![]() Director Rod Hardy initially wanted Freddie Highmore to star, but Highmore's mother (who works as a casting agent) suggested someone else. "She said, 'How would you feel about having Daniel Radcliffe in your picture?'" Hardy told MovieHole. He plays a young man named Maps, one of four orphaned boys who hope to get adopted. Radcliffe also appeared in the coming-of-age drama "December Boys," an independent Australian film. "My Boy Jack" received mostly positive reviews, with outlets like the San Francisco Chronicle praising Radcliffe's performance in particular. John went MIA after being sent to the front line, and his family's subsequent efforts to discover his fate are covered here. This TV movie is based on a play by David Haig (who plays Rudyard Kipling) and tells the true story of how John joined the British Army at the onset of World War I. And like the tortuous plot, with its shifting line between heroes and villains, whether that final illusion is worth all the work is another matter.In "My Boy Jack," Radcliffe plays John Kipling, the son of renowned English author Rudyard Kipling. It turns out to be as much about moviemaking as about anything in the story. Despite the so-what of the story surrounding them, those scenes build a certain level of anticipation for the expected piece de resistance that will cap the feature. It’s then that the characters get to drop the snarky goading and shticky putdowns that sub for personality, and the actors persuasively show how the magicians come alive in performance. But at least it takes a chance, compared with the predictable turns by Freeman and Michael Caine (as a nefarious insurance magnate), doing what they do.Īll aspects of the movie, including Brian Tyler’s otherwise overstated score, click when the Horsemen are doing their magic. It’s a setup that’s as hard to take for the audience as it is for Harrelson’s character. Case in point is the unwelcome arrival on the scene of Harrelson’s character’s evil twin. Lionsgate Plans 'Now You See Me' Mobile GamesĬompared with the first film, this one embraces the premise’s essential preposterousness, although not necessarily to winning effect. The production design by Sharon Seymour is a fluid counterpart to the plot’s uneasy mix of magic and heightened reality: a lyrical New York subway tunnel, the bright bustle of an open-air market in Macau, and the in-between of an ancient magic shop (based on an actual store) that’s run by a young man (Jay Chou) and his grandmother (Tsai Chin) and proves, unsurprisingly, crucial to the action. The same is true of an early scene where Eisenberg’s character moves seamlessly through a string of aliases while infiltrating a public event.Įlsewhere, Chu keeps things moving at a smooth pace that wisely discourages contemplation, abetted by the straightforward sheen of Deming’s widescreen lensing. Joe: Retaliation, sells the sequence’s pizazz without pushing it too hard. ![]() Chu, whose directing credits include a couple of Step Up features, Justin Bieber docs and G.I. But it’s also at the center of an exceptionally diverting set piece, in which Chu and DP Peter Deming niftily parse an extended bit of cardistry by the Horsemen, showing us each step of the trick without losing the sense of artfulness or the suspense of the situation. ![]() That leads them to Macau, where the movie gets a shot of cartoonish zest from a bearded Radcliffe’s super-rich baddie and his quest to recapture a super-duper computer chip.Īs MacGuffins go, that chip is exceptionally absurd. The quartet is, in turn, hijacked in flamboyant fashion. Dylan’s cover as an FBI agent is unraveling under the scrutiny of two colleagues ( Sanaa Lathan, David Warshofsky) just as the Four Horsemen come out of hiding to hijack a high-tech company’s product launch and expose the CEO’s privacy-threatening schemes. The Horsemen’s boss, Dylan has put the troupe on hold for a year since enacting revenge against magic debunker Thaddeus Bradley ( Morgan Freeman). By the time the story’s final revelation has been pulled out of the hat, the only thing that’s certain is the eventual materialization of Now You See Me 3. As practitioners of prestidigitation take on the wielders of malevolent corporate power, anyone tempted to give the story’s ostentatious twists much thought should understand the likelihood of headache. No less than in the glossy caper’s 2013 predecessor, the plot rides a surging tide of ridiculousness and culminates in a pileup of unconvincing explanations. Sleight-of-hand is the name of the game in Now You See Me 2- not just for the renegade magician characters, but for the filmmakers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |