Los ilusionistas 2

Among the other movies in the theaters this week, this is a good choice to spend your two hours..

I think the age warning of above 13 for this movie is actually right. My advice is that if you're above 40, it may not entertain you because this film doesn't include much logic among some events that follow one another.

Another thing is that this is also a movie about a struggle of saving the world from the bad guys. There many movies like that but this movie saves itself from being boring with the humor & sarcasm of the characters. Magics which we cannot come across in real life help a lot to take the movie to a higher position in the audience's point of view.

Best parts of the film:

1. The voyage of the horsemen after they jump through the tunnel.

2. When four of the horsemen are together in a room where they are being searched for a possible theft.

3. The magical performances of the horsemen in a city center at a special day of the year.

4. The audience may not guess how the film will end, will the horsemen succeed or not?

5. There may be a 3rd film of this series.

While the previous film was full of intrigue, mystery, and revelations, this film is a pale comparison to it's prequel. With considerably less action and more talk, the first half of the film manages to bore the audience. As well, this film gives off the feeling of trying too hard to be like the first one that it just falls short.

The acting is fine enough for the Horsemen, as they all reprise their roles. I did like Isla Fisher and her character, but unfortunately she got replaced by Lizzy Caplan, who isn't so bad either. I had a problem with Radcliffe's character. He was too weird, and his background was not very comprehensive. I also found out how short he actually is in this film. In addition, the film introduces Merritt's twin brother, Chase, played by Woody Harrelson. That was another no-no. Though the editing was done well enough between the two characters, the hair on 'Chase' was very obviously a wig which was unnerving. Needless to say, I found that the new characters were not a great addition.

As for the narrative, it kind of continues the story from the first film, but not in as much detail. As well, there are more elements involved in this film that detracts attention away from the main plot. This is what made it messy; with too many things going on the audience doesn't know which to focus on. And with no focus, the narrative just becomes jumbled up.

The effects are cool as usual. I especially liked the scene where they're tossing a card to each other. Visuals and coordination are nicely done there, and managed to engage the audience.

The ending felt a little too deja vu from the first one. As mentioned, it tries too hard to be like its predecessor that it just destroys itself. I'm not saying the film is not enjoyable, but while it isn't totally horrible, there is too much dialogue and not enough action. I'd liked to have seen more tricks, and less new characters who hardly had any foundation.

It's just like the first movie...it takes you into the mind of magic tricks and just how easy, hard and confusing and well timed it can be. It's interesting to see just how they do it, because we keep forgetting it's all fake and not real. This movie is magic mixed with a robbery heist all combined into one.

All the actors return, excluding Isla Fisher. This time we have a lady by the name of Lula (Played by Lizzy Caplan) who, to an extent replaces Isla Fisher. She's actually really funny and charming, to say the least. All the characters are exactly as the same as they were in the first one. We have a new villain by the name of Walter Mabry (played by Daniel Radcliffe.) He wants the Horsemen to capture a certain device so he can have access to everyone's details. Daniel Radcliffe surprisingly makes a good villain.

We rate this 3/5 stars (7/10.) The movie is entertaining, action packed and nonstop guessing and thrills all the way through. Why didn't we rate it higher? We thought it didn't deserve any higher. It's an enjoyable flick, just like the first one. Nothing more, nothing less. Go and check it out. It's worth seeing. -Autistic Reviewers.

As a film this really is poor. On practically every level it falls down… Now You See Me 2 picks up directly where the first film left off and the film follows a similar pattern – The 4 (or 5?) horsemen, performing larger-than-life magic with the aim of providing for those less fortunate or exposing those who do wrong. However, unlike the first, their motivations behind each of these stunts are a little less clear and certainly less meaningful. In fact inconsistent or unlikely character motivations and actions are a problem throughout the film (with supporting characters as well as the leads).Then there's the fact that this plot is so unrealistic and beyond the realms of possibility that it makes the first script look practically normal. The script in itself is a problem… it's messy, incongruent and forced – "well we need to have a shootout/car chase, otherwise it won't be cool enough".

