Cropsey (2009)

Strong and Moving!

Best movie ever!

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

What is a Cropsey? A Cropsey is the name given to a bogeyman used to frighten children by way of safe education (stay away from that place/that man/them woods etc). When Joshua Zeman and Barbara Brancaccio grew up they learnt that their Cropsey was in fact real. Or was he?Andre Rand was a convicted child kidnapper from Staten Island who is strongly suspected to have committed a number of child kidnappings and murders between 1972 and 1987. Most of the missing children were special needs cases, and with Rand having close ties to Willowbrook State School, a sorry place for the mentally ill thats conditions were exposed by Geraldo Rivera's infamous documentary in 1972, and his known living arrangements out in the Greenbelt Woods around Willowbrook, he seemed the likely culprit for sure.Zeman and Brancaccio do a sterling job of piecing together all available evidence and reports involving Rand, including interviews with family and friends of the missing children and the detectives who worked on the case. They even have epistle contact with Rand as they try to arrange a meeting with their very own bogeyman. The footage and stories involving Willowbrook are skin crawlingly effective, the visits to the ruins of the place equally creepy.We constantly see pictures of the missing children, and that of the only one who was found, murdered, close to one of Rand's makeshift campsites. These are real horrors in this horror film, and they cut the psyche like a knife. Unfortunately the makers lose a little focus in the final third, as more revelations and accusations enter the debate some of the unease wears off, the doc gets chocked as it were, and some of the harsh realities are replaced by fanciful supposition.Still, in the main this is a tremendous documentary, challenging and unbiased. It could just have been Zeman and Brancaccio walking around interviewing the usual suspects et al, but they go deeper than that to leave a lasting impression on both the mind and the soul. 8.5/10

Cropsey (2009) **** (out of 4) Excellent documentary from filmmakers Joshua Zeman and Barbara Brancaccio, two people who grew up hearing stories of Cropsey, a killer of children living up in Staten Island, New York. Through the documentary we hear how various children were told different stories of who exactly Cropsey was but then we get to a drifter named Andre Rand who many believed killed at least five children in the area. Throughout the documentary we hear about the urban legend that stalked the people of this town and we learn about the little evidence that got Rand convicted and how perhaps the legends are what got him found guilty and not the actual case against him. CROPSEY came to my attention as a horror movie fan because I had heard that both MADMAN and THE BURNING were based around this case. Both of those slashers took a lot of liberties with the actual story and that's what makes this documentary so interesting because it really does seem as if the two filmmakers wanted to get the truth and not just paint a picture of a monster. The directors try to paint an open and honest look at the case and by the time the picture is over you really don't know what to believe in regards to Rand's guilt. There are moments where you feel this guy is a monster and he must have committed the crimes but then a minute later you realize that there's really nothing connecting him to the crimes and there are even more mysterious circumstances around the case. As someone who had never really heard of the cases, I found it really interesting seeing the news clips from back when the crimes were committed as well as hearing from those who actually searched for the children. Out of the five victims only one's body was recovered and how it was uncovered was a little suspicious to say the least. The documentary also gets quite a few interviews with those who were connected to the case, those who searched for the body as well as a possible witness who is the most questionable person in the entire film. CROPSEY is certainly a very entertaining documentary taking a look at the connection between an urban legend and the truth.

"Cropsey" is a brilliant, yet unsettling documentary about an age-old campfire urban legend that became horrifyingly real in the 1980's for Staten Island, New York. The legend has different variances: A burn victim from a teenage prank turning into a homicidal campsite stalker (as seen in 80's slasher classic "The Burning"). A former attendant worker at a Staten Island mental institution that returns to the location after its closure, surviving in the woods and underground tunnel systems, snatching up kids in the dead of night. This documentary focuses on the latter myth., and explains how and why it became a harsh reality for residents of an "everybody knows everybody" type town.While the film raises many questions but provides little answers (mainly because the case displayed in the film is decades old, and was decided on circumstantial evidence), it is done really well and is painfully interesting. Recommended if you are into cold case files and documentaries that deal with things that are unanswered, and will probably remain that way for a very long time, if not forever.

CROPSEY is a film chock full of atmosphere, but seriously lacking in sense. Three quarters of the film is devoted to establishing an aura of unease and impending doom which is common to the Horror Genre. The film makers introduce documentation about abducted and possibly murdered children, makes the case for a mythical madman who might live near the site of an abandoned hospital, and relates numerous legends and rumors about who might have been responsible for these unsolved crimes. And then, we learn that The Bogeyman is real. His name is Andre Rand, and he has been convicted of kidnapping, but not murder. How can this be? If there was enough forensic evidence to link Rand to any of the kidnappings, how could he not be held responsible for their disappearance? The "No Body, No Murder Rule" can be waived if sufficient forensic or circumstantial evidence can be presented. It would seem that the prosecution really bungled the case, however, the film becomes almost infuriating because it stubbornly refuses to divulge details of the trial, or present reasons why a jury could reach such an absurd conclusion. It would be like finding the hijackers of the 9/11 plot guilty of plane theft, but not guilty of flying the planes into the twin towers. To borrow a phrase from the immortal Husker Du, that just, "Makes No Sense At All".