Imagine my confusion when I saw a new horror movie in theaters this weekend, and it was one I'd already seen months ago. Or so I thought. Upon closer look, Bagman is actually a completely different movie; the movie I was thinking of was actually Baghead. And while I didn't care for that British horror film all that much, it seems comparatively better after having seen Colm McCarthy's Bagman.
First of all, I'm always pleased when horror movies unearth obscure monsters from folklore once the more popular examples have been exhausted. However, writer John Hulme didn't look that far when he looked into mythology for inspiration; the main character of Bagman is basically another Boogeyman.
Except he carries a sack that he stuffs children into. To be more specific, naughty children. It's unclear if that last part applies at all to the story of this movie, as none of the kidnapped children are particularly misbehaving. If annoying your mom with an instrument is grounds for kidnapping by a supernatural entity, then, well, damn. That kid didn't stand a chance, Bagman or not.
Bagman is certainly serious about saying that bad things happen to good people, or something equally unimaginative. This movie, in general, has a lot of generic dialogue. Not even Shyamalan's stylized and slightly surreal style. Everything these appealing but uninteresting characters say is colorless. Which is a shame because you have Sam Claflin and Antonia Thomas in the lead roles. Unfortunately, nothing in their collective talent pool can make this script a success.
Despite a low but decent budget, Bagman is shot too modestly for a theatrical release. I appreciate the bright daylight shots and lack of yellowish filtering that has become standard in today's movies and TV shows, but overall this production looks offensively flat. It's almost uncinematic.
As for the characters, Claflin and Thomas' roles are as shallow as they can be. If it weren't for their apparent financial struggles, they'd have nothing to say or do. They just exist without leaving any considerable impression on you or the world around them. Of the two, Claflin gets the more complicated role; Patrick is haunted by the film's namesake after finding him as a child. Meanwhile, Thomas' character spends more time complaining about his son's adorable toy tape recorder than anything else. And don't ask me to pinpoint any unique traits on the brother or sister-in-law. Or the useless police chief. Even Patrick's father only appears in the story to spew information or be a jerk to his young son.
While it's easy to criticize Bagman, he at least features a fair amount of practical effects, as well as a passable design for the monster. This villain (Will Davis) is at his best when hiding behind a robe and hood, and his creepy antics are appropriately bizarre. Admittedly, the obligatory showdown between good and evil isn't as happy and clean as anticipated at the start either. This PG-13 rated horror film ends on a rather grim note.
Bagman would feel right at home with early-to-mid 90s direct-to-video horror, except there's nothing exceptional or even average about this film. It has neither charm nor personality. It copies other, better horror films and ultimately fails to make any impact on audiences today or in the future. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if this film wanted to stuff itself into a bag and disappear.
Comments
Post a Comment