Rating: ★★★½
Directed by Curry Barker
Starring Michael Johnston, Inde Navarrette, Cooper Tomlinson
Rated R
Release Date: May 15, 2026
Editor’s note: This review contains spoilers of ‘Obsession.’
Have you ever dreamed your crush would fall in love with you — knowing deep down you two belonged together? Curry Barker’s “Obsession” is a devoted portrayal of this very wish gone wrong.
The film opens with our protagonist, Bear (Michael Johnston), trying to muster up the courage to ask out his crush, Nikki (Inde Navarrette). Bear is the quintessential “nice guy” — the kind of guy who isn’t sure of himself and doesn’t show any real aspirations beyond dating his childhood friend. Instead of confessing his feelings to Nikki, he makes a wish on a supernatural gag gift for her to love him more than anything in the world. Unfortunately for everyone involved, this wish comes true — verbatim. The movie follows Nikki as she loses her bodily autonomy and begins to show an obsessive love — which only grows more sinister as the plot progresses — toward Bear as a result of his wish.
“Obsession” is a true-to-life depiction of an incel. The initially sympathetic Bear slowly reveals himself to be an unlikable protagonist repeatedly making selfish and cowardly choices — never once attempting to undo his wish until the very end of the film. His crush on Nikki is surface level — in the loosest sense of the term, she is his manic pixie dream girl. “Obsession” walks the line between refreshing critique and commentary from a male director on an experience he can’t connect with. The media’s objectification of women — very likely — is not something Barker has personally gone through.
Though it accurately portrays Bear as a man ignorantly terrorizing a young woman, Barker’s script falls short in two main aspects. The first is that “Obsession” fails the Bechdel Test. The only female main characters, Nikki and her friend Sarah (Megan Lawless), are never shown talking to each other one-on-one, their off-screen conversations always revolving around at least one of the male characters. If this choice was intended to highlight the lack of female voices in media, it was in poor taste. Silencing women in a film directed by a man is not a powerful message to send — it is the wrong one.
The other major issue with “Obsession” is that Nikki’s point of view is largely absent, aside from one chilling but brief moment between her and Bear. The scene allows us a glimpse into Nikki’s psyche as she begs Bear to kill her and end her misery, confirming that she has been conscious without control over her actions. While omitting Nikki’s character development may have been intentional to demonstrate Bear’s self-centered nature, his flaws would have been better revealed by showing the audience just how much Nikki was suffering in her own thoughts.
Nikki is never truly defined as a character beyond her kindness and her bad relationship with her father. Her underdevelopment is contrasted with Sarah’s, who, at the very least, has aspirations to attend art school. This dichotomy compels the audience to feel more connected to Sarah’s struggles, fleshing her character out in comparison to Nikki’s.
Despite its flaws, the success of “Obsession” is easy to root for. As an indie film, it reportedly worked with only $1 million. While that figure may seem small, thanks to excellent color grading and a versatile set, this budget does not noticeably constrain the film. The lack of financial resources is balanced out by an original story, decent acting, and directorial work that does most of the heavy lifting.
Barker’s camera work masterfully guides the viewer’s imagination, creating a terrifying immersive experience. The background is blurred throughout the movie to create an unnerving ambience, as if someone might pop out into the frame at any moment. Similarly, Nikki often hangs in the periphery of scenes, hard to see, like something out of the corner of your eye. This directorial choice allows Nikki’s presence to feel unsettling, even when she’s not actively violent — like a loose cannon.
The cinematography isn’t the only element crafting Nikki’s deranged character. Navarrette’s acting is a highlight of the piece, blending together the disturbing and the tragic. Her performance as Nikki allows the audience to sit with the fact that Nikki has completely lost her bodily autonomy while still delivering the standard terror of any good horror movie. Navarrette’s ability to move uncannily is more frightening than the movie’s bloodiest scenes. The range of the role makes Navarrette’s work stand out as the most compelling actor in the film.
