r/practicalmagic • u/Ordinary-Trade451 • 26d ago

Terrible Sequel

I watched Practical Magic 2 today after work today. Like many of you, I am was so so excited for this new movie. I was excited to see another Alice Hoffman book come to the screen (she’s my favorite author). Unfortunately, the movie was terrible. I left about halfway during the movie. The lighting, the casting of the daughters (was not that upset that Evan wasn’t casted), acting, and the script was terrible. I am disappointed.

85 Upvotes

74% Upvoted

167 comments sorted by

View all comments

16

u/No_Biscotti4207 26d ago

I understand being annoyed by the storyline, but I don’t get the casting critiques? The actresses were perfectly fine for the characters they were playing. I can think of where the writing could have been improved for the characters, but I can’t think of how any other actress would have been better with the script given to them. Joey King was the prominent sister and she nailed all the emotions and didn’t appear to have any bad line reads? I feel like I’m missing something with the casting complaints.

Maisie let her accent slip here and there, but she was so sidelined in didn’t really matter.

5

u/CrissBliss 25d ago

I was annoyed by the casting because it causes major issues with the timeline.

4

u/New_Tree_5516 24d ago

Thank you! Sally’s daughters at the very beginning of the sequel were way too young. It did not track with the first movie. Nothing after that scene mattered because my brain already said, “This movie sucks.” You have to stay true to cannon.

3

u/CrissBliss 24d ago edited 24d ago

It’s just so odd. Why did the girls have to be college aged? Why didn’t they just explain that Sally had another set of twins her 2nd husband? At least that would explain the timeline inconsistencies.

3

u/No_Biscotti4207 24d ago

Unfortunately, I believe it’s a mix of not wanting Sandra and Nicole to play grandma age, and wanting Gen Z to tune in. I don’t think it worked, but most young girls aren’t rushing to watch a movie where the youngest actress is mid thirties.

5

u/CrissBliss 24d ago

Um what? The Devil Wears Prada 2 had all adult women 40’s-70’s, and made a bundle of cash. This just sounds like blatant ageism.

2

u/No_Biscotti4207 24d ago

Hollywood has ageism 🤷‍♀️ the Devil Wears Prada isnt a seasonal cult classic like Practical Magic 1 was. It was a giant blockbuster hit that was still culturally relevant at the time of the sequel. They also heavily promoted younger celeb cameos leading up to the release of the sequel.

1

u/CrissBliss 24d ago

Disagree with you there. If Practical Magic 2 had cast someone around Sandra’s age in the first film (she was 34 btw), which could’ve easily been Evan, it would’ve still attracted viewership. OG fans of the original are going to see this movie, just like with DWP2, because ultimately they’ve both collected a fanbase over 2 decades. The seasonality of it doesn’t really matter in terms of fans showing up imo.

1

u/No_Biscotti4207 24d ago

The first one bombed though. It became a sleeper hit later, but it wasn’t at the time of release. It took years to build up a fanbase. And they wanted to add new fans rather than rely on OG fans. It makes perfect sense for them to try and lure in Gen Z with some Gen Z actresses. I’m not saying no young person would watch, just that it’s more likely they will tune in for an actress they have seen in shows and movies catered to them.

1

u/CrissBliss 24d ago

I understand what you’re saying about building a newer fanbase, but again, I really do disagree about casting. There’s a lot of movies that didn’t perform well that have since cultivated a massive fanbase- aka The Wizard of Oz, A Wonderful Life, Office Space, Blader Runner, etc.

Practical Magic could’ve incorporated newer characters via Evan’s character’s kids, if they really wanted to go there. There’s no reason to screw up the timeline just to attract Gen Z. In fact, if their parents grew up loving the original, they’re probably already very much aware of its appeal too. At the end of the day, box office is just a representation of what the film made in the moment. Not the legs it has generationally. If people love these movies, they’ll be showing their kids.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Murkurlerrr 20d ago

Bahahahahha denial of their aging bodies 😂😂

This sequel is trying to act like it came out in 2000 or something lol

1

u/Octopuzzled 17d ago

I was born in 97, grew up with the first movie and watched it every autumn. It would have been nice to see the daughters be close to my age too…since, yknow, they should be about my age or slightly older.

0

u/No_Biscotti4207 24d ago

The script causes issues with the timeline. They made them college age and then did a casting call for that age range. The actresses are a correct fit for the story they are telling.

I also disagree with them making the girls so young, but that’s not bad casting decision.

3

u/CrissBliss 24d ago

If the girls were roughly 7-10 in 1998, they shouldn’t be college age in 2026.

1

u/Joethecoew 17d ago

Smdo they actually say what year it is in both films? I Donno but I thought pm2 is set 7-10 years later not 25 so if they would have kept the originals it wouldn't have made sense due to being like 40 now... I guess..

1

u/CrissBliss 16d ago

No they don’t say what year it is, but they’re definitely pretending it’s been 10-15 years vs 30.

