Reviews
[REVIEW] ‘Smile 2’ Sees Parker Finn up the Ante on Sights, Sounds, and Scares
From its opening sequence, I knew that Smile 2 would be everything I wanted from the first Smile film. Aside from its excellent scripting and some true blue moments of terror from actress Sosie Bacon, the first film felt, unfortunately, underwhelming in how it utilized the horror of having your reality slowly stolen from you. Parker Finn’s directing and Charlie Saroff’s cinematography elevate what would be just a collection of solid scares and pitch-black humor into an enjoyably bleak supernatural experience, the most disturbing parts of which are its human ones. The raw human sorrow it generates, and the feeling of hopelessness it forces you to sit in. It’s a film about the slow and painful consumption of a performer by the masses, and what’s left behind as a result. And it’s what makes Smile 2 a damn good horror sequel.

From its opening sequence, I knew that Smile 2 would be everything I wanted from the first Smile film. Aside from its excellent scripting and some true blue moments of terror from actress Sosie Bacon, the first film felt, unfortunately, underwhelming in how it utilized the horror of having your reality slowly stolen from you.
I had doubts about a sequel beyond that since the Smile movies’ conceit also necessitates running through a plot that you’ve already seen before but in newer and more creative ways. When the “rules” of a monster are as constraining on the narrative as this one, there are only so many avenues the film can take leading to its inevitable ending. It’s a plot that demands you up the ante and make every moment before the credits count and feel worthwhile. And Parker Finn’s Smile 2 manages to do that.
It begins with a full-tilt, anxiety-inducing opening sequence that will leave you wracked with tension. Finn’s camerawork at the start proudly announces what’s to come: while the first Smile sat in steady shots and moments of relative silence to try and creep you out, Smile 2 cranks the amps, making you feel the cacophony of noise and chaos that will soon be plaguing the film’s superstar in mind and body. It’s a showstopping tone-setter, marking the beginning of a great sequel.
With a new album out and a world tour set to begin in a week, singer-songwriter Skye Riley is the comeback kid in the eyes of the media. But behind the scenes, the loss of her boyfriend in a highly publicized car crash, as well as her own substance abuse and self-harm issues, prove to make for anything but a glamorous return. As Skye tries to manage her physical pain from the accident, she witnesses the sudden and brutal suicide of an old friend, with an unnatural smile on his face as he does it. Soon, she finds herself carrying more than guilt for being unable to stop him: the visions of smiling people, both dead and alive, have begun to haunt her, and they’re only getting worse as her grasp on what’s real blurs into nothingness.
The film gives us a messy character to root for in Skye Riley, portrayed in an exceptional performance by Naomi Scott. She feels real and raw, contrasting the artificial persona she’s forced to inhabit and the parasocial leeching she has to stomach. The film goes to lengths to show the skin she’s forced to slough off and put back on to please the people around her, sequins and spandex, and all manner of concert outfits as she walks between living like a human and being treated as a cash cow performer. Naomi Scott in turn dons the resulting exhaustion and misery like a glove and embodies the film’s ideas of a person being left with nothing to give.
Scott is the quintessential pop star trying to be neatly redeemed through the press, and repressing all her emotions until she has to vomit them back out to disastrous effect. She conjures all the parts of Skye’s breakdown, both horrifying and mortifying, with pure dread. Her torture throughout the film feels even more relentless than Rose Cotter’s before her, and it’s due in large part to Scott’s facial acting being dialed in; her eyes manage to anchor the audience’s fear to her own and drag them down to her level.
Still, the film’s writing of her situation regularly dances and springs on the delicate line between “that’s hilarious” and “that’s depressing”, which is undoubtedly skillful. To inject great dark comedy in horror is a lot like composing musical comedy, in that it requires more than being just good at both, it requires shared excellence between the two. Certainly, not every intentional joke hits, but the subtlest moments it has to offer always do. Either way, don’t expect the film to be as strait-laced as the first entry.
In terms of how Smile 2 follows up on its predecessor’s well-loved effects, it’s about on par with what we’ve seen before. Some of the CGI fails to hit its mark, but every wound we’re subjected to, large and small, feels like they’re wrenched from true flesh and blood. Spoilers if you haven’t seen Smile, since this is something that happens in both films, but my one major complaint is the big demonic reveal of The Entity’s “true form”. The final number we saw from the previous film is back with some shiny new paint, and while the compositing of digital and practical effects for this sequence is well done, the “improvements” that have been made to the creature’s look feel overdesigned and a little hokey compared to the pure nightmare fuel we were fed in the climax of Smile. The monster looks a bit irreverent, given the film builds up a genuinely emotional streak throughout it only to cap off on meaty, wide-eyed insanity. That being said, those final shots are still tough to forget in their grotesqueness, and it’s an effective closer that does exactly what it needs to.
Parker Finn’s directing and Charlie Saroff’s cinematography elevate what would be just a collection of solid scares and pitch-black humor into an enjoyably bleak supernatural experience, the most disturbing parts of which are its human ones. The raw human sorrow it generates, and the feeling of hopelessness it forces you to sit in. It’s a film about the slow and painful consumption of a performer by the masses, and what’s left behind as a result. And it’s what makes Smile 2 a damn good horror sequel.
Reviews
‘Shadow of God’ Review: A Bold Indie Horror That Falls Short

Whether they land or not, it’s hard not to appreciate how impressive it is that Shudder gives a platform to myriad independent films. While Screambox struggles to finish the race, Shudder is doing a victory lap. Even the greats trip up occasionally. Shadow of God is a film I heard minor rumblings about across the interwebs, and as someone who isn’t into exorcism-like films, it still piqued my interest enough to seek it out. Then I watched it.
Shadow of God: A Promising Premise Falls Flat
Shadow of God follows alcoholic exorcist Mason Harper (Mark O’Brien) as he travels back to his hometown following a death during an exorcism. Mason meets up with his ex-beau, Tanis Green (Jacqueline Byers), who gives him a place to stay while he’s back. The semi-happy reunion between Mason and Tanis is cut short when the dregs of Mason’s deceased father’s cult learn of his arrival. Everyone’s faith will be tested as something more sinister than anyone could imagine rears its ugly head.
It feels like there was a disconnect between writer Tim Cairo and director Michael Peterson, as Shadow of the God feels nothing more than scattered parts of better films clumped together into a heaping mess of something. While full of awful dialogue, Cairo’s script tells a compelling and somewhat unique take on the religious horror subgenre. The bones of a better film exist deep within the script. A rewrite (or three) could have helped to trim the fat and identify the elements of the story that truly work. On the other hand, Michael Peterson seems to have little to no control over whatever he was doing here.
Digital Effects Ruin Emotional Depth
The real issue with the film is the unfortunate digital effects slapped on before the final cut. Any semblance of an okay film quickly flew out the window with the slapdash effects. Nothing takes you out of a well-crafted emotional moment like a giant, badly composited white light shooting out of someone’s forehead. I was so checked out by the end that my final note written about the film simply says, “barn effects BAD.” To be completely honest, I don’t even know what I meant by that.
Not a singular solid performance graces the screen during this hour and 27-minute series of images. I get that independent films face difficult and unique challenges that larger budget films don’t. But the performances feel as if the cast were given the script seconds before the scenes were shot. Mark O’Brien was a huge sell for me with this film, as I adored him in Ready or Not, and it feels like [maybe] his agent dropped the ball on this one.
The Potential Buried in Shadow of God
Reviews
‘Jurassic World: Rebirth’ Review: Show Me Your Teeth

It has been just three years since Jurassic World: Dominion put the latest trilogy in the franchise on ice with the bite force of a smurf, but like any money-maker in Hollywood, no IP stays extinct for long. Universal decided to revisit the franchise’s roots, heading back to the lab to poke and prod at its barely fossilized remains in an attempt to mix up its DNA enough to warrant a reboot. Jurassic World: Rebirth promised a thrilling return to form – a journey into dino-infested waters that put the terror back in Tyrannosaur. With horror-adjacent auteur Gareth Edwards (known for Monsters and Godzilla) directing and writer David Koepp (who adapted Jurassic Park and The Lost World), returning after a nearly thirty-year absence, expectations were colossal.
What they delivered is a glossy, crowd-pleasing theme park ride into nostalgia that never fully commits to genuine horror or the deeper scientific soul of the 1993 original. It’s enjoyable for fans who love every iteration unconditionally, but it is sure to frustrate those with a more critical eye who expected something closer to a cold-blooded classic.
Jurassic World: Rebirth – A New Chapter or Nostalgic Retread?
For those needing a refresher on the events leading up to Rebirth, you can snag yourself an honorary degree in paleontology with our handy Jurassic Horror 101. After closing out the first reboot trilogy with a whimper, Universal needed to steer the narrative away from pseudo-science and half-baked existentialism toward a more visceral experience; nothing will compare to Spielberg’s masterpiece, sweetie!
The elements for success are all here: Edwards has a strong resume in titanic horror, Koepp is the man behind the original film adaptation, and the fresh faces of Scarlett Johansson, Jonathan Bailey, and Mahershala Ali bring star power to the tropics. Yet, whether due to studio interference or simply buckling under nine tons of pressure, they still haven’t figured out how to catch lightning in a bottle twice.
Dinosaurs, Big Pharma, and a Tropical Mission
Set five years after dinosaurs were left to coexist with humans, we learn that the prehistoric beasts are once again facing extinction, both physically and metaphorically. Unsustainable living conditions within Earth’s rapidly changing ecosystems are eliminating them faster than an ice age, and – perhaps in a nod to our apathy in a digital world – the humans around them largely do not give a damn. As dino merch turns to ash and people avoid the roaming beasts like an invasive flash mob, pharmaceutical company ParkerGenix recruits mercenaries Zora Bennett (Johansson) and Duncan Kincaid (Ali), along with soon-to-be-unemployed paleontologist Dr. Henry Loomis (Bailey), for an adventure their wallets can’t resist.
