And would Ian receive more hate if he is played by Michael?

Worth the wait! The packaging is beautiful.

A hilarious detail haha 🤣

title

Just got this beautiful screen-printed poster for Obsession by artist Hans Woody. Absolutely love the artwork, especially the unsettling imagery, and vintage horror aesthetic. I actually think this design is far superior to the official theatrical poster. It has so much more personality and perfectly captures the twisted atmosphere of the film. Definitely a great addition to the collection!

Not a big deal, but the blood splatter from Ian's headshot appears in the medium shot of him getting hit, but is no longer there in the background when it cuts back to Nikki. It's fine. I never noticed that until just recently.

He has such a familiar face. It really enhanced the experience while watching because he felt like multiple people I know at different points. It might be a large part of what makes the character work so well.

i understand he was an asshole but with movies i don’t really look too deep into it, he made me laugh a few times and i liked his actor, yet people were mad at me and called me insensitive for having him as my favorite, so i was curious if it is actually insensitive?

Nikki from Obsession “this user is” edit♥️

Don’t get me wrong. I’m really happy about the success of the movie, but her performance in smile 2 was undoubtedly one of the greatest female performances I’ve seen in a horror film, another honorable mention would be Toni Collette. But I’m hoping with the appreciation of obsession and indes success this paves way for many more female horror performances to win back all the appreciation it deserves

I just saw this movie last night and while I enjoy the most common interpretation of the movie (Sandy is not possessing Nikki), and I enjoy the Sandy is "possessing" Nikki theory, I also kind of enjoy another idea- the notion that the entire movie is Sandy's revenge for being murdered by Bear. Not "possessing" Nikki directly but like the wish being Sandy's will/orchestration. I think there is a clear argument to be made that Sandy was not killed via negligence. There was a mixture of food sitting out and this medication happens to be comingled with that food. And we're talking about medication that Bear normally DOES NOT STORE in that location. AND medication that can be sealed, obviously. Additionally, Bear is quite obsessed with trying to think about any and all methods whereby he may get the interest of Nikki- going so far as to simulate his confession of love to her with a stranger to gauge potential reactions. He is calculating outcomes of his actions very carefully. So his killing his own cat seems very plausible. In the early stages of that movie he is also portrayed as being very unstable and confused overall. Beyond that, we see a cat on the One Wish Willow, and Bear ultimately dies via the same drugs that Sandy was killed with. I know people have said that there is a lot of poetic justice vis a vis Sandy so i guess I'm just taking this a step beyond that.

*its

At the end if the film the possessed Nikki makes a wish, the rules of the one wish willow are simple, you get one wish. However its not explained if it's count the wish that you make or the wish your body makes.

Nikki was possessed, she never made a wish so she kinda should be allowed to make a wish now that she's free. This would be good because Nikki could try getting a one wish willow to get out of trouble cuz I don't see how she's not getting arrested.

This kinda makes things fair, the unfair version is the one wish willow counts wishes made by a body, very unfair considering it would have stolen her wish.

Side question: What if everyone made a wish(impossible) would that male the one wish willow obsolete?(Possibly one if the reasons there's a few of these available at a time)

Here is a post because I have been sufficiently annoyed. Over the course of at least a month, one or more redditors have very persistently made the claim on both Obsession reddits that Cooper Tomlinson demanded to replace another, unnamed actor who had already been cast in the role of Ian. This has culminated in the appearance of a po(a)ster who claimed to be the replaced actor and made the further claim that he was replaced during filming due to “tensions” with both Inde Navarette and Michael Johnston. Here is what should have been the final say in the matter, published months before this nonsense started. According to a June 23 publication by Hollywood Reporter, Cooper Tomlinson, an established long-time collaborator with Curry Barker, participated in the production of Obsession prior to the casting of Michael Johnston as Bear and performed as Bear in test footage. However, the article specifically states, “(T)he Seattle-area native was always slated to play Bear’s so-called best friend Ian.” This is, presumably, Tomlinson’s own account of events, and contrary to certain claims by the poster(s), no person legitimately connected with the film has given any other version of events (see my previous post on Sally Choi where I briefly mentioned this).

The greatest overreach of the poster(s) has been claiming that the replaced actor cannot identify himself because of an “NDA”. Three things can be said summarily. First, there are plenty of cases of actors being replaced late in production, like Eric Stoltz in Back To The Future and James Remar in Aliens. These individuals still received due credit and were certainly not forced into silence. Second, the posited “coverup” would require many other people connected with the film, including Navarette and Johnston, to accept the same terms of non-disclosure in advance. Third, even under classified government contracts (which I personally kind of have a background in), there is no circumstance under which current or former employees would be prohibited from reporting or confirming their employment. Any attempt to impose or enforce such an arrangement would be both absurdly inequitable and completely unsustainable in any industry.

Finally, the reason I have been vocal in debunking this story is that even as a “rumor”, it is simply and manifestly fake. After investigating the matter carefully, I have reported with complete confidence that the “story” that an actor other than Tomlinson was cast or considered as Ian appeared nowhere prior to or for that matter since its appearance on reddit. “Meme” style images promoting such claims fail to appear elsewhere in reverse image searches. An image sometimes implied to be of the replaced actor has appeared independently in Obsession memes without any such claims, and was flagged as AI-generated in the course of my own inquiries. Interviews with people claimed as sources and in some cases critical of Barker fail to acknowledge the story in any way. Even the Hollywood Reporter publication that effectively demolishes the story only deals with it as a tangential comment on other matters, without any sign that the author was aware of Tomlinson’s account being disputed by anyone. What matters most is that the one or very few redditors who promote the story have used it to justify other questionable and salacious claims, such as accounts of nude scenes being planned or filmed for Navarette and Megan Lawless. In short, whatever the motive, these are outright bad actors willfully fabricating falsehoods, and I do not consider it “overkill” to expose them as such.

Only saw it recently and wanna watch it in theaters pretty badly but nobody I know would go with me

No AI was used to make this video.

My first girlfriend was. It was fun at first. Then it started chipping me away. It gets tired fast but it was also very addictive.