Tension is key in any thriller that wants to engage the public, but also the need to know how to differentiate yourself from all the others in order to stand out. That is something that ‘Searching’ did very well, a remarkable film starring John Cho who used technology to achieve a unique style that, at least, aroused some curiosity in the viewer.
The success of ‘Searching’ led to the rapid launch of a sequel that has taken longer to arrive than expected due to the pandemic. Finally titled ‘Missing’, it is true that it includes more than one reference to its predecessor, but the fairest thing would be to talk about the new installment of an anthology. There it is true that the lack of novelty is noted, but what it continues to offer is a thriller that hooks and flies by.
How it differs from ‘Searching’
As expected, the DNA of ‘Missing’ is very similar to that of ‘Searching’, using various screens at all times to structure the mystery they pose. Will Merrick and Nick Johnsonwho inherit an idea from Sev Ohanian and Aneesh Chaganty, writers of the first installment. The result is a film that alters the roles -here is a daughter who begins a desperate search for her mother who has disappeared from her- and opts for a style identical to that of her predecessor to tell us a somewhat more elaborate and far-fetched story.
If ‘Missing’ does something right, it is exactly that, since it is planting infinite possibilities to keep the viewer intrigued, which feeds the growing despair of the character played by a very convincing Storm Reid. The disappearance of his mother (Nia Long) hides so many surprises that it leads us to connect more with the great protagonist of the show, but it also tests the patience of the viewer.
For my part, ‘Missing’ got me to get into the game and follow with interest everything he was raising until he puts all the cards on the table. However, I am also aware that Merrick and Johnson’s script can end up overwhelming the viewer, especially when it affects more than necessary in that touch of suspense TV movie already present in ‘Searching’ and here it goes one step further.
Nor should we forget that the use of technology and screens can cause rejection in a certain sector of the public. I am quite clear that it would end up saturated in the event that a series opted for something like this, but nothing happens with a specific movie – let’s not forget that ‘Searching’ did not invent anything either, it simply went further in what had already been proposed the estimable ‘Deleted’ several years earlier-. It all comes down to a matter of personal preference. and, above all, the possibility that you find jumping from screen to screen dizzying.
Many lights but a very important hit
What cannot be denied is the agile use of this resource by Merrick and Johnson, who are committed to an even more fast-paced approach than its predecessor, giving at least weight to the inner drama that its protagonist goes through in order to give more priority to the surprises that arise throughout the story. One of the main consequences of this is that in ‘Missing’ there are more characters with authentic dramatic weight than ‘Searching’, where everything revolved more around the suffering of a highly inspired Cho.
Where that bet works best is with the character of Joaquin de Almeida, since through Javier an extra touch of humanity is introduced to the story. Don’t expect something extraordinary either, but a key element so that ‘Missing’ isn’t swallowed up by its imperative need to keep the public on edge. In addition, it integrates it well into the investigation carried out by the protagonist and it is not something free. In fact, it works better than the part where the mother’s character is given a bit more dramatic depth.
Unfortunately, ‘Missing’ loses me a bit during its ending, since it is true that the path to get there is fresh and somewhat addictive, but the proposed solution ends up being somewhat lazy. There it is noticeable that solutions seen on too many occasions are being recycled, reducing the impact of what should be the high point of the function. Nor does it destroy what has been seen before or bother so much in itself, but it does break the ascending line that Merrick and Johnson had been able to create without simply being more of the same with respect to ‘Searching’. Pity.
But is it worth it or not?
If you liked ‘Searching’, I would find it very strange that you don’t have a good time with ‘Missing’, but if its predecessor already left you with certain doubts, its sequel may not even help you enjoy the tension game it proposes. And if you haven’t seen either of them, I would recommend you start with ‘Searching’ first, really, and then decide if it’s worth continuing with the title at hand.
In Espinof: The 23 Best Suspense And Intrigue Movies Of All Time