Revenge of the Boogeyman
Tags: violence, dark, murder, flashback

Plot synopsis:
As young children, Laura Porter and her brother Henry witness their parents' brutal murder by a hooded man, whom they believe to be the Boogeyman. As an adult, Henry has attended group therapy, improving such that he is instead currently looking for work. Laura joins this group as he leaves, meeting the other members: nyctophobic Mark, germaphobic Paul, masochistic Alison, agoraphobic and commitment-averse Darren, and Nicky, a bulimic girl who fears extreme weight gain.
Upon her joining, however, the members of the group are targeted and murdered one by one. All of their deaths relate to their fears: Mark falls down an elevator shaft, trying to escape from the darkness when the lights go out, and is torn in half. Paul accidentally consumes a cockroach while eating a bag of chips; he is given cleaning solution by a masked figure, and upon drinking it, burns a hole in his throat. Laura begins to suspect these deaths are not accidental. The hospital loses power, leaving Laura, Alison, Darren, Nicky, Dr. Jessica Ryan, and the receptionist Gloria in the dark. Gloria goes to the basement to turn the lights back on, but once the patients return to their rooms, Alison is tied to her bed by the Boogeyman. He places maggots on her arms, which burrow into her skin via her self-inflicted incisions, and she kills herself attempting to cut them out.
Dr. Ryan goes to the basement to check on Gloria, but is electrocuted by the Boogeyman while standing in a puddle of water. Laura finds a file on her brother and those of other patients with bogyphobia (phobia of the Boogeyman). She learns that all bogyphobia patients - including Tim Jensen, the protagonist of the first film - have committed suicide after being treated by Dr. Mitchell Allen. Darren and Nicky have sex in the locker room as Laura finds Alison; she alerts them to Alison's corpse, but they find upon returning that the blood and maggots have been cleaned up, leading them to believe that Laura is hallucinating. Darren and Nicky go to his room, where they argue about the viability of their relationship. Darren forces Nicky out of his room, and is then attacked by the Boogeyman, who disembowels him and removes his heart.
Laura finds Nicky on a basement table with hoses attached to her, pumping bile into her body until she explodes. The Boogeyman chases Laura through the hospital; along the way she finds Gloria's body and Dr. Ryan, barely alive and mumbling in a trance-like state. She also runs into Dr. Allen, who believes Laura committed the killings. He tries to sedate her, but is stopped by the Boogeyman, who stabs him and shoves two needles into his eyes. The Boogeyman is revealed to be Henry; Dr. Allen had locked him in a closet in an attempt to treat him of his bogyphobia, and the Boogeyman possessed Henry at that time. The chase ends when Laura decapitates the Boogeyman with gardening shears. The police arrive and discover that under the Boogeyman mask was Dr. Ryan: after killing Dr. Allen but prior to chasing Laura, Henry puts the mask on the doctor and escaped. Laura realizes that Henry is running free and is arrested for the murder of Dr. Ryan.
In a post-credits scene, the Boogeyman looks at a picture of Laura and Henry as adults before disappearing.

Review: Bizarre, pretentious, idiotic sequel starts off with 40 minutes of flashback footage of the first movie.
So much footage is used from part one, that when the end credits roll, they actually credit both the cast of this movie AND the first one!When the flashbacks mercifully end, the rest of this movie is pretty much Ulli Lommel poking the viewer in the eyes with this ridiculous story about filmmakers wanting to do a movie based on the events in part one, then a certain piece of broken mirror turns up and you can guess the rest.
