So Many People Are Saying BACKROOMS and Its Monster Are Terrifying... But Was It Really??

Ever since Backrooms hit theaters, I've seen people praising the movie's horror, its atmosphere, and especially its monster. I've read reactions from viewers claiming the creature is nightmare-inducing and genuinely terrifying. After watching the film for myself, I came away with a completely different reaction.

It didn’t scare me… at all. In fact, I'm genuinely confused by how many people seem to find this movie frightening.

Maybe I've watched too many horror movies over the years. Maybe I've become completely desensitized to monsters and nightmare imagery. But whatever the reason, Backrooms never got made me feel any kind of fear. Not once.

And the creature at the center of the film, which is apparently haunting the dreams of some viewers, struck me as more comedic than scary.

The idea behind the Backrooms seems like it could be compelling. Endless yellow hallways, lots of rooms, some empty, some filled with random junk. Familiar places twisted into something wrong.

The fear of isolation. The fear of becoming lost forever. Those are universal anxieties that can create effective horror when they're handled correctly.

The problem is that atmosphere alone can only take a movie so far. For nearly two hours, Backrooms asks viewers to wander through yellow hallways, vacant offices, strange architecture, and endless corridors while waiting for something interesting to happen.

The movie constantly hints that there's something profound lurking beneath the surface. Some deeper significance. Some terrifying revelation. But the longer it goes on, the more it feels like it's running in circles.

When the monster finally arrives as a major threat, it should be the payoff to all that buildup. Instead, I found myself struggling to take it seriously.

The giant pirate mascot version of Clark looked more ridiculous and laughable than horrifying. Every time the thing appeared on screen, I wasn't filled with dread. I was distracted by how goofy it looked.

The movie clearly wants viewers to see this thing as a physical manifestation of Clark's inner darkness and self-destructive tendencies. That's a fine idea in theory. Horror has used metaphorical monsters for decades.

But a metaphor still has to work as a monster. This one didn't. The film spends so much time treating the creature as a shocking reveal that it forgets to make it genuinely frightening.

Its symbolism is more obvious than unsettling, and once the mystery surrounding it disappears, there's not much left to latch onto. The creature becomes another example of the movie presenting an intriguing idea without fully developing it.

That's really my biggest issue with Backrooms as a whole. It's packed with ideas that sound interesting, but the execution rarely lives up to the promise. The movie constantly gestures toward deeper meaning without ever giving those ideas enough substance to resonate.

As a result, the horror never lands. I never felt the kind of creeping unease that great atmospheric horror can create. Instead, I felt detached from what was happening on screen.

What surprises me most is seeing so many people call this one of the scariest horror movies of the year. I'm not saying those reactions are wrong. Horror is subjective. Different things scare different people.

Clearly, Backrooms is connecting with audiences who are invested in the original internet lore and the liminal horror aesthetic that inspired it. I just wasn't one of them.

For me, Backrooms is a movie built around a fascinating premise that never finds a compelling story to support it. And its heavily hyped monster isn't nightmare fuel. It's a visual representation of the film's biggest weakness. A cool idea that looks more impressive in theory than it does in execution.