Boogeyman 3 (2008) User Reviews

The Darkness Within Ourselves

[claudio_carvalho · 6/10 · 5 June 2009]

When the grieving Audrey (Nikki Sanderson) reads the private journal of his deceased father, who was a renowned psychologist of a clinic, she is attacked by the boogeyman. She has a nervous breakdown and goes to the Hammond Halls in the Wolfbridge University in Northern California to sleep in the dorm of her friend Sarah Morris (Erin Cahill). Sarah is a student of psychology that feels guilty for the death of her mother and presents a show in the WZXB radio in the campus to give support to the audience with her professor Dr. Kane (Matt Rippy). However Audrey is hanged by the boogeyman while Sarah glances at her and dies. Sarah reads the diary of Audrey's dad and discovers his theory that the boogeyman would be a physical manifestation of the innermost darkest fear of a person. Sarah believes on the illogical theory and tells to her boyfriend David (Chuck Hittinger) and their common friends Lukas (WB Alexander), Jeremy (George Maguire), Lindsay (Mimi Michaels) and Ben (Elyes Gabel). As far as they also believe in the boogeyman, the legend becomes stronger and reborns, killing his victim.

"Boogeyman 3" has an interesting premise that the imaginary monster that is used to frighten children gets stronger when people believe that the entity does exist. There is one creepy sequence when Sarah sees the corridor of Hammond Halls covered of corpses and gore. However, for a clever woman like Sarah, it would be obvious that she was doing exactly what the boogeyman wanted generating panic and making the students believe on the evil force. Despite of the flaws, this movie is not so bad and it is a worthwhile entertainment. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "O Pesadelo 3" ("The Nightmare 3")

Boogeyman 3: The best of the trilogy

[Platypuschow · 4/10 · 18 June 2018]

I hated the first two films, I thought they were simply horror done wrong with no originality at all. Cookie cutter horror and done badly, really really badly.

The third was expected to be just as bad but was a pleasant surprise, it's still mediocre but its passable by comparison.

This time the film actually has a structure, a competent plot and the "Boogeyman" isn't bad at all in appearance/execution.

It follows a tried and tested formula, kids in uni getting picked off one by one by this malevolent force but the "Belief" system makes for some interesting scenarios.

The deaths are average, the script is passable and the movie as a whole is nothing even remotely special but compared to the first two this is a work of art.

Just about watchable stuff and certainly ending the trilogy on a high....ish note.

The Good:

Boogeyman looks great

Has a few very inventive ideas

A couple of the girls on the cast were great

The Bad:

Potential was squandered

Still very generic

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

That girl from Coronation Street & Hollyoaks doesn't know how to age! Seriously, she has access to the fountain of eternal youth and I demand a pint or two....or three...or a weekend of bathing in it! I'm approaching 40 leave me alone!

Lame, unoriginal, and unscary. Pass on this one.

[Shattered_Wake · 4/10 · 31 December 2008]

After Sarah (Erin Cahill) witnesses the supposed suicide of her friend, she must fight to prove that her friends and the rest of the college campus are under attack from a malicious force known as (you guessed it) The Boogeyman.

There's something I've learned while spending the majority of my film-watching life consumed by the horror genre: No matter how good or bad a film is, a sequel is always a good idea (in the minds of the producers, that is). From the ten Friday the 13th sequels (which range from great to insultingly bad) to the thirteen (with more coming) Witchcraft films (all of which are awful), no matter how unnecessary a sequel seems, you can always fit one in. These days, it seems even worse. Even seemingly unknown films are getting countless sequels. Now, I can understand the annual Saw installment. They're perfect Hollywood moneymakers: Lots of earnings with minimal risks. But, Boogeyman? Does this really need two sequels? The first one was bad enough (yet still somehow managed to earn more than double its budget at the box office), and the second was pretty bad as well. . . so, why a third? Well, they've got that $28 million they earned at the box office burning a hole in their pocket and, instead of using it on something worthwhile, why not throw a couple million at what they assume is a built-in audience. Is there a built-in audience? Would I count as a part of that simply because I've seen both? I sure hope not. Regardless, before watching, I had actually heard some not-so-bad things about this installment, so I thought I'd return to the subpar franchise once more. This is the last time though, I swear! Anyway. . . the film itself is pretty bad. Most notably, the amateurish acting and script make for a dull and unlikable movie. The direction seems very "TV movie" and the editing is awful, exchanging MTV-style jump cuts for real scares. As a whole, the film stands as a typically underwhelming, unscary, and poorly made low-budget horror that should be avoided by anyone other than the truest of fans of the first two Boogeymans (then again, if you like both of those, I don't know what you WON'T like).