Perhaps she can't remember because of Lomell using a flashlight for lighting in many scenes, and the for-no-apparent-reason kaleidoscope vision some people have in the film?We're then treated to see (or is that tricked into seeing?) some of the most idiotic killings ever filmed: death by electric toothbrush, death by shaving cream, death by salad tongs, death by sucking on a tailpipe after being slapped on the ass by a ladder(?!) etc.No writer is credited (actually this was written by Bruce Starr, Ulli Lommel and Suzanna Love - she incidentally looks great in this movie, but you can watch the first movie to see her) and directed by Bruce Starr, Ulli Lommel and Paul Wilson (but both Ulli Lommel and Paul Wilson took their names off of this, and IMDb doesn't even list Wilson's name here) this was filmed in 1981 and not released until '83, and there is even a flashback sequence within a flashback sequence - what more can you ask for?
The British version, titled "Revenge of the Boogeyman" has a completely different set of titles: red lettering, like that found on a birthday cake, on plain white cards.
Now, about the so-called Director's Cut/ Redux: The original Boogeyman II recycled tens of minutes of footage of the first film, and this version recycles even more, approximately eighty to ninety percent of the Director's Cut/ Redux is whole chunks of the first film repeated again and narrated by Ulli Lommell, in the guise of Lommell being questioned by off-screen police about the deaths which occurred in the original Boogeyman film, from 1980.
(Who am I kidding, like there was really even a script for this) Apparently this redux/ director's cut takes place 22 years later, and the police are just now getting around to questioning him!
The Director's Cut/ Redux version gets a 1/ 10, and almost makes the original Boogeyman II look like a classic..
This is more flashbacks of the first "Boogeyman" movie than anything else (literally %75 of this film), and what it dosen't rip off is boring, cheap garbage.
In fact the best thing I can say about it is that it isn't quite as bad as the next sequel, "Return of the Boogeyman", which is only surpassed by maybe "Plan 9 from Outer Space" or perhaps a test pattern.
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?
Boogeyman II(1983/2002) * 1/2 (out of 4) Original Cut BOMB (out of 4) Redux VersionNotorious follow up to the 1980 cult classic has that films only survivor (Suzanna Love) going to Hollywood to see a friend when several producers become interested in her story.
The only problem is that part of the broken mirror from that original film is with her and soon the boogeyman is once again killing folks.
If the story sounds mildly interesting then you can just forget that because sadly this film is made up of at least sixty-percent of footage from the original movie.
I still remember the first time I watched this film and how confused and disappointed I was that it didn't feature more of a story.
THE BOOGEYMAN was a surprise hit and an effective thriller but none of that eeriness made its way to this cheap sequel, which was made after Lommel turned down an offer from Paramount for a bigger budget.
Once you try and get past the fact that the majority of this movie is from the original, you're left with a rather nutty film.
We get some extremely bizarre and at times downright stupid death scenes including one with a tooth brush and another with a car muffler.
I hated this film with a passion when I first saw it and the "director's cut", released through Image, didn't do the film any justice as it just featured this film minus about twenty-minutes and then with new footage thrown back into the film making it more BOOGEYMAN 4 than anything else.
No matter how the movie struck me this time there's no denying that this is still a major disappointment considering how effective the first film was and how much more could have been done here.
As it is, the film comes off as Lommel just throwing a fit about Hollywood as that's what takes up a lot of the new footage.When THE BOOGEYMAN became a huge hit in 1980 every studio lined up hoping Ulli Lommel would do a sequel.
Boogeyman 2 started with over forty-minutes worth of footage from the first film and then the second half had the director starring as a director being forced into making a sequel and the boogeyman shows up to kill the producer's.
He then adds fifteen minutes of newly shot footage (of himself) and pretty much changes the entire film to where you should really be calling this Boogeyman 4.
Since there isn't a part 4 I'd say that's what this is suppose to be, although Image is still selling the DVD as a sequel to the original film, which is certainly false marketing.
So in the end, Lommel made a hit film in 1980, kept the rights to that film and since then has made two sequels plus this thing with that original footage with newly added stuff on each one.
Again, the original part 2 was a horrid film but it did feature some hilarious death scenes including one by a muffler and another by a toothbrush.
