O Pesadelo 2

I absolutely hated the original BOOGEYMAN, which I still consider to be one of the very worst movies I've ever sat through, so it was with some reluctance that I sat down to watch this sequel when I saw it was on television. Thankfully, it's an unconnected sequel and an entirely different kind of movie. It's not a brilliant film by any means, but it works as a solid low budget horror and is a lot more effective than a lot of dross out there.

To be honest, this film doesn't have to do a lot to succeed. It's set in an asylum, and history has shown us that asylum-set horror films are usually very effective at conjuring up a spooky atmosphere. It's a slasher film, quickly adopting the usual template – about ten minutes waiting around until a gruesome death, then a face-off between sole survivor and killer at the climax – but as I haven't watched any slashers in a while I didn't mind that at all. Sure, the cast are a bunch of unknowns and their acting is only moderately effective, but it could be a lot worse.

Director Jeff Betancourt cut his teeth as an editor on the likes of THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE, so he knows his stuff and does a good job. Plus, the film provides work for two veteran actors – Tobin Bell, best known as Jigsaw in the SAW franchise, and Renee O'Connor, best known for her portrayal of Gabrielle in '90s TV series XENA: WARRIOR PRINCESS. The mention of SAW brings me to another point: this film's deaths. They're as gruesome as anything you'll witness in those bloody horror films, and actually seem to have been modelled on the type of nasty, in-your-face torture found in the SAWs. Bodily dismemberment, self harm, and explosion are the order of the day. Okay, so this film does have one of the most obvious 'twist' endings ever – one of those ones you'll guess right at the very beginning – but don't let that put you off. BOOGEYMAN 2 is a horror effort that offers chills and gore in equal amount.

Direct to video sequel to the Boogeyman about a brother and sister traumatized by the killing of their parents by the boogeyman. The sister finds herself in a psyche ward and well...you can figure out the rest.

Unremarkable but okay horror story is okay if you find nothing else to watch but if you've seen one of these films before for you've seen them all. The problem is that the film, while well made simply doesn't have anything in it that makes it stand out. This is probably as middle of the pile as you can go and has had the life crushed out of it from the stuff above and below it. I can't recommend it but can't say not to see it ether.

I have not seen the first one, so I am judging this movie solely on being an independent movie and not a sequel. The movie, as far as the boogeyman goes, isn't that bad. I'm not really familiar with the actually boogeyman story, but this was pretty interesting. The setting of the movie is somewhat your typical horror film (a hospital/clinic), but doesn't take back anything. It has a fair amount suspense, gore, character development, and eye candy. The acting was surprisingly above average, and actually really well done, especially from the main actress (who I've not seen before). Now, the movie isn't everything great either. Some of the scenes are somewhat over the top and corny, and there is some predictability. Overall, its not bad though, something to watch when you're bored. I rate it 6/10. Unrated (my rating): R for Strong horror violence and terror, language, some sexuality/nudity, and brief drug content

The filmmakers really wanted to tell a story with this one. And to a degree they succeeded. Casting Tobin Bell in a mysterious role is always a good catch too. Unfortunately most of the other actors do not completely live up to the task. Not to mention that the story is pretty weak if you think about it.

The death scenes are nicely shot and you'll also have a sex scene inter-cut with a horror scene (which seems to be a favorite for many horror fans). So there are a few nice bits and pieces here and there (make-up is good too, for a small budget movie like that. You can have fun with this, because they did put a lot of effort into it, to make it look good too. Depending on your expectations, you'll either like it or hate it. Especially towards the end, it'll be splitting people/viewers

I guess that the producers really had learned their lesson with part 1, the use of CGI was a complete letdown in part 1 but here we have a real boogeyman. It is even so that the boogeyman is more a real killer which gives us the fact that we are in the era of the slashers. The start of the movie learns us that two children witness the killing of both parents. The boy was already afraid and guessed that it was the boogeyman due the fact that the killer was never captured. For that reason they watched the children closely in psychiatry. Next stop, 10 years later. The boy tells his sister that he has to go. His sister is back in therapy but suddenly one after one people in her neighborhood get killed. She suspect the boogeyman is back in business. Once the killings start it's old school slasher style. I have seen the 93 minutes version in stead of the European version and I can say that the unrated version isn't afraid by showing the killings. It's mostly done in a bloody way or sometimes even in a gory way. The fact that the effects used are without CGI makes it all worth watching. It is also funny to see Tobin Bell as Dr Mitchell. I guess the director made an ode to SAW by putting in a device to rip open a chest. Anyway, Bell is excellent as all others who are really believable. You can guess easily who's the killer but the plot change gives it all worth watching. And for the ones wandering if all elements are in it to say it's a slasher, yes, Chrissy Griffith does show her milky ways in close up a few times. Sadly, part 3 was back to the imagination of the boogeyman in CGI, but the red stuff made it second best.