Curry Barker Rejects Possession for Obsession’s Toxic Twist

Obsession’s One – In a detailed conversation about Obsession, writer-director Curry Barker says he designed the film to avoid “possessed” performance—pushing instead toward a jealous, manipulative relationship powered by the One Wish Willow. From the movie’s key reshoots and ac

A lovesick woman’s laughter, a cursed wish object, and that unmistakable feeling that something is controlling Nikki from the inside—that’s what many viewers may be expecting from Obsession. But writer-director Curry Barker wants you to know what he’s doing is darker in a different way.

Barker insists the film isn’t about possession. In fact, he told Inde Navarrette’s character to steer clear of it. “We were very specific…I didn’t ever want her to play possessed,” Barker says in an interview with Collider’s Perri Nemiroff.

Instead, the danger in Obsession is rooted in a toxic relationship—manipulation dressed up as devotion, jealousy that turns tactics into control, and a wish that punishes autonomy rather than supernatural takeover.

Bear’s diner wish starts everything, and it’s not where Barker wanted the story to land

The movie’s engine is Bear (played by Michael Johnston), who gets introduced to the audience at a diner—practicing spilling his guts to a waitress and his best friend, Ian (Cooper Tomlinson). Barker says that scene was added with reshoots.

Bear is pining after co-worker and friend Nikki, and when he finally makes his move, he loses his nerve.. He chooses a One Wish Willow instead—something he describes as built from scratch for the story.. “I looked at wishbones. stuff like that. but nothing really worked. so I just made something up. ” Barker says. tracing how the wish-device concept took shape.

The results are instant. Nikki’s obsession with Bear consumes her, and Barker frames the danger as something “much darker than love”—not love taking over, but a relationship turning into something deadly and controlling.

Barker built the One Wish Willow to feel real, but kept the mystery intact

For Barker, the object had to be marketable and cinematic, but also lived-in. He remembers going back and forth on inspiration, even briefly considering the idea of a monkey paw after watching an episode of The Simpsons in which Bart receives one.

He started brainstorming and writing from there, then worked toward an original purchaseable item. “I just want to do something that he could purchase,” Barker explains, adding that he was already thinking about how it could be reproduced. He even jokes he’s happy to own one now.

In designing it. Barker said he and his mom went down a “rabbit hole” of options—experimenting with box sizes and shapes. including concepts that were too close to a toothpaste box.. Their work, he says, helped create a prop that feels like it has history without over-explaining its origin.. “Almost keeping it mysterious is sometimes the best way to go,” Barker says.

He also rejects the idea that the film needs a complete “bible” of lore. “Nope,” he says when asked whether he had a One Wish Willow bible. “Same thing with The Chair,” he adds, emphasizing that leaving it open invites interpretation.

The performance rules were strict: whiny and desperate, not possessed or angry

To make sure the movie’s horror didn’t tip into supernatural possession, Barker gave Navarrette clear direction. “It was all about not leaning into the ‘possessed,’” he says. “I didn’t ever want her to play possessed. I wanted her to play like a jealous girlfriend.”

He also laid out the emotional mechanics. “We didn’t want to do an anger,” Barker says. “We never wanted to play angry. We always wanted to play whiny or desperate.” His reasoning is that anger reads as threatening, while his goal was manipulation.

Barker points to references like Ti West’s Pearl and Ari Aster’s Midsommar—watching them together with his cast and using specific performance rawness (including the “dry heave crying” from Midsommar) as a guide.. He even made himself look “really silly in front of the whole crew” to demonstrate takes.

He returns to the human horror in the end.. Barker says he didn’t want Nikki’s darkness to look like something supernatural.. “I wanted it to be more like…this is just a toxic. toxic relationship. ” he says. adding that he was interested in what a person might do when all they want is to keep someone close—using tactics like guilt and even self-harm. instead of turning the story into a slasher.

The party pressure and the reshoots that tightened Bear’s intentions

When filming got underway, Barker expected one scene to be the hardest: the party.. He says it was overwhelming because he’d mainly done short films and smaller projects with friends.. But he also found a way through it—by focusing coverage on the perspectives that mattered.. “We care about Ian’s perspective. we care about Sarah’s perspective. ” he says. describing how that focus relieved pressure even as the overnight shoot left everyone exhausted.

In the editing room, reshoots—and a key change—became central to how the film ultimately opens.. Barker describes the original opening shot as something he eventually fought to keep.. The movie’s first version began with Bear. then tilted down to a dead cat. then more until he’s watching a romance movie on TV—mirroring the film’s last shot.. “It took me a long time to give that up. ” he says. but he ultimately found an opening that brought the viewer into Bear’s situation faster.

Barker also describes a reshoot meant to clarify Bear’s motivation.. A note during principal photography. he says. was that Bear came off as frustrating because he “wasn’t doing enough to fix it.” Barker responded by pushing a different emphasis: showing that Bear isn’t trying to make the wish go away. he’s trying to make it work.

He points to a specific scene—where Bear comes out of the bathroom after seeing his hair was cut, confronts Nikki, and tells her, “Nikki, we need to talk about last night,” while she responds with “Okay!” Barker says the scene was reshot to stress that he wants the wish to stay, not disappear.

From TIFF buzz to Focus Features campaigning—Obsession is headed to theaters

Obsession’s path to a wider audience also moved quickly. Barker says he got the news it made it into TIFF, describing it as a life-changing night. He adds that after waking the next day, he fielded calls from agents and learned “People are putting in bids!”

Barker says Focus felt “really, really right,” and that the studio’s campaign pitch matched how everyone wanted to proceed—especially around controlling what they reveal. “We all seemed to be on the same page about not giving too much away,” he says.

Obsession is in theaters now, with a release date of May 15, 2026 and a runtime of 108 minutes. The film is directed by Curry Barker.

What Barker plans to carry into his next film: pacing and staying in the frame

Looking ahead, Barker says Obsession taught him a lot about pacing—especially the kind of pacing that depends on rehearsal and actor performance rather than editing tricks.

He describes a shooting style that isn’t “very coveragey,” prioritizing storytelling inside the frame.. “I like to maximize storytelling in the frame. ” he says. aiming to show everything in one shot when possible and to avoid cutting only to inserts.. The catch, he notes, is that when you don’t cut, you can’t speed scenes up later.. “It’s stuck that way,” Barker says, so the rehearsal and pacing work has to be right on set.

For Barker, that’s the lesson he’s keeping. The horror in Obsession may revolve around a cursed wish object, but the real control—on screen and behind the camera—is built through relationship dynamics, performance choices, and the discipline to let the frame do the work.

Obsession Curry Barker Inde Navarrette Michael Johnston Cooper Tomlinson One Wish Willow TIFF Focus Features horror interview toxic relationship horror May 15 2026