[Nicolai P. Zwar]

Watched two “horror movies” recently… one good, one bad.
THE EXORCISM by Joshua John Miller (that’s the bad one) and THE BOOGEYMAN by Rob Savage (that’s the good one).

It’s interesting to compare these and short-review these side by side, because they are from the same era, probably had similar resources, and both try to play around with “spooky stuff that lurks in the dark”, but one is a complete snore-feast and the other is a delightfully spooky take on “monsters in the closet”.

Let’s start with THE EXORCISM by Joshau Miller (2/10, 2024)
Russell Crowe plays an aging, alcoholic actor who gets another break when he gets the lead role as the Exorcist an “Exorcist type” movie called “The Georgetown Project” (which is basically “The Exorcist”), but who starts to become mysteriously possessed, so that the movie’s catholic priest consultant has to perform an actual excorcism on the actor. But the movie around him never figures out what it wants to be. It has the budget, the cast, the premise, yet it drifts like a production waiting for someone to call “action.” Scenes stretch without tension. The pacing sags. The film keeps hinting at something clever, something meta, something dangerous, but never commits. What should feel like a descent into madness instead feels like watching someone rehearse for a better movie that never arrives. Professionally made, yes. But dramatically inert. A horror film that forgets to be horrifying, or even interesting. A boring snore…. almost stopped watching it… that’s how boring it was.

Unlike THE BOOGEYMAN by Rob Savage (6/10)

Sure, this may not be a masterpiece either, but who cares. As I said, I like it when a movie simply knows what it’s doing. And this one knows. It’s a lean, confident spookfest built on an old Stephen King short story. King’s biggest strength as an author has always been to write about or from the perspective of children. This movie taps into the primal childhood terror of the closet door left slightly ajar. The setup is simple: the two daughters of a recently widowed therapist get haunted by the mysterious titular antagonist after a seemingly disturbed patient commits suicide in their home. Nothing new under the sun (or in the shade), but the execution is sharp. The film moves with purpose. You immediately know what’s at stake. The scene when a seemingly disturbed patient is desperately trying to explain that his three children were killed by a mysterious creature but he is now a prime suspect is well played, and after the patient commits suicide you just know which family that creature will latch on to next (that’s why we’re here and watch the movie). THE BOOGEMAN does well, balancing emotional weight with well‑timed jolts. It understands that the fear of what might be hiding just out of sight is more potent than most big CGI reveals. The result is a horror movie that respects its audience enough to scare them honestly—through craft, rhythm, and a clear sense of what story it wants to tell. It’s the type of movie kids who are officially not old enough to see them yet should love (I know I would have).