Obligatory Horror Elements:

• Subgenre: Demonic, I guess? Or ghost, or something.

• Violence/Gore: There's a good bit of blood but none of the violence is really explicit enough to make it worth it.

• Sex/Nudity: A teensy bit of the homely girl at the beginning, but nothing too sexy.

• Scares/Suspense: A for effort, but flash-cuts aren't really all that scary. The acting was pretty frightening though.

• Mystery: Not really. Just pretty stupid.

• - -

Final verdict: 3.5/10. Lame, unoriginal, and unscary. Pass on this one.

-AP3-

Wow. What a film!

[rockdalecop · 1/10 · 28 August 2009]

I'm a horror movie buff just like the next person. But oh my God, this was awful. First, I was expecting plenty of violence and gore. There is none here. Maybe some computerized blood here and there but that's it. Now, let's talk about the main chick. Yes, she's easy on the eyes but the whole talking between her and her buddy radio DJ doctor was getting on my nerves. Now, let's talk about the bogeyman himself. What in God's name is his problem? I can't remember a movie where the bad guy could get locked in a closet by a much smaller chick. I mean, the thing was a wuss. I really was not expecting much, but come on. There are movies like Wrong Turn 2 which is also a direct to video film which delivered the goods. Plelty of violence and gore. Avoid this movie at all cost.

mediocre but entertaining

[trashgang · 4/10 · 26 August 2010]

The boogeyman lives in closets, that's the urban legend in the US. Over here he lives under your bed and in other countries it's also somewhere else. What I mean is, the boogeyman is everywhere and curses anyone that crosses his destiny. And so all movies with boogeyman in it were cursed. From the first one in the eighties unto today nobody really liked them. Or they were cursed with poor effects, or with sad CGI. But number 3 in the franchise, is the best of them. Again it is a mix between CGI and at last a real person. And that makes it all a bit creepier. to compare it with the first one, there is already T&A in the first minutes and there is already blood too, two things we missed in the first part. And there is a lot of blood. Sometimes gallons of the red stuff flows on screen. They even put a bit of gore in it. A bit of lack of suspense in the storyline but it's a good starter for an entertaining evening.

Far from scary...

[paul_haakonsen · 4/10 · 21 February 2011]

I watched "Boogeyman 3" without having seen the previous 2, although they are in my collection. So I had no expectations to the movie, and I had little clue what it was all about. And it seemed that you didn't really need to have watched the first two movies to be in the loop.

"Boogeyman 3" is not rich on shocks, creepy moments or scares, though I have a decent enough amount of gore in it. I found this to be a rather dull movie for a horror movie. I wasn't thoroughly entertained and I sure wasn't feeling any sense of dread.

The story told in this movie, well it was a bit weak and there were some gaps in the overall flow of the story. But it did manage to pull through and close up nicely enough.

Not being familiar with the boogeyman from the previous two movies, I found the make up to actually be quite nice. He looked sinister enough, especially the face. However, and I must point this out, the noises he made, what was up with that? They were more of a hilarious thing than a scary thing. That really didn't work well for the movie. And why would he be chasing people when he can apparently just appear from any shadow or dark place? What was the point of chasing the tail of people? For shocking and scaring the people, sure. But if you think about it, it really made no sense.

The effects and CGIs in "Boogeyman 3" were good enough, and I liked what I saw. The blood, however, was a tad too red. But other than that, good enough job.

As for the acting and the people starring in this movie. I found most people to actually do a good enough job with their roles. Nothing award-winning here, but still good for a horror movie of this caliber.

If the "Boogeyman" series is an attempt at a slasher like Jason Voorhees or Freddy Krueger, then it is not much of a memorable character they have as the killer. There is nothing iconic about this boogeyman, sorry to say.

For a horror movie, "Boogeyman 3" came off quite weak, and there are lots of other horror movies out there far better. Now that I have seen it, I can honestly say that I will not pick it up and watch it again. I will, however, watch part 1 and 2, just for the sake of having seen them.

"Boogeyman 3", starring the Pink Power Ranger!

