Pretty Good
Added 11/9/2009
Not bad- I never thought of the "Boogeyman" in these terms, but it was entertaining. If you collect, you'll watch it again.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Worst Horror Movie I've Ever Seen
Added 8/7/2009
I have never seen a horror movie lamer than this one. If you want to get scared than watch Freddy Vs Jason or It or something, but if you want to see a stupid horror movie that isn't even scary, then by all means, watch this one. The only part I liked was the beginning, because it was actually kind of scary when the Boogeyman ate his father, but the rest is crap and not worth watching. Don't buy or watch it, just ignore it completely.
2 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
Looney toon or boogeyman?
Added 7/24/2009
Did the retired cartoonists from Bugs Bunny and the Looney Toons have their hand in making this film? It is certainly a salient feature. For example, in the beginning of the show, the kid's father is hurled up and down the parameters of the closet space with such force and animation similar to the old cartoons. It is more comical than terrifying. And the ghoul, whose motives are left unstated, seems merely to be a mischievious character reminiscent of bugs bunny or daffy duck, or, better yet, woody the wood pecker of Mel Blanc lore. Except, instead of the humor resuting from that head banging lunacy of Melanerpes formicivorus, we have the same mischief combined with unadulterated malcontent. The acting seems to involve lots of young people with pensive faces trying to imitate how young people talk and act. The theater does have as its goal the imitation of real life, but not verbatim. Improvization and poetic liberty seem to be a foreign concept to many of these young actors. The plot? There wasn't any. No punch line. The producers apparently thought that putting a kid in a haunted house of his youth, embellishing the spook with special effects, and adding a minor subplot of his social life would make for great movie making. It fails miserably. Why this immaterial being is able to bring about physical effects, and why, in the end, he is finally subject to being hit over the head with a common table lamp, begs the question.
2 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
One of the worst horror movies I've seen
Added 7/21/2009
I thought this movie was going to be good, but I don't see what was scary about it at all. It started out looking like it could be scary, but then it ended up being ridiculous. It didn't seem very believable to me that an adult man would still be afraid of the same things as when he was a child. The movie was very boring to me. There were too many scenes where nothing significant was happening. I only finished watching it because I thought it would be worth it to finally see the boogeyman later on in the movie, but I was even more diappointed when I saw it. The monster's CGI was too terrible for it to even be scary. The ending also wasn't very good and left too many unanswered questions. I would only recommend this movie to someone who likes one of the actors or actresses in it. If you want a good horror movie that's worth watching, this isn't it. Some better horror movies are "The Ring" or "The Sixth Sense."
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Barry Watson did his part in this movie, we all know him from 7th heaven,
it could have had a better story line but i wouldnt consider this lousey..some sences were pretty good acually, Im a fan of Barry Watson soo ima give this 4 stars..you could watch this more than once for sure..
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Pretty Good
Added 11/9/2009
Not bad- I never thought of the "Boogeyman" in these terms, but it was entertaining. If you collect, you'll watch it again.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Worst Horror Movie I've Ever Seen
Added 8/7/2009
I have never seen a horror movie lamer than this one. If you want to get scared than watch Freddy Vs Jason or It or something, but if you want to see a stupid horror movie that isn't even scary, then by all means, watch this one. The only part I liked was the beginning, because it was actually kind of scary when the Boogeyman ate his father, but the rest is crap and not worth watching. Don't buy or watch it, just ignore it completely.
2 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
Looney toon or boogeyman?
Added 7/24/2009
Did the retired cartoonists from Bugs Bunny and the Looney Toons have their hand in making this film? It is certainly a salient feature. For example, in the beginning of the show, the kid's father is hurled up and down the parameters of the closet space with such force and animation similar to the old cartoons. It is more comical than terrifying. And the ghoul, whose motives are left unstated, seems merely to be a mischievious character reminiscent of bugs bunny or daffy duck, or, better yet, woody the wood pecker of Mel Blanc lore. Except, instead of the humor resuting from that head banging lunacy of Melanerpes formicivorus, we have the same mischief combined with unadulterated malcontent. The acting seems to involve lots of young people with pensive faces trying to imitate how young people talk and act. The theater does have as its goal the imitation of real life, but not verbatim. Improvization and poetic liberty seem to be a foreign concept to many of these young actors. The plot? There wasn't any. No punch line. The producers apparently thought that putting a kid in a haunted house of his youth, embellishing the spook with special effects, and adding a minor subplot of his social life would make for great movie making. It fails miserably. Why this immaterial being is able to bring about physical effects, and why, in the end, he is finally subject to being hit over the head with a common table lamp, begs the question.
2 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
