Boogeyman Movie Review

Of course, nobody will admit to this at Screen Gems, which is releasing "Boogeyman." But it's no coincidence that every movie Hollywood doesn't screen in advance -- either by not holding previews until the night before opening or not holding them at all -- is largely lambasted once critics and audiences have caught up with it.

Every year in late January/early February, and again in late August/early September, studios traditionally dump their worst offerings onto the market, hoping the lack of new big-draw blockbusters will translate into profits for any new movie with heavy TV advertising -- which is why you probably haven't been able to escape "Boogeyman" ads in the last two weeks.

In 2004 for example, nine movies were released without screenings (which may be a record), including "Alien vs. Predator," "Exorcist: The Beginning" and "Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid" in August alone, and "The Cookout" and "Paparazzi" one week later.

And with the strategy working better than ever -- the five aforementioned titles took in more than $180 million collectively despite huge drop-offs in ticket sales after bad word of mouth -- Hollywood hucksters will likely be encouraged to continue cranking out crappy movies and hiding them from critics, counting on suckers to make them rich.

Whether you give a hoot what critics have to say or not, you should regard the lack of Friday morning reviews to be a huge red flag when considering shelling out $8 to $10 for the latest heavily-hyped wannabe blockbuster. Because when that happens, it's not some cinema snob with a newspaper byline telling you the movie is rubbish -- it's the people who made the movie admitting to it themselves and just hoping you're not smart enough to listen.