"Look closely, because the closer you think you are, the less you will actually see" - while the makers of this movie have been pushing this message ever since the trailers came out, even after walking out of the theater, it has been hard for me to figure out what kind of a movie this is - no matter how closer (or farther) I look at the issue!
Alright, this is a movie about magicians (who call themselves The Four Horsemen, no biblical reference intended). But, is this a movie about magicians performing magic? Please stop thinking on the lines of Nolan's "The Prestige". It is hard to look at the movie from this "magic" perspective because magic does not form the essential crux of the story. Well, there is magic throughout the story, some of which well explained and some of which totally bizarre and unexplained, but the magic is simply not the central theme of the story. Of course, towards the end of the movie, people disappear in carousels, and re-appear in France; however, a simple climax twist not-so-well connected to the movie proceedings does not do enough justice to the infinite number of unexplained magic tricks throughout the movie. It would have been amazing had some of the mind blowing tricks been explained; the only plausible answer to the question: "Why were these tricks not explained" is that the story is simply not related to those magic tricks. Is this a heist movie? It started looking like one initially; though there is some stealing involved, it did not feel like one at the end. Wait, is this simple, plain revenge? Ah, the final minute of the movie conveys this idea, but at that moment, the viewers can definitely figure out the answer to the million dollar question: "What type of a movie this is?!", with the answer being: "Who cares!"
"Now you see me" is a perfect example of taking a good story, getting an amazing cast to work for you, but spoiling the fun for the audience with some poor screenplay writing and direction. For most part of the film, the story does not seem to head to any particular direction or with destination in mind at all. The magicians are supposed to perform three acts - first in Las Vegas, second in New Orleans, and third in New York City - and each act is supposed to top the previous one. While the first act sets up the stage for the movie, the second act creates so much excitement for the audience. Unfortunately, the final act along with some preceding and succeeding scenes is mostly responsible for the letting the entire movie, and hence the viewers, down!
It is easily possible to write pages after pages praising for the entire cast, and they actually deserve it. Be it Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Isla Fisher and Dave Franco who star as the Four Horsemen, Mark Ruffalo and Melanie Laurent as the policemen who try to catch up with the magicians' tricks, Michael Caine (who, I thought, did not have much to do!) or Morgan Freeman, all of them have performed extremely well. Halfway into the movie, I started thinking whether Mark Ruffalo or Jesse Eisenberg was the main character, especially since Eisenberg appeared so sparingly after the first fifteen minutes of the movie, and it was a full Mark Ruffalo show from thereon. However, what was supposed to be a cat and mouse game between them did not create sufficient tension to captivate the viewer.
The real problem lies with the script and direction. Though the first half of the movie sets up the stage well, it drags between the first and second act, and right immediately after the second act as well. Good writing should have upped the ante after the second act, but the movie sets off as a torn kite without a clear direction. May be that's why when the final twist - which is supposed the awe the audience - appears, the viewer is already frustrated with the one million unresolved plot holes, and hence, the reaction to the twist is: "Oh, Ok! The movie is over, let's get out of the theater!" Worse, if somebody were to try to make some sense out of it, there are a million questions about the story, particularly regarding the fifth horseman whom Mark Ruffalo has been searching for throughout the movie - very contrived, the entire episode looked.
In all truth, I liked the overall story and in parts, the movie was fun. Even the climax twist was not a let down, only the events that culminated in it were! If alone, they concentrated some more on those plot holes, if alone they had a more taut script to tie down the viewers, if alone the movie had a clear destination instead of the dumb third magic act, if alone Louis Leterrier and co. had steered the ship better, the film would have turned out to be an amazing heist-cum-revenge-cum-magic movie! Unfortunately now, the movie is none of the three!
