With Pearl, director and writer Ti West managed to create a duology of horror films loved by critics and audiences. However, does this second film in a soon-to-be trilogy stand on its own? Or do the expectations of being a prequel derail it? Does Pearl prove a worthy successor to X?
As someone who is a fan of Ti West, I can answer that simply; Horror fans feast this year. Pearl is a movie that will stick with you long after the upsetting credits sequence.
Pearl (2022)
Director and writer Ti West (House of the Devil) strikes horror gold twice in one year in his X follow-up, Pearl. Pearl is a gothic slasher film that serves as a prequel to X. The movie explores the life of a younger Pearl, X‘s murderous biddy, against the 1918 outbreak of Spanish Influenza and the first World War. Pearl struggles with her desire to leave the family farm and be a star. She is under the thumb of her domineering german mother, infirm father, and has a husband who is off fighting in Europe. However, Pearl’s life may take a turn through a meeting with a film projectionist and news of an audition for dancers.
The film stars Mia Goth (Suspiria), who co-wrote the film’s concept with Ti West during the production of X as the coronavirus outbreaks was in full swing, as she reprises the role of Pearl from X with significantly less make-up. The film also stars David Corenswet, Tandi Wright, Matthew Sunderland, Emma Jenkins-Purro, and Allistair Sewell.
What worked with Pearl?
There is a lot to love about Pearl, and in many ways, the prequel is more surprisingly ambitious than X. Pearl, at its best, functions as a companion to X, not necessarily as a prequel that establishes story elements, but rather in themes. That is not to say the film is overly beholden to what came before it, either. The film cleverly evokes the pandemic-era anxiety with the historical Spanish Flu and weaves a pandemic into the story that feels modern but does not overwhelm the rest of the film. The film rhymes with its predecessor in several ways, such as attitudes toward sexuality and pornography, ambition and violent escapism, and even down instances of dialogue. Like Ti West’s earlier collaboration with Mia Goth this year, the film has that x-factor.
“The X-Factor”
Speaking of Mia Goth. Goth is delightful in X as an elderly Pearl and Maxine Minx. However, the way she is unleashed as the young Pearl in this movie is one of the most impressive performances I have seen in a film this year and maybe in the past few years. She is frightening, ambitious, beautiful, terrifying, tragic, charming throughout, and utterly carrying the film. That is not to say that the other performers do not pull their weight, but compared to the role of Pearl, there isn’t as much to do, and they’re better off standing out of the crossfire as Mia Goth decimates the audience. A five to six-minute monologue in the film’s climax featuring Pearl laying bare her sickness and sadness floored my wife and me.
Advertisement
Pearl is also a visually stunning film, down to the technicolor-era trappings of title cards and supernaturally bright colors. Ti West knows his way around a camera, and Eliot Rockett’s cinematography provides a beautiful combination of old-Hollywood visual language with some of Ti West’s usual bag of tricks and some of his go-to editing techniques. Zooms, in particular, carry a terrifying power in this film.
The sumptuousness of the color also works well with the film’s period details, such as costuming and the music by Tyler Bates and Tim Williams. Horror films can sometimes appear overly dark or dingy, but Pearl avoids this by embracing a look of old Hollywood just as X embraced a grind-house grit.
What didn’t work with Pearl?
As much as I loved Pearl, two things temper my appreciation. I think the film filling the role of a prequel to X does it a slight disservice and results in some minor problems. As a prequel to X, the film must line up Pearl’s story with the Pearl of the 1970s. It can be rough stitching at times. For the most part, the film is a success and rhymes with its technical sequel, but other times the threads and loose and frayed. Namely the role of Howard (Alistair Sewell) in the events that are to come in Pearl’s future.
Also, because there was an alligator in X, there must be one in Pearl. These kinds of checklist moments are acceptable, but something I feel also limited the film a bit compared to X. X succeeded in surprising me in some ways that Pearl simply could not because it is a prequel.
Secondly, my other criticism of the film is that Mia Goth’s Pearl so thoroughly devours it that it misses opportunities to explore the surrounding characters. In many ways, the movie sacrifices the extended cast on the altar of Pearl at the expense of a richer characterization. My complaints most derive from two characters: The Projectionist (David Corenswet) and Ruth (Tandi Wright), in that we get some tantalizing glimpses into deeper, richer characters. Frustratingly, these developments are cut short, so the characters suffer for it. Particularly the stern Ruth, whose story seems to run as deep and intertwined with Pearl’s, we do not get to explore. It is less so for The Projectionist, but his scenes reveal an interesting thematic connection to X. I would have loved to see that expanded.
