---
title: "Smile 2"
year: 2024
kind: "film"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/smile-2"
fi1m_id: "smile-2"
imdb_id: "tt29268110"
tmdb_id: 1100782
wikidata_id: "Q123472063"
fi1m_score: 64
critics_score: 62
critics_reviews: 16
published: "2026-09-09"
updated: "2026-09-18T08:37:57.860959+00:00"
region: "EE"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Smile 2 (2024)

Directed by Parker Finn · 2h 07m · Horror, Mystery

## Identity

Smile 2

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/smile-2
- **Type:** Film
- **Fi1m ID:** smile-2
- **IMDb ID:** tt29268110
- **TMDB ID:** 1100782
- **Wikidata ID:** Q123472063
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt29268110/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/1100782, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123472063

**Fi1m score: 64** · Critics 62 from 16 reviews

*In a sentence:* The backup dancers are the scariest thing in it, and they are only doing their jobs

> Parker Finn’s sequel moves the grinning curse from a psychiatrist’s office to a pop star’s comeback tour, and Naomi Scott gives it more than it deserves. It is loud, long and frightening in bursts, and it plays the same trick until we stopped flinching.

## Synopsis

Skye Riley (Naomi Scott) is a pop star a year on from the car crash that killed her boyfriend Paul (Ray Nicholson) and sent her to rehab. Now she is sober, back on the chat-show circuit and rehearsing a comeback tour, with her mother Elizabeth (Rosemarie DeWitt) running her days and Darius (Raúl Castillo) watching the numbers. Her back hurts. She goes to Lewis (Lukas Gage), an old schoolfriend who sells pills, and finds him frightened of something he cannot describe. What happens in his flat follows her home. Parker Finn writes and directs the sequel to his 2022 film *Smile*; Kyle Gallner returns from it for the opening. It runs 127 minutes and carries an 18 certificate.

## Review

Parker Finn’s first *Smile* (2022) sent a psychiatrist to watch a patient die grinning, then let the grin follow her home. The sequel keeps the curse and changes the victim. Skye Riley (Naomi Scott) is a pop star days from a comeback tour, sober since the car crash a year ago that killed her boyfriend, and managed by her own mother. Finn, who wrote it as well as directed, has noticed that a woman paid to smile for a living, and photographed every time she fails to, is the ideal host for a thing that lives in smiles. It is a good idea. The film runs 127 minutes and opens with a hand-over from the first one, Kyle Gallner’s Joel returning briefly to carry the curse across.

Scott is the reason to see it. She sings the songs, dances the routines and plays a woman whose every hour has been booked by someone else, so that when the visions begin she has nowhere private to fall apart. Her Skye is brittle, rude and often unpleasant, and the film lets her be. On a chat show, asked by Drew Barrymore about the crash, she gives an answer that has plainly been rehearsed a hundred times, and Scott lets us count them. Later, alone, she screams, and we believed every second of it.

Charlie Sarroff shoots a good deal of the film upside down, sliding the camera across ceilings and hanging the city over Skye’s head, and the first time he does it we felt the floor go. He does it at least five times. Lester Cohen builds her flat as a white glass box high above the street, every surface reflecting her, so there is usually a second Skye in the frame doing something the first one is not. Cristóbal Tapia de Veer’s score does what his television music does: voices hiccup and yelp, a bass note buckles under them, and the whole thing sounds as if it is laughing at her, and it is mixed loud. Alexis Forte puts her in silver on stage and grey hoodies off it.

The best sequence is a single long take in that flat. Skye’s backup dancers appear one by one out of the dark, in costume, and come towards her in formation, moving the way dancers move but slightly wrong, and Sarroff’s camera backs away with her. Nobody shouts. Nothing jumps. We were properly frightened, the good kind, the kind where you notice your own hand on the armrest. The shot runs unbroken for what felt like two minutes before anything touches her.

He does not trust it often. Finn’s other trick is the fake-out: a face fills the frame, the score bangs, Skye wakes up, and it was a dream, or a vision. Elliot Greenberg cuts to these on a metronome. The third time we saw it coming; by the tenth we were counting rather than watching, and around the ninety-minute mark we noticed we had stopped flinching and started checking the time. That made us cross, because the first hour had earned better. The shape of the story is the first film’s too, down to the man in a dim room (Peter Jacobson) who has studied the thing and explains its rules and a plan for beating it. The rules are the same as last time, and so is most of the plan.

Rosemarie DeWitt plays Elizabeth, the mother who is also the manager, and there is a film in that relationship which the script keeps glancing at and not making: a woman who nearly lost her daughter to pills and now schedules her like product. Dylan Gelula, as the old friend Skye pushed away, gives the film its only warmth and gets about three scenes to do it in. Raúl Castillo and Miles Gutierrez-Riley hover at the edges with phones. Barrymore plays herself and is good at it.

The first *Smile* was small and hit hard. This one is large and hits often, which is not the same. See it with company and, at home, with the volume down, for Scott, for the dancers and for a score that will have you looking over your shoulder. It carries an 18 certificate and uses it.

*Fi1m score 64, published 9 September 2026.*

## What the critics say

Most critics come away in favour, though rarely with much warmth. Nearly every review, including the unfavourable ones, praises Naomi Scott’s lead performance as a pop star pursued by the grinning curse; she is asked to fall apart at length and does so without vanity. The scares are agreed to be bigger, louder and bloodier than before, and several critics find that moving the story into celebrity gives the film an emotional centre the original lacked, with fame and addiction doing real thematic work.

The reservations gather around length and repetition. Many reviews call it bloated at over two hours and complain that it follows the 2022 template too closely, leaning on jump scares and fake-outs until they stop landing. The spread is wide. Polygon regards it as better than the original in every department, while Den of Geek is alone in finding the heroine shallow enough to resent, and Deadline, unusually, thinks her private troubles are what drags the film down.

## Straight answers

**Is Smile 2 worth watching?**

*Smile 2* is worth watching for horror fans who want a frightening first hour and a strong lead, and we scored it 64. Naomi Scott gives it more than the script deserves, and one long take with her backup dancers is properly scary. It is loud, long and repeats its dream fake-out until we stopped flinching.

**How long is Smile 2, and what is it rated?**

*Smile 2* runs 2h 07m. It is a horror and mystery film.

**Where can I watch Smile 2 in Estonia?**

*Smile 2* is streaming on Netflix in Estonia, and it is also available to rent from Apple TV from €3.99. It leaves Netflix on 29 September. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.

**How violent or frightening is Smile 2, and is it suitable for children?**

*Smile 2* carries an 18 certificate and uses it, so it is not suitable for children or younger teenagers. The frights come in bursts, with a very loud score, faces filling the frame and visions that turn out to be dreams, and the film runs 127 minutes of it. The squeamish and the easily startled should give it a miss.

**How does Smile 2 compare to Perfect Blue?**

*Smile 2* and [*Perfect Blue*](https://film.one/film/perfect-blue) both put a pop star at the mercy of her own image, but Satoshi Kon's animated thriller is the sharper film about fame and the more disorienting to watch. Parker Finn's sequel is a jump-scare horror that is frightening in stretches and repetitive by the end. Watch *Perfect Blue* for the ideas, *Smile 2* for the shocks.

**What should I watch after Smile 2?**

After *Smile 2*, try [*Perfect Blue*](https://film.one/film/perfect-blue) (1997, Fi1m 82): Satoshi Kon’s pop idol loses track of which self is hers; the model for half this genre. Then [*Black Swan*](https://film.one/film/black-swan) (2010, Fi1m 82): A dancer’s body turns against her under the lights; the pressure is the monster; and [*It Follows*](https://film.one/film/it-follows) (2014, Fi1m 84): A curse passed hand to hand, played slow and in daylight, with a synth score to match.

### Reviews we read (20)

- **Los Angeles Times**, Katie Walsh (85/100, inferred): The critic deems it a superior sequel that ups the horror stakes, volume, and creativity with a pop-star setting, delivering bigger jump scares, elaborate delusions, and bloodier body horror. It singles out Naomi Scott's no-vanity, hysterical lead performance as a breakout that carries the film's mix of sincerity, humor, and wild thrills. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2024-10-18/smile-2-review-horror-naomi-scott-parker-finn)
- **Variety**, Owen Gleiberman (80/100, inferred): The review calls it a skillfully disquieting sequel that creates a genuine emotional center by truly being about a pop star's mental breakdown under fame and personal demons. It praises Naomi Scott's skilled, sympathetic performance while noting the film wrings honest jolts from the unreality of pop stardom until a somewhat extended and grandiose ending. [Read](https://variety.com/2024/film/reviews/smile-2-review-naomi-scott-1236178126/)
- **Empire**, James Dyer (65/100, inferred): The sequel expands the premise with a pop-star protagonist and celebrity satire but feels like a retread that doesn't surpass the original's tension. It delivers effective scares and a strong lead performance yet lacks surprise and momentum over its long runtime. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/smile-2/)
- **Little White Lies**, Hannah Strong (3/3/3): Parker Finn follows up his 2022 smash with a suitably silly sequel in which a pop star becomes the latest victim of the grinning demon. The film delivers gross-out kills and violent jump scares but feels like a rehash for much of its runtime. [Read](https://lwlies.com/reviews/smile-2)
- **Radio Times** (3/5): Smile 2 offers more of the same with a powerhouse performance from Naomi Scott as the pop star battling the demonic entity. It features stylish art direction, an off-kilter score and weapons-grade jump scares. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movies/smile-2-review-naomi-scott/)
- **Time Out**, Whelan Barzey (3/5): The supernatural chiller bares its teeth at Gen Z celebrity culture through the story of a pop sensation targeted by the curse. It offers an interesting meditation on fame but suffers from a bloated runtime and clunky pacing. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/smile-2-review-2024)
- **Vulture**, Bilge Ebiri (45/100, inferred): The critic praises the core idea equating a pop star's public life with supernatural horror as metaphorically potent. It ultimately over-relies on cheap jump scares, repetitive fake-outs, and excess, losing emotional engagement and scuttling its ambitions. [Read](https://www.vulture.com/article/review-smile-2s-ideas-are-scarier-than-the-movie-itself.html)
- **Screen Daily** (40/100, inferred): The sequel to the 2022 horror hit lacks the crucial element of surprise as it follows a pop superstar plagued by terrifying visions. It delivers chills and sly commentary early on but succumbs to trite horror tropes and elicits shrugs rather than terror. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/smile-2-review/5198202.article)
- **The Guardian** (40/100, inferred): The glossier follow-up to the 2022 curse horror is well-made and well-acted but the franchise struggles to carve out its own identity. It repurposes the setup around a pop star but relies too much on narrative trickery and feels like an over-extended march without enough distinctive voice. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/oct/17/smile-2-review)
- **Slant Magazine**, Rocco T. Thompson: The critic calls it a near-perfect sequel for its intensity and one-upmanship, with strong practical effects, framing, and performances. It deepens the series' themes of trauma, addiction, and mental health struggles through a fame-centric story. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/smile-2-review-naomi-scott-parker-finn/)
- **The Hollywood Reporter**, David Rooney: The critic finds it a fun, well-acted horror sequel with effective scares, strong visuals, and sound design. However, it sacrifices restraint and the original's subtlety for excess, spectacle, and a less gripping protagonist. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/smile-2-review-naomi-scott-parker-finn-1236033017/)
- **The New York Times**, Beatrice Loayza (Critic’s Pick): The critic finds the sequel bigger, bloodier, and more compelling than the original, raising stakes by centering on a pop star's pressures instead of a psychiatrist. It singles out Naomi Scott's splendid performance and the film's thematic ambition around addiction, stardom, and control. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/17/movies/smile-2-review.html)
- **Polygon**, Austen Goslin (90/100, inferred): The critic highlights it as a rare sequel that's better in every way—bigger, scarier, funnier, smarter—thanks to Parker Finn's confident direction, focus on the pop star character, inventive scares, humor, and thematic depth around addiction. [Read](https://www.polygon.com/review/466687/smile-2-review-best-horror-movies-2024/)
- **Collider**, Jeff Ewing (8/10): The critic praises it as an exceptional sequel that improves on the original with better scale, scares, humor, and a standout performance by Naomi Scott, though noting it could explore the entity more and relies on jump scares. [Read](https://collider.com/smile-2-review/)
- **The Wrap**, William Bibbiani (80/100, inferred): The review calls the sequel funnier and scarier than the first film with a playful streak that makes it feel like an evolution. New jump scares and the gleeful way it manipulates the audience and hero are singled out for praise. [Read](https://www.thewrap.com/smile-2-review/)
- **/Film**, Chris Evangelista (7/10): The sequel is a relentless, bigger and meaner non-stop spookshow with a sensational lead performance from Naomi Scott and an effective ending that makes up for flaws like excessive length and overused tricks such as predictable jumpscares and upside-down camera shots. [Read](https://www.slashfilm.com/1689564/smile-2-horror-movie-sequel-review/)
- **NME**, James Mottram (3/5): The review calls it a middling re-run of the original that lacks freshness, borrows from other films, and is rarely scary, though it maintains suspense and knows how to twist the knife. Naomi Scott’s committed performance as the flawed pop-star heroine is highlighted as a positive. [Read](https://www.nme.com/reviews/film-reviews/smile-2-review-horror-naomi-scott-3803332)
- **Deadline**, Pete Hammond (40/100, inferred): The critic finds the sequel follows the original template too closely and feels bloated at over two hours. Effective jump scares are noted but the film gets bogged down in the lead character's personal struggles. [Read](https://deadline.com/2024/10/smile-2-review-intense-naomi-scott-sequel-2022-horror-hit-1236117263/)
- **Den of Geek**, Joe George (2/5): The critic finds the sequel bigger but flatter overall, with exhausting in-your-face visuals and a shallow, unlikeable pop-star protagonist that leaves viewers resenting her instead of sympathizing. Some effective horror sequences and gory deaths are singled out for praise amid the missteps. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/smile-2-review-it-leaves-you-frowning/)
- **Film Stories**: The film largely repeats the beats and scares of the first movie with a bigger budget and more gore, but delivers strong jolts and an entertaining, unsettling experience thanks to Naomi Scott's committed performance as the pop star protagonist. [Read](https://filmstories.co.uk/film-reviews/smile-2-review-the-smiling-demon-is-at-it-again-in-horror-sequel/)

