Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Smile 2’s Ideas Are Scarier Than the Movie Itself

Published

on

Smile 2’s Ideas Are Scarier Than the Movie Itself

Naomi Scott in Smile 2.
Photo: Paramount Pictures/Everett Collection

Smile 2 has one genuinely good idea, which is that the everyday life of a messed-up pop megastar is indistinguishable from the shrieking terrors of a supernatural horror movie. Whenever director Parker Finn runs with that thought, the film has a nice, disorienting punch. The victims of horror movies usually suffer in private, stalked through dark empty houses or remote forests or abandoned corridors. Smile 2’s superstar protagonist, however, is constantly surrounded by people: hangers-on, assistants, fans, and gawkers. She suffers in full view of the public, with people all around her who could presumably help. That turns out to be just as unsettling as an eerie lake or a cabin in the woods, and more metaphorically potent to boot.

The film follows a few days in the life of global pop icon Skye Riley (Naomi Scott), who is returning to performing after a period in rehab and a lengthy hiatus due to a gruesome car crash that scarred her and killed her actor boyfriend Paul (Ray Nicholson). But when her old friend and dealer Lewis (Lukas Gage) cracks a sinister smile before gleefully bashing his own head open with a 35-pound weight plate, things start to go truly haywire. Skye begins seeing Lewis’s figure lurking around her, as well as that of the long-deceased Paul. Most importantly, she starts to see the smiles — those unsettling, unnatural, wide grins from the first movie that tell us that demonic possession may be afoot.

Advertisement

At its best, Smile 2 keeps us guessing as to whether Skye is being haunted or simply dealing with the craziness of fandom. Is the sweaty, clingy creep who wants her to sign his T-shirt and won’t leave her alone a monster from the beyond, or just your average stalker? What about her incessantly supportive mother (Rosemarie DeWitt) or her obsequious assistant (Miles Gutierrez-Riley)? Then there’s the fact that Skye is a recovering addict. (The only reason she visits a dealer is because she’s not allowed prescription-strength pain meds but is still in agony from all her post-accident surgeries.) Could these things following her be drug-induced hallucinations? Okay, maybe “keeps us guessing” is overstating it: We know the true answer to all these questions, even if Skye doesn’t. But while the film is too much of a standard-issue horror movie to keep things ambiguous, it does make us think about how the phony smiles that surround celebrities aren’t too different from the evil smiles that surround the protagonist-victims of the Smile franchise.

Director Finn has clearly given this some thought, and he wisely doesn’t just revisit the narrative stations of the first picture. He made his feature directorial debut with that film, a surprise hit in 2022 that was an expansion of a short he’d made two years earlier. But Smile ran out of steam after establishing its nifty premise of an unseen viral demon that plastered disturbing grins on people’s faces before making them kill themselves. A world in which other people’s smiles became monstrous threats was a brilliant visual idea, one of both eerie immediacy and symbolic charge, but the movie eventually lost itself amid the predictable requirements of a genre picture.

Unfortunately, Smile 2 is similarly torn between its novel premise and the base demands of horror. It’s hard not to watch Skye’s spiraling reality and think of all the young nonfictional celebrities who’ve melted down in front of our eyes over the years: the Britneys, the Lindsays, the Amandas and Aarons and others. And yet while Scott’s appropriately freaked-out performance helps, the film never quite manages to make us care for Skye, in part because she’s a victim right from the start and things never settle down long enough for us to get any sense of her as a character. The film’s empathy exists mostly in the abstract, as Finn overdoes Skye’s fraying consciousness. Right as we should be feeling something for her increasingly helpless situation, he bludgeons us with ineffective jump scares — cheap, haphazard ones, awkwardly telegraphed and accompanied by loud booms and crashes on the soundtrack — and increasingly meaningless dream visions.

Like he did in the first film, the director has one go-to move that he relies on over and over again: to follow one particular narrative path before revealing that — psych! — it didn’t really happen. He wants it to be a rug-pulling mindfuck, but the more it occurs, the more it devalues everything we’re seeing. As Skye becomes increasingly unable to tell what’s actually happening and what’s a waking nightmare, we should feel more for her, and we should feel more with her. Instead, we lose interest, as the whole thing becomes pointless and even a little cynical and cruel. The movie ultimately scuttles its own ambitions.

