and what happened to...? The reason you watch a horror movie is
to be scared, thrilled, and frightened and with this movie you will be.
The best thing I liked seeing was that this movie didn't have to resort
to all the blood and gore that most horror movies seem to have just to
be scary. So pop that DVD in, get the kids out of the room, turn off
the lights, and just enjoy the movie for what it tries to do, give you
a thrill.
8 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :- CGI-man, 9 May 2006
Author:
ianmutimer from United Kingdom
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
Thanks to this movie, i will now be taking a break from movies of this
CC (crap calibre).
Unlike most of my adventures finding a crappy horror movie, i didn't
rent this 'movie' because i was attracted by the sleek graphics on the
cover, and i sure as heck didn't buy it because of the innovative
title. Actually to this day i am still wondering why, why, why God,
why?!
Concerning the storyline - this has to be one of the most shallow
movies i have ever seen, and i'm not talking about end at the swimming
pool shalllow, i'm talking about that drip in the bottom of your
coffee/tea mug that you can never get out.
On with my review: The movie starts by introducing the main character
as a young boy in bed at night, he is scared because of something - the
boogeyman i presume, or CGI-man as i like to call him. Anyway his dad
comes in to calm him, and reassure him that 'there is no such thing as
the boogeyman'-yes he really says that line. Then he get's pulled into
his son's closet by some wind or something. The movie then skips 15
years to him as a mid-twenty year old man. He is fairly successful as i
understand - he has a hot girlfriend and a hot car. The only thing that
isn't hot is the fact that he manages to find everything scary. I mean
everything. I thought it would just be closets - logically as his dad
was took into one by CGI-man 15 years ago, but it's everything. Every
10 seconds he suddenly stops walking and turns to stare at a random
object with a worried, but confused look upon his face, like he's a
little scared but at the same time wondering if he has left his
macaroni burning on the stove. It's quite amusing at first, but after
around 100 times it becomes a little irritating.
The scariest moment in the movie is when he is driving his car and a
bird flies into the window. The best and funniest part is straight
after the bird incident, when he stops his car, gets out and just
stands there to stare at the road looking quite upset and moved by the
bird's death?!
Then his mother dies so he decides to do what anyone would do who is
scared of everything - he goes to stay at his childhood house - where
his father died/got pulled into a closet. He then meets a childhood
friend who is randomly in need of some ice, they then talk about his
mothers death, where she says 'sorry about your mom', he responds with
'me too', and she replies with 'how about that ice then?', sweet girl!
Toward the end of the movie the guy is obviously under the illusion he
is in 'narnia' and proceeds to walk through the back of the closet in
his old house into a hotel room a few miles away? Then his girlfriend
disappears, and then his uncle, so he just presumes the boogeyman took
them...well what other possible explanation could there be? - well
plenty actually - maybe taking the dog for a walk or trying to find the
movie director so they can persuade him that it is a lame movie and
they should stop filming now.
The ending is not a firework spectacular finale, but then again i
didn't expect one after watching 90 minutes of monkey poo. He goes to
some house abandoned house and sits on a chair (where some other dude
before him attempted to face the boogeyman, but he got to scared and
died). He then confronts the boogeyman and he tells him he is not
scared of him, there are a few gusts of wind, then the boogeyman dies.
The end! You can watch it if you wish, but i suggest you spend 89
minutes trying to find the boogey/CGIman in places such as: your
closet/under your bed or on you N64 where similar graphics are
displayed.
Feel free to check out my other horror flick reviews. Peace out.
11 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :- Waste Of DVD Money, 20 April 2006
Author:
darby777 from United States
The movie had so much potential just by the subject matter, but as
usual the title was more exciting then the movie. No explanation of the
Boogeyman, No real plot to think of...if there was ever a story line,
it must be laying on the editing room floor or by now in some landfill.
