New legacy sequel, familiar complaints (and praise).
Amid a barrage of legacy sequels, “Practical Magic 2″ arrives this weekend falling into many of the same pitfalls as its predecessors — even as some critics praise the film for capturing the charm that made the original an enduring hit.
The film joins the wave of nostalgia-driven sequels such as “The Devil Wears Prada 2,” “Happy Gilmore 2” “Tron: Ares” and “Freakier Friday,” among others; a Hollywood trend that has proven to be mostly fan service, with hit-or-miss reviews.
The Sandra Bullock- and Nicole Kidman-led sequel, which lands nearly 28 years after the original film adaptation, has been called everything from “cute” to an “endearing oddity” to “cursed” and “pointless.”
Still, reviews for the sequel might be more optimistic than the reception the original film received — though, in the decades since, the film has managed to build a cult-like following.
“Never in a million years did I think we would do a sequel or I’d want to do it,” Bullock recently told The New York Times.
“Look, the first time we came out, the reception was — no one was ready for that,” she continued. “So, I didn’t even imagine it. Then over the decades, we realized the story resonated with an audience that got to find each other.”
Now, that audience gets its long-awaited sequel. Set roughly 25 years after the original, Sally (Bullock) and Gillian (Kidman) reunite to break the centuries-old family curse that threatens to condemn them to a life without love. As the curse begins to unravel the family of witches, the sisters must confront dark secrets and make sacrifices for each other.
Bullock said she ultimately chose to join the sequel as a way to “to honor the first one” while still making a “stand alone for those who have never seen the first,” she told the Times.
Here is what some critics and fans are saying about “Practical Magic 2.”
What critics are saying
Early critics reviews for “Practical Magic 2″ range from mixed to tepid. Critics praise the film for capturing some of the charm that earned the original its enduring, cult-like appeal, as well as the chemistry between Sandra Bullock and Nicole Kidman.
Some of critics’ biggest complaints center on the film’s sluggish, overloaded plot and the overreliance on nostalgia to draw audiences in.
Here is what some critics are saying about “Practical Magic 2.”
- “This late sequel delivers a retread of the signposts that made the original a beloved fixture for certain moviegoers,” writes Variety, “while failing to correct the flaws that made everyone else all but forget it for three decades.”
- “It’s no classic follow-up à la ‘Top Gun: Maverick,’ but it casts a cute enough spell,” writes the Daily Beast. “‘Practical Magic 2’ is first and foremost fan service.”
- Time Out wrote, “It’s not going to bewitch audiences for decades to come, but Practical Magic 2 is still a cosy flick that puts sisterhood at its heart.”
- “As with the 1998 original, the single best reason to watch the sequel is the chemistry between Sandra Bullock’s Sally and Nicole Kidman’s Gilly,” wrote The Hollywood Reporter. “The sequel, likewise, works better the less you look for any sense of logic.”
- The Independent called the film a “lazy, pointless cash-grab sequel.”
- “Even Practical Magic’s most passionate fans won’t have anticipated this 130 minute endurance test of a sequel,” writes Little White Lies.
- “‘Practical Magic 2′ is not quite as satisfying as the original,” writes Deadline, adding that the film “fail(s) to capture what made it so magical in favor of a nostalgia-driven IP grab.”
- “The overarching, if occasionally overwritten (’no magic is stronger than sisterhood’), theme of feminine solidarity through cyclical adversity is winning enough,” writes The Guardian. “There’s just enough magic here to still, despite everything, cast a peculiar spell.”
- USA Today called the film, “charming” but “cursed by repetition,” adding that it “might only truly cast a spell for fans of the original cult movie.”
- “Only time will tell if ‘Practical Magic 2′ has the staying power of its (also flawed) predecessor,” writes The Wrap. “(But) the cast and crew deliver more than enough reasons to head to the theater.”
- “‘Practical Magic 2′ lacks the charm, whimsy, and heart that made the original film a classic; instead, it’s a mess, with a plot both convoluted and bland that will put no one under its spell,” panned Collider.
- IndieWire called the film a “spellbinding sequel,” adding that it “succeeds where so many other legacy sequels tend to feel superfluous.”
- “‘Practical Magic 2′ is not an especially entertaining movie. The glacial runtime does it no favors,” writes The New York Post, while also calling the film a “wretched sequel.”
What people are saying
Fans and critics who saw “Practical Magic 2″ are praising Sandra Bullock and Nicole Kidman’s dynamic performances as well as its nostalgic touches, while other criticize its uneven, overstuffed storytelling and lengthy runtime.
Here is what some viewers are saying about “Practical Magic 2.”