I’ve been craving a theatrical horror experience. I thought about going to see “Terrifier 3,” but those films aren’t for me. I’ve tried the other two… just not my cup of tea. I’m here in Ellensburg, so I can’t go to the repertory theaters in my hometown of Portland that are playing an array of horror classics right now. I missed out on going to The Majestic cinema in Yakima and seeing their slate two weekends ago. 

I saw the first “Smile” and liked it, but I didn’t love it. I thought it was a pretty effective horror movie that, save for a fantastic ending, was really nothing special. But when I saw the trailer for “Smile 2,” I was mesmerized. I don’t know what it was, but something about it just screamed to me that it was going to be something worth seeing and worth seeing in a movie theater. 

I went into “Smile 2” hoping for a very fun time at the movies, and to be scared a bit, and in a way that’s exactly what I got. I had a blast watching this, and was extremely scared at points while watching it. But there is something much more potent about “Smile 2” beneath the surface, especially compared to its predecessor. 

Naomi Scott gives a career-best performance as superstar Taylor Swift stand-in Skye Riley. (Between this and “Trap,” what’s the deal with popstar-horror movies this year?) I’ve been a fan of hers for a long time now, since her role as the Pink Ranger in the 2017 “Power Rangers” reboot as well as her turn as Princess Jasmine in the “Aladdin” remake, and she turns a whole new leaf here. She brings life to a character placed in a somehow-already-all-too-familiar-trauma-core vehicle and channels her self-doubt, hysteria, addiction and paranoia extremely authentically. Her turn here has shown me that – if she wants it – she has a spot on the 2020s scream queen Mount Rushmore. This was her first real endeavor into horror but it doesn’t feel like it whatsoever. I would really love to see her stick around in this genre for a while. 

Director Parker Finn is also throwing 100 mph here. One of the things that was most attractive to me about the first “Smile” was the clear steady hand behind it all, and Finn takes all the lessons and he learned and ideas he garnered during and since the production of the first film and completely runs with them all. The level of poise and craft shown by him here is remarkable, and he delivered some of the most effective horror I’ve seen this decade. 

Both of the main set pieces in Skye’s apartment were incredible, but specifically one that involves her back-up dancers I thought was super scary and claustrophobic. 

Back-tracking a bit, one of the most impressive things about the film was the opening scene from the perspective of Kyle Gallner’s character from the original, serving as our only real connection to the first film. The scene was so phenomenal that it did make me wonder what a movie purely about his character would’ve looked like, because frankly it looks like he’d gone through hell. And as interesting as it was seeing how this curse would affect the life of a popstar, I feel like how it would affect the life of a cop would be just as fascinating. 

This scene immediately showed me what it was about the trailer that had grabbed me: The prowess in the filmmaking. Shot in what appears to be one singular take, this cold open displayed a level of poise in the filmmaking and the creative design behind the film that was a breath of fresh air amongst a mainstream horror landscape that all seems to look, move and feel the same. Each set piece in this movie is so thoroughly thought out, from the blocking of the actors, to the framing of the camera, to the design of the set. For me, I can give grace to flaws in the plot if I can see some all-too-rare intent in the filmmaking. 

And are there flaws in the plot of “Smile 2”? Sure. Notably, a lot of the themes can feel like a retread of previous, better work. Given that it’s a horror film about a pop star, it’s near impossible to avoid comparison to the 1997 anime horror film “Perfect Blue,” and for good reason because that movie is a masterpiece. But if a movie can wear its influence on its sleeve but still provide some new nuance or layer, then why not celebrate it? 

The film does suffer from all-of-this-is-in-her-head syndrome at points, but it does it in such a bombastic and totemic way that I fully buy into it. A symptom of that too is an ending that somehow out-does the original, completely blowing my mind for what was one of the best horror twist-endings I’ve seen in a very long time, and also introducing a concept for a potential third film that is super, super exciting. 

I’ve been thinking a lot recently about how movies used to just be better than they needed to be. If this was just a fun time at the movies like I had been expecting, I would’ve been satisfied. But it wasn’t. And I love it all the more just for that level of care.