This "Redux" version makes the film look even worse and it's a damn outrage that Image would release what's basically part 4 as the original part 2.
Here's why, the DVD of Boogeyman 2 isn't the VHS version from the 80's, it's a hack job from a hack director who went and took forty+ minutes worth of footage from the first film and the 'new' Boogeyman 2 footage is a bunch of scenes that play in a fast forward mode - what the ???????????
This makes no sense and is so badly done that it leaves the viewer chucking the DVD in disgust.The original part 2 was a decent horror film but this new DVD version is a worthless piece of garbage.AVOID this film.
Now that most OOP's and other obscure movies are available on DVD I just watched the original Boogeyman 2.
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.
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.
It didn't make sense, so much that I restarted it a few times to make sure I wasn't watching "the making of Boogeyman II".
It looked like the worst B movie I've ever seen.
If there was ever a film that didn't need a sequel, it was Ulli Lommel's The Bogey Man. This follow-up would have been more understandable if it were a personal project from the same director, but for some reason; someone called Bruce Starr has taken up the reigns (I neither know, or care, the reasons for this.
The plot this time focuses on some people in Hollywood who want to make a film based on the events of the first Bogey Man film (groan), this gives Brucey Starr an opportunity to stick a load of scenes from the original together with the stuff he directed.
Revenge of the Boogeyman is quite simply an awful film.
Don't get me entirely wrong here; I actually like the original Boogeyman.
This is barely film-making to be honest and director Ulli Lommel should really hang his head in shame but seeing as his franchise has repeated the exact same trick a further two times I suspect he isn't strictly too bothered.Once we get beyond forty minutes of flash-backs we kick into a new story where Lommel himself plays a director who has been asked to make a film about events depicted in the first movie.
The rest of the movie involves the Boogeyman returning and killing various people in what has to be a series of the most stupid death scenes ever conceived for a motion picture.
The only reason I can conceivably think you should watch this is if you are attempting to complete the video nasty list.
Writer/director Ulli Lommel is nowadays a very notorious and even quite hated individual because he unleashes multiple downright insufferable straight-to-video horror stinkers on the market every single year, but there once was a time when he was a promising filmmaker.
In the very earliest phase of his career he made the near-brilliant "The Tenderness of Wolves" and throughout the early eighties he made a handful of inferior but highly amusing horror movies, like "Brain Waves", "The Devonsville Terror" and "The Boogeyman".
Ulli Lommel and his buddies must have been so proud on their accomplishment that they decided to re-use all the best footage to fill up almost three quarters of the sequel.
Yes, you read that right: "Boogeyman II" is stuffed like a Christmas turkey with key footage of the original, and that's the main reason why it receives so many negative reviews around here.
Through long and extremely detailed flashbacks, Lacey tells the story about the murderous spirit in the little piece of mirror to befriended actress and her husband director (played by Ulli Lommel himself, with his atrocious German accent).
Naturally they want to exploit Lacey's bizarre thriller story and turn it into a horror movie, but then the Boogeyman returns to kill them all during a typical Hollywood pool party.
The film still got included in the infamous list of video nasties, but only because of the stock footage of the original and not because of the ridiculous new murder set pieces..
I think what this director needs to do is release the original version of this film otherwise sooner or later he will go out of the business!!!
As other reviewers have already commented, this film is half scenes from part 1 and half new, ridiculous, hilarious killings.
In BOOGEYMAN II, Ulli Lommel, who was the director of THE BOOGEYMAN (and the "unofficial" director of this sequel) plays Mickey.
Ulli Lommel is a TERRIBLE actor, just like Ed was.
The acting from both women are identically bad.Aside from the criminally long flashbacks, which show whole sequences from the first movie, BOOGEYMAN II is made up of other amazing cost saving ways, moments like when we only see filmed action with the voices of the actors added later in post-production.
So, from the looks of it, Lommel simply filmed two actors standing next to the pool and the content or the dialogue was written and added later in post-production.
