REVIEW

DVD Review: The Boogeyman 2

Written by Derek Fleek
Published September 17, 2008

You know you have a problem when the opening scene is the most well-crafted scene in the film and it almost spells out who the killer is for those of you with your brain in second gear. There is no mystery here. It's just another entry in the "torture porn" genre trying to disguise itself as a psychological thriller.

Haunted by her brutal past memories, Laura now has a long-term fear of the Boogeyman. After the death of her parents at the age of eight, Laura hasn't been able to shake off the idea that the Boogeyman was responsible for her parent's death. Convinced she saw it happen, she still has visions of the Boogeyman (who supposedly lives on fear) a decade later and voluntarily checks herself into a mental facility crowded with phobia-induced patients. A seemingly perfect feeding zone for the Boogeyman.

Although I didn't care for the first one, I could admire its spooky atmosphere and its creepy tone. It never solely relied on blood spatter or decapitation for thrills (which isn't a bad thing when done right). Don't get me wrong, I like my horror movies gory. However, a stylish atmosphere is what makes horror movies surreal and Boogeyman 2 bypasses any attempts at conjuring a sleek atmosphere. It substitutes ambiance with gore and the result is, unfortunately, less frightening and less original than the first.

While the acting was pretty convincing (with the exception of a couple of one-dimensional characters), the screaming wasn't. It is almost as if these actors were intended to be in a drama and were inadvertently placed in a DTV horror sequel. Tobin Bell (most known for his satanic role in the Saw franchise) rarely appears in the film and is obviously just there to leak star power, a cheap way of attracting audiences familiar to his work.

First-time director Jeff Betancourt has a talent, and it shows spontaneously every now and then. But the material here is a poor choice for a debut director to exert his or her talents. I feel Betancourt would've done more justice to a B-grade horror flick, possibly gaining a cult status in this manner. Who knows, it might have been his ticket to fame. Adding injury to pain is debut screenwriter Brian Sieve, a strong believer in unwanted sequels. The fact that he believes that the original Boogeyman was worthy of a trilogy is proof of the previous statement. That's right, we have a Boogeyman 3 in the works. It is obvious that Sieve is empty and has no originality up his sleeve.

When will Hollywood ever come up with something new to include in this vapid genre? It seems as though nearly every first-time screenwriter is turning to sequels and prequels as an attempt at making something worthy. Audiences are in dire need of something different, something unique, and Boogeyman 2 is far from this need.

The DVDs special features (if any are interested) include widescreen and fullscreen versions of the film, commentary with Betancourt and Sieve, commentary with Bell and Danielle Savre and producers Gary Bryman and Steve Hein, and a featurette on the makeup effects from storyboard to screen.

Derek Fleek is an online movie critic and promoter of the site Popcorn Monsters. His favorite genres are horror (modern and classic), comedy horror, and occasionally a good drama. His favorite movie is Pulp Fiction and his favorite director is Quentin Tarantino. You can find more movie reviews at his website.
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
DVD Review: The Boogeyman 2
Published: September 17, 2008
Type: Review
Section: Video
Filed Under: Video: Horror
Writer: Derek Fleek
Derek Fleek's BC Writer page
Derek Fleek's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Derek Fleek
Video: Horror
All Video Articles
All Review articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — September 18, 2008 @ 13:18PM — Brad Schader

"most known for his satanic role in the Saw franchise"

This confuses me and makes me question the entire review to be honest. I saw (no pun intended) nothing Satanic in the Saw series and it makes me wonder if you have seen them at all. It also then makes me wonder if you saw this movie also because you call this "tortue porn" as well and saw is not that either.

#2 — September 20, 2008 @ 15:38PM — Bill Fields

While I agree that relying solely on gore instead of atmosphere can be problematic, I question where this critic is placing the blame. I think the director is more responsible for creating atmosphere on the screen than the screenwriter. Also, it is the producers who believe the franchise is "worthy of a trilogy" -- not the writer that they hire to write their sequel. The critic who wrote this review would benefit from a better of understanding of the movie making process and seems to be placing blame carelessly.

#3 — September 20, 2008 @ 18:20PM — Derek Fleek

Thanks for reading everyone.

Brad, I don't understand the fact that you feel nothing satanic was presented in the Saw franchise. The Saw franchise is the exact definition of sadistic torture porn from my point of view. And this movie is nothing more than another film centering on torture and lacking in atmosphere.

Bill, I can see where the producers are equally to blame for hiring the screenwriter here, but it is the screenwriter who is responsible for coming up with the brainy idea of making a sequel. I blame him for coming up with the idea and the producers are to blame equally for the fact that they agreed to it. I did fail to mention this in my review.

Hopefully that will clear things up.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/81329)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments