Practical Magic 2 Review

Introduction

After almost three decades, the Owens women are finally back on our screens. Practical Magic 2 arrives nearly 30 years after the original 1998 romantic fantasy.

The sequel is directed by Susanne Bier and continues the story of the Owens family. Sandra Bullock and Nicole Kidman are back as the sisters Sally and Gillian Owens.

Moreover, there is also an introduction of a new generation of Owens girls. The movie is loosely inspired by Alice Hoffman‘s 2021 novel, The Book of Magic.

This time, the family curse falls upon a new generation of Owens family members. Sally’s daughter, Kylie, learns many family secrets that were unknown for years.

Moreover, she uncovers the dark family history associated with magic. And her romance becomes tangled with the family curse.

Thus, the Owens women once again need to face their family history. It takes them to the journey through the USA, Europe, and English countryside.

They need to learn the history of their curse and try to break it at last.

I have to confess that I had certain reservations regarding the sequel. I was never really fond of the original Practical Magic.

So, naturally, I was not sure whether we needed another movie at all, decades later. There was always the danger of this being a case of nostalgia for the sake of nostalgia.

So, decades later, does the magic still work? Sadly, I find my views on the film somewhat mixed.

There are definitely some things that are quite enjoyable. But the film does face some problems with pacing and visuals.

Returning to the Owens Family

There is comfort in going back into the Owens world again. The first movie had created an intriguing world with magic, romance, and family drama.

But it looks like the filmmakers here are trying to build upon that world. And that is one of the most positive elements of this film.

For starters, the Owens family seems bigger and more complex here. The story moves past Sally and Gillian and explores the next generation.

The filmmakers get to play around with the theme of family history affecting the next generation. It is one of the better themes in the screenplay.

And it is a theme that has been explored to its full extent in the screenplay. Sally has been doing her best in order to hide her daughters from the family magic.

Her reasons are justified considering what she had to experience before. Nevertheless, keeping the truth hidden leads to complications.

In time, Kylie finds out all the secrets that Sally had been hiding from her. There is an interesting contradiction created by the desire to shield a person and prepare them for life.

Magic is used in the film as a metaphor for the family history. Moreover, the idea that one cannot escape his/her past is explored in the movie.

At times, it is the only solution to the problem. These themes give the sequel more substance than a simple supernatural adventure.

A Bigger Story, But Not Always a Better One

The most prominent feature that separates the two movies is the scale. Practical Magic 2 tries to seem larger compared to its predecessor.

There is more mythology and more focus on the magic itself. Furthermore, the plot itself travels much farther geographically.

The journey into Europe and English countryside makes the movie have an entirely new tone. This way, it also allows the movie to differentiate itself from the locations of the first part.

However, more does not necessarily equal better. Sometimes, it seems like the movie just adds stuff because it can.

There are many themes vying for attention. Family, grief, love, magic, and intergenerational trauma.

There are also themes of female empowerment and legacy and its implications. All of these themes could make for a great sequel.

However, they do not always have the same level of development. Some thoughts get a lot of focus prior to being discarded.

Other thoughts may be intriguing but are never developed in sufficient detail. This creates the impression that there are too many things going on in the screenplay.

There are a lot of things to talk about in the film. But the problem is that they are not always said in the most efficient manner possible.

This becomes especially true for some of the young characters. For example, Kylie receives quite a significant part in the story.

But the same cannot be said for other members of the new generation. In this way, the concept of a new Owens family seems rather inconsistent.

The film clearly wants to pass the story forward. Yet some characters still feel connected mainly to the original movie.

How Faithful Is It to the Book?

The film is based on the book written by Alice Hoffman called The Book of Magic. But the movie cannot be seen as the direct translation of the novel.

The directors have used some of the basic ideas of the novel but have turned them into a movie sequel.

And the movie has to attract those viewers who have watched only the original movie. This poses a tough challenge for the creators of the movie.

I believe that the movie has followed the themes of the book much more than its details. The theme of family, magic, and female strength has been retained.

The idea that women need to save themselves is especially noteworthy. This theme suits the Owens family perfectly.

The film also retains the book’s interest in family history and inherited consequences.

However, some of the novel’s depth is inevitably reduced. A film has less time to explore every character and storyline.

This becomes particularly obvious during the final act. The story has many elements to resolve before the credits roll.

That creates some noticeable problems with the pacing.

Pacing Problems

Pacing was probably my biggest problem with Practical Magic 2. I felt that the first half of the movie was particularly slow.