Among the most anticipated releases this year, “Obsession” holds its own. The remarkable directing, original plot, and provocative theme earn it some praise. That being said, the lack of female voices and the relatively underdeveloped characters drag the film down. “Obsession” comes across as one of those artistic indie works that belong in an A24 lineup, though whether that means it’s enjoyable and thoughtfully explores its themes is an entirely different question.

T.J. Brearton • Jun 3, 2026 at 7:50 am
I really appreciate this take. Perhaps, to your point, as a male viewer watching a film from a male director, it never occurred to me that this was about an incel, only that Baron’s (Bear’s) motivations felt unclear and/or shallow to me. Equally, I found Nikki’s character ambiguous, since the line between her being an antagonist and a victim isn’t established until halfway through the time, and even then must co-exist with increasing violence.
I mostly experienced Obsession as pastiche, though whether intentionally or not, I couldn’t tell. Nikki’s weird movements that you describe, and some of the more gruesome horror, felt suited to one type of horror film (The Ring, Final Destination), while the talky-ness and drawn out suspense felt akin to 90s psychological thrillers (Fatal Attraction, Single White Female), all wrapped up in a Monkey’s Paw premise.
Anyway, thanks again for this perspective. Good points to ponder.
Mason • Jun 1, 2026 at 2:09 pm
“the lack of female voices and the relatively underdeveloped characters drag the film down”
I think you are missing something here. You, from a pragmatic, maybe even intellectual standpoint, want to see “female voices” in this particular film because maybe you see this as the opportunity to do so, especially given the subject matter. If Curry had done so it would have made the entire premise of the movie an even more gross and unbelievable fiction. I am not criticizing you here, but just acknowledging your credentials, “Third year double major in Literature Writing and Cognitive Science”. You are probably going to slaughter my response as you parse this one out lol
But to get to my point, the average friend group that is still hanging out in their twenties functions very much like the one in Obsession. These types of cliques are not, will not and have never been a representative of our more advanced forms of civilization.. especially if they all met in high school. Your average friend groups function more like a security blanket for those that are experiencing an arrested sort development in their early to mid-twenties, just like this group; We get hints of Ian and Nikki messing around behind the scenes that Ian doesn’t even share with Bear who’s crazy about Nikki, there are hints Nikki has a freaky side, experience with drugs like Molly, their current big “career” is music store attendants/salespeople, Nikki and Sara don’t have a whole lot going in their professional or personal life, and we don’t see a whole lot of honesty or even closeness between those characters…they simply exist as a unit/tribe for absolutely no other reason than “to be”. This isn’t a high quality, high minded moral bunch is it? The connecting factor within these groups (because I’ve been part of them) is NOT to cause friction, not to reproach one another, nor is it to treat each other with honesty, real love and kindness. It’s let’s self-medicate, keep the peace, maintain, have fun and party. Even Nikki in the car ride with Bear says she’s kind of derelict, adrift, and perhaps the spell of the wishing willow found easy prey in Nikki as a victim because none of these characters are really “on their journey” yet and she wants to move to find her next big thing. Maybe she wants to get away from the friend group that she feels isn’t genuinely good for her? And maybe that even includes Bear who can’t even speak up for himself?
In any case this is reality for millions and millions of post high school adults in a highly commercial and capitalistic society that barely manufactures anything and hardly believes in anything as well. I just don’t get why this would be a better film if you inserted something foreign into this environment, like a conscience. Most twenty somethings aren’t having sex, or if they are “it’s casual”, nothing serious, some have given up on dating, marriage, most don’t believe in God the government or long term anything. And say everyone survived this film? what’s the chance they aren’t all doing the same thing into their early 30’s in the same boring uninspired fashion? Maybe the girls are in their 2nd marriage or addicts of some kind, Ian will be Ian for 20 more years, Bear assistant manager or manager of the music store. You just can’t insert these high minded ideals into cinema like that and expect it to resonate or change the world. A lot of women out there DO act like this and don’t see a reason to change. Change has to come from within, not a “thematic plant” or “cultural suggestion” put inside a thriller movie in a theater for 10$