Extraño habitante

After having watched Boggy Creek 2 I am glad that I saw it on MST3K because it is clear to anyone with a pulse that this is a film that must be viewed in the proper context. I find it hard to believe that it could be enjoyed outside of the MST3K universe.I found the dialouge contrived and, along with situational elements, often forced.Still, I do hope there will be a Boggy Creek 3 so that some nagging questions may stand a chance of being answered. Why couldn't Tim keep his shirt on? Exactly why did the professor drag the girls along with him? Why did a retired lawyer of all people have an outhouse? Did someone actually part with hard earned money so this film could be made? Why is it I feel less intelligent after having seen this movie? Why? Why? Why?

"I'm driving my car, lookin' for a Waffle House, drinkin' my Wild Turkey!" Watching this movie on MST3K is the ONLY way to view this totally horrible flick. The acting is so bad, it's beyond belief. How Charles Pierce ever thought this would work, I have no idea. This movie makes me want to break something. WATCH ONLY ON MST3K.

"Good night Tim, where ever you are..."

Ha! The original Boggy Creek was one of those films you see as a kid that really feaks you out and you cant quite explain why. So when I saw this DVD in a bargain bin I knew i had to snap it up. This film freaks you out in a totally different way. It starts as what seems to be a vanity project for its star and director, an ageing monster hunter with a very sad outfit and red cap. But theres this weird charm about the whole thing that just keeps you watching. It has the quality of an old tourism film abou the american woodlands. And there are actually a few effective moments, most noteably the finding of the decapitated animal and the approach of the beast as seen by the motion sensor computer. Is this where Aliens got its ideas from? Who knows?

Theres a hilarious scene where the lead guy has to protect the others from a "MAD DOG!" which he shouts at the top of his voice. But what is cool in this is that he really messes it up and the young bloke their sorts it out. So the director doesnt totally see himself as the Dirty Harry of the woods.

Watching it in its original form you cant help but find it trashy and daft. But theres a glint in the eye that elevates it. Even small touches like the soft focus in the flashback sequences, and the animal being attacked in the water all have an imaginative flavour to them.

Would love to see the original again, but for now this film will do nicely. Its schock but I loved it!

My review was written in December 1985 after a Times Square screening.

Charles B. Pierce's "Boggy Creek II", made in 1983, finally arrived in New York with the misleading retitle "The Barbaric Beast of Boggy Creek Part II". Pic is actually a very mild and folksy piece of regional filmmaking in which it is clear that the filmmaker (who doubles as his own leading man) really likes the creatures. Though labeled number 2, pic is actually the third trip to Boggy Creek, since Pierce's 1972 hit "The Legend of Bobby Creek" was followed in 1977 by a film aimed at the kiddies (and made not by Pierce but by Tom Moore) called "Return to Boggy Creek".

Pierce stars as Bryan Lockhart, a University of Arkansas professor of anthropology who is pulled away from a football game (where the Razorbacks are beating Tulsa) to investigate reports that the Boggy Creek creature is on the loose again. He quickly rounds up an expedition peopled by student Tim (Chuck Pierce, the director's son) and two pretty girls (Cindy Butler, Serene Hedin).

Quartet travels south to Texarkana to interview folks who've sighted the beast. Camping out, they set up a computerized system of sensors to track the nearly 400-pound creature's movements. Pierce includes fuzzy-focus flashbacks illustrating previous tales of this creature's contacts with humanity. Pic doesn't really pick up steam until the final reel when Jimmy Clem appears in a fine acting turn as a hermit who has captured the creature's offspring which he is holding as bait to attract the parent. Prof. Lockhart lets both creatures go, intoning the film's message that they're part of nature living in harmony and ought to be left alone to roam free.

The creature looks like a man in a gorilla suit and film is painfully short on thrills. This type of filmmaking went out with the wilderness adventures, whose heyday was a decade ago.

My friend bought two DVDs for a pound (i.e. under $1 each) figuring that no matter how poor the films, the cases they came in would be worth the expenditure. That gives you some idea of what value the bottom end of UK retailing places on this...

If you look at the credits: Written by Charles B Pierce, Directed by Charles B Pierce, Starring Charles B Pierce, Chuck Pierce, Mack Pierce (who probably provided his own boat), Pam Pierce (who I think did the make-up too), Coke scrounged from (here) Jeep borrowed from (here), Computer borrowed from (here) etc. you get the impression this is a family "let's help Dad/Charles out here" movie on the tightest budget and a lot of goodwill.

The most frightening experience for Charles & the kids seemed to be an incident when a dog barked at them (a lot). Despite being armed Charles was unable to get a single shot in the noisy animal even at close range, utterly pathetic.

Think of people in monkey suits, literally. I found a slight tendency to smile when I saw a monkeyed-up kid 'attacking' someone, but the entire thing was very poor indeed. I can't remember why I forced myself to watch this, but force myself I did. Perhaps it was a desire to see the credits that kept me going?

Never, ever - life's too short.