Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 10/11/2022
New to Theaters: “Smile”
Dedicated trauma counselor Dr. Rose Cotter finds herself possessed by a sinister force posing with a foreboding smile in “Smile.” I can’t lie; my expectations for “Smile” weren’t the highest after viewing the film’s vague marketing materials. Fortunately, the final product offers an unnerving thrill ride bolstered by commendable thematic ambitions.
If anything, “Smile” should represent a breakout effort for writer/director Parker Finn. From his haunting tracking shot opening onward, Finn establishes a foreboding visual voice as a filmmaker. It’s easy for some horror filmmakers to elicit cheap thrills through buckets of bloodshed and pandering jump scares. Under Finn’s guidance, “Smile” thankfully never sells itself short for gimmicky moments.
Finn controls the camera precisely, extracting a sense of slow-burn tension that keeps Rose’s devolving mental state in the front view mirror. He and cinematographer Charlie Sarroff also utilize uncomfortably intimate framing choices and muted color tones effectively as tools to extenuate the material’s underlying dread. As for the frightening imagery, Parker displays sensible tact in utilizing scares only when it’s called for in the material. The patient approach makes the nightmarish blips of repulsive imagery all the more terrifying as Parker conjures equally inventive and unsettling set pieces that will likely linger long after the credits.
Finn displays an equally keen perspective when it comes to his screenplay. In a climate where several horror films exploit mental illness as a cheap explanation for their dopey narratives, “Smile” ruminates on the hot-button topic with the empathy and dramatic gravitas it deserves. Rose’s work as a mental health professional and her lingering struggles with PTSD receive a significant portion of screen time here – a decision that allows the material to develop a meaningful dramatic core underneath the ample array of scary set pieces.
Finn’s worthwhile messaging sometimes congeals too much to mainstream horror sensibilities, particularly in a third act where the script didactically spoon-feeds viewers the writer/director’s thesis. Despite some inconsistencies, Finn’s observational edge provides his narrative with an equally haunting and vital undercurrent. I also give star Sosie Bacon, the daughter of Kevin Bacon, significant credit for carrying the narrative’s weight on her shoulders. Her emotionally raw performance evolves throughout as Rose comes face to face with her untimely fate.
“Smile” impressively exceeds expectations at every turn. I am glad horror filmmakers like Finn continue to view the horror genre as a tool for meaningful meditations on the world around us.
New to Streaming: “Hocus Pocus 2”
While opinions may vary on its quality, “Hocus Pocus” possesses a revered standing amidst many audiences’ Halloween catalogs. Fans and detractors of the 1993 supernatural tale will likely agree about the film’s unimaginative sequel, “Hocus Pocus 2.” The latest straight-to-streaming cash grab from Disney brews a cynical cauldron that results in oppressive boredom for viewers.
I don’t necessarily treasure “Hocus Pocus,” but I respect the film as a decent byproduct of macabre and family-friendly sensibilities. “Hocus Pocus 2” possesses none of the original’s distinctive charms. Here is a film that strips all creative energy to placate the widest audience possible. The screenplay meshes generic young adult drama and awkward fish-out-of-water comedy with little success, while Anne Fletcher’s joyless, autopilot direction lacks any artistic merits. I’ve seen several Halloween-themed commercials framed with more passion and creative ingenuity than “Hocus Pocus 2’s” blend of shotty visuals. Even for a Disney+ release, the lack of care is appalling.
The potential enjoyment of seeing stars Bette Midler, Sarah Jessica Parker and Kathy Najimy reunite as the wicked Sanderson Sisters is fleeting once viewers realize the characters receive little purpose from their screenplay. The trio of sisters lacks the comedic bite and devilish charisma that made them household names in the first place. Worst of all, there isn’t a single frightful bone in “Hocus Pocus 2’s” body. The movie negligently avoids carrying on its predecessor’s mantle by presenting a bland, commercialized depiction of its source material’s paranormal atmosphere.
Nothing here seems to be inspired by any innovative ideas. Instead, the final product is yet another example of The House of Mouse producing a factory-assembled attempt at siphoning nostalgic sentimentality from audiences. I hope Disney quits while they are ahead with their recent slew of passionless sequels and unnecessary remakes.