Post by PhantomKnight on Oct 16, 2022 20:56:20 GMT -5
I honestly can't say I'm surprised with the outcome of Hocus Pocus 2. Full disclosure: I'm pretty much a lifelong fan of the original, to the point where I always watch it on or around Halloween, but I don't consider it an all-time masterpiece or anything. It's a silly romp, but one that's done with a lot of charm, goofy energy and personality. Hocus Pocus 2 definitely has goofy energy, but a pretty severe lack of the other two. Yet at the same time, I can't really say I'm mad at this movie. I'm more like an exhausted parent: "I'm not angry with you, Hocus Pocus 2. I'm just...disappointed."
But AM I disappointed, though? Because the trailers for this thing were never inspiring or promising. They made it look like a cheap Disney Channel Original Movie, aka cringey, kind of sequel, and that's pretty much exactly what this is. It made me feel how I imagine fans of Dumb & Dumber felt when they got Dumb & Dumber To twenty years later: seeing the main/iconic characters of the first film come back to the same roles after so much time and continuing on with the same schtick, but the shtick isn't coming off the same, and to diminishing effect. To be fair, though, I WILL say that the re-teaming of Bette Midler, Kathy Najimy and Sarah Jessica Parker is hands down the best part of the movie, as their chemistry remains very much intact -- it's just that the material they're given this time sucks. The script for Hocus Pocus 2 comes from a first-time screenwriter, Jen D' Angelo, and boy, does that come across in the final product. I don't doubt that this is a movie being made by people who have a genuine affection for the first film. The problem is that they're making a bunch of bad decisions or leaning too much on nostalgia, to the movie's detriment. For instance, the first half of this movie recycles a lot of basic plot points from the first, but it's with too knowing a wink at the audience, and you can practically see the filmmakers making jazz hands, smiling stupidly and hear them going "Haaaaaahhhhh....??", as in, "Look! We're doing the things again! The things!"
Those things/moments this film is trying to recreate worked in the first film, but that was because those scenes and the movie's overall goofy charm were more genuine there. That movie was just being itself. It's a great example of a movie having a lightning-in-a-bottle quality to it, one of those movies that just sort of stumbled into its endearing qualities. And when you try to recreate lightning in a bottle, you just end up getting electrocuted. Instead of more genuinely funny stuff with the Sanderson Sisters, there's a lot of forced and, again, cringey elements to this movie that make it feel forced. Either that, or as one of my film-loving friends has already said, it's the greatest Walgreens commercial ever produced. Speaking of, it's also been said that the film in general has a visual look/color palette that makes it look like an extended Super Bowl commercial, and I have to agree. It just makes the movie look ugly and extra cheap a lot of the time. No wonder it's a straight-to-streaming release.
But getting back to how a lot of this movie feels forced: it features not one, but TWO musical numbers. Why? Because the number in the first one went over so well. But the key difference there is I Put A Spell On You was a FUN musical interlude that also fit within the narrative. These simply do not. When the Sanderson Sisters are summoned back, the very first thing they do is a rendition of Elton John's The Bitch Is Back (here, The Witches Are Back), and it's like the movie itself quickly realizes what a bad idea that was, because the number ends pretty abruptly, almost as if the director was hitting the Eject button. The second attempts to recreate the first's party scenario, but doesn't even come close. This is the biggest moment where the film goes out of its way to indulge in some Memba Berries, but even before it's over, the feeling very much becomes, "No, movie, you're drunk. Go home."
It all can be boiled down to this: yes, the first Hocus Pocus was a Disney movie aimed largely at a younger audience, but it still took the time to provide at least SOME menace and craft a bit of a spooky atmosphere befitting a Halloween story. Hocus Pocus 2, by comparison, feels like exclusively a kiddie movie. There's no menace, no spooky atmosphere, no sense of true danger AT ALL, and just a lack of any real cleverness or ANYTHING for an older audience to appreciate. If the movie were any fun, I could forgive some of that, but it's not. By the second half, my head had slumped to the side as my arm was propped on the armrest of my chair, fingers rubbing my forehead in exasperation while my eyes became glazed over. To quote Roger Ebert from one of his numerous reviews with Gene Siskel: "Things were moving on the screen and I looked to see what they were." And I haven't even gotten to the trio of kids in this film, who are flat, dull and feel like they'd be more at home on a CW show. But honestly, the more words I type about Hocus Pocus 2, the more disheartened I become, almost like it's the equivalent of the life-draining potion from the first movie.
Is there ANYTHING I liked about Hocus Pocus 2? Well, the film features an opening scene set during when the Sandersons were young girls and the younger actors there absolutely nail the characterizations, the returning trio still slip back into their characters easily and actors like Tony Hale and Sam Richardson do...alright. But that's it. Remember the groan of exasperation that Billy Butcherson gave in the first movie after he'd been resurrected from the dead? Well, that pretty much sums up my reaction to Hocus Pocus 2.
1/2 /****