The second half is also rather slow in getting to the conflict. Usually, I have no issue with pacing being a little slow.

Pacing that is a bit slower allows things to develop naturally. In this case, I didn’t feel that it was developing as such.

Some scenes seemed to drag on a little too long just explaining things.

There were other scenes that seemed to rehash emotional territory covered before.

The story progresses to its climactic third act.

That’s when the problem with the pacing becomes even more obvious.

Everything starts happening all at once. The story must provide details on certain aspects of the family’s history.

There is also a need for satisfying endings in their journeys. Thus, the last act seems too hurried.

This is even more disappointing considering how much time the movie has taken to get there.

A more balanced structure could have been applied to the film. The first part could have been much shorter.

This would allow having more time devoted to the final confrontation.

More time should have been given to the last act. However, there are events that happen too fast. This makes for quite an unusual rhythm.

Sometimes the movie is too long, but still not long enough. This must be the best way to put it.

Susanne Bier’s Direction

Susanne Bier takes the franchise in a more contemporary direction. There is a clear attempt to make the film feel like modern fantasy.

The magical elements are much more visible than before. The film also relies heavily on visual effects. I can see why it was done this way by the filmmakers.

Nowadays, audiences are more used to sophisticated fantasy settings. The sequel that appeared nearly 30 years after that needs to prove its uniqueness.

But sometimes, I thought the film was trying too hard. Occasionally, the modernisation happens at the cost of the atmosphere.

The original had a certain visual character of its own. It was warm, somewhat gothic and even intimate.

The sequel looks more clean and refined. This makes it look more modern. However, being more modern is not always equal to being more magical.

In some instances, the visual effects seem to diminish the magic. In the original film, one could imagine the action.

This sequel insists on showing all the action. Sometimes, this makes the fantasy feel less personal.

I wouldn’t say that Bier’s directing is not successful. There are several moments when her style works wonderfully.

First of all, the whole world of the Owens’ family seems more expanded. Secondly, there are several good visual moments concerning the darker magic.

However, sometimes the film seems to get stuck between the two different styles. It wants to respect the original movie and become a modern fantasy film at the same time.

Cinematography

Simon Duggan‘s cinematography is elegant and technically excellent. Nevertheless, in my opinion, the visuals are less characteristic of the original.

The first movie had an atmosphere of warmth and even a certain autumn. The color palette was creating a cozy and somewhat mysterious atmosphere.

The second movie has a cleaner, more modern style of visual effects. It is, however, not necessarily a negative point.

Still, it only adds to my impression that this film is too much trying to become modern. The world of the original seemed to be somewhat imperfect.

And it was this imperfection that made it attractive. The world of the sequel seems more perfect, but visually more expensive.

Sometimes it even loses something in terms of warmth. Also, there are many visual effects used in this movie.

Not all of them work out equally well. However, the dark magical scenes seem to be some of the best ones.

The cinematography occasionally evokes discomfort through the use of perspective and distortion.

This proves that the movie does not always require amazing special effects. In fact, at times a small change in visuals will go much further.

Location is yet another good thing about the film. Setting the story in the English countryside gives the film a new location to work with.

There are some great landscapes and atmospheric locations. These shots contribute to the expansion of the world without using CGI exclusively.

I would say that the cinematography of the film is more modern than magical.

The Performances

The returning cast members clearly evoke nostalgia. Nostalgia, however, is far from being enough for a whole movie.

One of the main letdowns for me personally was Sandra Bullock. Her acting came off as somewhat one-sided.

In addition, it was too familiar. Sandra Bullock has portrayed numerous characters that were alike.

It would be possible to make Sally evolve emotionally. Considering what has been going on in the first installment, she would need to change a lot.

Sadly, this was not the case for me. This is not necessarily a bad performance by Bullock. It just gives us nothing new.

I would expect Sally to grow up to a mature woman, after experiencing almost 30 extra years of life. Sally is very much alike to the woman I saw before.

Nicole Kidman gives a much stronger performance. Her return as Gillian is one of the more enjoyable aspects of the film.

Kidman brings a wild energy to the character. However, she also gives Gillian an unexpected sense of empathy.

That combination works particularly well. More importantly, Gillian actually feels as though she has developed.

There is a sense that life has changed her since the original. Kidman gives the character more emotional depth than I expected.

Dianne Wiest is unfortunately given very little to do. Her presence is welcome, but her character feels underused.

