Curry Barker Explains the Jolt Behind Obsession’s Sad Face

By Tom Whitfield

Curry Barker made Nikki’s sad face frightening in “Obsession” by holding the shot longer, giving extras physical reactions instead of facial ones, and hiding the snap’s cue.

Barker presents the scene in a new “Anatomy of a Scene” video, introduced with: “This is Anatomy of a Scene for my film ‘Obsession.’” The video arrives “just in time for Halloween.”

It presents “Obsession” as Barker’s “indie horror hit.” The segment gives no release date, running time, audience count or box-office total, so the film’s scale cannot be checked from his account.

Barker starts the scene breakdown with a wish: “Kiss the person on your left.” Bear, played by Michael Johnston, wants Nikki, played by Inde Navarrete, to fall in love with him.

He says the pair are “fully in love” and that Nikki has had “hints that she’s going crazy.” Bear is still “trying to make it work” when, in Barker’s words, “this is the scene where it really goes bad.”

Barker calls the effect “awkwardness.” He wanted “to capture” it by holding “a little bit longer than what audiences are used to,” which, he says, forces the audience to watch. His test was social: “What would it be like if these experiences happened at a party?”

He also asked how people would react, whether the room would go quiet and at what points they would laugh. That party logic sets the terms for the sequence.

His references were “Scare Tactics” and “Impractical Jokers.” Barker said he noticed “no emotion on their face” in most prank-show reactions, alongside a physical response such as: “My eyes are wide and I’m freaking out.”

He told the extras to “play around” and to make that physical response visible. He also wanted “a lot of looking around.”

Barker recites the scene’s dialogue:

“Nikki — you OK?” “I’m just kidding, guys. [laugh] I’m just kidding. [laugh] Come on, it’s a joke. I’m just joking. OK, fine. I’m not joking. Deal with it.”

“Anybody want any Jell-O shots?” “I’ll take one.” “Thank you. Reggie.” “Yep. Cool.” “Any other takers?” [gasp] [gasp]

Barker did not want the performance to go overt. He said: “I didn’t ever want her to play possessed or anything.” Instead, he describes Nikki as taken over by “this entity or whatever she — or this wish or this curse or whatever you want to call it.” He offers three possible names without choosing one.

Nikki comes back into her body at that exchange, and Barker calls the instant “almost a jump scare for her.” His model for the jolt was the feeling of “being in one place and then being teleported to another.”

His aim is blunt: “It’s really important to me to create shock as well.” Yet he asks why a director would give away a cue: “why are we giving away our cues here?” His answer is to withhold it: “how can I not make you think it’s going to happen?”

The claim needs a limit. Barker describes his intentions, but the segment gives no screening reactions or evidence about whether viewers saw the snap coming. It shows the design logic, not its reception.

What changes for the audience when Barker withholds the cue?

Barker’s answer is that viewers should not be able to prepare for the jolt. Without an announced cue, the snap can register as an event inside the party rather than a scheduled horror effect. The scene’s ordinary party behavior does not explain what is coming, and the audience finds out at the same moment as the room.

For “Obsession,” the unanswered question is whether Barker’s held shot and withheld cue still work for viewers who have not heard him explain the design.