UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Anoushka Slater While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Stevieboy666 UK VHS title - Revenge of the Bogey Man. I acknowledge that The Bogey Man was no classic but I have a soft spot for it. So back in the 1980's when I saw it's sequel on the shelf in my local video store I was over the moon. Boy, was I in for a disappointment! At least half of Revenge's running time is footage from the original. John Carradine's name appears in the opening credits yet only delivers a few words (stock footage). The new footage consists mainly of a group of people chatting around a Hollywood home. When they do start getting bumped off we get such pathetic treats such as death by toothbrush, by car exhaust, etc. As for the promised "Carrie" style ending, what a load of rubbish. How this made the "Video Nasty" list in the UK I just don't know. Just shows what a farce the whole affair was.

BA_Harrison Under interrogation from the police, art-house film-maker turned horror director Mickey Lombard (Ulli Lommel) gives his account of the events that have resulted in his arrest for a series of grisly murders.In the mid 80s, UK horror fans were treated with utter contempt by the BBFC when the organisation saw fit to draw up a list of films they deemed unsuitable for public viewing due to their graphic nature—a list which included several films that are now recognised as classics of the genre. To make matters even worse, this 'video nasty' list also included certain titles that were indisputably complete and utter garbage. Years later, horror fans who actively seek out all of the official 'nasty' titles for the sake of completion can find themselves playing a game of horror movie Russian roulette.One video nasty that is most definitely the movie equivalent of a loaded chamber is Ulli Lommell's Boogeyman II (AKA Revenge of the Boogeyman), an absolutely dire snooze-fest that almost makes taking a bullet to the brain seem like the preferable option (it would certainly involve a lot less suffering). Consisting primarily of regurgitated footage from the first film, plus a few additional scenes starring the director himself and some risible supernatural killings (including death by electric toothbrush!?!), Boogeyman II makes most of the other nasties look like classics in comparison (so perhaps it's not an entirely worthless flick after all).So bad is the film, in fact, that it has been suggested by some (including Lommell himself, unsurprisingly) that the whole thing was a massive two fingers up to the film industry by a disgruntled director unable to receive funding for anything but horror films. If this was the case, then I guess Lommell succeeded: his film is a joyless experience from start to finish, one which must have had his investors seething with rage.Incredibly, twenty years after its initial release, director Lommell issued a re-edited 'Redux' version intended to finally realise his original vision. If anything, this cut is even worse than the first one.

lastliberal Revenge of the Bogey Man or BoogeyMan II was initially one of the video nasties banned in Britain. It was released in 2003 after additional footage was added.Revenge of the Bogey Man is a good title because Ulli Lommel takes his revenge on us by showing all of the original Boogeyman film within this and some additional footage that really adds nothing to the story.Can you say ripoff? Don't bother to watch the original because the entire movie is here.What the heck was he thinking? Does he play us for fools? I guess he gets his revenge as I watched it.

eccom2002 A reflexive horror film that predates any of those tired SCREAM films. Not only do we get the best scenes from the first film (well, most of them) and then we're introduced to some cliché obnoxious (but still engaging) "Hollywood-types" only for them to be gorily killed (by toothbrush, by shaving cream, by hedge-clippers, by tail-pipe, etc). And in the end, the most obnoxious of the survivors gets done away with satisfyingly.This is a body-count film in the most cynical sense. The film-makers know who the "bodies" are and they make sure that YOU know who they are long before they get killed and that you want them to get killed.