Now You See Me 2: Movie Review

We took full advantage of cheap Tuesday at our local cinema this week to go and watch Now You See Me 2. Following on from the great success of Now You See Me came the movie sequel that I’m not sure I wanted or even needed.

I personally think that the first movie ended their characters stories so well that I didn’t need to find out what happened after. Having said that, when I heard it was coming out soon I did get a bit excited. The husband and I LOVED the first one so why wouldn’t we love the second?

Here’s the trailer if you haven’t seen it:

A small aside here, I always thought that ‘Now You See Me 2’ was a bit of a meh title for the film. I, personally, would have called it ‘Now You Don’t!’ As it turns out other people hate this title too, especially where it has been called ‘Now You See Me: The Second Act’.

The film continues from a year after the original movie’s end point. The horseman are stabled and Rhodes (Mark Ruffalo) is waiting to hear from ‘the Eye’ about their next move. After they finally come out of hiding, with a new leading lady, at a tech event to ‘out’ a naughty CEO they themselves are ‘outed’ by a mysterious voice. They quickly escape and jump down a chute on the roof of a building in New York only to come out in a Chinese restaurant in Macau. Hijinks ensue.

I was really looking forward to this movie; hoping that it would have the same amount of magic tricks along with the twists and turns that keep you guessing up until the end. I came out a little bit disappointed by this movie and here’s why:

  1. There is much less ‘magic’ in exit Ok, there is a card-throwing scene that is quite cool but does go on just a little bit too long for me. There is only really this and the set pieces at the end of the film in terms of magic tricks, except for the regular disappearing acts.
  2. They tried to shoehorn Lizzie Caplan in. Isla Fisher was unable to be in the film due to a pregnancy, which is understandable they need to get a woman in there to make it not a ‘sausage fest’. It feels like the Lula part was still written for Isla though, even to the point that they bring up that Lula pulled a hat out of a rabbit – which is something that Isla does in the first film. No offence to Lizzy Caplan but she felt kind of forced on me and I didn’t take to her, I actually found the character annoying by the end, not to mention the cliché ending for her that made me mad!whygif
  3. There’s a character that does NOT need to be there. There is one character I won’t spoil who they are but you will understand when you see it. They are a pointless bad joke and could have been any other actor playing a similar part.
  4. It’s actually a bit predictable. The first movie had a lot of twists and you never knew what was coming or how they did it. The sequel however seemed to go a bit overboard on this and rather than making it unpredictable it made the film drag on as they kept explaining everything.
  5. It doesn’t follow its own continuity. I re-watched the first film after seeing this one to compare and found that the sequel does not actually follow its own continuity. I have already mentioned the hat/rabbit part but for example; Rhodes explicitly talks about the memory of this father saying goodbye that morning and leaving him to go do the trick. In the sequel the movie starts on that morning and Rhodes is there at the bridge talking to his dad and watching him die. Also the actor playing his father is a different actor, they can’t even use the excuse that it was set earlier because we see him on the morning of in the first film.

There is one twist that I REALLY want to talk about but I can’t to avoid spoilers, but a character is revealed to have done something once but since then has never spoken to the person involved or anyone else to explain their actions…it makes no sense. But then neither does Rhodes’ motivation as the sequel accidentally shows.

Don’t get me wrong, I did like the movie and overall it was a good film but it was certainly not the first one, as so often happens with sequels. The main cast I still love and I love how they interact with each other. The addition of Daniel Radcliffe was great he plays ‘overgrown spoilt child’ well, even if he is not as threatening as he could have been.The film is fun and continues its quippy fast paced nature (in general).

It seems to have split audiences and critics in their responses and I think that all depends on how you feel about the first film,I walked out a little disappointed because it wasn’t the original. But that’s because I had walked in thinking it would be over and above what we had seen previously because it had proven that the format worked well and would be able to run with it.

What did you think about the movie? Do you agree?



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *