Bagman

While I had actually never heard about the 2024 horror movie "Bagman" prior to sitting down to watch it, there would be no doubt about me actually sitting down to watch it. Why? Well, given a life-long romance with the horror genre ensures that any horror movie available gets a fair chance.

Writer John Hulme put together a script and storyline that definitely had potential. However, the narrative suffered from the fact that the movie had no ups and down. It was a pretty monotonous viewing experience, fairly devoid of anything particularly scary or thrilling. A shame really, because there definitely were potential to the storyline and script. Just a shame that it sort of fell short of delivering.

The only performer on the cast list that I was familiar with was William Hope, and he only had a supportive role to play. I will say, however, that the acting performances in the movie were fair, despite of only having a mundane script to work with.

Visually, the movie was okay. It was not a horror movie that relied heavily on special effects, and the effects that were in the movie were good enough. However, the design of the bagman itself just wasn't overly impressive, and the grand reveal once the hood was pulled back was sort of anti-climatic.

Watchable, for sure, but director Colm McCarthy just didn't deliver an outstanding or particularly memorable horror movie. And I doubt that I will ever return to watch the movie a second time.

If you are a horror aficionado, such as I am, give the movie a chance; you might just happen to find it more enjoyable than I did.

My rating of "Bagman" lands on a four out of ten stars.

The Bagman had an intriguing premise but left a lot of questions unanswered, especially when it came to the characters' decisions. One of the most perplexing choices was leaving the child alone while all the horror unfolded. It felt illogical, given that the adults were clearly aware of the danger and opted to sleep together for safety. Why would they separate the most vulnerable person? This inconsistency really pulled me out of the experience and made it hard to connect with the characters' survival instincts.

That said, the movie did have its moments. The atmosphere was chilling, and there were a few genuinely unsettling scenes that kept me on edge. However, it often felt like the pacing was off, with long stretches of buildup that didn't always pay off.

Despite these issues, I'm actually interested in the sequel. The film has laid down some groundwork that could go in a great direction. If the sequel addresses the characters' decisions better and tightens up the storytelling, it could deliver on the promise that the first film hinted at. There's potential here, and I'm curious to see how it develops.

Bagman has low ratings, but I usually don't let that stop me from watching something that seems interesting. Sometimes the movies are incredible, and sometimes they are worse than the ratings. Horror movies are not ever scary to me, but I enjoy the atmosphere and psychological parts of them. Bagman was not anything very original, but it was still a decent watch. I didn't find the movie hard to follow and I didn't see the parents as terrible like so many other reviewers have said.

I gave this a 6 rating and would have a 7 if not for the "ending" of the end of the movie. After how the movie turns out, and that was definitely different and I wasn't really expecting that, but it's after what happens that I felt was a little flat. I guess it ended how it should as not to be carried out to be a 3 hour movie, but I kind of wanted to see more. The climax was good though and I felt made it worth seeing the movie through. That's a good thing. Just when you think you know what's going to happen, because again, it wasn't anything with an original plot. That was a really good way to turn the movie into something different.

I say give it a go. It was a decent movie with a really good ending.

So after seeing this one earlier today, I thought I would give it a quick review.

Now I agree with some of the reviews such as these days people are rating gore covered horror movies with high ratings, so they realise that gore filled horror movies are not scary, why? Because they swap the scary for the gore.

This is another side of the same coin, here me out for a second.

This film was enjoyable but not scary one bit, this movie while nothing wrong with it, it became a straight by the book, seen this before non scary horror.

See what I mean when I said, two sides of the same coin. Gore filled horror movies are not scary because of the gore and by the book horror movies are not scary either but both are and can be enjoyable.

Watch this film, enjoy it for what it is and don't hope for anything special.

Bagman is essentially the definition of a generic horror movie. Nearly everything it attempts has been done before, and audiences are tired of these tropes. An evil entity tries to lure a young child away from its parents, who are too clueless to take effective action against it. There are cheap thrills, weak jump scares, foolish characters, and a child who sounds eerily similar to Gage Creed from Pet Sematary (1989).

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect is the parents' irrational behavior. When your child seems to be in danger and there are multiple break-ins at your home, you would make sure to stay close to your child. However, these parents do a remarkable job of ignoring their kid or keeping a significant distance, allowing the entity to enter the house undisturbed. There's also the typical exposition dump and one of the most generic modern horror plots imaginable.

Honestly, though, I kind of liked the entity, and I think there was some potential to create a decent horror movie with it as the antagonist. Unfortunately, the film fails to stand out amidst all the subpar horror being released today, making it hard to imagine that many people will enjoy it. While there were a few moments I appreciated, overall, it's far from good. [5.2/10]