-

I'm going to be frank with you. I felt the first "Boogeyman" was inept on nearly every level. It had rather tense atmosphere, but the plot was paper thin and everything but its haunting scenery and aforementioned atmosphere was utterly forgettable. The picture attempted something of a supernatural ending, which I won't give away here, but to say that it didn't work would be understating it greatly. "Boogeyman 2," its sequel in name-and-reference only, takes the idea of the "boogeyman" and moves the series in a completely new direction.

The first film flirted with the notion of its titular monster being all in lead Barry Watson's head. It was rarely a physical entity. The words inscribed on this semi-sequel's box art read "Fear. In the Flesh," perhaps hinting not-so-subtly that this will NOT take the same approach as the rather meek original. Director Jeff Betancourt has turned this into - what some may consider - a "run of the mill" slasher flick with out-of-place sex and gratuitous violence prerequisites met. Although "Boogeyman 2" still acknowledges that there may lurk a boogeyman outside the physical (which I appreciated), the focus is more on insane asylum teenage slicing and dicing.

I'm proof positive that Betancourt will catch a lot of flak for this sequel, and I do understand that the criticism is well deserved on some fronts. As much as I enjoy slashers, this film rarely "breaks the rules," if you will. How many times have you heard this one; people start dying left and right and no one seems to believe the only character who thinks someone MAY be offing them. Or this one; while people are dying, two characters still seem to find time for a little promiscuity. And, not to mention, the Scooby-Doo-like unmasking of the killer (thought that got played out by the time the 2000s rolled around) simply does NOT work. But visually the film looks great. There's a certain sinister element that Betancourt conveys well, though I'd dare say it’s more thanks to solid set design and cinematography. The minimal scares are handled effectively and there's tons of atmosphere present throughout as well.

Most surprising about a direct-to-DVD horror sequel, though, is when its acting manages to be above par. "Boogeyman 2" won't have anyone shining up their Oscars, but it’s much better acted than the original. Not to mention, having the inimitable Tobin "Jigsaw" Bell in the house is an unarguable plus. The characters as a whole are rather unbelievable at times, though they are suffering from mental illnesses which, if you're feeling lenient, you could say causes these actions. The smorgasbord of clichés on hand is probably more to blame on the script than any of the actors. Bottom line, I bought the performances even if no character was overly likeable. I could, however, have done with someone who knew how to carry themselves better as a masked villain. Whoever was behind the mask lacked in presence so bad it hurt.

If this hadn't been a sequel to the woefully mediocre "Boogeyman" and was, instead, a standalone slasher flick, I probably wouldn't be as forgiving of its flaws as I am. As a sequel, it doesn't really work. It only mildly references the original, but is miles ahead of its predecessor in quality. The scares are there, the gore is plentiful, and the acting is way above par for a film of this genre. Most, though, will either love or hate "Boogeyman 2" for the simple fact that it has little to do with the first and is pretty much its own film. But that is precisely why it stands on its own two feet so well.