“Smile 2” is better than the first part, even if it's just more of the same

PHOENIX (AZFamily) – Open wide!

Summary

Smile 2 follows pop star Skye Riley (Naomi Scott) as she attempts to make a major comeback after drug addiction and an accident nearly cost her her life the year before. Skye’s comeback tour seems to be going well, but the pain of her accident causes her to secretly take Vicodin.

When Skye’s drug dealer Lewis (Lukas Gage) kills himself after giving her a creepy smile, Skye begins seeing smiling people stalking and stalking her. Skye’s mother (Rosemarie DeWitt) and her social circle all think she’s just losing her mind, but Skye believes she’s cursed and has to figure out how to stop it.

My thoughts

For me the first Smile was one of those cases where it just didn’t live up to all the hype that surrounded it. I didn’t actually care if I would even see it since I just don’t find the whole “creepy smiling person” thing that scary, but the hype was too big to ignore. People acted like it was a horror movie for the ages.

So do you consider me overwhelmed when the film did so well? It’s not bad or anything. It’s well acted and competently made, but not that scary. While it didn’t really scare me, it seemed to have an impact on the majority of viewers out there, enough to make a lot of money and give Paramount the green light for a sequel. But will it just be more of the same?

Smile like you mean it

Yes, it turns out it’s actually more of the same, but that’s not particularly bad. I would argue that writer-director Parker Finn made a better film this time, most likely because he honed his skills on the first film. The horror aspect of Smile For me the film is definitely more cheesy than scary, but as a standalone film they aren’t bad.

What constitutes this? Smile The way films work is that they are primarily character-based stories, with horror elements sprinkled in. You could actually remove the supernaturally smiling people entirely and get the exact same movie. From the other characters’ perspective, they don’t see what the main character sees; it just seems like they are witnessing a nervous breakdown.

Like Sosie Bacon’s character Rose in the first film, Naomi Scott’s Skye Riley carries a lot of emotional trauma, guilt and grief. While it seems like Rose had her life together before she was haunted by the smiley face demon, Skye Riley is a total train wreck from start to finish. The smiling people are a little more spread out this time, so we’re mostly watching a pop star’s downward spiral into madness.

At 128 minutes, it’s certainly a long downward spiral, but that running time goes by quite quickly due to Naomi Scott’s captivating lead performance. She’s in virtually every scene, often in her own one-woman show, complete with numerous close-ups of her various frightened expressions.

Scott’s performance draws you in from the start, but as Skye Riley’s mental state deteriorates, she acts like a magnet that draws you in even more. I couldn’t take my eyes off her, with her intense eyes and manic grimaces. It was an incredibly emotional and physical role that Scott threw himself into, creating an ever-growing tsunami wave until the end.

Even though she’s obviously based on Taylor Swift and Ariana Grande, Skye Riley feels like a real character. Parker Finn may be treading a lot of old ground here with this sequel, but the way he and Naomi Scott brought Skye Riley to life made for a uniquely compelling final girl.

If one thing is certain, Naomi Scott definitely deserves a spot in the 2024 Horror Hall of Fame alongside Mia Goth, Maika Monroe, Cailee Spaeny, Willa Fitzgerald, Demi Moore, and Margaret Qualley. Seriously, what an incredible year for women in horror .

Say cheese and die

The pop star attempting a comeback after a battle with addiction and a near-death experience was an interesting angle, but the actual story and thematic exploration we get here doesn’t go much further than last time.

The format and structure are basically the same: the protagonist witnesses someone killing themselves and is then haunted by smiling people while trying not to pass on the curse.

There’s an exciting one-shot opening scene with the always great Kyle Gallner concluding his arc from the first film, but anyone hoping that it ties into the larger story will be disappointed. Smile 2 is essentially a standalone sequel with little connection to the original, aside from the curse that the main character carries.

It was nice that Finn didn’t feel the need to explain more about the curse while still keeping things vague. It’s just a curse that once you get it, you’re screwed unless you think outside the box. Finn flirts with some deeper ideas that are frustratingly not fully explored. Even if the characters and setting are different, it somehow feels like we’re watching the same movie as the first.

However, like the first one, Finn knows how to make a great looking, atmospheric film. He indulges himself a bit too much with the tilting and rotating camera and drone shots, but the man really knows how to set the mood. The way he frames and builds the tension feels almost Hitchcockian at times, with lots of long, wide panning shots so you can take in the eerie surroundings.

Finn also brings the stuff for the horror dogs out there. If you’re afraid of the smiling maniacs lurking in the dark, you’ll get plenty of them, topped off with predictable jump scares. However, some of the more gory moments are pretty great, with some grisly practical effects. It’s actually impressive that a horror sequel that’s largely unrelated to the first is so decent.

It’s kind of funny and a little ironic that the end credits are the scariest part of both films. Not in a funny, “Haha, this movie isn’t scary at all” kind of way, but they are legitimately disturbing. As the credits roll, composer Cristobal Tapia de Veer creates a haunting, cacophonous soundscape that almost makes you feel sick. It’s just a shame that the rest of the film doesn’t elicit the same reaction.

Final verdict

Smile 2 It’s not exactly diminishing returns, but most of the time it’s seconds that taste just a little bit better than the first serving. It all feels a bit familiar, but it’s a more than serviceable horror film, which is mainly supported by a mesmerizing lead performance from Naomi Scott. From now on, when I see her in an upcoming film, I am confident that she will excel like she did here.

I’ll definitely be interested to see where Parker Finn takes his career. His next project is a remake of the 1981 film possessionso I hope he continues Smilesince it has already dried so well. He has what it takes to really do something outstanding. If you liked the first one SmileYou’ll enjoy it, just expect more of it. It’s exactly the same, but it’s done a little better.

My rating: 6.5/10

Smile 2 will be released in cinemas nationwide on Friday, October 18th.

Do you see a spelling or grammatical error in our story? Please click here to report it.

Do you have a photo or video of a recent news story? Send it to us here with a short description.

“Smile 2” is better than the first part, even if it’s just more of the same