There is clearly more potential within the character. The screenplay simply does not give her enough material.

Stockard Channing also returns in a supporting capacity. She is good in the role and brings familiarity to the film.

However, she remains more of a side character this time. It feels more like a welcome return than a substantial character arc.

The additional cast members prove successful additions. Joey King has a lot more to do than Maisie Williams.

She is impressive and energetic. Her character feels authentic in its connection to the next generation.

Maisie Williams is given less material to work with. Nevertheless, she feels very natural in the context of the family.

These two additions help the movie to move past mere nostalgia.

But for me, the best addition was Lee Pace. His role adds something else to the movie. There is charisma and self-confidence in the actor.

Also, he has a playful side to him. And when he is on screen, you find yourself watching closely.

It makes his performance feel modern, not just nostalgic. This makes his performance particularly remarkable in the context of the entire cast.

What Works and What Does Not

There are a number of aspects in Practical Magic 2 that work well. The first one concerns the central relationship between Owens ladies.

The topics of family and generational trauma make the plot more complex. Nicole Kidman makes an adequate development of the returning characters.

Joey King is a decent addition to the Owens family. Lee Pace is another nice character who makes a difference for me.

New settings are another aspect that allows the movie to stand on its own. One more thing worth mentioning about the movie is its magical mythology.

It is not just retelling the same story with new characters. The movie tries to bring the family into a new generation.

This is what every sequel should try to do. Unfortunately, the movie does not manage to do it.

The pace of the movie is uneven throughout the whole movie. This screenplay attempts to tackle too many themes at once.

There were several characters that deserved additional development. Additional time was needed for the final act to resolve the storyline.

Sometimes the visual effects appeared too abundant. The modern approach to production may also interfere with the warmth of the original.

Most of all, the sequel sometimes has trouble establishing itself as it is. It attempts to be nostalgic without falling into predictability.

Also, it tries to be modern while keeping the character of the original. This is a delicate balance to keep.

Sometimes it succeeds. Sometimes the two approaches clash.

Does The Magic Still Work

So, after nearly 30 years, was another trip to the Owens family worthwhile?

For me, the answer is complicated. I went into this film expecting very little. I was never particularly attached to the original.

Therefore, I did not have the same emotional connection as many fans may have. That perhaps made me more aware of the sequel’s weaknesses.

However, I also appreciated some of the things it attempted.

The film clearly wants to explore what happens when family history catches up with another generation.

That is an interesting idea for a sequel. The themes are also more mature than simply repeating the original’s romantic fantasy.

The relationships between mothers, daughters and sisters are particularly important. There is also something appealing about seeing the Owens women facing their past together.

Unfortunately, the film sometimes becomes overwhelmed by its own ambition. There is simply too much happening in one story.

The mythology itself could have been tightened up a bit. More characters could have been fleshed out.

The climax of the movie could have been fleshed out a little bit as well. Visual effects, on the other hand, could have been more selective in their usage.

I believe that the film could have done with trusting its characters a little more. It is only when the Owens women talk and interact that they really begin to fascinate us.

Magic should make their relationship stronger, not overtake it.

Final Verdict

All in all, however, Practical Magic 2 is a mixed movie. Nevertheless, there are plenty of pluses that justifies the comeback.

Nicole Kidman performs better than her predecessor. Lee Pace is the best actor in the movie with something new.

Also, the topics of family relations and trauma inheritance are quite intriguing. The development of Owens’ mythology is yet another positive thing.

However, the uneven tempo prevents the story from unfolding. First two acts are too slow to my taste.

The third act is then too fast and stuffed. Moreover, some visual effects seem to try and modernize the movie.

Regrettably, at times they take away some charm of the first one. Sandra Bullock’s performance leaves much to be desired.

Sally was supposed to change a lot in almost thirty years. However, her acting seems quite similar to that of her younger self.

In conclusion, I watched Practical Magic 2 wondering whether we need it. Now I am still not sure about it.

However, I would be lying if I said that going back to the Owens family was a total mistake.

There are definitely entertaining performances and important themes. There are also times when the magic is truly rekindled.

Unluckily, the rest of the movie becomes an effortful attempt. It wishes for greater magic, greater mythology and more modern aesthetics.

But sometimes the small moments are the most successful. Practical Magic 2 never quite manages to recapture its enchantment.

It builds on the original world without really knowing what made it special. The magic is still there.

Unfortunately, I do not think it is powerful enough to make up for the wait.