Boogeyman

Most of the SyFy movies are either bad or bottom-of-the-barrel. There are a few tolerable ones out there, but they are too far and between. I'll start off to say that Boogeyman is not among SyFy's worst, and I didn't think it was a terrible film. It was one of those films that did have some promise but didn't live up to that. Boogeyman does start off decently, the idea was good and the beginning set a good atmosphere. The film does have a couple of good things beyond that, the monster effects for SyFy are not too bad, they are not great but much improved from most of the SyFy monsters I've seen. Plus, this monster actually is quite menacing, rather than being over or under-utilised and not doing all that much. Visually, it is not so bad either, I was expecting choppy editing and the like, and while there is some stiffness there is definitely much worse around. The scenery is sometimes basic, but does set a foreboding tone and has some authenticity. However, there are a lot of faults still. The acting is better than most SyFy movies, but is not great. The leads have some likability but the younger boy especially is awful. The way the characters are written doesn't help either, nobody stood out as likable, none of them are developed all that convincingly and some in places even had an over-the-top vibe. I was particularly annoyed by the police chief, her constant pep talks and huddle ups are enough to make anybody mad. I also disliked how the boys were made to look like idiots in some parts of the movie. The dialogue is likewise lame, it is very cheesy and little of it rings true. Disappointing also is the story, after a decent start it quickly turns into predictability and utter stupidity with nothing standing out as creepy, suspenseful or convincing. The monster does elevate things, but the aimless exposition and the bland build-ups hamper the scenes with it in from being any more than they actually were. There are a couple of jolts, but little beyond that and I was often thinking "I've seen this all before... and done better". Further spilt by a rushed and rather contrived finale, Boogeyman is better than most SyFy movies and had potential but doesn't live up to it. 4/10 Bethany Cox

Boogeyman (2012)

** (out of 4)

Average SyFy production has brothers going into a creepy house and accidentally letting loose the title character, a burned faced monster who can kill with its bare hands. Soon the boy's father (Eddie McClintock), a cop, is investigating while his partner/lover (Amy Bailey) might know more than she's telling. BOOGEYMAN (there's no "the" before the title) is certainly far from the majority of the bad movies that turn up on SyFy but at the same time its not that good either. In reality this turned out to be one of those movies that features some interesting things in it but they never really add up to be a good movie. Everything here from the direction to the performances are good but there's just something missing from the film. I think it would have helped had there not been the entire Biblical thing going on. I'm not a moralist or anything, I don't object to religion being used but I just didn't think it worked here. Another problem is that none of the characters are all that interesting and since we spend a lot of time with them, it certainly would have helped to make them more likable. Again, I thought the performances were rather good and this includes the two leads. They share a nice chemistry together and they certainly overcame their weak characters. I also really enjoyed the look of the monster. The burned, skull-like face was very effective and I thought it was one of the better monster designs I've seen in a while. His killing power was also fun to watch. With that said, BOOGEYMAN is worth watching if you're a major fan of the genre but it's still way short of being a classic or even a good film.

RELEASED TO TV IN 2012 and directed by Jeffery Scott Lando, "Boogeyman" concerns a single cop father in a small town in Michigan (Eddie McClintock) and his attractive female partner (Amy Bailey) who investigate the mysterious death of a nasty recluse who seemed to be keeping 'something' in the attic, but 'it' was released and is now on a murderous rampage. Emma Samms plays the chief of police while Danny Horn & Gabriel Steele play the father's two sons, a teen and adolescent respectively.

This is NOT the theatrically released "Boogeyman" from 2005, which started the 3-movie franchise, but rather a standalone TV flick. The cast, locations, monster and plot are all fine. In spirit, it's akin to the Friday the 13th sequels after the first two movies; even the 'monster' looks like Jason when he morphed into an inhuman zombie by Part VI (1986). Speaking of the monster, they reveal him right from the get-go, which destroys any suspense. Even the Friday the 13th sequels waited till the end to reveal Jason's hideous face. Speaking of which, every Friday the 13th flick is a masterpiece compared to this movie.

What's wrong with this version of "Boogeyman"? While the eventual explanation of the monster is interesting and unexpected (I'm not going to give it away), the movie smacks of amateurism in script and overall execution (you'll know what I mean). The filmmakers try to make up for it with quirky or amusing moments (e.g. the two lesbians), but it wasn't enough. The flick needed a serious rewrite and to work out the kinks in execution, but these take time, and time costs money, which the producers weren't willing to spend.

THE MOVIE RUNS 85 minutes. Unfortunately, I can't find any info on where it was shot, but it doesn't look like lower Michigan, although I suppose it COULD be Upper Peninsula Michigan, but I doubt it. WRITER (term used loosely): David Reed.

GRADE: D+

When a series of strange deaths are apparent in a small town, the local authorities find them to be caused by a demon released that has a special connection to several of the residents and must stop its rampage before its target is found.

This was a decent overall entry as this wasn't one that really has a lot of bad points but not one that's really overflowing with positives either. One of the better features here is the enjoyable pace, as it's got some nice action scenes spread throughout with the different confrontations here with several high-energy scenes including the great attack on the old man, a generally enjoyable massacre on the kids in the forest and a later attack on a neighbor that gets some chilling stalking including along with the actual kill which is quite brutal. The film's two biggest scenes, though, come from the house ambush where the phone calls let them on to what's happening early on, the bedroom encounter is chilling and the different gun-battles here bring the action as well as some creepy stalking in the house's hallways gives this some better scenes, and the later encounter in the father's shack is really fun with the chaos and panic of the abduction serving as the launching point for the myriad of fine stalking scenes out in the woods picking off the members one-by-one in chilling encounters, the confrontation in the attic is highly enjoyable with a lot of action streaming throughout here and the influx of the storyline ramifications gives this one some even more fun here with how this impacts the action. While there's also some fun to be had with the creature's history and back-story, which is pretty clever and quite unique in and of itself because of what it signifies and how it's done here to link together both its appearance in the story as well as the connection to the human stories, it's got enough to really like here that gives this one some positive points against the film's big flaw. The problem here is basically a common grievance in having the one character who knows what's going on and how to stop it keep that information to themselves, forcing everyone else to deal with the situation without knowing what to do themselves. It's gradually apparent here that something's happening and there's little reason to think that would've been accepted and useful from what's happening, but rather it's all kept here that way instead. As well, the film's decision to handle the bullying aspect here is somewhat mishandled here as this spends quite a bit of time here setting it up only to drop it without really giving it any real purpose at all, since it doesn't really have any point in helping them overcome the creature, none of the bullying provides the strength to battle it later and the creature never gives them any kind of comeuppance or even accidental revenge as it just drops the thread altogether which makes such a questionable and controversial angle to have been included at all. Along with some usual atrocious CGI, these problems do affect it but overall it's pretty decent.

Rated Unrated/R: Violence, Language, Brief Nudity, strong themes of bullying and children-in-jeopardy.

This isn't Stephen King's Boogeyman, although it came out the same year.

It is unusual in the respect that it links to the Bible; a first for me in horror films.

The story starts with Cain and Abel (Genesis 4:9), but leaves us wondering what this has to do with the Bogeyman. We'll find out later.

The boogeyman starts with Skinner, who had him hid in the attic. Why?

He dispatches a couple of luscious babes who are getting it on in the woods. Are we back to the Bible again? Paul's letter to the Romans?

Anyway, there is little to recommend this film. It is not scary, and the killings are mild. Find the original for a good boogeyman.