The acting was bad, the story line was bad, the direction was bad, the
editing was bad, the writing was bad, the special effects were bad, and
the short clip of the children in the house that were suppose to be
victims of the Boogeyman could have been left out of the movie. It
added nothing to the plot or mystery or even likability of the movie,
it's characters, or even the Boogeyman. If someone decides to make a
re-make of this movie about the Boogeyman, please call me. The
nightmares I've had as a child about the Boogeyman far surpass the
"should have been G rated" bad comedy about an evil that has frighten
adults and children alike for centuries.
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv scheduleAwards & Reviews
user commentsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summaryplot synopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotesFun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsnews articlesPromotional
taglinestrailers and videospostersphoto galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsIMDb user comments for
Boogeyman (2005)
61 out of 84 people found the following comment useful :-

I Hate this film!, 15 December 2005
Author: HeartCollector from United Kingdom
Soooo I ended up seeing this film at the cinema cos my half brother is a moron who only likes bland Hollywood movies... I could have said no... no... I won't suffer the indignity but foolishly I figured "Hey, at least I'm not paying for it" and tagged along... but I did pay... oh lord I did pay...
This film is basically about a middle class twenty-something advertising executive (with a hot rich girlfriend and a really slick car)... who is frightened of cupboards!!!!!!!! CUPBOARDS!!!!! I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. This is apparently due to some childhood trauma that occurs in the opening scene but to be honest I'm not sure exactly what happened cos the sequence looked like it was shot and edited by an epileptic who had taken an amphetamine overdose. It seems to have become accepted in Hollywood that the best way to make a scary movie is to direct it like a Britney spears music video... admittedly thats pretty terrifying but not if you:
Cast bland, wooden actors... Base all your scares on tired haunted house cliché's (The wardrobe scene was one of the most poorly executed horror sequences I've ever seen, void of tension, void of style and the pay off is so lame even a black cat hissing and jumping on him would have been preferable)... Layer the most annoyingly intrusive score over everything... Make no attempt at narrative cohesion... Drench the final scene in childish CGI...
If this film had contained even a shred of lightheartedness about it I might have found it tolerable but everything about it was so po-faced and serious, I find it hard to believe anyone could enjoy this film on any level. It's almost impossible to relate to any of the characters, mainly because they are so miserable and unlikeable and as a result it's impossible to CARE whether they live/die/disappear/get snatched by a stupid purple comic book character.
I recommend that anyone who is remotely considering seeing this film does not do so for their own well being and the sake of their souls... Don't become like me! Don't become a bitter purple CGI freak who hides in cupboards thinking about how much he wants to flame this film on every website on the internet... I hate this film! AAARGH!
119 out of 219 people found the following comment useful :-

Hollywood insults the audience again, 5 February 2005
Author: Matt..377 from United States
Yep, it's official. Overproduced garbage is what Hollywood considers horror thrillers these days. Another in the long line of generously funded but substantially lacking horror films somehow finds distribution, this time it's "Boogeyman".
A young man must content with his childhood fears of the Boogeyman, who has seemingly "stolen" his father and others close to him. Without giving anything away, that's the extent of the nonexistent plot. There are no surprised or character development, which culminates in a ho-hum ending.
As others have pointed out, the director must've thought he was filming a video for MTV, which camera swoops and shakes (not to mention loud bangs) passing for scares.
Save your money and your time and rent a low-budget horror film instead, the reward will be much greater.
* out of ****
32 out of 49 people found the following comment useful :-

Scary Effects, Promising but Empty Story, Awful and Ridiculous Conclusion, 2 November 2005
Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Tim (Barry Watson) is a young man with a great trauma: when his father left his family sixteen years ago, in his imagination his father was indeed taken by the Boogeyman. In Thanksgiving, while visiting the family of his girlfriend Jessica (Tory Mussett), his uncle Mike (Philip Gordon) calls him informing that his mother has just passed away. Tim travels to his hometown, meets his former crush Kate Houghton (Emily Deschanel) and advised by his shrink, decides to spend the night is in old home to face the monster of his imagination. Along the night, weird events happen with Tim and his closest friends.