It seems that dinosaurs are still thriving on small islands surrounding the equator, and ParkerGenix has discovered within these surviving creatures a medical miracle that may provide a cure for heart disease. However, this being a Jurassic movie, our beautiful trio is tasked with retrieving this biomaterial from an island overrun by failed genetic experiments abandoned by the infamous company that started it all – InGen.
Rebirth’s script does touch upon the ethical dilemmas of serving Big Pharma for a seven-figure payout. Still, these moral quandaries are explored no more deeply than a child kicking at sand on the beach, hoping to uncover something shiny underneath the silt. Thematically, the franchise has painted itself into a corner since 1993. The existential wonder, quiet pathos, and scientific stakes have since been mined dry, which makes the shift toward more human-scale horror a welcome pivot. Two reboots in, we may never see a film that so effortlessly balances terror and philosophy as the original did. So, while I could continue to rip the script to shreds, why bother? Instead, let’s get to why you’re really here and tear into the horror of it all.
Does Jurassic World: Rebirth Deliver on Horror?
As is common with blockbuster films, Rebirth finds itself at odds with its behind-the-scenes talent and the studio executives at Universal. They clearly chose Edwards for his experience with films of kaiju proportions, and Koepp’s portfolio includes its fair share of bangers, including 2025’s critically acclaimed Black Bag. The marketing heavily features the newly hatched D-Rex, a “Xenorancor rex” level monstrosity that by all accounts should be the scariest thing this franchise has ever seen. However, the cold open, which includes a Final Destination-like mishap that allows the D-Rex some bloodlust, is all too brief. And that is the film’s biggest flaw: They have to let it linger, and they don’t.
A certain sense of style and cinematic flair that horror’s best know how to use is simply missing. Is this a creative misstep, or is the studio afraid to alienate families? The hallmark sequence that strands our heroes — a franchise staple — lacks the dread felt in the original’s historic T-Rex attack or even the epic trailer cliff dive from The Lost World. Since the human characters in these movies survive far more often than they should, they could at least leave us a bit shaken after such a spectacle. That said, the film does include a tense river raft sequence from Michael Crichton’s novel that fans have been begging for since the 90s, and it is undoubtedly the movie’s highlight.
CGI vs. Practical Effects in Jurassic World: Rebirth
I could overlook the lack of scares, or at least choose to politely ignore them, if they had gone back to basics and incorporated quality practical effects. Most are aware that OG’s lasting reverence is at least partly due to its extensive use of lifelike, tangible dinosaur prosthetics and robotics. In 2025, a solid combination of quality CGI and practical magic would go a long way. Backed by Edwards’ love of lighting a dramatic silhouette, the D-Rex does have some ominous and visually impressive moments as we catch glimpses of her amidst fire and fog. Then you see mother monster full frontal without the filters, and it feels like catching sight of a sweaty drag queen after a summer brunch performance.
The editing does the film’s attempts at horror no favors either, exhibiting strange spatial logic during tense beats where dinosaurs seem to vanish between cuts and human characters appear to ignore the massive beasts that were chasing them moments earlier.
A Love Letter to Jurassic Fans
As mentioned, fans of the franchise do have a lot to love here, despite Rebirth flopping in the horror department. Instead of the over-the-top fan service found in Dominion, we are given plenty of self-referential nods and visual echoes, from mirror messages to rescue flares and raptors in the kitchen. The excellent score by Alexandre Desplat likewise resurrects a familiar tune that accompanies a sequence featuring mutated Brachiosauruses that look ripped from Annihilation, which almost brought a tear to the eye of this longtime fan. What the movie lacks in scares, it makes up for in charm, and moments like these, along with a central trio of likeable characters, are enough to keep the formulaic plot moving along.
It’s no surprise that Wicked’s Jonathan Bailey, as the eager and inexperienced Dr. Loomis, is as charming as ever. The flitters of interaction between him and Johansson’s gruffy mercenary, Zora, are endearing, and Mahershala Ali’s characterization of Kincaid rounds out the trio with enough wit to establish them as the reboot’s next generation. A paper-thin backstory helps us understand why these would-be heroes are risking their lives for the better part of two hours, leaving room for improvement in potential sequels.
There’s also a forgettable family with the personality of wet rags who get caught up in the action, serving more as catalysts for set pieces than as developed characters. Still, their scenes provide some comedic relief through Gen Z’s himbo boyfriend, Xavier (David Iacono), and a cute baby dinosaur named Dolores (could a Labubu crossover be on the way?).
Is Jurassic World: Rebirth Worth Watching?
Overall, Jurassic World: Rebirth is more entertaining than innovative. It won’t convert any skeptics into dinosaur enthusiasts, but true fans can find plenty to enjoy in this sweaty jungle romp. It’s predictable and lacks the horror elements that readers of Horror Press crave, but I had a good time despite it all. The franchise still has teeth, albeit buried deep within its gums. Hopefully, Universal will allow some creatives the freedom to yank them out in bloody glory for the next one.
Jurassic World: Rebirth is now in theaters!