MovieChat Forums > Sinister (2012) Discussion > So, it was all really the doing of...(sp...

So, it was all really the doing of...(spoilers)

posted 9 years ago by bluerevenge
12 replies | jump to latest

The Boogeyman?!? I mean the kids seemed to have spelled his name wrong but they're kids--I'm sure he's not a disco-dancing serial killer.

Anyway I dunno if that's all that believable; and, in fact, I think this movie unfairly characterises The Boogeyman as someone (something?) who would do such a thing. I don't think there's ever been a case of the Boogeyman killing families. I think he just likes to hide in kids' closets and under their beds and stuff to scare them at night.

It's more plausible these kids are the killers themselves and just blamed the Boogeyman for their issues. Then again that wouldn't explain how all the killings are similar, connected, and how the kids disappear into Boogeyman-land afterwards.

At one point in the movie I actually thought the over-eager police officer was that one kid, all grown up... That it was each kid growing up and passing on to a new kid, the practice of killing their own family and then teaching the next kid. True twisted serial killing style. But nope...

The movie was not that scary TBH, but that was especially the case once they exposed the killer in the first kid's drawing--depicting the alleged "Mr. Boogie". At that point I laughed that they would blame this all on our lovable (loathe-able?) childhood friend. But definitely don't let kids watch this because if they're scared of The Boogeyman already, your comforting them in telling them "he doesn't actually hurt anyone" might not be believed, them preferring to believe the fairy tale shown here instead.

6/10? Nah, let's go with 5/10.

[–] carapuce26 9 years ago

I don't understand ? Are you a troll ? Were you not paying attention or were you hidden under the blanket for the whole movie ?

Anyways I don't understand your point. The university professor in the movie spoke of an anciant pagan god named Boghuul, that lives in images of himself and posess the children who look at those images, causing them to do a blood sacrifice for him before stealing them to eat their soul over time... Given his name is Boghuul, it makes sense for young kids to misinterpret it as Boogie, because of how similar the name is, and that was probably meant by the author of the movie to confuse you by causing you to wonder "what? Is this the boogeyman?" and then take you on a completely different path. This was so plainly obvious I don't understand how anyone could ignore it unless it was deliberately... ?

Personally I thought the pagan god they invented was pretty cool and he did scare me. I've seen a great deal of horror movies and I thought this one was rather enjoyable.

[–] bluerevenge 9 years ago

I don't understand ? Are you a troll ? Were you not paying attention or were you hidden under the blanket for the whole movie ?

Anyways I don't understand your point.

Clearly, you don't. The point is Baghul or not, the end result is the Boogeyman.

The bottom line is the movie is about the Boogieman* killing families via their children and then taking the children to Boogeyman-town thereafter. Ooooh so scary!

*Whether you call him Mr. Boogie, Bagul, Boghuul (that's a new one?), Boogeyman, or Bah-schmool, is irrelevant. It's all the same--some silly make-believe evil entity made up to explain it all. A movie trying to be "scary" by presenting a fairy tale made to frighten little kids LOL.

If this isn't a hysterically laughable premise, I don't know what is. The movie is great if your goal is to scare those of 12 years of age and below; otherwise it's nonsense. On second thought 5/10 is probably generous but for the laughs, entertainment, and for the fact that Hawke carried the whole movie on his own, I'll stick with that.

[–] alvaro-jneto-684-642758 8 years ago

Obvious troll is obvious troll is obvious troll is obvious troll is

Sounds more like you don't dare to consider the point that the premise wasn't to build on a story made to scare little kids - because it obviously wasn't - but to recognise that would mean actually getting scared from a made up scary story, and you just can't allow that, you're too macho (butch? are you a girl?) for that.

[–] wesperkins 8 years ago

I think the confusion is when the professor calls the entity by its name, I forget but it's in the post, some it's similar to boogeyman. Furthermore, when the kids draw the pics of their family being murdrerer, don't they always have the boogeyman next to their family? It's been awhile since I saw this, but I know they draw him I just can't remember the name the kids call him. And I think the OP may be saying that after watching the whole movie and it turned out to be the bogeyman he would be dissapointed in lack of originality. But since it's some obscure pagan God, we don't have to worry about that.

[–] Velvet_Roses 9 years ago

I'm sorry that was me replying first I had browser issues. I just wanted to add that if you stopped paying attention once you took for granted that you already knew the explanation before it was laid out it sort of makes your judgement biaised...

And that thing about the police officer ? Personally I think that's about the most cliché one could get :/

Now I'm truly done ! :P

[–] Debbieuk 9 years ago

I thought exactly the same thing about the police officer. I think that was deliberately put there as a red herring (especially as he was very creepy and when he called constantly towards the end of the film).

[–] stitchesaresore 9 years ago

Things to keep in mind:

1. Baghul, the demon created for this film, seems to draw inspiration from several pre-existing entities. For instance, the god Moloch. Rather than parents sacrifing the children, it is twisted to the children sacrifing the parents.

2. Likewise, the Boogeyman himself is a catch-all of different mythology and demonology. That's why you hear so many different tellings of what this creature actually is, with children being the only true link between tales. In fact, by this point in society, Boogeyman has become the term for almost any monsters making children paranoid. There is very little purity to the legend. It's much the way that American southerners will call every soda "Coke" despite meaning any unspecified soda from Pepsi to Mountain Dew.

3. Even assuming that we're talking about some clearly defined entity, what is loveable about a monster hiding under a child's bed, trying to scare them and/or take their souls? He can be loveable in a "love to hate" or even sadistic fashion like movie villians, but saying dude is evil is hardly slander.

