Focus Features/A24
Audio By Carbonatix
One indie horror sensation with a young director, great reviews from critics and fans, huge returns on a low budget and an avalanche of buzz would be a film of note.
Right now, movie audiences have two.
“Obsession” came out first, on May 15. The Focus Features flick by 26-year-old Curry Barker has already earned about $285 million on a mere $750,000 budget. A24’s “Backrooms,” directed by 20-year-old Kane Parsons, entered the chat on May 29. That has also surpassed $200 million off of its reported budget of $10 million. Both films are directed by young creators with YouTube backgrounds: 26-year-old Curry Barker for “Obsession” and 20-year-old Kane Parsons for “Backrooms.”
But it’s here where we report the differences between the two horror films. And no disrespect to “Backrooms” fans but we find “Obsession” to be a far superior film.
First of all, the word-of-mouth effect is evident in the massive success of “Obsession.” The film’s box office take actually increased in its second weekend, an unprecedented milestone, and as a matter of fact, the film’s third weekend topped both the first weekend and the second weekend. The last time such a phenomenon occurred was in 1982 with the movie “E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial.” As of this week, it’s nearing $300 million worldwide, so unsurprisingly, it’s the most profitable movie in Focus Features’ library.
“Backrooms,” with its largely internet-based lore, was indeed highly anticipated, but it’s a niche audience. Are you up on the concept of liminal spaces? Neither were we when attempting to grasp the meaning behind “Backrooms.” To be fair, “Backrooms” made history in its first weekend; its $81.5 million domestic take/$118 million worldwide made it A24’s biggest-grossing opening weekend ever and its first film to cross $100 million at the box office. Reviews were overwhelmingly positive, but word-of-mouth spread and attendance dropped off sharply, about 68%, after the historic first-weekend numbers.
If you’re not up to speed on the abstract and ambiguous concept, “Backrooms” comes across as slow and boring. “Obsession,” however, tells the simple story of a wish gone bad in the context of male and female dynamics. It’s far more universal and is still resonating with audiences.
Defenders of “Backrooms” are quick to point out that it’s supposed to be ambiguous and doesn’t follow the type of narrative the average moviegoer is used to. From what we can understand about it, “Backrooms” is a slow-burn film about an alternate universe that tries to replicate reality but doesn’t get the details quite right. It is indeed creepy and to be honest, it’s not a bad film but it requires viewers to have been enthralled in the YouTube sensation it’s based on.
Obsession, with its “Fatal Attraction,” “Twilight Zone” vibe for a new generation, is easy to understand and enjoy, making it easily the most talked-about film currently in theaters. There’s good reason for all the hype. One of those reasons is the incredible performance of Inde Navarrette as Nikki, the object of desire that lonely boy Bear wishes would fall in love with him. Michael Johnston also gives a great performance as Bear, and to be honest, the entire cast does a great job of making this “be careful what you wish for” story believable.
Barker’s YouTube output propped him up to garner attention from a major studio and interestingly enough, A24, which distributed “Backrooms,” had also bid on the “Obsession” project. Don’t weep for A24; “Backrooms” is the studio’s highest-grossing film of all time. And they found their own genius in Parsons.
But overall, “Obsession” is just a whole lot more fun than “Backrooms.” Barker blends humor and horror masterfully, not unlike Zach Cregger and Jordan Peele. “Obsession” uses creepy and uncomfortable moments that make the audience uneasy before the fright finally catches them off guard.
To each his own but we’re voting for “Obsession” for your next theater visit, if you haven’t seen it already. Actually, we recommend more than one viewing — many details become apparent the second time you watch it. And twist our arm to want to see Navarette’s performance again and again. Some are whispering about an Oscar nomination. Perhaps she’ll be the next awards surprise, like Amy Madigan’s win for “Weapons.”