## Details

- **Director:** Parker Finn
- **Director:** Parker Finn
- **Writer:** Parker Finn
- **Cinematography:** Charlie Sarroff
- **Editor:** Elliot Greenberg
- **Music:** Cristóbal Tapia de Veer
- **Production design:** Lester Cohen
- **Costume design:** Alexis Forte
- **Producer:** Marty Bowen, Isaac Klausner, Wyck Godfrey
- **Cast:** Naomi Scott as Skye Riley; Rosemarie DeWitt as Elizabeth Riley; Lukas Gage as Lewis; Miles Gutierrez-Riley as Joshua; Peter Jacobson as Morris; Ray Nicholson as Paul Hudson; Dylan Gelula as Gemma; Raúl Castillo as Darius
- **Runtime:** 2h 07m
- **Release (Estonia):** 18 October 2024
- **Genres:** Horror, Mystery
- **Budget:** $28 million
- **Box office:** $138 million
- **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU_bAopCcSE

## Where to watch in Estonia

- Netflix: streaming, leaving 2026-09-29
- Apple TV: rent €3.99, hd
- Apple TV: buy €13.99, sd

*Checked 2026-09-10.*

Also available in: AE, AR, AT, AU, AZ, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, EC, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HK, HR, HU, ID, IE, IL, IN, IS, IT, JP, KR, LT, MX, MY, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PE, PH, PL, PT, RO, RS, SE, SG, SI, SK, TH, TR, UA, US, VN, ZA. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country.

## If you liked this

- *Smile* (2022): Finn’s first go: one psychiatrist, one grin, and far less noise.
- *Perfect Blue* (1997), Fi1m 82: Satoshi Kon’s pop idol loses track of which self is hers; the model for half this genre. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/perfect-blue.md)
- *Black Swan* (2010), Fi1m 82: A dancer’s body turns against her under the lights; the pressure is the monster. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/black-swan.md)
- *It Follows* (2014), Fi1m 84: A curse passed hand to hand, played slow and in daylight, with a synth score to match. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/it-follows.md)
- *Repulsion* (1965), Fi1m 88: Catherine Deneuve alone in a South Kensington flat, and the walls start to give. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/repulsion.md)

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/smile-2