The Boogey Man

1980 "The most terrifying nightmare of childhood is about to return!"
4.7| 1h22m| R| en| More Info
Released: 07 November 1980 Released
Producted By: The Jerry Gross Organization
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

A young girl witnesses the brutal murder of her stepfather at the hands of her brother, by mirror reflection. Years later, when the mirror is accidentally shattered, a dark and vengeful curse is unleashed on the family, and anyone unlucky enough to come into contact with its shards falls victim to heinous murder.

Genre

Horror

Watch Online

The Boogey Man (1980) is now streaming with subscription on Prime Video

Director

Ulli Lommel

Production Companies

The Jerry Gross Organization

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial
Watch Now
The Boogey Man Videos and Images
View All

The Boogey Man Audience Reviews

Steineded How sad is this?
Bergorks If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.
Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
Kaelan Mccaffrey Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.
Rainey Dawn Sadly I do recall seeing this film in the 1980s after *trying* to re-watch recently. I forgot all about see this film back then, now I recall it. The only reason I *tried* watching it was for John Carradine - I like him. The film is terrible, stupid but Carradine is good as always.Nothing to see here but some cheap, cheesy murders - if you like that sort of thing thing this film might be up your alley! I'm not into that so this film did nothing for me.Why give this film 2 stars? Number one reason: John Carradine, number two reason it held my interest a little bit in the beginning but after the first half hour I really lost all interest - it started out fine and kept going down hill from there. The idea behind the film could be fine but needed some major work on the script to make this mess work well.2/10
tomgillespie2002 Like many horror films back in the 1980's (and even today), The Boogeyman takes its influence from John Carpenter's landmark in horror, Halloween (1978). While Michael Myers was the physical embodiment of the 'boogeyman' legend (I say legend, but it is more a term given to whatever scares little children at night), Ulli Lommel's shockingly s**t video nasty goes the extra mile and adds a supernatural spin to the story in the shape of a haunted mirror.The quite effective opening has a young girl and boy spying on their slutty mother as she seduces a man with a stocking on his head. They are spotted, and the man ties the boy to a bed while they have sex in another room. The girl cuts him loose with a large knife, and the boy then uses it to murder the man. Years later, the boy Willy (Nicholas Love) is mute, and the girl, Lacey (Suzanna Love), is psychologically troubled by the events of her childhood. Her psychiatrist Dr. Warren (John Carradine, looking like he's hoping nobody will notice his presence in the film) advises her husband Jake (Ron James) that she should go back to her childhood home to confront her demons. She does, and while there she sees the man wearing the stocking in the bedroom mirror, which she smashes. Jake pieces together the mirror and takes it home, when strange deaths start occurring.Yes, this is as daft as it sounds. Horror movies have long made killers out of strange things (tomatoes, clowns, a house), but a mirror that influences suicides? Mmm. It's one of the strangest choices for a killer 'bad guy' I've come across in horror since the strangely likable Death Bed: The Bed That Eats (1977). If anything, this at least separates it from other mundane entries into the slasher genre, but the film struggles along trying to juggle a story a sibling connection, psychological torment, and standard stalk-and-slash. There is a half- decent death involving a 'long kiss', but apart from this, it is instantly forgettable.www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com
Vomitron_G Well, if you're a die-hard horror fan, then watching "The Boogeyman" is worth it. But also, there's some serious stuff wrong with this movie. It seems like Ulli Lommel watched more than one good horror movie before he made this, but he didn't quite know how to make one himself. Here are some random movies that crossed my mind while seeing "The Boogeyman": "Halloween" (1978) (the opening-scene), "The Amityville Horror" (1979) (man, that one house almost looked like a replica), "The Exorcist" (1973) (throw a bit of possession and a priest in the mix) and "Suspiria" (1977) (those colourful lighting techniques towards the end). All good movies, but "The Boogeyman" is such an oddball mixture, that it's even hard to pinpoint where exactly it all went wrong. There's pacing problems, the suspense build-up feels wrong somehow and there are definitely some huge, inexplicable leaps of logic.But the mirror-angle was pretty cool and original. And most killings are a lot of fun! I've never seen a girl first rip her shirt to shreds with a pair of scissors for the sole sake of revealing her breasts, and then plant the scissors in her neck in a quite bloody fashion. And what about that 'longest kiss you've ever seen'... Pretty hilarious! And the ending is a colourful hoot too.Whatever happened to Ulli Lommel? Where did it go wrong? I've seen two movies by him now and at least "The Boogeyman" was entertaining (albeit, very likely not for the reasons Lommel imagined at the time). But one of his recent efforts, "The Tomb" (2007) was one of the worst pieces of crap – pardon my French – I've seen in the last few years. Anyway, to all (younger) horror fans who are ready to go back in time a bit and delve further into obscurity, "The Boogeyman" is one you might want to pick up at a certain point. Although there's much better stuff to be discovered too, of course.
