Acensbart
Excellent but underrated film
Curapedi
I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.
Abbigail Bush
what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.
a_chinn
The first Boogeyman film was pretty awful, but it must have made enough money to warrant a direct-to-video sequel. Although this horror film is not very good, it is better than the original, but not by much. The story here has a young woman checking herself into a mental institution to deal with her fear of the Boogeyman. A major change from the first film is that the Boogeyman is much more flesh and blood and much less supernatural, which is an odd choice for a supernatural thriller. One smart choice by the filmmakers was to forego the PG13 rating and go for a hard R rating, filling their film with loads of gory practical special effects instead of the much overused computer generate gory special effects (i.e. "Ghost Ship" or "The House on Haunted Hill"). This sequel also has a better cast than the first film, with Renée O'Connor and Tobin Bell Tobin as doctors at the institution. Overall, the story isn't that good and it's not all that scary, but for a low budget horror film, it does boast some excellent gory (PRACTICAL) special effects, which was enough to hold my interest.
jacobjohntaylor1
This first movie of Boogeyman is very scary. And this is just crappy pooh. Why did it get a 5.2. It is not scary. Boogeyman 3 is a better movie and that was awful. This movie has an awful story line. It has awful editing. It has an awful ending. Do not wast your time. Do not wast your money. Do not see this awful movie. It is just awful. Boogeyman is one of the best horror movies ever. And this is one of the worst horror movies ever. This is not a 5.2. This is a 1. 5.2 is just overrating it. This is the a pile of stink pooh pooh ca ca. Do not see it. I do not know why people like it. It is just pooh pooh and pee pee on top of it.
tonyjea92
the 1st movie was "interesting" to say the least but this sequel i just don't know what to say about except maybe the title and thats predictable.so basically 2 siblings went to a asylum to get help from their fear of the boogeyman OK understandable, but you'd think that the so-called boogeyman himself would be an actual entity rather than laura's own brother who actually went deranged after his visit from the hospital but no they decided to stick with a slasher esque type of movie not supernatural.but the one thing i can't quite understand was that if the boogeyman was laura's brother (henry) all along then who (or what) killed their parents when they were 8 and 11 was it just coincidence or was there something in this movie that we overlooked all along?
Miller Pitman
This was an AWESOME movie. Mainly, I would not like this kind of movie because it is supernatural (suggestively in this movie)... But It had AWESOME plot twists, sick effects, and a good story. Scared the crap out of me and my friend. I watched it alone in the middle of the night and I couldn't turn the lights off after it was over! If you like horror movies, THIS is a one for you. If you liked Jeepers Creepers, this is your kind of movie. I suggest this to all horror fans. However, I did not like the ending. (no spoilers) It was just... rather depressing but it added a lot to the scariness of the movie.This is my favorite horror movie. Not to say that will be the same to all of you, but I have seen TONS of horror movies and.. this beats them all. In my opinion, this is the ultimate scariest movie of all time.