[–] king_of_bob 9 years ago

Yes and no. Bughaal is the "demon" in this movie, and it seems likely he was intended to be the basis for The Boogeyman.

Anyway I dunno if that's all that believable; and, in fact, I think this movie unfairly characterises The Boogeyman as someone (something?) who would do such a thing. I don't think there's ever been a case of the Boogeyman killing families. I think he just likes to hide in kids' closets and under their beds and stuff to scare them at night.

You need to look up the mythology then. In most of the myths they come and take children. This movie just adds a bit about the Boogeyman using the child it takes to kill their entire family.

But what's unfair about changing the back story of a mythological creature, anyway? It's not like a myth has feelings that can be hurt.

At one point in the movie I actually thought the over-eager police officer was that one kid, all grown up... That it was each kid growing up and passing on to a new kid, the practice of killing their own family and then teaching the next kid. True twisted serial killing style. But nope...

It also wouldn't make any damn sense. This wouldn't even be a serial killer story. It would just be some story of people murdering their entire family and then for some reason getting someone else to kill their entire family as well.

The movie was not that scary TBH, but that was especially the case once they exposed the killer in the first kid's drawing--depicting the alleged "Mr. Boogie". At that point I laughed that they would blame this all on our lovable (loathe-able?) childhood friend. But definitely don't let kids watch this because if they're scared of The Boogeyman already, your comforting them in telling them "he doesn't actually hurt anyone" might not be believed, them preferring to believe the fairy tale shown here instead.

It's not alleged, we know for a fact that Bughaal was behind the killings.

And you seriously need to look up the mythology. The Boogeyman did in fact hurt children. The stories your parents told you and the actual mythology are not the same.

Besides, what is the point of telling your kids about the boogeyman if you aren't using it to make your children behave? Why tell them about the creature if you're just going to tell them it can't do anything to them?

The new home of Welcome to Planet Bob: http://kingofbob.blogspot.ca/

[–] bluerevenge 9 years ago

You need to look up the mythology then.

LOL I think you missed the sarcasm :P

It also wouldn't make any damn sense.

Perhaps not but it would at least make sense killing-wise. You know, because people can and do actually kill people in real life...on their own...without implied influence or possession of alleged and laughable ghouls & goblins, lol.

And you seriously need to look up the mythology.

And you seriously need to look up the definition of mythology. Because whether or not the boogeyman has hurt anyone in mythology is neither here nor there; because, either way, guess what? It's still make-believe nonsense! And again, in this case it's just a story to scare kids, just like this movie--scary for 12 year olds and younger, but no one else.

So bottom line is if you want to give your littles ones a good scare, then watch this with them--fun family movie night! :) If you want an actual scary movie for yourself though? Look elsewhere 'cause this movie stinks...bad.

[–] Reema2688 9 years ago

Anyway I dunno if that's all that believable; and, in fact, I think this movie unfairly characterises The Boogeyman as someone (something?) who would do such a thing. I don't think there's ever been a case of the Boogeyman killing families. I think he just likes to hide in kids' closets and under their beds and stuff to scare them at night.

Since the entire concept of Boogeyman is a myth, isn't it open for interpretation to various people how to represent him, lovable or loath-able?
And how in the world can any fictional movie, that too horror (which have elements of supernatural) can ever be believable! Enjoy it for the jump-scares, creepiness, eeriness etc.

This movie covered those elements pretty well.

The problem with social media - Idiots now got a voice

[–] bluerevenge 9 years ago

I think you also missed the sarcasm, lol. But anyway that's understandable given it's just text.

As for how can any fictional horror movie be scary, well they could be a little more realistic and believable for one thing (blaming things on the Boogeyman is the exact opposite of doing that).

TBH most horror movies don't scare me...at all. Which makes a lot of them pretty un-enjoyable (and I don't "enjoy" silly jump-scares either). But in fairness I do rate the really bad ones (like this!) accordingly. Some horror movies, even if not scary [to me], are at least well done. This one, the only thing good about it was Ethan Hawke who [at least tried] to carry the whole movie on his own. If not for him I would have given this a 3 or 4 out of 10 instead of a 5.

IMO the movie is just plain bad, I don't know what else to say so I'll just leave it at what I said before--it stinks!

[–] Reema2688 9 years ago

I got your initial sarcasm 😃.
What I didn't get is how incorporating the element of Bogeyman makes it completely unbelievable. Unenjoyable to you, yes..but unbelievable how? Unless and until someone actually believes in the supernatural, this genre is always unbelievable & unrealistic(w.r.t the scary entity - in this movie, the 'Boogeyman').

I completely agree to your point that some horror movies are extremely well done, where as some just plain old suck. If I have to categorize, I will say like this -
Good : Paranoramal Activity I & II, Insidious I & II
Sucky : The remaining movies of Paranormal activity series, Insidious III

But when I categorize something unbelievable, it has mainly to do with the ridiculousness of the flow of narration, senseless reaction or action on the characters' part, inconsistency in the story, over-the-top effects etc. (just to clarify, it is just my way of defining, not necessarily correct).

Personally, I found movies like The Human Centipede, Contracted, Dead Girl some of the most unbelievable horror. So massively disgusting/gross/infuriating that I did not even bother after 20mins or so. But then, to each his own right! 😃

P.S. Stephen King's It, Child's Play got me running scared of the lovable Clowns & Dolls when I was kid, and I still enjoy those movies.

The problem with social media - Idiots now got a voice