See All

Advertisement

Movie Reviews

Another Look At Curry Barker’s ‘OBSESSION’ (2026) – Movie Review – PopHorror

Published

on

Another Look At Curry Barker’s ‘OBSESSION’ (2026) – Movie Review – PopHorror

Often when the word of mouth begins to spread and hype the newest “best movie ever”, the viewer has to take these opinions with a mound of salt. But as the week two financial gate for Obsession jumped over twice as high as its debut, people started paying attention. With a Youtuber at the helm and the critics lauding this romantic horror film as the second coming, it was time for this particular reviewer to see what the hype was all about.

Obsession is written and directed by Curry Barker (Milk & Serial 2024). It stars Inde Navarrette (Superman & Lois TV Series 2021) as Nikki and Michael Johnston (9-1-1 TV Series 2026) as Bear. Bear is in love with Nikki, but he lacks the gumption to ask her out. On a whim, the bashful Bear buys a “One Wish Willow”, a magical totem that, when broken, allows the bearer one granted wish. Bear wishes for Nikki to love him, but this love comes at the ultimate cost.

The acting is the first thing that the audience will become obsessed with in Obsession. Navarrette is poised for a breakout year and would fit very well as a new-age “final girl” in the horror genre. Johnston is no slouch either, as he brings a lot of layers to Bear, but Navarrette is the one that’ll haunt your dreams for weeks. The actors told the stories on their faces, and Navarrette’s sudden screams make for the most natural jump-scares in ages.

Barker’s writing in Obsession is as crafty as his pacing. Bear is a really likeable guy who becomes unlikeable for trying desperately to hold onto his dream scenario. Nikki is a helpless victim who’s so terrifying that it’s hard to get close enough to help her. This movie takes the dime-a-dozen “monkey’s paw” trope seen in things like Wishmaster (read our retro review here) and Wish Upon and gives it a fresh spin without getting overcomplicated.

Obsession also thrives in its technical prowess. The quiet sound design and still characters make the movie a genuinely unsettling experience. The usage of rewinding shots gives Nikki a chilling economy of movement, while speeding up shots creates sudden peril and makes scenes instantly uncomfortable. The viewer never gets a chance to truly catch their breath, but the stakes continue to grow with every scene.

It’s very easy to see why Obsession has audiences buzzing. It’s the kind of movie that’s going to hold a spot at the top of lists at year’s end, but if the chance arises to see it in a large theater, the experience will be even more rewarding.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Film Review: “Pitfall” – MediaMikes

Published

on

Film Review: “Pitfall” – MediaMikes

Starring: Marshall Williams, Richard Harmon and Alex Essoe
Directed by: James Kondelik
Rated: NR
Running Time: 108 minutes

Our Score: 1.5 out of 5 Stars

Survival horror is the ultimate guilty pleasure because you can amplify any life-or-death situation into the paranormal, horrific, thrilling, or cruelly dramatic extremes it finds itself in. So why doesn’t “Pitfall” come close to tickling “The Ritual,” “The Blair Witch Project,” or “Wolf Creek” vibes?

Woods and grief feel like a ritualistic trope at this point as “Pitfall” opens on Scott (Marshall Williams) and Ashley (Alex Essoe) mourning the death of their parents. For reasons that may or may not be revealed later, they join three friends on an ominous trip that quickly introduces the titular pitfall, a massive trap designed to kill prey.

The movie constantly battles convention with unpredictability. The problem is that at more than 100 minutes long, there’s plenty of time to sit around and wonder where the story is heading. If “Pitfall” moved with the frantic pace of a Tuesday afternoon soap opera on meth, maybe I’d be swept up in the chaos. Instead, I found myself waiting for reveals that felt more eye-rolling than shocking.

Advertisement

I really wanted to like “Pitfall” because of how invested it is in physical violence, emotional trauma, and psychological brutality. Unfortunately, the movie never convinced me it knew what to do with those ideas. By the time it arrives at its revelations and ultimate purpose, “Pitfall” feels less like a title and more like a review.

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

The Breadwinner (Christian Movie Review) – The Collision

Published

on

The Breadwinner (Christian Movie Review) – The Collision

About the Film 

Advertisement

On the Surface

For Consideration

Advertisement

Advertisement

Beneath The Surface

Engage The Film

Family Dynamics

Advertisement

  • Daniel holds a PhD in “Christianity and the Arts” from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is the author/co-author of multiple books and he speaks in churches and schools across the country on the topics of Christian worldview, apologetics, creative writing, and the Arts.

    Advertisement

    View all posts


Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending