\”An improvement on the (good) original. Naomi Scott's performance is outstanding, she is so convincing and fully committed to the role all the way through - to the point that she elevates the film as a whole up a notch. The rest of the cast are good, e.g. Rosemarie DeWitt, but 'Smile 2' is very much Scott's movie. The run time is perhaps a little longer than it needs to be, though to be honest that is only a minor criticism in the grand scheme of things. Much of what is onscreen helps nullify any potential (minor) pacing issues, the violence and gore is quite graphic but it is nicely done and is exactly what we want to see from a production of this sort, let's be real. I will say this does feature a few too many cheap jump scares, something I'm not a big fan of, but just like the above it isn't a notion that hinders the overall quality of the end result. Based on the ending, the next sequel could be a lot of fun - here's hoping!”

r96sk

\”Tween horror. Perfect to have on in the background whilst making tiktoks or like somthing I dunno lol. I get the feeling the script for this was written in text speak and emojis. I'm not sure if this is Blumhouse, I couldn't summon enough interest to bother finding out. If you've seen the first flick (not movie and certainly not film), you know what this is about, cheese "jump scares" that solely rely on the sound being loud and some tween-palette friendly "gore" - a bit of blood. Nothing's shocking, horrifying or engaging and the "acting" is terrible, which is maybe the most shocking element. That guy that was in The White Lotus, I've seen be good in things other than this, he's not good in the 5 minutes or so he's in this. Naomi Scott waddles round like a less obese version of Florence Pugh with even less charisma. She's pretending to be a pop star, a story misstep that leads to some AI generated music that somehow sounds a decade or so dated. Film could have been vastly improved if it was ~80 minutes of Scott being attack with a screwdriver, but that didn't happen and it's 2hours of mediocrity. Looking at the sidebar here, it made money, so I guess we're getting Smile 3. With some luck, that will be an entirely AI project and no actual creatives will be harmed in the creation process.”

No

\”The only thing I can remember about the first Smile (2022) was that it went downhill after that opening scene with the patient. I had no intention of watching a second one until I saw it was Naomi Scott, "... fine." Now I'm looking forward to the next one. Naomi Scott carried this film with her performance.”

Sejian

\”First Smile was a great horror movie. I was worried that second one wouldn't be very good as usually this is how it happens, but thankfully, Smile 2 was a great continuation of first one. It didn't disappoint. I'm very pleased with Smile 2. They did great.”

Dean

\”I found it to be a significant improvement over the first installment. Naomi Scott's portrayal of Skye Riley is outstanding; she brings depth and authenticity to every emotional scene, making her character's journey compelling and relatable. The film benefits from a higher budget of $28 million, compared to the original's $17 million, which is evident in its enhanced production quality. The opening prologue is particularly gripping, setting a tense and immersive tone right from the start. Director Parker Finn adopts a more mainstream approach with effective jump scares and incorporates intense gore scenes that heighten the horror experience. The narrative cleverly blurs the lines between reality and illusion, keeping viewers on edge and questioning what's real. Overall, *Smile 2* delivers a thrilling and psychologically engaging horror experience, surpassing its predecessor in both storytelling and production.”

RalphRahal