Reel Time: Cinematic Sleight of Hand in Now You See Me

What is cinema but one big illusion? This is the question the Now You See Me franchise seeks to answer as despite appearing as a facile and flat-though-thrilling blockbuster it engages with the ideas of illusion and trickery at the core of cinematic history.

Firstly, I wholeheartedly agree with the general critical consensus about these films: both of these films have excellent opening acts, full of rich visuals & excellent dialogue from a stellar team of actors, but ultimately fall apart in their final acts, which are underwhelming and often confusing. Secondly, however, I think there’s something more going on  – maybe there’s a card hidden up someone’s sleeve here.

Woody Harrelson has a card up his sleeve in Now You See Me 2

The whole point of these films, I would contend, is not some lofty ideal or critical approach to something – what they are is an intensely fun exploration of what cinema can trick us into believing, a depiction of the thrill of the cinematic spectacle, and, ultimately, a homage to cinema’s essential qualities of trick and illusion.

A quick lesson in cinema’s mechanics and some historical figures. Cinema is but one big illusion. The moving image is not a moving image, but rather a sequence of still images moving at just the right frame rate (the frequency at which these images are moved over the screen) in order to mimic movement as it is perceived by the human eye. As such, at it’s core cinema is a trick played on the human eye to create the impression of fluid movement.

Tom Gunning, Professor at the University of Chicago, describes the way in which audiences of early cinema would have engaged with the movement of the image, with the illusion of fluid movement, rather than any sort of narrative or artistic intention. It’s in the name: the cinema of attractions is designed to appeal to its own viewer, to attract it to its image. The novelty of this illusory movement was one of these attractions. A famous anecdote describes the shock of audiences upon seeing the Lumière Brothers’ “Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat” because they believed the train was real. Although this was really a rather lavish rumour it reveals (as all rumours and urban legends do) that the discourse surrounding cinema at the time was largely tied to ideas of magic and trickery – that cinema could conjure a real train from the image of one through it’s movement.

This was latched onto by Georges Méliès, a filmmaker and illusionist who developed the beginning of special effects techniques (left). Méliès is a real contrast to the Lumière Brothers, who focused more intently upon the scientific function of the camera. Méliès offers us the thrill of seeing the impossible, advancing ideas of the cinema of attractions – instead of revelling in simple movement, his fantastical films offered this same attraction through the use of seemingly impossible, magical tricks. 

As such, cinema is partly founded on the thrill of illusion: the illusion of movement and the illusion of magic. And I think this is what Now You See Me is exploring and is a contributing factor to the failure of their final acts.

Initially, the illusions presented to us, particularly in the opening acts of the films, allow us to revel in the action – the what, rather than the why – as rather than tying the tricks into a tight narrative, they exist simply as spectacle. This is what is, primarily, so attractive: the movement, the fictional magic trick itself. Where the film falls down is when these tricks, though they become increasingly extravagant, are explained. When we explain the tricks, the magic dies.

Dave Franco in Now You See Me reveals the reality behind the illusory mirror

As such, the magic of cinema – the pure mental exhilaration, the trick of perception this entails – appears to be recovered here amongst the enthralling magic tricks and the illusions, created with the use of tight direction, choreography and special effects, now, and almost always, the core elements of a cinema of attraction. The failure? When we look to hard, when we become to thoughtful, when we spoil the trick for ourselves.

Exciting and visually dazzling, the Now You See Me films also play host to an original and fresh idea that harkens back to cinematic history. My only criticisms? Often the plot becomes too confusing, the final acts are, as discussed, chronically disappointing, and the ration of men to women – seriously, only one woman at a time?