happyendingrocks This derivative little mess has a few things going for it, but ultimately crumbles under the weight of its own flimsy logic and silliness.Quick plot summary: A little boy murders his mother's abusive boyfriend, who somehow turns from a cruel jerk into a demonic evil spirit that returns years later to get revenge on the now-grown boy by killing random characters who have nothing to do with the murder. The malevolent force's path of vengeance is a bit hard to follow, especially since the focal point of the film is the boy's sister, who didn't actually participate in the killing. The murder is precipitated by the boy being tied to his bed as punishment for watching mother and boyfriend make out. It's important to note that before said make-out session, mother puts her pantyhose over boyfriend's head, which he continues to wear throughout the make-out session (safe sex was apparently practiced much differently in the early 80's). Sister cuts brother loose with a knife that he then uses to kill Panty Hose Head. The killing happens in front of mother's bedroom mirror, which captures Panty Hose Head's essence and blesses him with the ability to travel to any mirror he wants, possess people, and force them to stab themselves with scissors. His unexplained transformation also imbues him with telekinetic powers that allow him to execute strangers with clever death tools like a window sill and a car door. Did I mention that he goes on to possess sister and make her talk like Linda Blair? That's also very important to the story, so I'm sorry it took me a minute to share that. Some other stuff happens, and there's a little boy with a piece of broken mirror supernaturally bonded to the bottom of his shoe, and that phantom shard glows and pulsates and kills off a couple of ancillary characters by forcing them them to French kiss each other. Also, the now-grown brother tries to strangle some woman whose only purpose in the film is to be almost strangled for reasons unknown. There's a therapist in there somewhere too, but other than setting up a scene where sis does her Blair voice, I'm not sure why he's there either. Oh, and a chunk of glass from a shattered mirror vibrates and cuts the fingers of anyone who picks it up, but instead of letting go of the glass and not getting cut, the multiple people who pick up the glass choose to keep bleeding and shaking while they try to fit the piece back into the broken mirror. Oh, and a shard of this glass affixes itself to one of sister's eyes, which glows red or green depending on something that's never explained, and then she levitates and makes her husband bleed out of his eyes, but it turns out he's fine and the blood we see coming out of his eyes is actually just a couple of smears on his face in the next scene. And then a mirror gets thrown into a well and promptly explodes. This isn't a very quick plot summary, is it? Let's just stop there.Nearly everything about the film is borrowed from far superior works. The arbitrary title seems like an attempt to cash in on the success of Halloween (this is made even more obvious when you see the familiar "child's hand gripping a butcher knife" camera shot at the beginning). The pointless insertion of a priest who comes to investigate the strange happenings is an obvious nod to The Exorcist, as is the afore-mentioned voice our lead heroine adopts throughout the film. Even the house most of the film takes place in is only a coat of white paint away from being a doppelganger for the infamous Amityville Horror estate.The film builds slowly, but since the clunky execution of the plot isn't all that intriguing, the meager splatter thrown at us for a payoff isn't nearly enough to justify the journey there. You'll probably decide this whole affair is nonsense long before you get to the goriest scene in the film, wherein our previously discussed clergyman gets repeatedly stabbed in the back by kitchen cutlery... which causes fountains of blood to flow from his scalp (?!).On the plus side, there are some nice atmospheric touches, so even though there isn't any real tension to speak of, the film LOOKS like it should have some. The cast seems to take the goofy material as seriously as they can, so the performances are all serviceable. Plus, the music is pretty nifty.Aside from that, you probably don't need to spend 80 minutes trying to make sense of everything I've discussed here. If you do, the door is blatantly left open for a sequel, so you're probably committing yourself to an additional 80 minutes as well. Life is far too short, so let's just say I watched this movie so you don't have to and leave it that. As for Boogey Man 2: The Return Of Panty Hose Head, you're on your own there.