This post was updated Oct. 22 at 7:54 p.m.

“Smile 2” is a familiar, fun horror – but nothing to sink your teeth into.

Director and writer Parker Finn’s sequel lurched into theaters Friday, inviting audiences back into the “Smile” franchise after the original film’s surprise popularity in 2022. Paramount Pictures clearly hopes the franchise will become a gold tooth in the company’s horror repertoire, allowing Finn to explore comfortable territory: A mysterious entity is once again haunting the protagonist through hallucinations of smiling people. This time, the victim is Skye Riley (Naomi Scott), a pop star preparing for a career-reviving tour who witnesses her drug dealer mutilating himself, causing the smile curse to be cast upon her.

[Related: Film review: ‘Joker: Folie à Deux’ reimagines classic characters, delivers haunting narrative]

This is not only Finn’s second feature-length stab at the series but also the second go-around for the same cinematographer, editor and composer. This practice shines through, as deep rumbling synths punctuate well-paced and intelligently shot sequences. Everyone on the team obviously enjoyed crafting this film, and the team’s relatively meager $28 million budget never feels like a limitation in its hands. Even the movie’s special effects – particularly the grotesque mutilations induced by Skye’s hallucinations – feel more lavish than restrained.

And the filmmakers are proud of their gore. Each time a character endures cringe-inducing body horror, the shot lingers for a moment. Then it lingers for a moment more. Then, finally, the camera peels away – but the memory is sticky. The audience dwells on the disfigured jawbone, emptied eye socket or fleshed-out smile until the next opulent, gory scene. One might complain that these horrifying sequences occupy relatively little time in the film, but that is fine: Their sparseness ensures their impact persists until the end.

These gorefests are often accompanied by periods of psychosis in which the film’s jumpscares and chases deliver thrills rather than scares. The hallucinations of Skye’s decomposing mind are the center of the film – she can feel when things are not quite right, and so can the audience. The filmmakers lean into this clear-minded dynamic: There are no fakeouts or cheap tricks here, but instead well-telegraphed sequences of horror. The endings of terror sequences are equally obvious, often punctuated with a rapid scene transition à la “The Exorcist.”

Without the element of cheap surprise, these horror sequences rely on evocative imagery, such as the aforementioned explorations of the human body, to impress terror upon the audience. Familiarity is similarly twisted to create fear. The film has a small repertoire of characters, and many of them feature in these hallucinations – but to mixed effect. The battered manifestations of characters from Skye’s troubled past, who the audience barely gets to know, are far less distressing than a creepy fan or trusted best friend inexplicably terrorizing Skye within her own home.

These apparitions are the film’s primary method of commentary, offering insights into what terrifies Skye as a media-battered celebrity. Some of these allude to her past trauma, while others highlight the worst aspects of celebrity culture – such as her fear that no one actually likes her, or the imposing nature of fan interactions. In particular, the 2021 conclusion of Britney Spears’ traumatic conservatorship looms over the audience as it watches Skye’s mother and manager become increasingly controlling after the celebrity’s public breakdowns.

Perhaps aiding this comparison, Skye lacks even the pretense of agency throughout the film. She identifies the cultural problems facing her celebrity status – and she eventually demands that her emotions and mental health be put first – but she is most often compelled to rebel by her manipulative hallucinations. She becomes either the victim of culture when she stays in her box or the victim of psychosis when she tries to push against expectations. There is no justice here.

There may be value in this message: Celebrities are damned if they call out the culture, and they’re damned if they acquiesce to the demands of their fans and managers. But horror movies live and die by their protagonists. Skye is no final girl, but instead a woman ruthlessly victimized by the screenwriter behind the camera and the monsters in her mind. The film attempts a poignant exploration of the pitfalls of celebrity status – and it succeeds in expressing the terror of certain components, particularly sexual harassment – but it ultimately feels like shallow, misguided commentary.

[Related: Film Review: ‘Beetlejuice Beetlejuice’ follows the original with comedy and thrill]

This does not mean “Smile 2” is a bad experience. It is regularly evocative and alluring throughout the first two acts, only losing momentum as the film writes itself – and the series as a whole – into a corner by the end. Most of the scares and jokes land, with Finn’s passion for his burgeoning Hollywood franchise shining like a toothy grin. But “Smile 2” has to compete with a compendium of horror classics to stand out this Halloween season, and its muddled commentary puts it behind many of its more intelligent contemporaries.

“Smile 2” is a competent horror film with a few cavities. When the next sequel inevitably manifests in theaters, let us hope the franchise’s wisdom teeth have fully grown in.