Tag Archives: kyle gallner

Smile 2: A Relentless Cycle of Horror with Few New Twists

11 Monday Nov 2024

Posted by in Movie review

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

So here we are reviewing another sequel, and how long will we go this time before referring to the SOH list of what makes a good sequel?
Well for a start, Smile 2 does the right thing by starting soon after the last film, which (if you remember) ended with the lead character’s ex-boyfriend/cop friend Joel (played by Kyle Gallner) watching her self-immolate.
So, by the rules established from the first movie, that means the Smile Curse has been passed onto him.
And the opening of this new instalment deals with that, as we discover Joel at the end of his 6-day run (the length of the curse before the Smile Demon has to kill its host and choose another victim).
Having been put through the wringer that this creature puts you through, Joel’s course of action is very predictable in a: if-you’re-gonna-go-down-take- somebody-with-you kind of way.
From here we discover this film’s protagonist, Skye Riley (played by Charlie’s Angels / Aladdin’s Naomi Scott). A mega popstar who’s half Lady Gaga, half Britney Spears (at the time she was conceived by writer / director Parker Finn, that’s who he had to go off as inspiration, although today the only parallel you immediately think of is Tay Tay).
With the demon latched onto her, what ensues is 2 hours of the same sort of relentless trauma the original film’s lead – Rose Cotter – suffered through.
And that’s where we hit the crux of it all. The film’s spirit (as set by its predecessor) is to put the lead through relentless hell. Till she loses. And then the hell passes on to another for the next film.
It’s a cliché production line approach that one expects from this sequel, but hopes will have the courage to break. Or at least warp.

Spoiler alert, it doesn’t. But it does end with a twist that is both daring and limiting in terms of where it leaves off for Smile 3.
But that’s for that review. This is Smile 2, and essentially what this film does well – very well in fact – is exactly what it did the first-time round (see above re: hell).
There’s a nice old skool rhythm to Finn’s directing. Whether it be his audacious use of the pan function on his tripod head, or pretentious use of wide-angle lenses, or the gratuitous use of 70’s style GFX for the opening titles (all of which – as cinematic storytelling devices go – seem to be making a bit of
a comeback lately. Especially in other medium to small budget horrors like Barbarian and The Black Phone etc).
But does all this make Finn a leader or a follower?
All we know is that the afore mentioned thing this movie does well is also its prison.
For this Demon has an invincibility to it that makes it all so… pointless. There is nothing anyone can try to defeat it. And even then, they only start trying AFTER they chew up most of the movie runtime wondering if they are going crazy, believing they are not going crazy, and figuring out what is making them go crazy.
And even then, once they try stuff, there’s nothing this creature can’t defeat with a flick of the lazy writer’s wand…. Ie: “It was all in your head”.
For anything approaching a plan or a way to combat it is basically an illusion conjured by the demon itself to give you false hope, so why bother? Even the method that Scott’s Riley tries to beat the creature this time round feels eerily similar to the first film. So straight away you know it’s not gonna work.
And spoiler alert, when it doesn’t, you do feel decidedly annoyed. Because, as with the golden rule of writing (where the protagonist has to make the hard choice) you, as a storyteller HAVE to give your protagonist (and therefore your audience) hope. Otherwise there are no stakes, and instead what you are watching is porn.
Which is fine. Who doesn’t love porn? But porn is not great story-telling.

In terms of performance – Scott does a good job of portraying a mega star under the sort of strain unique to individuals who are also a living breathing multimillion-dollar brand.
And in her case, she is also combating a personal trauma in the form of a tragedy that takes place before the film (when do lead characters NOT have a harrowing event defining their backstories these days?)

The Prognosis:

Smile 2 has earned a lot at the box office and is a critical hit because admittedly it is a very good horror film. It’s just not a good film.
Oh, and also, Jack Nicholson’s son has a small part in it. Smile if you can pick him.

  • Antony Yee

Strange Darling: A Thrilling Puzzle That Teeters on Its Twists

16 Wednesday Oct 2024

Posted by in Movie review

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

JT Mollner’s Strange Darling is a thriller that takes an intriguing approach to a familiar narrative, using a fractured, nonlinear structure to elevate its suspense. Set in rural Oregon, this tense cat-and-mouse game stars Willa Fitzgerald and Kyle Gallner, whose performances help keep the film grounded, even as the plot contorts and shifts like the twisted mind of the serial killer at its core. The use of six chapters to recount a serial killer’s spree, told out of order, adds a fresh spin on the genre but doesn’t entirely escape the trappings of its narrative gimmick.

One of the film’s strongest aspects is its storytelling device. The nonlinear arrangement keeps the audience on edge, forcing us to piece together events as they unfold out of sequence. This fractured perspective works well to heighten the sense of disorientation and paranoia, placing us in the characters’ shoes. Mollner’s script is tightly knit, allowing for moments of true tension and chilling revelations, and the shifts in perspective between the man and the woman engaging in this deadly game of pursuit add emotional depth to the thrills.

Giovanni Ribisi’s cinematography on 35mm film elevates the tension further. The grainy texture and moody visuals enhance the atmosphere, creating a haunting backdrop for the chaos that unfolds. Rural Oregon comes to life as a cold, isolated landscape—perfectly suited for the grim events that take place.

