'Louis Leterrier's Now You See Me split critics, and I found myself on the short end with those who found it rather enjoyable. Of course the combination of stage magic and a caper story was all but tailor-made to appeal to my tastes. It may not have been the tightest plot around, but Leterrier delivered a romp that, like a carnival ride, kept going around even when any grounding in logic fell away.
But, as any ride must, it came to an end. Given how heavily the first movie relied on its own momentum, even a fan like me was skeptical at the prospect of starting things up again for a sequel. Indeed, Jem director Jon M. Chu struggles to recapture Leterrier's magic in Now You See Me 2, but the whole thing never quite gets back off the ground.

In her place we have Lula (Lizzy Caplan), who's been working the "underground" magic scene that specializes in gorier fare, all guillotines and ripping doves in half -- all an illusion, of course. Dylan recruited her and decided she's now part of the group, but Danny doesn't like her. It's never quite clear why, though, other than just ego and change-aversion on his part. But it does echo the problems with the movie as a whole: swapping out pieces, coasting on past achievements, and expecting things to work as smoothly as they did before.
And just like the movie, things don't go as planned. An attempt to disrupt a tech company's product launch, exposing it as a secret spy-on-everyone network, goes awry. The four flee, but find their escape re-routed to Macau, where wealthy and secretive brat Walter Mabry (Daniel Radcliffe) demands they steal a magic computer chip to clear their names. Meanwhile Dylan's FBI cover is blown, and he has to enlist the aid of his old rival Thaddeus Bradley (Morgan Freeman) to help find the group himself.

Chu, on the other hand, starts out with a lot of balls in the air, and proceeds to add more. So many moving parts makes the plot ungainly, and more difficult to control precisely. The timing is off. Feints are telegraphed. Seams come loose. An offhand line suggests a character knows more than they logically should at that point. Is it a clue? no, just a sloppy point in the script.
It's not that films must be perfectly executed down to the smallest jot and tittle. Cinematic nitpickery is the laziest form of criticism, but pulling off caper flicks like these takes fanatical attention to detail. Leterrier had it, and even then it didn't work for half the critics. Chu's timing is always just a little off, and while that wouldn't normally bring a movie down, it's enough to keep this one from taking off.
Rating: 2 out of 5