"Boogeyman" was really a great deception for me. I saw the trailer and I expected a promising story, exploring the fear of darkness of children through the American legend of the monster in the closet. (Note: in Brazil, we do not have the legend of the "monster in the closet". The legend of the Boogeyman does exist (it is called "Bicho-Papão"), but its location is not specified and certainly is not necessarily in a closet). However, the story is very empty, without explanation, and with an awful and ridiculous conclusion. In the DVD, there is a not good alternate ending, but better and better than the released conclusion. The scary effects and the music score are the best this movie can offer. "Boogeyman" is watchable, not a masterpiece of the genre, but also not among "the worst horror movies" as commented by some users. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "O Pesadelo" ("The Nightmare")
14 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-

Directors and Producers take note !!! Learn from this movie's mistakes., 15 March 2006
Author: Error_PC_LOAD_LETTER from United States
Let's acknowledge the fact that practically everyone HATES this movie. Yet it had a lot of potential. What went wrong? Producers, film students, TAKE NOTE. Its EVERYTHING BAD in a horror movie, and makes us feel cheated, insulted, and burned.
Its the kind of movie that LOOKS like something we'd be interested in. The trailer showed a pretty creepy scene: a slow walk to a front door of a Gothic-style Victorian farmhouse, a scary hand on the door. The stuff of childhood nightmares and imaginings.
Additionally, the movie had a lot going for it -- a spooky-as-hell soundtrack, a seriously creepy Gothic farmhouse which even old-house fanatics might shudder at being alone in at night. Small-town stagnation and isolation. Unhelpful country people who just don't like outsiders. The stuff of moody, haunting atmospheres.
But, rather than play on a slow, spooky, dreamlike ambiance the house, the terrors, the memories of the lost dad and his murder/abduction, we get a woosh of distracting angles and wild camera swoops and flashes of light that are neither realistic nor scary.
The eerie soundtrack is constantly interrupted by flashes of light and noise that are supposed to 'scare' but show nothing and only interrupt the brooding atmosphere.
And what is the Boogeyman in this movie, anyway? Balled lightning? An explosion of distorted, computer-animated birds? a malfunctioning transmitted cartoon image of the grim reaper? Hard to tell. Bad computer animation spoils the image. We can't even imagine.
We certainly do NOT see any Boogeyman. Not the guy with the creepy hand on the door in the trailer. If we see anything at all, it's like video game graphics distorted by a glitch in the imagery.
C'mon, producers -- GIVE US THE BOOGEYMAN. Not videogenic mess.The Boogeyman must be a CHARACTER we can see -- preferably something that talks or has some other habit that frightens us. Freddy Krueger, Jeepers Creepers, the Tall Man on Phantasm, Reverend Henry Kane on Poltergeist or the chauffeur on Burnt Offerings who is too thin and tall and has a freaky, inappropriate grin and piercing stare -- are Boogeymen. (Jason Voorhees, Michael Myers, and Leatherface are perhaps another type of boogyman, but their agenda is less frightening because they exist merely to kill)
Rather than being killed or abducted by the boogeyman which we see in the trailer,we instead see people being bounced around the walls of rooms and hallways like rubber balls. Just one impact at this overdone velocity would kill a person instantly, but here, we see people bounce around the walls and get back up, unharmed, to 'fight.' and see victims instantly wrapped in saran rap, etc. On and on it goes.
Directors, producers, please take note. It just doesn't work. Things that move faster than the eye can see are not scary. Cheap computer graphic effects don't work. Loud, startling noises are a cheap substitute for brooding horror or shocking terror, and don't work.