[Boba_Fett1138 · 4/10 · 14 July 2012]

The whole Boogeyman movie series is one I just can't understand. I just don't know what it is trying to do and be exactly and the series as a whole is one you can easily do without, even if you really are into horror stuff.

Thing with the whole series is that it's trying to be horror but at the same time also serious movies with drama in it. The results are a whole bunch of slow moving and not that very interesting movies, that besides also hardly do anything new or original. They fail at being good movies and they just don't work out the way they were supposed to. They were persistent though, since this is actually the third movie out of the series. Seems that it also is the last one out of the series though, fortunately.

Seems that this movie was a tiny bit trying to be more like a common modern horror/slasher. It just isn't being a very good one though. As earlier mentioned, the movie is just moving too slow and is not being very interesting with its story or any of its characters. It also does a poor and lazy job with its story really. It doesn't ever explain anything, though I admit that this movie still did a better job at it than any of the previous movies, out of the series. But still, it's mostly relying on all of the events that happened in the previous movies and does very little to try and delve deeper into things and search for a clear explanation for all of it. It's actually funny how all of the movies are heading into a totally different direction with their stories and as a series, the 3 movies just aren't being connected very well or convincingly to each other.

At times the gore and some of its other horror elements were still OK but overall it's being nothing too exciting or surprising.

And I was about to rate this movie just as 'highly' as its two predecessors but then came its moronic ending, which was something totally unconvincing and just did not worked out very well.

Just really not worth watching.

4/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

See it, it's worth a scare or two!

[brettchatz-1 · 7/10 · 3 January 2009]

A psychological gore-fest awaits as the college students at Hammond Hall get slaughtered in their droves.

What differentiates Boogeyman 3 from other supernatural horrors is its ability to deliver constant suspense - albeit formulaic - throughout its 90 minutes on screen.

Critics of the film have denounced it as just another slasher fest with precious little to make it worthwhile. While the storyline is predictable, there is an element of psychological uncertainty that pervades the film.

How can something not be real if we really believe in it?

When a college girl named Sarah witnesses the gruesome murder of her friend, her life gets turned upside down. There is an all pervasive presence of evil manifested in the form of a demonic entity.

One after another students who begin believing in the Boogeyman legend are discredited, until they start dying and it gets scary as hell right through to the bitter end...

How the hell did this become a trilogy?

[BA_Harrison · 2/10 · 3 April 2018]

Ulli Lommel directed a couple of trashy low budget horror films in the '80s called Boogeyman and Boogeyman II; the first was OK, but the second was a virtually unwatchable mess. Boogeyman (2005) and its second sequel, Boogeyman 3 (I skipped Part 2), have nothing in common with Lommel's films except for that, like his utterly diabolical sequel, they also suck big time.

The main problem with Boogeyman 3 is that there is zero consistency in the actions of the titular creature. Sometimes it will suddenly appear and then disappear; sometimes it will creep up behind someone, and then disappear; occasionally, it will grab them, pulling them into the shadows, only to let them go; and sometimes it will kill them. What tactic the creature uses depends entirely on whether director Gary Jones intends to make the viewer jump, creep them out, or shock them (although nine time out of ten, he achieves none of these, his cheap scare tactics and excess of CG effects rarely having the desired effect).

Furthermore, the film fails to stick to its mythos: supposedly, if you fear the boogeyman, it has more power over you, and yet several of its victims are those who do not believe that the creature exists. None of this makes any sense and proves extremely irritating.

2/10, just for the eye candy, especially Nikki Sanderson as Audrey, who provides the film's only nudity early on, and the two cuties at the end, who lounge around together in their underwear (as most men like to think all college girls do).

Avoid this film at all costs

[iancs16 · 3/10 · 2 January 2009]

I was a huge fan of the first film, it was jumpy, well put together, and relied on shocks rather than gore which i always prefer, however having never seen the 2nd i can't comment on the direction that takes. Let me just start by saying that the boogeyman in this looks like a dreadlocked version of a poor man's freddie krooger.

I don't remember ever seeing the boogeyman's face in the first film, and it was all the better for it. For some reason they seem to have given him a personality, he takes great pleasure in ripping people apart, you can tell this from his bowser-esquire laugh which emits from his throat when he destroys one of his victims which sounds like it was ripped right out of mario kart.

This film just makes you groan, rather than feel any sense of dread. Instead of sticking to the originals shock tactic seem to have just spent the entire special effects budget on buying as much tomato juice as possible, then endlessly pouring it down every vent at any given moment, while trying to pass it off for blood.

Avoid at all costs.

it worths over 8 for sure!

[waken_dj · 28 January 2009]

Creepy,gloomy and dark! better even the first one .I didn't expect that but after a few minutes i started to believe that the boogeyman is true :) Great story although nice scenario ,great acting! It is for sure in the top 20 in my list of horror films.I cant tell you i enjoyed it cause a shiver was in my back all the time! that means i enjoyed for sure! i recommend not to see the official rating for this movie cause you ll propably like this film just like i did maybe more.I m not just enthousiastic i really believe this one will give you the creeps. I must not forget to say that the end is unexpected,genius and creepy too.

90 Minute TRASH

[najamfzl · 1/10 · 1 May 2009]

I really doesn't find any sense in this movie the BoogeyMan is a belief or what ? i don't know why they make it again and again, a 90 minute waste, this movie has nothing which belongs to Horror neither the script defines the clarity of the concept of BoogeyMan plus no connection with the past sequel is projected . Some of the sound effects are not synchronized with the time line of the movie i don't know what people like in this movie. However the actors really tried their best but they land up in a failure, the direction must in a way which keeps you glued to your seats with some sluggish camera work and screenplay the story seems to be stuck at many places.

A total disaster, silly piece of horror or you can simply say "A 90 Minute Trash"

Good horror movie...

[MovieGuy01 · 5/10 · 1 October 2009]

I thought that Boogeyman was quite a good film, it all happens when a college student called Sarah Morris witnesses the suicide of her roommate, who has suffered a nervous breakdown. afterwards there are horrific events that cause her to believe something supernatural is happening, she tries to tell the rest of her dormitory that the Boogeyman exists but they will not believe her, soon the evil force grows stronger and her friends begin believe her.she has to find a way to stop stop this evil force from coming back before the entire campus ends up getting killed. I really enjoyed this film although i have not seen the first two films. i would recommend this film to people as it is such a good film.

I agree with the person who called it "mediocre, but entertaining"

[Wuchakk · 6/10 · 26 August 2014]

Released to video in 2008, "Boogeyman 3" takes place at a university in Northern California, (although it was shot in Sofia in Western Bulgaria). Audrey (Nikki Sanderson), the daughter of Dr. Allen (Tobin Bell) from the previous film, is harassed by an unseen entity in her dorm, which she believes is "the boogeyman," a malevolent spirit intent on killing as many as possible. Her best friend, Sarah (Erin Cahill), is a psych major who tries to help Audrey whereupon she catches a frightening glimpse of the boogeyman and people start mysteriously dying. Sarah tries to warn everyone in the dorm to GET OUT.

Like "Boogeyman 2," this third installment in the low-budget series is limited by its one-dimensional setting -- about half the movie was shot at a dull dorm lobby and the rest in rooms nearby, plus a couple outside scenes. As such, the characters and their story HAVE to work or the movie will bomb. The results are not great, but it's marginally better than the previous film, largely due to a decent assortment of females and the great look of the boogeyman himself (itself?) -- it appears as a tall thin man with long scraggly hair, a black gown and a hideous face.

As far as the female cast goes, Cahill is solid as the protagonist and Sanderson is effective as Dr. Allen's daughter. There are a couple of other quality females on hand, including cameos.

Being a horror-on-campus film, it's reminiscent of the two "Decoys" movies and "Urban Legends: Final cut," so if you like those types of films you might like "Boogeyman 3," but – to me – it's the least of these. Like I said, the setting is too one-dimensional, but there are other flaws. For instance, most of the male characters are weak, with the exception of Sarah's psych professor from the radio show, and the blood that flows down walls and fills the floors looks more like cherry Icee fluid than actual blood.

Still, "Boogeyman 3" delivered just enough for me to give it a weak thumbs up. Aside from the women and the look of the boogeyman, I like the angle that the monster feeds on people's belief to manifest in the physical realm, as well as the Christ figure at the end.

The film runs 94 minutes.