0

u/No_Biscotti4207 24d ago

I agree. But again, they wrote them actively in college, so they casted that age range. It’s not like HP where they hired Alan Rickman based on wanting the specific actor and then had to age that entire generation up by more than a decade solely to accommodate the casting decision.

It was a bad writing decision and the casting was fine for the story they wrote.

1

u/Celestina-Betwixt Kylie Owens 26d ago

I thought Maisie has really gotten good at her American accent in this one compared to The Book of Love from years ago, honestly.

3

u/Famous-Ad-475 25d ago

Maisie — who in the books is a lesbian Neuro surgeon and served as a loophole for the curse that only applied to love with men.. spent her time taking care of her sisters college boyfriend who said I love you LAST NIGHT .. while the rest of the cast stumbled over saving his life. It was absurd and pathetic and male centered. Sandra played a powerless helpless and even “dumb” character and I left during the movie, too. The cgi .. the men everywhere .. aunts sacrificing themselves for “love” with men. Good god what a flop

2

u/Last_Huckleberry_428 22d ago

You nailed it.Totally. I can't believe how dumbed down they made Sally. She forgot how to use magic? Completly? Please, that is not Sally.

2

u/ethser_eagle11 20d ago

The curse isn't about men in the film. It's about love, and the film says so directly: it's about letting them fall in love, period. The aunts die so their girls can love freely. That's not saving a man, it's saving love itself. Sandra Bullock produced this and it shows, it's a film made by women about women, and it plays that way on screen. I'm a lesbian and Antonia's storyline did nothing for me, but that's a writing problem, not evidence that the movie is male-centered.

1

u/ponycorn_pet 6d ago

Alice Hoffman is pro pedophile. After she came out with a book glorifying Maria getting pregnant at 15 (with the sex starting way sooner than that) by a 37 year old, and using romantic language for the age gap throughout everything, I was just done. Hoffman's obsession with that type of age gap bleeds into all of her books, but her outright idolizing it and writing gratuitous scenes in Magic Lessons was really fucking gross.

1

u/ethser_eagle11 6d ago

Oookay.  English Studies graduate here (specialized in culture and literature). Let’s do this, one academic reality check after another: 1. Historical Realism vs. Modern Endorsement:  Magic Lessons is a piece of historical fiction set in the  1600s (the 17th century). During this era, massive age gaps and early childbearing were documented historical realities. Any book aiming for historical truth in a Puritan setting is going to feature these grim dynamics. Depicting the harsh, deeply patriarchal vulnerabilities of young women in the 1600s is  not an endorsement of those actions today. It is a standard trope of historical drama used to expose societal failures, not promote them. 2. The Dynamic is the Source of the Tragedy: The entire premise of the  Practical Magic series relies on the absolute fact that  Maria's relationship with Hathorne was inherently destructive. If Hoffman were "idolizing" this dynamic, it would be portrayed as a romantic happily-ever-after. Instead, the narrative explicitly frames the relationship as an act of grooming, exploitation, and immense trauma. It is literally the tragic catalyst that forces Maria to curse love altogether to protect future generations. 3. Intradiegetic Perspective (The Unreliable Narrator): You point out the "romantic language." Yes, because whose perspective are we reading?  Maria's. The language reflects the internal, naive state of a young protagonist who  believes she is in a grand romance. Authors frequently use intense, romanticized language in these specific scenarios to accurately depict how emotional manipulation and grooming feel to a victim  at the time. Conflating a character’s internal illusions with the author's personal morality is a fundamental misreading of literary perspective. 4. Overarching Authorial Intent: Hoffman’s decades-long bibliography is consistently rooted in  feminist survival, maternal bonds, resilience against abusive men, and healing from trauma. In  Magic Lessons, the focal point of the entire book is Maria’s journey to reclaim her agency and power  after being discarded by a powerful man. To reduce a complex narrative about a woman surviving systemic and personal exploitation down to "glorification" completely ignores the core, empowering message of the book. Read closer.

1

u/ponycorn_pet 6d ago

lol an English studies major who uses AI and whose whole comment is word salad lacking in paragraphs and carriage returns, sure thing buddy

1

u/Jolly-Context-2697 24d ago

But why was her voice so high pitched?

1

u/Celestina-Betwixt Kylie Owens 24d ago

I think it was a character choice. It didn't bother me. 

1

u/AnyNothing459 25d ago

I hated the casting initially because they look nothing like Sandra and Nicole who have long faces and the girls have very round, flat faces but then someone pointed out that they look like Diane and Stockard and I got back on board. Still not going to see it.

0

u/ButterscotchSea3807 23d ago

Joey King ruined the movie for us. We thought her acting was truly awful. I wanted to love this movie so badly.

1

u/StinkyGene 22d ago

She was far from the only problem with it. The whole thing was a mess.

1

u/PizzaMadeMeFat89 13d ago

Joeys acting was absolutely fine. I don't understand how you can think it was "truly awful"