"Now You See Me 2" Review

The original "Now You See Me" was released way back in 2013, and is a bit of a guilty pleasure of mine. I know it has problems, and I know I should be more critical of it than I am, but it is just such a fun movie that doesn't take itself seriously that I just sit back and relax watching it. It boasted a stellar cast, some great set pieces, and the use of magicians and illusions was a unique selling point that set it apart from other heist movies. Now, 3 years later, we have the sequel (which should have titled "Now You Don't" but never mind), which sees the return of the Four Horsemen and pits them against a new threat in the form of Daniel Radcliffe (not quite the return of Harry Potter fans were expecting but I'll take it). However, director Jon M. Chu makes a few mistakes that I have to point out here. Although not a terrible movie, and it has some good moments, this sequel unfortunately falls short of the original.

Since this is a sequel, spoilers within for the first "Now You See Me." As you should know if you're thinking about seeing this movie (or maybe you just don't care), the first movie ended with the reveal that FBI Dylan Rhodes (played by Mark Ruffalo) had in fact been orchestrating the acts and plans of the main Four Horsemen as part of a revenge plot 30 years in the making. The sequel picks up around one year after this reveal, with the Four Horsemen (now with new member Lizzy Caplan due to Isla Fisher being unable to be a part of the movie) being drawn out of hiding and lured into a trap by a new threat. Now separated from their handler Rhodes, the Horsemen must use all of their ingenuity and magic know-how to pull off yet another impossible heist. However, while the original made a point of explaining the magic and tricks on show, this one lacks the logic and reasoning behind all of it's set pieces. There are plenty of plot holes in the movie and there are just too many to ignore. Honestly, in a movie focusing on magicians using tricks and illusions to pull off heists, I know suspension of disbelief is required, but good luck not having a laugh at the lack of reason throughout this one.

The movie also has a significant lack of any real character development. Easily the best character in the movie is Mark Ruffalo's Dylan Rhodes. The movie takes the opportunity to really dive into the character's motivations for his actions in the first movie and he has a very engaging subplot with Morgan Freeman's Thaddeus Bradley who he holds partly responsible for his father's death. Buffalo is an incredible actor and he gives a very emotional performance in the movie, making him the most likeable and relatable character in the movie. The only other character in the movie who gets any sort of development is Daniel Radcliffe's villainous Walter. Radcliffe's gives a hilarious and very memorable performance in the movie and his character becomes more developed as more about him and his true nature is revealed as the plot progresses.

The other characters in the movie, on the other hand, aren't particularly memorable. Most of them are completely one-dimensional: Jesse Eisenberg is playing his usual arrogant character once again in Daniel Atlas and doesn't want to listen to authority, Dave Franco plays Jack Wilder who has no personality other than being the young, token "cool guy" of the group, and Michael Caine is playing angry Michael Caine. However, while these characters are essentially harmless, there are a couple of really annoying characters in the movie. Although I later started to warm to her and grew used to her humour, Lizzy Caplan's Lula is initially overly energetic and is very annoying. She's also shoe-horned into a pathetic romantic subplot with Wilder, which only caused me to groan every time it was brought up. However, Caplan is trying her best at least and her character does not even compare to Woody Harrelson in this movie. Now, Woody Harrelson is a good actor and he has done some terrific work before. While his returning character from the first movie isn't a problem, something that hasn't been heavily advertised (and for good reason) is that he also plays the character's twin brother in the movie, who works alongside Radcliffe's character. And boy is he annoying. At times, the character verges into Jar Jar Binks territory with how much he will irritate the audience. Every scene he is a part of is easily the worst parts of the movie.

However, chances are plenty of people aren't going to go and see this movie for aspects of filmmaking like character development and a logical plot. The majority of people are going to see this movie based on the fun action and set pieces that the first movie was praised for. Thankfully, there are plenty of these in the movie. From a ludicrous but still extremely enjoyable sequence with a playing card to the heavily advertised set piece finale in London (which features the incredible money shot of every trailer with Eisenberg disappearing in the rain), there is never a dull moment throughout this movie. That is, assuming, like I said, that you can just turn off your brain and not think too much about the reason and logic behind what you are watching on screen.

The technical aspects of the movie are a mixed bag to say the least. For the most part the visual effects of the movie are on point. There is a nice mix of CGI and practical effects on display, all of which look very convincing when in use. One prime example of where these two blend particularly well is in the aforementioned playing card sequence. Effects are obviously required in order to allow this scene to be in the movie as there is no way that the actors would be able to pull off these very difficult, if not impossible, card throws and tricks. Where the CGI is used, it is very hard to identify and pick out, and the sequence consistently looks realistic. Talking about this scene also allows me to pinpoint and praise the cinematography of the movie. All shots in the movie are very clear and it is easy to notice every detail the filmmakers were clearly hoping for the audience to see. The various tracking shots throughout the movie also deserve to be commended, which is why I mentioned the card sequence when talking about this aspect of the movie, with the camera impressively following the card at close range as it is passed from person to person. However, the technical parts of the movie aren't all great. The editing in particular is an issue which has to be talked about, and this was evident from the trailers months in advance. Very frequently shots will cut away far too early and character's mouths will not line up with what they are supposedly saying.

Overall, "Now You See Me 2" is a very mixed bag. There is a great deal to criticise here, particularly surrounding the one-dimensional and often annoying characters as well as the plot which is illogical even by the standards of the original, which at least took the time to explain how everything we were seeing was happening. However, the good outweighs the bad with this movie. The technical aspects of the movie were on point for the most part, particularly with regards the visual effects, there are some great action-packed set pieces throughout, and a couple of noteworthy performances which need to be highlighted. If you cannot enjoy a movie without a logical plot and sufficient character development, then I'd say give this one a miss. However, a movie is meant to entertain audiences and keep them engaged for a few hours. If you can turn your brain off and just have fun with this one, then you'll have a good time watching this movie.

Pros

• Fun set pieces
• Some great performances
• Great visual effects
• Cinematography

Cons

• Lack of significant character development
• Some irritating characters
• Removes the logic and explanations of the original
• Bad editing

Rating: 6/10

Release Date: 4th July, 2016

Starring Jesse Eisenberg, Mark Ruffalo, Lizzy Caplan, Woody Harrelson, Dave Franco, Daniel Radcliffe, Morgan Freeman, Jay Chou and Michael Caine