Final Verdict on Pearl (2022)
2022 is an excellent year for horror fans as Ti West has delivered two of the most substantial horror projects of the year in X and Pearl. Ti West’s latest film is wholly subsumed by the charisma and presence of Mia Goth. While some of the necessary but perfunctory prequel elements are admirably handled, the strain of working within the confines of future events can take its toll on the film.
(4 / 5)
Pearl is distributed by A24 and produced by Mad Solar Productions, Little Lamb, and Bron Studios. The film’s runtime is 102 minutes and can currently be seen in movie theaters.
Advertisement
We would love to hear your thoughts on the movie in the comments if you’ve seen Pearl. Enjoy the review? Check out our other horror reviews here on Haunted MTL.
Want more Pearl? (Sponsored)
Have you seen X (2022)? If not, consider picking up a blu-ray before you see Pearl in theaters. Use our special Amazon link to add to your movie collection and help support Haunted MTL.
Smile 2, a psychological supernatural horror, released in October 2024 just in time for Halloween, sees director Parker Finn (Smile, Laura Hasn’t Slept) return with a sequel starring Naomi Scott (Aladdin) as pop star and recovering addict Skye Riley. While Smile 2 boasts a talented cast, it ultimately falls short of its predecessor, offering a familiar storyline with minor variations and a predictable finale. The film attempts to introduce a new method to combat the parasitic ‘Smile Entity’, but this addition fails to elevate the sequel beyond a pale imitation of its chilling predecessor.
The Plot.
Smile 2 begins shortly after the end of the original; just six days after Rose Cotter’s death. During a short interlude scene, we watch as the now cursed Joel attempts to pass the Smile Entity on by killing one criminal in front of another. The plan backfires spectacularly, inadvertently passing the curse onto an innocent bystander named Lewis Fregoli.
The film then shifts gears, introducing Skye Riley, a singer and performer making a triumphant return to the spotlight with a comeback tour after a tumultuous past. During a candid interview on the Drew Barrymore Show, Skye opens up about her struggles with addiction and the devastating loss of her boyfriend in a car accident. Her sobriety journey, however, faces a severe setback when she seeks pain relief from her old high school friend, the unwitting Lewis Fregoli. In a chilling turn of events, Lewis takes his own life while Skye watches, passing the Smile Entity onto her. Unaware of her new cursed existence Skye gets on with rehearsing for her tour, but she begins to notice that strange things are happening. People are smiling at her in an unnatural way and she becomes the target of anonymous attacks and aggressions. When text messages begin to arrive from an unknown number, Skye decides to get some answers.
Highlights.
Let’s not beat about the bush. I found Smile 2 difficult to finish and was struggling at about the hour-and-a-half mark to stay awake. That being said it’s worth watching because everyone needs to see the 3-minute scene of the ‘smilers’ chasing Skye through her apartment. This was possibly the creepiest thing I’ve seen on a screen. The buildup, the synchronicity of the movement of the actors and their positioning, the camera work, and the lighting. I have rewatched it several times and it doesn’t get old. If you are only interested in watching this, fast forward to the 123-minute mark and get ready to be impressed.
Drawbacks.
Where do I start?
My primary concern with Smile 2 is its striking resemblance to its predecessor. The narrative follows a familiar pattern: an attractive woman fleeing a supernatural force, grappling with hallucinations, experiencing a mental health decline, and culminating in the revelation someone close to Skye was the Smiling Entity after all. This repetitive structure diminishes the film’s impact.
Advertisement
While the introduction of a new method for shedding the entity initially offered a glimmer of hope this concept wasn’t fully realized. It just served to add names to the line of people that the entity has infected in the past.
Furthermore, the film’s pacing suffers from excessive focus on Skye’s musical career. Scenes showcasing her stage rehearsals and music videos, while intended to establish her identity as a performer, feel unnecessary and detract from the narrative momentum. Yes, we understand she’s a performer, you told us, you don’t need to prove it. These scenes appear to artificially inflate the film’s runtime, suggesting a lack of confidence in the core story.
The Final Take.
Ultimately, Smile 2 fails to expand upon the established lore of the franchise. The film’s conclusion feels contrived, with a blatant setup for a third installment. Hopefully, if a ‘Smile 3’ is inevitable, the creative team will bring fresh ideas and avoid simply retreading familiar ground.
