ASHEVILLE, N.C. (828newsNOW) — Looking for a new movie to see as summer vacation starts? Check out our reviews of three major releases: the indie horror phenomenon “Backrooms,” the silly 80s throwback “Masters of the Universe” and the sixth installment of long-running parody series “Scary Movie.”

You should see…

(Courtesy: A24) Chiwetel Ejiofor explores the eerily mundane labyrinth of “Backrooms.”

“BACKROOMS” (2026, 110 min., directed by Kane Parsons)

There are two remarkable things about “Backrooms.”

The first is the set design. The film takes place almost entirely in a series of eerie rooms, wallpapered in vomit green and constructed in bizarre, unsettling dimensions. The decor of the spaces are equally idiosyncratic, filled with furniture with elongated appendages and signs with words written backwards, or else doors with extra doorknobs, windows without a view and pools with too much or too little water. Mostly, however, the spaces are empty, expressionless and seemingly endless. As the characters of the film explore them, the feeling of dread they evoke is a symptom of an aesthetic impeccably rendered.

These “backrooms” are the cinematic manifestation of an internet phenomenon, an obsession with liminal space that originated from a single social media post and exploded into a collective creative writing exercise across the World Wide Web.

The signature authorial voice in the backrooms project is Kane Parsons, a 20-year-old YouTuber who began creating short horror films about the subject as a teenager. Just a few years later, Parsons has earned a reputation as an industry wunderkind, translating his scary, lo-fi YouTube videos into a film that has already earned over $100 million worldwide, the biggest opening for an A24 movie ever.

Parsons is the second remarkable thing about his film. The director’s experience crafting shorts for his YouTube channel is evident in every frame of “Backrooms,” but that is not to say there is anything amateurish about it. On the contrary, it is clear that Parsons has years of filmmaking under his belt already. His feature debut is impressive, drawing strong performances from leads Chiwetel Ejiofor and Renate Reinsve and nailing an atmosphere of unease better than horror flicks directed by artists decades his senior.

It follows that the best parts of the film are a fusion between its two stars: Parsons and his rooms. When the film patiently unspools Ariadne’s camera into the depths of the backrooms, the movie is a complete triumph, terrifying through the simple act of hiding what’s behind the wallpapered corner.

It is unfortunate that “Backrooms” must kowtow to the demands of a more conventional movie, building a script, characters and themes around its titular subject matter. These are not bad – the headline of this review would’ve been “Badrooms” if they were, obviously – but they are not as brilliant as the concept which spurned them.

The story of “Backrooms” sees a therapist, Reinsve, attempt to rescue her patient, Ejiofor, from the backrooms after he discovers the dimension in the basement of his failing furniture shop. They are not alone: a monster stalks the halls, as well.

There some interesting ideas to excavate about the two characters. We learn in flashbacks that Reinsve’s character, Mary, is a survivor of an abusive childhood spent trapped in a house by her unwell mother. Her story begins with the house’s demolition. Clark, Ejiofor’s furniture tycoon, reveals in his therapy sessions that he dreamt of being an architect, but lives in his furniture store after being kicked out of “his” house by his estranged wife. Both characters have lost their homes, and both through traumatic means. The more we learn about Clark and Mary’s abodes, the more we realize the backrooms look a whole lot like them. The characters theorize that the backrooms are “remembering” and replicating things from the real world, but doing worse and worse the deeper they go.

It’s a cogent metaphor for the abstraction of painful memory. Our minds can trap us in the setting of our greatest hurt, even as the specifics get fuzzier the more time that goes by. I appreciate the efforts of screenwriter Will Soodik to bring order to Parsons’ world, and despite this interpretation, the film leaves the specifics ambiguous, fuzzy and available to ascribe other meaning to. The ending, for instance, is delightfully obtuse.

However, the more the film attempts to explain the backrooms, the further the movie gets from what makes the backrooms so scary. Looking at those yellowed, empty rooms creates an itch in the back of our heads. Searching inside our heads to ease that itch may be what’s logical, but like a mosquito bite in late July, it just feels better to scratch.

Rating: 3.5/5

You should skip…

(Courtesy: Amazon MGM Studios) Nicholas Galitzine wields “The Power” as He-Man in “Masters of the Universe.”

“MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE” (2026, 141 min., directed by Travis Knight)

Before seeing it, I was worried that “Masters of the Universe” would look like nothing but a cheap toy commercial. I was wrong. It looks like an expensive toy commercial!

I am not mad about it. “Masters of the Universe” is inoffensively charming, led by a silly, self-aware performance from Nicholas Galitzine as the meek-but-musclebound hero, Prince Adam, better known as He-Man to you, me and anyone else who has heard of the 1980s media franchise. If, like me, the name “He-Man” was just about everything you did know about “Masters of the Universe,” Travis Knight’s new film has you covered better than its star’s leather loincloth. The movie serves as a meta, amusing entry point to the world of Eternia, a planet ruled by an evil blue skeleton-man named Skeletor and populated with green tigers, too many cyborgs to count and multiple magic-wielding blonde women.

To be clear, it’s all amusing, not funny. There are jokes a-plenty, but almost none of them land. However, something about the sweet earnestness of their persistence is hard to resist. “Masters of the Universe” is perfectly entertaining, putting it leagues above other B-tier 2026 blockbusters, like the ugly, misbegotten “Mortal Kombat II” or the frustratingly empty “Michael.” It looks pretty good, too. Produced by Amazon MGM Studios – don’t miss the thrilling deus ex machina of a Prime delivery truck! – the movie is glittering with expensive VFX and festidiously cartoon-accurate costumes.

“Masters of the Universe” just lacks anything more. Fashioned as the second major Mattel-branded release after Greta Gerwig’s brilliant “Barbie,” the movie pays lip service to retreading the paces of its predecessor. “Barbie” featured Barbie learning about her identity by dipping into the real world before returning to usurp evil in her fantasy world? He-Man follows suit. “Barbie” pointedly excises a romantic relationship between its main character and a purported love interest? Okay, “Masters of the Universe” will too, only without a point. “Barbie” reinvigorated a toy franchise by producing a narrative to attach new meaning to? “Masters of the Universe” would certainly love to do that. Where “Barbie” was smart, pointed and a little cynical, “Masters of the Universe” is broad, messy and airheaded.

It’s no skin off my back for a new He-Man adventure to falter. I am happy to admire the comic commitment of Alison Brie and groan at another plum part given to Jared Leto. I appreciated the chemistry between Galitzine and Camila Mendes and rocked out to the banging Daniel Pemberton score. I never loved these characters before, so it is more than enough to simply like them. I left the experience entertained and apathetic, but I’m sure the toys will be very cool.

Rating: 2.5/5

(Courtesy: Paramount Pictures) In the sixth “Scary Movie,” the Wayans family shtick is wearing off.

“SCARY MOVIE” (2026, 96 min., directed by Michael Tiddes)

Perhaps appropriately for the sixth installment in a decades-old comedy series, there are only about six funny jokes in the whole of “Scary Movie,” and they may all be confined to the first six minutes, where the inimitable Teyana Taylor does a terrific send-up of the Samara Weaving opening of “Scream VI.” It’s a swift, swift decline to the bottom of the lowbrow humor heap from there.

Though the horror movies “Scary Movie” satirizes are new, the jokes could not feel more stale. Seeing a classic scream queen in a horror legacy sequel is like enjoying your favorite meal. Watching Marlon Wayans, Regina Hall and Anna Faris recycle the same shtick 25 years later is like eating the ambiguously moldy leftovers your roommate abandoned in the fridge.

“Scary Movie” has been marketed with the tagline “Every Line Will Be Crossed,” insinuating that nothing would be off the table in the pursuit of a gag. In practice, it meant that the Wayans spend an hour and a half punching down. The “edgy” jokes in “Scary Movie” are lame, dated and offensive in the limpest way possible. None of it is subversive or clever, but much is definitely in bad taste.

A short list of the horror movies “Scary Movie” references are “Weapons,” “Scream,” “The Substance,” “Get Out,” “Longlegs” and “It Follows,” in addition to zeitgeist stuff like “Wicked,” “KPop Demon Hunters” and “Michael.” Maybe contemporary horror movies have just gotten too good, but watching “Scary Movie” stumble through cheap skits poking fun of those flicks made me appreciate each of them that much more.

This franchise had been dormant since 2013. Let’s hope after this one, it stays dead.

Rating: 1/5