The true 'Boogeyman' archetype that really scares the crap out of us is a slow, menacing presence. We may only get glimpses of him or he may torment us from the closet or under the bed as in Poltergiest, or he may come a'calling like a traveling salesman or road menace. True Boogeymen must be seen in closets, we see him in the mirror on closet doors, we see him hanging like a scarecrow or hanging from a noose like a kite caught in a tree. They come uninvited to take what they want; they can appear out of nowhere and can seem to disappear just as fast; they usually have personalities and voices that creep us out no matter how many years pass; they are invincible, and they like for you to learn of their invincibility as you try to fight them off. They love to torment and terrorize their victims before killing/abducting/soul eating/dragging them off to hell or whatever they do.
True boogeymen may have some weaknesses. In better horror movies and nightmares, they can sometimes temporarily be resisted or staved off by certain psychological or spiritual disciplines, or religious rituals but they cannot really be destroyed. At best, they may leave us to find an easier target, but they usually get what they want.
I was not impressed at all with this movie; I'm even more disgusted by the fact that they had a lot of good actors/sets/technologies to work with.
For instance, the character of Franny Roberts (Skye McCole Bartusiak), a mysterious, attractive, but oddly troubled twelvish-year-old girl who seems to know what's going on, was by far a more interesting character in this film than the 'Boogeyman.' In fact, she was the most interesting character in the movie: weirdly sad, melancholy, yet somewhat a tomboy -- like a lost childhood friend we forgot about and kinda miss. Why wasn't she given a bigger role?
And the protagonist Tim (Barry Watson) did a pretty convincing act of being legitimately scared and haunted by a childhood memory. They (Tim and the little girl, Franny) should have been the ones, together, to thwart or vanquish the "boogeyman.' Not the guy and the ex-crush 'Kate.'
Remember, the boogeyman should be a menacing presence; a collector of souls, a tormentor who plays games with his victims before taking them away. Boogeymen may have vulnerabilities, but cannot really be destroyed. Please, no more computer-animated lightning explosions and MTV to represent the boogeyman.
Most of all, the Boogeyman needs to be a character, and not just be bad graphics a-flashing. The boogeyman needs a voice and creepy antics. He is an abductor of souls, the tormentor of children, he is somewhat invincible but can be driven away, and always takes his helpless victims to a fate worse than hell.
Remember this.
26 out of 41 people found the following comment useful :-

I've Coughed Up Scarier Stuff Than This, 6 November 2005
Author: moniker_jones (moniker_jones@hotmail.com) from south tejas
The one genuinely scary moment in director Stephen Kay's laughable excuse for a horror film occurs during the end credits, when the audience discovers that it actually took three professional screenwriters to pen this abominable nightmare. The last few years have been a golden age for modestly budgeted fright flicks. Last fall's The Grudge proved that if you market a film well and release it at just the right time, there's no end to the money you can make. I walked away from that film rather disappointed, but my confusion paled in comparison to the slack-jawed bewilderment that consumed me during Boogeyman.
The film's opening sequence features a man being ravaged by an unseen monster while his son observes helplessly. Fifteen years later we discover that Tim (Barry Watson) has never properly dealt with his father's sudden, grisly death. After learning that his mother has passed away, Tim returns home for her funeral. While in town he decides to face his fears by staying overnight in his unusually creepy boyhood home.
A series of muddled, incomplete ideas figure their way into the plot, but ultimately the story is nonsensical and just plain stupid. As with most recent horror films, Boogeyman provides no real terror, and instead attempts to startle the viewer by adding abrupt, loud noises to the soundtrack. The final straw is the title character itself, revealed briefly during the film's climax to be nothing more than a ridiculous, computer-animated mess. Avoid this moronic snoozefest like the plague.
Rating: D-
53 out of 95 people found the following comment useful :-

What the heck?!!, 5 February 2005
Author: windjockey from United States
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
SPOILERS BELOW!!
Apparently very little continuity is required to bring a movie to the screen these days. This is one movie that would have benefited from a massive ground-up screenplay re-write. Boogeyman begins in the childhood bedroom of our hero, Timmy. It is here Tim witnesses his father being brutally...um...what? Killed? Abducted? Sucked into another dimension? I guess we will go with killed for now, killed by something in his closet. Why do we not see the assailant at this time? Because of the stunning plot twist later that reveals the horrifying truth as to the identity of the true killer? Actually no.