Then there's the fact that Isla Fisher's character has left the gang and although briefly explained at the beginning of the film, is never mentioned again. Yet her replacement (played by Lizzy Caplan) is not only treated as if she's been there since the beginning, but also held responsible for all the actions she wasn't around for in the first film. I get the feeling it might have been easier for her just to play Isla Fisher's character (Katie Holmes-Maggie Gyllenhaal in Batman style) rather than trying to shoehorn in a different character. And talking of characters – Daniel Radcliffe's character is atrocious. I don't want to give anything away but he is such a stereotypical, spoilt, British man it's untrue. Moreover his acting in this was reminiscent of all his appalling, wooden performances from the early Harry Potter films… And just I was starting to believe that maybe he could act!

And then there are issues around plot holes, speech which is purely for the viewers' benefit, seemingly irrelevant sub-plots and a ridiculously backwards ending which doesn't appear to make much sense.

So how the hell, given all these problems, does it give it get a 6 I hear you cry? Well, as with the first, it is still thoroughly entertaining. It's light-hearted fun, which isn't really tackling any of the world's serious topics and as a spectacle is still great. Sure I found myself thinking of several occasions 'my god this is garbage', but it didn't annoy me. It's the kind of film where you can laugh off the issues and appreciate the fun parts.

In summary, if you liked the first one, I certainly wouldn't discourage you from seeing NYSM2. I'd just go in with limited expectations and an acceptance that many aspects of it aren't going to be very good. If you have those two things you'll probably enjoy it thoroughly, despite all its flaws.

Now You See Me 2 wins the title for most unnecessary sequel, maybe of all time. The first film was a surprise with decent twists and performances. It was a success, apparently to the point where the studio thought the audience needed more. We didn't and this film doesn't really offer anything new and it expects us to really be invested in these characters and their story. Yet neither of these things are really compelling enough for a second go-around. As a result, this sequel just manages to be serviceable.

The Horsemen are in hiding and the FBI are on the hunt for them. It's been over a year and now the stage is set for their triumphant return. Just when they reappear in the limelight, the trick seems to be on them. Their entire stage was hijacked and they find themselves at the mercy of Walter, a mad genius who needs their skills to steal a microchip. In this battle of wits, which magician has the upper hand?

I begged my wife to see The Conjuring 2, but she was terrified of the original and absolutely did not want to see the sequel in theatres. Double that for the fantasy adventure film Warcraft, so we were stuck seeing the magic heist flick Now You See Me 2...why this wasn't called Now You Don't, me and millions of others apparently will never know. Most of the cast has returned with the exception of Isla Fisher and Mélanie Laurent, with the former disappearance explained away with a few bits of dialogue. In her place we have Lizzy Caplan, who seems a lot more at ease with the cast and the material. One of the welcomed additions to this sequel.

While the original was somewhat refreshing, this one treads the same waters. I was pleasantly surprised by the twists and turns the original offered us, here everything is telegraphed and predicted a few scenes beforehand. Thus the magic is gone, to a degree. The spectacle is still there is some sequences, yet the revelation is timid. I had to stop thinking about logic a lot of times in order to enjoy the spectacle. One sequence involving the team throwing a card between each other to keep it hidden from people inspecting them, was really well done. But why do they need to throw it to each other? Why not just have one of them keep it and continuously hide it? I don't know. Double goes for a plot hole that I simply do not understand involving a fake chip and the real one. NYSM2 doesn't bother to explain much that makes sense and instead tries to explain what we already know.

As I said before, Caplan is the one good addition the film does. Most of the cast seems to sleepwalk through their roles, especially Eisenberg. The second new addition is Daniel Radcliffe, who despite playing a "magician" does his best to shed that Harry Potter persona. Between his role in Horns, here and the upcoming Swiss Army Man, I hope he manages to do it. NYSM2 is again, a pointless sequel that manages to entertain enough to warrant a view if you're a fan of the original.