GRADE: B- (because I'm in a good mood)

Back to the shadows

[ctomvelu1 · 5/10 · 4 April 2011]

After shifting from a supernatural entity in "Boogeyman" to a flesh and blood lunatic in "Boogeyman 2," the killer in Part Three is once again of supernatural origin. A demonic creature, looking like something from a well-known demented rock band, is knocking off college student, and one girl does her best to stop the slaughter. Unfortunately, she doesn't fare very well. And no one believes her. The opening sequence, involving an old trunk, is a dilly. The rest of the movie unfortunately plods, although the murders do pile up quite rapidly. There's also some brief nudity for the guys to relish. Unfortunately, this boogyeyman is no more scary than the boogeyman in the original. Well three movies makes a series, right? Let's just hope this is the last we will see of this boogeyman.

Boogeyman 3

[HorrorFan1984 · 5/10 · 25 May 2020]

A supernatural force known as the Boogeyman is stalking a campus dorm in Northern California. It's fuel is people believing in it's existence.

The film opens with a young woman named Audrey who is the daughter of Dr. Allen from Boogeyman 2. He was the lead supervising doctor at the clinic where Henry went on a murderous rampage while dressing up as the boogeyman. One night as she mourns his death, a shadowy figure comes from under her bed and pulls her under. We then go to a university in Northern California where we meet psych major Sarah and her group of friends. Audrey comes to her dorm room late at night and tells her about the boogeyman and within hours she is dead.

The boogeyman makes it look like a suicide, but Sarah saw the figure strangling Audrey. While reading through Dr. Allen's journal, Sarah reads that he believed there was some sort of actual supernatural boogeyman which got life from others believing in it. Pretty soon, she tells the entire campus her beliefs of the boogeyman through a university radio show. This gives the boogeyman strength and makes the body count rise. Will anyone survive?

Boogeyman 3 isn't a bad horror film, I enjoyed it way more than the original movie despite the much lower budget. It takes back to the supernatural boogeyman like n the first film and doesn't follow the serial killer story from the sequel. I do think this movie made the idea of the boogeyman haunting people who believe in it much more enjoyable to watch than part one. It follows a simple story and doesn't try so hard to break away from that.

The acting is definitely the weakest of the series. Erin Cahill leads the way as the main character of Sarah and does a fine job. Everyone else is fairly unknown and not all that impressive. The characters are also not really written well either. That was a flaw for me as I didn't really care who survived or not. I also found the ending to be a bit of a letdown.

Overall, Boogeyman 3 is a fine low budget horror film. It definitely felt and looked like the lowest budget in the entire series and took a step back from a pretty good second movie in my opinion. But worth a watch at least once for horror fans.

5/10

Boogeyman

[marinaant-36217 · 4/10 · 18 April 2022]

Honestly this was kinda bad and I'm disappointed since I liked the second one. It started out okay and I thought it would get better because that's what happens in most films but it only got worse with bad effects of the boogeyman and meh acting. The ending was awful as well.

When I was a kid

[summerannecour · 5/10 · 19 June 2020]

I remember this movie really well it was the first horror movie I've ever watched (remind you I was like maybe 8) and I remember I was scared as hell if I would watch this movie now I would find it not that sacry since i love horror (more murderers and stuff not really paranormal) but as an 8 eighth year old not so good hHa I had nightmares from it for years and couldn't sleep because I was so scared, I always thought someone was behind me watching me and I still have that to this day this film gave me really a trauma haha while I don't find it scary now I still have that feeling

This is awful

[jacobjohntaylor1 · 1/10 · 8 June 2017]

The first movie of Boogeyman was one of the scariest movies I have ever seen. And this is just awful. It has an awful story line. It is not scary. It has an awful ending. Why did this get a 4.9. This is one of the worst movies from 2008. This is not a 4.9. This is a 1. It is awful. Do not wast your time. And not wast your money do not see this movie. This this a w very bad movie. It is not good that all. I would not scary a ten years old. If you want to see something real scary see the first movie of Boogeyman. Also a very scary movie to see it The Exorcist. But not this movie it is awful.

Third and final of the disappointing Boogeyman franchise

[a_chinn · 2/10 · 2 January 2018]

Bad sequel is pretty much on parr with the first two low quality Boogeyman films. A college girl is scared of the Boogeyman. She tells others college kids the more people who believe in him, the more powerful he becomes, which ends up making the Boogeyman more powerful. Unoriginal story, cheap scares, and nothing here at all to recommend. Dullsville!

