Return of the Tooth Fairy 2020

Art & Craft

In terms of art and craft, the film is described as a low‑budget, home‑video effort with consistently bad camera work, lighting, and special effects. Reviewers compare the visuals to a junior‑high project and highlight poorly executed makeup and set design. No positive remarks about direction or editing are offered, resulting in a markedly low appraisal of the technical execution.

Character & Emotion

When evaluating character and emotion, critics note unconvincing acting, flat performances, and lack of chemistry among the cast. The main protagonist receives a brief mention as “cute,” but overall the portrayals are deemed pitiful and amateur. Even the few reviewers who acknowledge minor character motivations still criticize the general acting quality, leading to a weak score for this aspect.

Story & Flow

The story and flow receive mixed feedback. Many reviewers find the plot incoherent, citing an implausible school‑reunion premise and sluggish pacing. However, some acknowledge a modestly interesting premise involving a traumatized individual and a supernatural threat, describing it as an improvement over the original. The balance of negative and limited positive observations places this aspect in the lower‑mid range.

Sensory Experience

Sensory experience is heavily criticized for poor sound design, pervasive background noise, and inconsistent audio levels. Visual style suffers from washed‑out lighting and cheap effects, with reviewers likening it to a child’s costume. While a few note occasional eerie moments, the dominant view is that the auditory and visual components detract significantly from the viewing experience.

Rewatch Factor

Rewatch factor is uniformly low, with most reviewers advising against future viewings and describing the film as a waste of time. Only a single comment hints at modest enjoyment, but the prevailing sentiment is that the movie lacks lasting appeal or entertainment value, resulting in a minimal score for repeatability.