We’re back again with Goosebumps The Vanishing, episode two. A story too big for one episode, apparently.
Or, maybe this is just a nod to the fact that Stay Out Of The Basement was a two-part episode in the original 1995 show. Either way, after seeing this episode, we could have kept it to one.
The story
We begin this second episode with Anthony investigating the parasitic plant taking over his body. Rather than, I don’t know, going to the hospital, he’s decided to phone a colleague and send her some samples from the bulb he pulls out of his arm with a handheld garden trowel.
Meanwhile, Devin is having his own worries. He’s haunted by what he saw in the sewers. So, he gets CJ to go with him to investigate. What they find is more of the tendrils of the plant that dragged him down through the manhole last episode.
Advertisement
I sure would have liked to see more about that.
Instead, we see Devin pivot to flirting with a newly single Frankie. Because teenage hormones I guess.
Meanwhile, Trey is having a terrible day. First, his girlfriend leaves him. Then, Anthony breaks his car window.
Needing a way to deal with his frustration, Trey decides to break into the Brewers’ basement. There, he starts wrecking up the place. Until he meets the plant creature and has an unfortunate accident.
What worked
The big difference between this episode and the last is the increased gross-out factor. This episode had some straight-up cringy moments. From the tendrils waiving from Anthony’s arm to the whole goat he brings home to feed his new pet, this episode was skin-crawling gross in the best way possible.
Advertisement
The series is called Goosebumps, after all.
What didn’t work
Unfortunately, that’s where my praise ends. This episode, unlike the last, just wasn’t that great.
To start with, there was a lot of unnecessary drama between characters who are not in danger of being eaten by a plant from the inside out.
I especially disliked the focus on the Frankie/Trey/Devin love triangle.
Now, I don’t hate it. This part of the story adds extra emotional depth to the show. We can see why Trey would be especially incensed by his girlfriend falling for the son of the neighbor he’s feuding with. But it would be more enjoyable if it wasn’t so cliche and dramatic.
Advertisement
I hate the way Trey tried to gaslight Frankie. It makes me dislike him when he should be a sympathetic character. I hate how whiny Devin is every time he talks to Frankie. And I hated the impassioned speech Frankie gives after Devin asks her why she was with Trey.
Listen, I understand what we’re going for here. Devin and Cece are not struggling financially. They’re doing alright, and their new friends here in Gravesend are not. We kind of got that without Frankie claiming that her socioeconomic status is why she’s dating a bully and gaslighter. It felt out of place. It felt like pandering. It certainly didn’t feel like something an eighteen-year-old would say. I hated it.
Finally, there was a moment near the end of the episode that irritated me. I don’t want to give too much detail because I wouldn’t dare ruin an R.L. Stine cliffhanger. But, well, it doesn’t make a lot of sense.
I get that we’re watching a show about a carnivorous plant that is going to wreak havoc on this family and neighborhood. I understand the suspension of disbelief. Some might even say I am a little too generous with it. So I can buy into a teenager being absorbed by a plant and turned into a monstrous version of himself.
I can’t buy into what happens at the end of this episode. It doesn’t make sense with the rules established. It certainly doesn’t make any sort of scientific or logical sense. It is a lazy moment meant to further the storyline but threatens the structural integrity of the season.
Advertisement
All in all, this wasn’t the best episode of Goosebumps. But it’s only the second episode. Honestly, the season has plenty of time to go either way.
The movie monsters always approach so slowly. Their stiff joints arcing in jerky, erratic movements While the camera pans to a wide-eyed scream. It takes forever for them to catch their victims.
Their stiff joints arcing in jerky, erratic movements As they awkwardly shamble towards their quarry – It takes forever for them to catch their victims. And yet no one ever seems to get away.
As they awkwardly shamble towards their quarry – Scenes shift, plot thickens, minutes tick by endlessly… And yet no one ever seems to get away. Seriously, how long does it take to make a break for it?
Scenes shift, plot thickens, minutes tick by endlessly… While the camera pans to a wide-eyed scream. Seriously, how long does it take to make a break for it? The movie monsters always approach so slowly.
Robot Dance from Jennifer Weigel’s Reversals series
So my father used to enjoy telling the story of Thriller Nite and how he’d scare his little sister, my aunt. One time they were watching the old Universal Studios Monsters version of The Mummy, and he pursued her at a snail’s pace down the hallway in Boris Karloff fashion. Both of them had drastically different versions of this tale, but essentially it was a true Thriller Nite moment. And the inspiration for this poem.