Boggy Creek (2010)

Wonderful character development!

Dreadfully Boring

Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

In 1972 an advertising salesman from Texarkana borrowed $100,000 and made an indie picture entitled "The Legend Of Boggy Creek". His name was Charles B. Pierce. The film was released on the drive-in circuit and earned an astounding $20 million. Bigfoot was just emerging into the public consciousness at that time and we all wanted to know more about the elusive and frightening creature. Charlie's film was a "docudrama", containing re-enactments of alleged encounters between the residents of Boggy Creek and the mysterious monster. Many of the locals actually portrayed themselves in the film. That was the humble origin of the Sasquatch film. Over the years many others have tried to emulate the success of that picture. Some have retained the documentary format while others have woven fictitious tales of men and women being menaced by the beast. Mr. Pierce himself tried to follow his initial success with a Boggy Creek II, which mixed new re-enactments with a fictitious story about a college professor and a few students trying to find the legendary critter. Although this movie bears the name of Boggy Creek it does not follow the original's documentary format, preferring instead to offer up a fictional narrative concerning a troubled young lady and some friends attempting to stay a week in her recently departed father's cabin in Boggy Creek, Texas. The filmmakers should have stuck with the re-enactment format, then they would have actually had a story to tell. Instead we get this plodding, deadly dull pile of Squatch poop. The movie runs 1 hour and 27 minutes. That first hour is pretty much filled with nothing but padding. Jennifer, the troubled young woman, loved her father and hates her mom, who left daddy when she was still a child. The fact that Jennifer's loss has come as a crippling psychological blow to her is established by long, lingering shots of her staring off into the swamp, shots that seem to go on forever. Friends and their boyfriends show up to help Jenny get over it. They are all trite and stereotypical. There is a brooding redneck with a shotgun, who lives next door and warns them that there is something evil in the woods and that they should leave. Guess what? They don't. Instead they decide to follow through with camping in the woods. The two young men are brutally dispatched by a Sasquatch in short order. The women run for their lives, but to no avail. The final scene shows poor, pathetic Jennifer surrounded by Bigfeet, her fate all but sealed. The original Boggy Creek was an amateurish affair, to be sure. Mr. Pierce had never directed a feature film before, and it showed. (He actually did go on to make a couple of very fine films and is credited with coming up with the line "Do you feel lucky, punk?" for Clint Eastwood's Dirty Harry.) Amateurish though it was it still managed to deliver a few chills to that 1972 audience. This movie delivers nothing. There is no plot, no suspense, no insightful or witty characterizations, no drama, and no horror. The highlight of the film is when they all take a boat ride and you get to see footage of the lake. It appears to be a very lovely place. I wish they'd showed us more of it!So this is the fate of the Boggy Creek franchise, if it can be honestly labeled that. From an inauspicious but promising beginning it has quickly devolved into a cheap vehicle for stock characters and clichéd situations and, of course, lots and lots of padding. Do yourself a favor and seek out the original, if you're determined to see a Boggy Creek movie. The rest of them are just a waste of time.

Boggy Creek (2010)* (out of 4)Obnoxious horror film mixed with some really bad drama has Jennifer (Melissa Carnell) inheriting a cabin from her late father. The cabin, located in the swamps of Boggy Creek, apparently has all sorts of people and animals being mutilated. The locals believe it's a Bigfoot creature but Jennifer and her friends still decide to hang out at the cabin and sure enough the hairy fellow shows up.BOGGY CREEK is yet another disappointing film in the ever-growing list of disappointing films that deal with the legendary monster. For the life of me I can't understand why such a well-known creature has gotten so many bad movies made of him. Perhaps the reason we can't locate a real one is because it's ashamed of all the bad movies out there? Probably not but this film really doesn't have anything fresh or original going for it and in the end it comes across as a real time-killer.I think the biggest problem with the film is that it runs 87-minutes and about 75-minutes are nothing more than boring melodrama. There's a long-running and downright boring plot dealing with Jennifer and her troubled relationship to her mother. We get several flashback sequences that are just downright boring and there's never a single moment where you're caught up in the character's drama. Even worse is the fact that the other subplot dealing with a neighbor whose wife was killed by the creature and another guy who gets to have feelings for Jennifer never come to anything worth caring about.I will say that the cast members do what they can with the material and while none of the performances are great, they're at least worthy enough to keep you entertained in the slightest way. Carnell is at least cute enough in the lead role and one wishes she had something better to do. BOGGY CREEK has some really bad looking editing, some poor cinematography and just nothing in it really comes together in the end. The biggest problem a low-budget film can have is it being boring and this one here just doesn't have any energy.

If a construction went into a project with no plan, paid no attention to detail, worked without any clear-cut responsibility or leadership and just kind of decided to throw a bunch of bricks and mortar together in order to see what would happen; we would be left with the architectural equivalent of 'Boggy Creek.' It seemed to me that 9/10ths of the movie was spent on fluff attempting to build up to a climax that never happened. The storyline would have a hard time standing against the most generically idiotic stories written with 12-year- olds in mind. This was like a spooky episode of the OC. The word of the day is contrived - contrived emotions, contrived dialog, contrived situations, contrived shots, contrived character archetypes, contrived death. I'm not upset, there have been many movies worse than this, made with worse actors. The pacing, incomplete plot and one of the worst scripts ever imagined are to blame in this case. The camera-work was not too bad, the make-up and effects were plausible, the girls were pretty, though I almost think they told the black guy to improvise or perhaps his character was just meant to behave like the most stereotypical Hollister-sporting black guy ever. There was one surprise though, the male "eye-candy" didn't turn out to be as big a moron as we're led to believe. Nevertheless, it wasn't enough to save him in the end. So, it's the mysterious backwood version of Seth Rogen to save the day (yawn). I didn't even make it that far. I woke up and the blonde girl was screaming... fade to black and cue credits. I didn't bother going back to see.

I must say that this film seemed to have it all: a great new imagining on the Killer Big Foot genre, and reawakening a classic! The location was awesome, and the trailer for this movie really grabbed me. I saw an article on Dreadcentral about the creature Fx, and I knew this was going to be the best Big Foot movie ever made.boy was I wrong. The movie was nothing like I expected it to be. The story got too caught up on the B.S. of some emotionally disturbed chick and her daddy issues. It was more like watching a French coming of age teen drama than an American made monster movie. I found myself fast forwarding through the eternally long scene where this girl wanders through the house while an out of tune piano tortures the audience. I kept waiting for the sightings of Big Foot.I did not like the characters, they did not interest me at all. And there seemed to be pieces of the story missing. A lot of holes. Not that I gave a damn about the story, because I bought the movie to see the monster. Where is the monster?FINALLY! We see the monster. It's a pretty bad ass monster! Facades FX created the creature FX and the gore for the kills, and they did a KICK ASS JOB! they saved this movie for me. The kills were great, the creature was great, but there wasn't enough of either. Also, there is a kill pictured on the DVD box, but it was not in the movie. That disappointed me.The Behind the scenes footage and interview with the FX man Phil Nichols along with what few scenes of the creature there were, made the price of the purchase worth it for me. But I am hesitant to recommend this title to anyone based on the plot or cinematography or other elements. The scenes seemed somewhat blown out at times, and it had a lot of continuity problems (it's raining, now it's not, it's raining, now it's not... it's night, no it's day, oh wait it's night again).I'm not sure what the screenwriter and director had in mind, but this wasn't what Boggy Creek / Big Foot/ Monster fans were expecting. So I will give it five stars for the creature effects, but that is about it.Let's hope they learned their lesson with the Zombies V. Humans that is due out soon from this same group.