Cost saving techniques like this are very reminiscent of what Ed Wood did with his films.Another thing that reminded me of Ed Wood was the moralistic tone of the "story": should they make a movie about Suzanna's experience or not?
When Lommel walks around his house, with corpses all around and thinking it's all a prank, well, it ends up being more embarrassing than funny.Then there are the absolutely ridiculous death scenes, which for some unexplained reason, always involve a man and a woman getting killed together.
This is probably the funniest death scene ever conceived for a movie.BOOGEYMAN II is remarkably awful but it's so bad that, like Ed Wood movies, it's really entertaining in a "it's so bad it's good" way.
THE BOOGEYMAN, though not the greatest film in the world, was pretty good and looks like a masterpiece compared to this stupid sequel.
Anyway, at least Suzanna Love is beautiful and the music is the one good thing to be found in this weird movie.It's obvious Ulli Lommel, who apparently hated making horror films and couldn't get funding for anything but horror films, did this movie out of spite.
The film is a slap on the face, to  fans of horror, to fans of the first movie, to anyone who rented this.
The version of Boogeyman II I will be commenting on is the 'Director's Cut' entitled Boogeyman Redux on screen & released on DVD which has newly shot on video footage inserted into a an absolute mess of clips form the first two Boogeyman films.
Boogeyman Redux starts with some footage from Boogeyman (1980) & then cuts to Mickey Lombard (Ulli Lommel) in shades & a baseball cap sitting at a table being filmed presumably by the police as he is read his rights after being charged with murder.
Art film director Lombard begins to tell his story, a story that began 22 years ago when a woman came to him & told him a strange story about some killing committed by the boogeyman & that he should make a film about them.
The remaining 10% is interview footage with Lombard as he bridges the chunks together & annoyingly there is footage taken from Boogeyman II (1983) which for some reason Lommel has decided to speed up & replace the soundtrack with an awful electronic score, once all the good scenes from the original Boogeyman are used Boogeyman Redux ends.
Directed by Ulli Lommel this has to be one of the worst films ever, please bear in mind that I'm referring to the 'Director's Cut' DVD version & NOT the Boogeyman II I thought I was getting.
In fact I have seen the original cut of Boogeyman II years ago & I would be interested in comparing the two.
Basically just about the entire film is footage from Boogeyman with a few sections cut out, it's like it was cut down for an hour TV time-slot with some of the more boring exposition scenes cut out & the Lombard interview scenes in place of the commercials as they're about as entertaining & useful.
The sped up footage from Boogeman II is worthless & the bits with Lommel as Lombard being interrogated by the police are obviously shot on video & look out of place & as tacked on as they surely were.
There really isn't much else to say except just watch the original Boogeyman instead, it's virtually the same as this just without the annoying Lommel popping up every 10 or 15 minutes & doesn't have the frustrating sped up footage from Boogeyman II, this is a complete mess of a film & I hated it.
The Cinema of Ulli Lommel: Boogeyman II Redux.
Boogeyman II Redux (1983) was Ulli Lommel's re-editing of the first Boogeyman with new footage of himself as "the director" being interviewed about the murders that were committed in the first movie.
Well, Ulli Lommel wanted to create his perfect vision of the movie, a cut of the film that he always wanted to do (and also to keep retaining the rights to Boogeyman).
If you haven't seen the first film then you'll enjoy it more than if you never watched the original.The "Redux" also features two "trailers" for future Boogeyman sequels (one is for the rarely seen Return of the Boogeyman and another is a hybrid of two of Lommel's other films "War Birds" and "U.F.O." The clip for Boogeyman 5 is pieces of those films edited together with a couple of scenes from The Boogeyman.
All I wish for is that he release his entire catalog on d.v.d. I will be one of the many that'll by his films because I actually enjoy his style of film making.Despite what people say, the spliced in footage doesn't look bad and Boogeyman II Redux is worth another look at.