Bagman

The Bagman had an intriguing premise but left a lot of questions unanswered, especially when it came to the characters' decisions. One of the most perplexing choices was leaving the child alone while all the horror unfolded. It felt illogical, given that the adults were clearly aware of the danger and opted to sleep together for safety. Why would they separate the most vulnerable person? This inconsistency really pulled me out of the experience and made it hard to connect with the characters' survival instincts.

That said, the movie did have its moments. The atmosphere was chilling, and there were a few genuinely unsettling scenes that kept me on edge. However, it often felt like the pacing was off, with long stretches of buildup that didn't always pay off.

Despite these issues, I'm actually interested in the sequel. The film has laid down some groundwork that could go in a great direction. If the sequel addresses the characters' decisions better and tightens up the storytelling, it could deliver on the promise that the first film hinted at. There's potential here, and I'm curious to see how it develops.

I mean come on... your house has been invaded 10 times and you still choose to watch your kid on a monitor, leave him unsupervised in a tub, and constantly move out of sight of the child to allow things to happen further? Where is the common sense meter when it comes to writing. I understand movies need suspense points but when you have to insult our intelligence to achieve suspense then that's just a recipe for a bad review. No parent will put their in law who has been attacked in the bed with them while they put their baby in another room to watch on a monitor. Lots of holes in the story and terrible editing. At one point a loud bang in the babies room and both parents started running somehow in that 2 seconds the wife was on the phone with the police. God this was awful.

This is just like all the other films with the same boogeyman premise. This "Pied Piper" uses a bag. That is pretty much all.

And because of the narrative skipping around the way it does, this is not only boring - it gets really confusing. So they couldn't even copy the formula in a productive way.

The effects are kinda meh. I guess there was music too. But it was probably some cliched horror music library of tiresomeness.

Oh and that dreadfully atrocious, terribly deplorable, shamefully abysmal, horrendously annoying, abominably appalling, stratospherically ear-piercing wooden deal that the kid treasures. Yeah, no.

This movie just wasn't my bag, man.

Bagman is essentially the definition of a generic horror movie. Nearly everything it attempts has been done before, and audiences are tired of these tropes. An evil entity tries to lure a young child away from its parents, who are too clueless to take effective action against it. There are cheap thrills, weak jump scares, foolish characters, and a child who sounds eerily similar to Gage Creed from Pet Sematary (1989).

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect is the parents' irrational behavior. When your child seems to be in danger and there are multiple break-ins at your home, you would make sure to stay close to your child. However, these parents do a remarkable job of ignoring their kid or keeping a significant distance, allowing the entity to enter the house undisturbed. There's also the typical exposition dump and one of the most generic modern horror plots imaginable.

Honestly, though, I kind of liked the entity, and I think there was some potential to create a decent horror movie with it as the antagonist. Unfortunately, the film fails to stand out amidst all the subpar horror being released today, making it hard to imagine that many people will enjoy it. While there were a few moments I appreciated, overall, it's far from good. [5.2/10]

So after seeing this one earlier today, I thought I would give it a quick review.

Now I agree with some of the reviews such as these days people are rating gore covered horror movies with high ratings, so they realise that gore filled horror movies are not scary, why? Because they swap the scary for the gore.

This is another side of the same coin, here me out for a second.

This film was enjoyable but not scary one bit, this movie while nothing wrong with it, it became a straight by the book, seen this before non scary horror.

See what I mean when I said, two sides of the same coin. Gore filled horror movies are not scary because of the gore and by the book horror movies are not scary either but both are and can be enjoyable.

Watch this film, enjoy it for what it is and don't hope for anything special.