| ||||||||||||||||||||||
MALL.ShopperFavorites.com
Best Prices
Shopper Favorites Web Search |
DVD : Boogeyman (Special Edition) |
- I thought this movie was better than everyone thought it wasSo far ive seen alot of bad reviews and a few good reviews for Boogeyman. I went out and got this movie not too long ago and i actually liked it alot. It had alot of parts during the movie where it would make me jump from the closet slaming n all. I really liked the actual Boogeyman at the end of the movie. The special effects were not the best, but i still think they were good and it made a good looking boogeyman to me. The story was good. I liked this one better than the 2nd Boogeyman because the Boogeyman was actually real in this one. He was quick and had some "throwing around" of the actors at the final confrontation of the Boogeyman. I think this movie deserved alot better than what it got. Its one of my fav. horror/suspense movies so far because of a good bad guy and an alright story. The end was okay, but overall i think the story and the actual Boogeyman were pretty good. I enjoyed watching this and i hope they know they did a good job making it.
Rating:
- Blinding EditingCreepy at first...Then begins the Headace Induced editing...My vision was blured for two hours after seeing this movie...My Eye Balls were Slam Dunked...Bounced..Spun Around...Back Handed..and visually assulted by the fast shifting editing...I hung in there waiting for the pay off, but even the end only a few minutes long was BAD..BAD..comic like C.G.I...and even that was sped up and even more Eye Damadging...and they lived happily ever after, the end... Warning Do Not watch this movie on a Big Screen TV, or risk visual inpairment! I wont even get into the Audio assult you will also indure...where is my Visine? ..and asparin?
Rating:
- BoogeymanThe movie has nothing to do with the 2. part....
Its not bad...but the 2.part is much better.
Anyway if you like scary movies go ahead and by it:))))))
Rating:
- Just not workable as a horror movie or suspense movie!I just saw this movie the other day thinking that it was going to be a remake of the The Boogeyman from 1980!! Well to my chagrin not only was it not a remake of that brilliant 80's classic but it also just didn't deliver the goods like it did either!! This movie was not horrible by any means,but it was very wanting in the scares and victims department. I mean what could they have possibly been thinking anybody would have found the least bit interesting about a horror movie where nothing much happens throughout the majority of it? To say nothing of the fact that there's neither any nudity nor much in the way of victims being killed by The so-called Boogeyman at all. So what do we have left then? Well let's see Barry Watson trying to deal with a childhood trauma while going from place to place with his homely and uninteresting not to mention pushy girlfriend. YAY!! LOL!! And the rest of the time he's either running into this really cute little girl named Franny or riding around with sexy "Bones" star Emily Deschanel. And the rest of the time he's alone walking around his old house AIMLESSLY!!! When his incredibly lame girlfriend gets seized by the Boogeyman for some reason we neither see her later on nor find out exactly what happened to her. For what it's worth I was seriously hoping for a sex/nude scene between Barry Watson and Emily Deschanel, but greatly to my chagrin it never happened. Needless to say with how dull the rest of the movie proved to be that just might have kept me from dozing off as I would've done had the movie been longer. Also for what it's worth the movie didn't need any of that corny zooming closely at the furniture and the doors and stuff. 'Cmon was that B.S. really necessary?! And when we finally come to his face-off against the Boogeyman, all we see is Barry and Emily being sucked towards the closet, only for him to need to just simply break a creepy doll and a plasma ball and then kick The Boogeyman in the head. And then all Barry does is look out the window. The only reason to even watch this borefest is just to see the impressive/precocious actress who played Franny!! She was excellent!!
Rating:
- Should have read the reviewsI rented this one on a whim, having heard nothing about it and knowing nothing of the cast or director. It didn't look that great, but I always liked the folkloric "boogeyman" character and I figured if nothing else it would be worth some cheap thrills and a bit of fun. I was wrong.
"Boogeyman" is one of the most disjointed, obtuse and utterly unenjoyable flicks I have seen for a long time. The first few minutes are so predictable it is almost like a parody of better horror films, and then things just get worse. Bad (or non-existent) plot. Bad acting. Bad CGI monster that looks like it was recycled from The Mummy. Just bad in general.
The main character, Barry Watson, thinks acting consists of trying to strike the most brooding pose possible. He plays the male in possibly the most uninteresting love-triangle put to film, with his gorgeous, rich, caring girlfriend (Tory Mussett) on one side, and his plain-jane tomboy childhood sweetheart (Zooey Deschanel's sister Emily Deschanel) on the other. There is no real conflict here, and the gals just appear and disappear as the plot calls for it, moon a bit over our brooding hero, and then...exit the stage when their cue is called. Oh, and of course there is a pre-requisite "spooky little kid" character (Skye McCole Bartusiak), and if you can't figure out her story about five minutes following her appearance than you haven't been watching any horror films for the past 10 years. Even if you slog through the whole flick, there is no resolution. Is the boogeyman real or not? Did certain characters die or not? What exactly is going on? You will never know...
This DVD comes with a few extra features, including an interview with the director, Stephen T. Kay. I was almost more interested in this than the movie, because I was curious as to how he could justify the train-wreck he made. I was even more annoyed when I heard him talking about how he wanted to emulate Japanese and Korean horror movies, and that was his goal when making "Boogeyman". I happen to be a fan of Asian horror flicks, and I can say that he widely missed the mark. He scratches only the most surface areas of the genre, while ignoring all of the rich cultural mythology and depth that make the films work. Clearly, Stephen T. Kay should stick to his role as "Reginald Jennings" on the soap opera General Hospital, and stay away from the back of a movie camera. Based on this film, he is a director to avoid.
The one good thing that I have to say about "Boogeyman" is that it is beautifully photographed, and both props and sympathies go to the cinematographer, whose talents where fully wasted on this amateur-hour production.
MALL.ShopperFavorites.com
|