Flash forward fifteen years and we have a psychologically unstable Timmy (Barry Watson-or "Matt" from 7th Heaven) living a door free lifestyle in the city. Staying with his girlfriends parents he is visited(?) by his mother in a vision yelling at him to look at her?! What?! Why!? Huh??? The reason for this event will be revealed later in the movie. Wait, no actually it will not.
His mother had just died and Timmy decides to go back to his childhood home, the one with the killer closet, to settle family affairs. Here is where stuff gets weird. While at the house he is visited by a young girl with a basic understanding of what is going on.(she may be the only one) She is found with a backpack full of missing children posters which Timmy open and rifles through. These missing children suddenly appear around our hero clamoring for him.(?) It is later suggested these are all the children that were abducted by the Boogeyman. Why these children are able to visit Timmy and explain what is going on-yet his father cannot, is important and will be revealed later in the movie. Wait, no actually it will not.
Later Timmy leaves the house and stays at a motel where his girlfriend is abducted (not killed!?) by the Boogeyman. Here is where Tim finds a 'portal' in the closet at the motel that leads back to the house.(?) Later in a suggested time warp(?) Timmy finds the Boogeyman fighting with his still alive(?) girlfriend and begins to pursue the evil entity in earnest.(it is at this time the film abandons the fear of the unknown and show us the boogeyman, making this film just a little less thrilling) After destroying all his childhood trinkets in his room, the Boogeyman is sucked into the closet for good, never to return .What?!?! What happened to his girlfriend? Is his father and uncle still alive? In the epilogue the nature of the Boogeyman and the fate of those taken by him will be fully explained. Wait, no actually it will not.
Roll credits.
With a myriad of unanswered questions still lingering, one understands the true importance of a complete plot. Which is why this movie needed a severe re-write. The acting was good enough and the cinematography and direction was typical for a thriller. But the damn thing just did not make sense. Childhood fears coming to deadly fruition can be a great concept if fleshed out with complete ideas and good direction. You wont find that here. For a well done 'monster under the bed' type movie, check out this classic from your video store. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0084516/
92 out of 173 people found the following comment useful :-

Skip this one., 15 February 2005
Author: jade_fine from California
Something I've noticed lately is that horror movies make for great previews. When I saw the trailer for BOOGEYMAN I was thinking, "This film is gonna rock!" WRONG! This is another terrible Hollywood scare flick that couldn't scare a 12 year old. I jumped more at the preview than the movie. The worst part is the story is so heavy handed that it steals any fun out of this convoluted mess. Let's remember what were making here, guys, it ain't no Oscar contender. Too bad the movie wasn't just a shade worse so it could enter that so-bad-it's good realm. This one is just bad.
There are a lot of great horror movies out there these days so skip this one!
8 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-

Not sure why everyone hates this movie, 28 December 2006
Author: dcwebman from United States
I watched this movie first on DVD with the lights turned off, no distractions, and was surprised at how thrilling the movie was. So much so that I had to buy the DVD. I came to IMDb to see some particulars of the cast and was amazed at all the people that did not like the movie.
I have certainly seen my share of horror movies starting back when Halloween first opened and through all the slasher flicks of the early 80's and the Japan-based horror movies of today. There have certainly been scarier movies than Boogeyman, but I sure got my share of thrills, jumps, and scares out of it.
Sure, there are some unanswered questions at the end but I find that often in this genre like stuff that doesn't make sense, why did that happen, and what happened to...? The reason you watch a horror movie is to be scared, thrilled, and frightened and with this movie you will be.
The best thing I liked seeing was that this movie didn't have to resort to all the blood and gore that most horror movies seem to have just to be scary. So pop that DVD in, get the kids out of the room, turn off the lights, and just enjoy the movie for what it tries to do, give you a thrill.