What I saw:
Direction: 3.0/5
Writing: 2.5/5
Acting: 3.5/5
Music: 3.0/5
Cinematography: 3.5/5
What I felt:
Degree of Tautness: 2.5/5
Emotional Quotient: 2.5/5
Intelligence Quotient: 2.0/5
Entertainment Quotient: 3.5/5
Alright, this is a movie about magicians (who call themselves The Four Horsemen, no biblical reference intended). But, is this a movie about magicians performing magic? Please stop thinking on the lines of Nolan's "The Prestige". It is hard to look at the movie from this "magic" perspective because magic does not form the essential crux of the story. Well, there is magic throughout the story, some of which well explained and some of which totally bizarre and unexplained, but the magic is simply not the central theme of the story. Of course, towards the end of the movie, people disappear in carousels, and re-appear in France; however, a simple climax twist not-so-well connected to the movie proceedings does not do enough justice to the infinite number of unexplained magic tricks throughout the movie. It would have been amazing had some of the mind blowing tricks been explained; the only plausible answer to the question: "Why were these tricks not explained" is that the story is simply not related to those magic tricks. Is this a heist movie? It started looking like one initially; though there is some stealing involved, it did not feel like one at the end. Wait, is this simple, plain revenge? Ah, the final minute of the movie conveys this idea, but at that moment, the viewers can definitely figure out the answer to the million dollar question: "What type of a movie this is?!", with the answer being: "Who cares!"
"Now you see me" is a perfect example of taking a good story, getting an amazing cast to work for you, but spoiling the fun for the audience with some poor screenplay writing and direction. For most part of the film, the story does not seem to head to any particular direction or with destination in mind at all. The magicians are supposed to perform three acts - first in Las Vegas, second in New Orleans, and third in New York City - and each act is supposed to top the previous one. While the first act sets up the stage for the movie, the second act creates so much excitement for the audience. Unfortunately, the final act along with some preceding and succeeding scenes is mostly responsible for the letting the entire movie, and hence the viewers, down!
It is easily possible to write pages after pages praising for the entire cast, and they actually deserve it. Be it Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Isla Fisher and Dave Franco who star as the Four Horsemen, Mark Ruffalo and Melanie Laurent as the policemen who try to catch up with the magicians' tricks, Michael Caine (who, I thought, did not have much to do!) or Morgan Freeman, all of them have performed extremely well. Halfway into the movie, I started thinking whether Mark Ruffalo or Jesse Eisenberg was the main character, especially since Eisenberg appeared so sparingly after the first fifteen minutes of the movie, and it was a full Mark Ruffalo show from thereon. However, what was supposed to be a cat and mouse game between them did not create sufficient tension to captivate the viewer.
The real problem lies with the script and direction. Though the first half of the movie sets up the stage well, it drags between the first and second act, and right immediately after the second act as well. Good writing should have upped the ante after the second act, but the movie sets off as a torn kite without a clear direction. May be that's why when the final twist - which is supposed the awe the audience - appears, the viewer is already frustrated with the one million unresolved plot holes, and hence, the reaction to the twist is: "Oh, Ok! The movie is over, let's get out of the theater!" Worse, if somebody were to try to make some sense out of it, there are a million questions about the story, particularly regarding the fifth horseman whom Mark Ruffalo has been searching for throughout the movie - very contrived, the entire episode looked.
In all truth, I liked the overall story and in parts, the movie was fun. Even the climax twist was not a let down, only the events that culminated in it were! If alone, they concentrated some more on those plot holes, if alone they had a more taut script to tie down the viewers, if alone the movie had a clear destination instead of the dumb third magic act, if alone Louis Leterrier and co. had steered the ship better, the film would have turned out to be an amazing heist-cum-revenge-cum-magic movie! Unfortunately now, the movie is none of the three!
What I saw:
Direction: 3.0/5
Writing: 2.5/5
Acting: 3.5/5
Music: 3.0/5
Cinematography: 3.5/5
What I felt:
Degree of Tautness: 2.5/5
Emotional Quotient: 2.5/5
Intelligence Quotient: 2.0/5
Entertainment Quotient: 3.5/5
No comments:
Post a Comment