La légende de Cropsey

Realizing the urban legend of their youth has actually come true.

Two filmmakers delve into the mystery surrounding five missing children and the real-life bogeyman linked to their disappearances.

Nothing really new here, but it puts everything together in one place. Goes on a bit long. The filmmakers try to suggest the killer was supplying kids to devil worshipers to to a group of abusers. The killer denies everything of course even though he was the last person seen with all the victims.

I would have preferred way more information on the killer than just random conversations with cops and residents trying to remember what happened 20+ years ago.

So net net is the documentary could have been way better than it is. And the fact that they could not get an interview with the killer sort of creates a big dud.

"Cropsey" is a 2009 documentary by Joshua Zeman and Barbara Barbara Brancaccio dealing with the real-life disappearances of several children from Staten Island, New York. The film, for the most part, follows the investigation and jailing of suspect Andre Rand, and the film delves into whether or not Rand did it, while questioning his motives, the possibility of there being accomplices, etc.

The film, for it's subject matter, is entertaining in a perverse way to watch. Much in the same way you might shiver at a campfire tale or watch a train-wreck with morbid curiosity. And it does provide some thrills and chills for the audience, particularly with some bizarre scenes in which it is proposed that Rand was in cahoots with, or knew members of human- sacrificing, Satanic cults. (Although, like most things in the film, this goes nowhere real fast.)

But the film feels too much like exploitation. From using the "Cropsey" urban legends and stories in a way that doesn't quite fit in well with the film (at least to me, it felt like a bit of mudslinging), to the fact that nothing is accomplished in the runntime. Nothing gels together, nor is it particularly compelling to watch.

No answers are given to any of the burning questions that the film proposes (which becomes the documentary's taunting theme- "We don't know..."), and to be honest, it makes you question everything way too much. From moment to moment, you'll hate Rand, then feel sympathy, then question if he's the real culprit, then hate him again. It's too much of a roller-coaster ride for the complete lack of payoff, and it leaves you feeling thrilled, but empty.

I give "Cropsey" a 6 out of 10. It's an eerie watch, and does have some good moments, but it doesn't accomplish anything major. It just exists for the sake of existing.

Cropsey (2009)

**** (out of 4)

Excellent documentary from filmmakers Joshua Zeman and Barbara Brancaccio, two people who grew up hearing stories of Cropsey, a killer of children living up in Staten Island, New York. Through the documentary we hear how various children were told different stories of who exactly Cropsey was but then we get to a drifter named Andre Rand who many believed killed at least five children in the area. Throughout the documentary we hear about the urban legend that stalked the people of this town and we learn about the little evidence that got Rand convicted and how perhaps the legends are what got him found guilty and not the actual case against him. CROPSEY came to my attention as a horror movie fan because I had heard that both MADMAN and THE BURNING were based around this case. Both of those slashers took a lot of liberties with the actual story and that's what makes this documentary so interesting because it really does seem as if the two filmmakers wanted to get the truth and not just paint a picture of a monster. The directors try to paint an open and honest look at the case and by the time the picture is over you really don't know what to believe in regards to Rand's guilt. There are moments where you feel this guy is a monster and he must have committed the crimes but then a minute later you realize that there's really nothing connecting him to the crimes and there are even more mysterious circumstances around the case. As someone who had never really heard of the cases, I found it really interesting seeing the news clips from back when the crimes were committed as well as hearing from those who actually searched for the children. Out of the five victims only one's body was recovered and how it was uncovered was a little suspicious to say the least. The documentary also gets quite a few interviews with those who were connected to the case, those who searched for the body as well as a possible witness who is the most questionable person in the entire film. CROPSEY is certainly a very entertaining documentary taking a look at the connection between an urban legend and the truth.

One thing I like about this film... and that I don't like... is that it opens the way to the next step in the story. Unfortunately, the film does not provide an avenue for the step to be taken. It didn't move forward fast enough and left the juicy bits for us to imagine. Feels like perhaps there was not the will or the money needed to take the story to the final conclusion. The dissection of his psychological profile. As made clear in the movie, he is very affected by his experience at Willowbrook (and his mother's experience in care) why not look at what happened at Willowbrook because he probably started there and what was Willowbrook's official or unofficial means of disposing of the deceased patients? Were there many unexplained accidents while he was there? Who did he work with and then have contact with or visit on Staten Island after Willowbrook shutdown? But mainly, what did Willowbrook do with the deceased patients in their care? and where was his mother buried? How could he have recreated those circumstances on Staten Island? Plus, he likely knew of ways to get into parts of Willowbrook that seem totally unaccessible to folks unaware of what it is like to be homeless. Take the camera in there, not just superficially look over the grounds please. There were furnaces and other places on those grounds that would naturally be a place he would have known about which could very well be buried in ruins now and that's what I needed to see- more effort.

Cropsey was said to be a a mythical monster / man that lived on Staten Island , New York who supposedly kidnapped and killed children. The one big problem with this monster is that he was not so mythical, in fact he was very real and he goes by the name of Andre Rand.

I don't know what it is about the 1970's but people seemed to be incredible slow and somewhat naive. On Staten Island children went missing over a long period of time but nobody seemed that bothers , including the police. Parents still let there kids out and they still went missing . People were odd and especially in America or were they?

The one thing Cropsey shows is that people had a completely different mindset back then and that's the overriding impression this film gives me.

On Staten Island there used to be an horrific mental institute. One of which you only see in horror films. There is original footage of how the kids housed in this hospital were treated and it's very , very disturbing.

The film makers try to get to the bottom of who killed these kids by interviewing family and witnesses but none seem that credible. You start to believe that there has been a miscarriage of justice with Andre Rand but despite the lack of evidence , he and his lawyers do themselves no favours.

Ultimately this is a frustrating film because unlike the Paradise Lost documentaries this answers very little.