8 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-

CGI-man, 9 May 2006
Author: ianmutimer from United Kingdom
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
Thanks to this movie, i will now be taking a break from movies of this CC (crap calibre).
Unlike most of my adventures finding a crappy horror movie, i didn't rent this 'movie' because i was attracted by the sleek graphics on the cover, and i sure as heck didn't buy it because of the innovative title. Actually to this day i am still wondering why, why, why God, why?!
Concerning the storyline - this has to be one of the most shallow movies i have ever seen, and i'm not talking about end at the swimming pool shalllow, i'm talking about that drip in the bottom of your coffee/tea mug that you can never get out.
On with my review: The movie starts by introducing the main character as a young boy in bed at night, he is scared because of something - the boogeyman i presume, or CGI-man as i like to call him. Anyway his dad comes in to calm him, and reassure him that 'there is no such thing as the boogeyman'-yes he really says that line. Then he get's pulled into his son's closet by some wind or something. The movie then skips 15 years to him as a mid-twenty year old man. He is fairly successful as i understand - he has a hot girlfriend and a hot car. The only thing that isn't hot is the fact that he manages to find everything scary. I mean everything. I thought it would just be closets - logically as his dad was took into one by CGI-man 15 years ago, but it's everything. Every 10 seconds he suddenly stops walking and turns to stare at a random object with a worried, but confused look upon his face, like he's a little scared but at the same time wondering if he has left his macaroni burning on the stove. It's quite amusing at first, but after around 100 times it becomes a little irritating.
The scariest moment in the movie is when he is driving his car and a bird flies into the window. The best and funniest part is straight after the bird incident, when he stops his car, gets out and just stands there to stare at the road looking quite upset and moved by the bird's death?!
Then his mother dies so he decides to do what anyone would do who is scared of everything - he goes to stay at his childhood house - where his father died/got pulled into a closet. He then meets a childhood friend who is randomly in need of some ice, they then talk about his mothers death, where she says 'sorry about your mom', he responds with 'me too', and she replies with 'how about that ice then?', sweet girl!
Toward the end of the movie the guy is obviously under the illusion he is in 'narnia' and proceeds to walk through the back of the closet in his old house into a hotel room a few miles away? Then his girlfriend disappears, and then his uncle, so he just presumes the boogeyman took them...well what other possible explanation could there be? - well plenty actually - maybe taking the dog for a walk or trying to find the movie director so they can persuade him that it is a lame movie and they should stop filming now.
The ending is not a firework spectacular finale, but then again i didn't expect one after watching 90 minutes of monkey poo. He goes to some house abandoned house and sits on a chair (where some other dude before him attempted to face the boogeyman, but he got to scared and died). He then confronts the boogeyman and he tells him he is not scared of him, there are a few gusts of wind, then the boogeyman dies. The end! You can watch it if you wish, but i suggest you spend 89 minutes trying to find the boogey/CGIman in places such as: your closet/under your bed or on you N64 where similar graphics are displayed.
Feel free to check out my other horror flick reviews. Peace out.
11 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-

Waste Of DVD Money, 20 April 2006
Author: darby777 from United States
The movie had so much potential just by the subject matter, but as usual the title was more exciting then the movie. No explanation of the Boogeyman, No real plot to think of...if there was ever a story line, it must be laying on the editing room floor or by now in some landfill. The acting was bad, the story line was bad, the direction was bad, the editing was bad, the writing was bad, the special effects were bad, and the short clip of the children in the house that were suppose to be victims of the Boogeyman could have been left out of the movie. It added nothing to the plot or mystery or even likability of the movie, it's characters, or even the Boogeyman. If someone decides to make a re-make of this movie about the Boogeyman, please call me. The nightmares I've had as a child about the Boogeyman far surpass the "should have been G rated" bad comedy about an evil that has frighten adults and children alike for centuries.
Add another comment
Related Links