Fitzgerald and Gallner shine in their respective roles, with Fitzgerald balancing vulnerability and menace in a way that keeps her character unpredictable. Gallner’s performance carries a weight of darkness that lingers, making their dynamic a crucial point of the film’s success. The supporting cast, including veteran actors Barbara Hershey and Ed Begley Jr., add credibility and presence to the film, even in smaller roles.

However, the film’s nonlinear presentation becomes a double-edged sword. While it cleverly pulls the rug out from under the audience multiple times, it also leans heavily on this trick. The twist-heavy narrative begins to feel more like a puzzle box of shocks rather than a cohesive tale with deeper thematic resonance. It’s effective in its moments, but as the story moves toward its conclusion, the reliance on narrative twists somewhat diminishes the emotional impact.

Though its reliance on twists may occasionally feel like a crutch, Strange Darling captivates with its gripping performances and inventive structure. It’s a thriller that keeps you guessing and pondering long after the pieces have fallen into place.

  • Saul Muerte

Movie review : Smile (2022)

24 Tuesday Jan 2023

Posted by in Movie review

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

One of the first things you learn in the field of advertising is the concept (and then painstaking explanation of the difference) between Idea and Execution.

In an advertising sense, a strong execution can make for a great one-off ad, but a STRONG IDEA can make for a great campaign (made up of MANY executions) over a period of months.

And a BRILLIANT idea? One that speaks to the HEART of the proposition or product you’re promoting? That can last decades.

This isn’t restricted to creative endeavours either. In an episode of the Big Bang Theory, Sheldon and Leonard get into it over which is more important (idea or execution) when they haggle over credit of a scientific discovery they’ve made together.

And therein lies the crux of this review.

On the surface it would seem the answer to the question, “which is more important, idea or execution”, the answer would appear to be…Idea.

That’s what I was always taught. But as a director once told me many years ago – when discussing different video gauges – “What’s the point of busting a nut shooting something on the best format possible if the person watching it sees it on a TV that looks green?”

This was in the days before digital formats and flat screens, but what he was saying made an uncomfortable sense. There’s a reason why cinemas are still in business despite recent innovations in home entertainment systems. Nothing beats a cinematic experience, even if the movie itself is shit.

Another way of looking at it is through your ears. A lot of sound engineers & producers will tell you, if the album you’re crafting sounds good on shit speakers, it’ll sound AWESOME on good ones.

So, execution is not nothing.
And – in this reviewer’s typically long-winded way – we get to the crux of Smile.

On the surface of it, it is a completely unoriginal idea. An unseen all powerful McGuffin tortures a person, puts them through hell, kills them, and then moves on to the next victim.

It Follows anyone? Truth or Dare anyone else?

For those of you who saw the trailer and thought this was another “one of those” type of films, you’d be right! Right down to the way they usually start, middle and end.

But UNLIKE those movies, this one has been wildly successful ($216 million to date against a budget of just 17). In fact it’s been so popular it has crossed over into mainstream popularity (you know you’ve made it big when you get mentions on American late-night talk shows).

But why? Admittedly it had a clever marketing campaign but at the risk of alienating my advertising brethren who I so lovingly mentioned at the head of this article, so what?

People don’t throw money at a volume of 12 to 1 at a movie unless it has something IN the product itself. And so with Smile, what is it?

Well – if you’ve been paying attention so far – if it’s not in the idea, then it has to be in the execution.

Here at Surgeons of Horror we have mentioned several times during our many podcasts that horror –as a film genre–is easy to do. But hard to DO WELL.

That’s because in the moment of actually making a horror, NOTHING is scary. The moment is out of context, contrived and repeated until an acceptable take is achieved.

The scary comes in the editing, and this movie is well put together.

From accomplished jump scares to decent tension and build up, a film like this hinges heavily on the lead actor (in this case Sosie Bacon) to sell the trauma of what she’s going through without getting annoying; and she by & large does a very creditable job.

In a nutshell, Smile is a cookie cutter template taken straight from the maguffin curse book. A curse puts a person through hell before killing them (in this case, by making them commit a grisly suicide) before leaping on to the next person (specifically, the one who witnessed the suicide) and so on.

What ensues is the usual steps of unsettling happenings leading to bigger and bigger scares; the protagonist goes through the standard stages of disbelief of the curse, believing the curse, understanding the curse, and finally, defeating the curse by – and this bit is a must – FINDING A LOOPHOLE as laid out by the rules of the curse.

But does it work? Well – how Smile handles that is straight out of the playbook too. Twisty twist included. Although – and this is an interesting observation to its execution; because the movie Truth or Dare would make people smile in a crazed CGI assisted way, this movie – when anyone does the same – does so without digital assistance.

Which is a pity, as a slight and unnaturally skewed smile is very unsettling in the best traditions of the uncanny valley. And although it is ALWAYS trendy to say ANY movie with SPFX is better without CGI, in this case it would have helped an already well made film even better. CGI is an arrow in a film-makers quiver. And as with all such tools, it’s all about how you shoot it.

The Prognosis:

So Smile is not very original. But it is very well done, and there is the (now) ancient and famous fable taken from the greatest summer blockbuster horror of all time – as said by its director – “If I’ve done my Job right for the first 100 minutes, then people won’t care that shooting an oxygen tank in a shark’s mouth won’t blow up in the last 2”.

(I may be paraphrasing)

But the point is, as a movie Smile earns a lot with its reminder that whilst Idea is indeed more important, a great idea will never be great without a fitting Execution. And that’s something to… err, grin about.

  • Antony Yee