Falls apart at the end

[Michael-d-duncan · 8/10 · 7 September 2009]

So as much as I was hoping that this was going to be so bad that it became comical, i really didn't get it. Was it pretty predictable? Yes. Were the characters clichéd ? Yes. Did it have some pretty good scares? Yes.

This movie reminded me of nineties and late eighties supernatural slashers, not a ton of gore, in stead some good jumps. There was a time when horror movies didn't try to wow you with nasties, they tried to make you jump out of your seat. That was the kind of movie this was trying to be. Now it was not the best but it was entertaining and enjoyable, the only real qualm I have is the ending. The cheese factor goes through the room and there is no real resolution.

Shortly, don't waste more than a buck at the red box for this one, but it'll still make for a good popcorn, pizza and Guinness night provided you don't try to take it so seriously.

Solid and enjoyable conclusion to the series

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 9/10 · 26 October 2017]

Attending a college with her friends, a young woman finds that her friends are being stalked by a demented figure from her nightmares, and once she gets them to believe her story sets out to find a way to stop it from claiming more lives around the campus.

This was a solid if slightly flawed effort. One of the finer points of this one is the fact that there's quite a lot of work done here to really sell the idea of the creature and it's prowess. This one still manages to fulfill the idea of the exploitation of their personal fears which gives this one some rather enjoyable scenes here, from the incredibly fun opening attack in the girl's house where she gets attacked by the spirit and is followed up by the different freak-outs on the campus while she's visiting her friend, the actual attack later on where the creature appears unexpectedly while the victim is unaware of the creature behind her as she's on the phone, the crazy sequence of her friend seeing the creature while in the middle of a drug session and ends up confronting his biggest fear when the creature traps him inside the chest. The fact that this one also sets up her premonitions into what's coming up later as the lone visions she has turn out to be coming true which makes for a rather fun time once they do manage to emerge with the vision of the air-duct murder, the massacre in the dorm and the later attack in the laundry room further this one incredibly well as there's a spectacular connection between the two setups here. Since both work hand-in-hand to make the film about the creatures' need for pop-culture belief and the more power it derives due to that, this one manages to readily feature not only a great central killer but also gives this plenty of chilling and suspenseful scenes. Given that these scenes focus on a genuinely creepy and scary figure that is kept live-action for its scenes which allows for some spectacular make-up work not only on the titular killer but also the fantastically bloody and brutal killings, which all manage to give this one a lot to really like overall here. There's not much to dislike here, most of which revolves around the rather incessant inability to believe what's going on as there are plenty of scenes here that showcase something going on around the school yet this one going on for as long as it does with the idea of her being crazy. This goes on way too long to be effective and seems way too obvious it's being done simply to keep the storyline going. As well, the finale is way too clichéd and pulls out too many expected moments that really lower the effectiveness of the setup. These here are what hold this one down.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, Full Nudity and drug use.

The legend of the Boogeyman doesn't die

[Elvis-Del-Valle · 8/10 · 7 June 2023]

The Boogeyman trilogy concludes with this installment featuring a Boogeyman that goes beyond what is usually known of this legendary being. As it is a movie made for home format, it certainly shows something inferior to its predecessors with a rather questionable Boogeyman design. At least the movie closes the trilogy with a plot that focuses on how the legend of the Boogeyman survives and adapts over time. Here he implies that the Boogeyman inspires a fear that affects others in different ways, but in order to keep them believing in him and thus the legend lives on. In a certain way, legends of this type have prevailed for a long time, recorded in history because they have been narrated by word of mouth and because of the fear they inspire in people. The legend of the Boogeyman has prevailed for many centuries, being told in the same way or modified according to the times. It is not uncommon that throughout this trilogy the Boogeyman has been seen with a different appearance in each film, since in each film he has manifested himself in different ways. First as the classic Boogeyman that terrifies children, then as the manifestation of the evil and madness of the human being, and now as a being taken from an urban legend. What does remain intact in these 3 versions is that the purpose of the Boogeyman has always been to inspire fear in others, which has made this character transcend generation after generation in different ways. The Boogeyman can change in many ways, but it is clear that his legend is eternal and that is what the end of this trilogy conveys. As a home format film it is like any other of its type. It sins of being a somewhat generic horror movie of a being terrifying a university as if it were a slasher film, but looking at it from the other angle, it maintains something of what can be expected in a movie about the Boogeyman. My final rating for this movie is 8/10.