Director Ruben Fleischer heard a loud gasp.
In the very first screening of “Now You See Me: Now You Don’t,” one particularly shocked moviegoer had an audible response to the heist film’s third-act twist. (Don’t worry, we won’t ruin it!)
“It was one of the most gratifying moments of the whole process,” Fleischer says via Zoom the morning after the New York City premiere. “I was so pleased the audience was invested enough to react.”
Cinematic trickery is, of course, the whole point of the “Now You See Me” franchise. But Fleischer is new to the series. (The prior two installments were directed by Louis Leterrier and Jon M. Chu.) Set 10 years after the sequel, Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Dave Franco and Isla Fisher return in the third entry as the thieving illusionists known as the Four Horsemen. This adventure follows the slick, Robin Hood-esque quartet as they work with new recruits — Justice Smith, Dominic Sessa and Ariana Greenblatt join the ensemble — to bring down a dirty diamond dealer, portrayed by Rosamund Pike.
Fleisher, best known for box office hits including “Venom” and “Zombieland,” brought many of the elements that turned the magic-infused franchise into a commercial success. So rest assured, there’s plenty of quippy dialogue, exotic locations (they jet to Antwerp, Abu Dhabi, South Africa and the South of France) and cardistry. Fleischer also wanted to up the stakes — and keep the audience in perpetual suspense — with bigger, bolder sleight-of-hand spectacles, which he crafted in collaboration with experts like Magic Castle owner Randy Pritchford.
“Fun was the North Star for me because that’s all anybody expects out of these movies,” Fleischer says.
Ahead of the film’s release, Fleischer spoke to Variety about reuniting with his “Zombieland” actors Eisenberg and Harrelson, assembling a few surprise cameos, and what critics don’t always “get” about commercial fare.
(Warning: This interview contains some spoilers for “Now You See Me: Now You Don’t,” which opens in theaters on Nov. 14.)
What was your familiarity with the “Now You See Me” franchise before you were hired to direct this film?
“Now You See Me” came out after “Zombieland” and stars two of our leads, Jesse Eisenberg and Woody Harrelson. So naturally, I was curious about it when it came out and saw it in theaters. I was so enamored of the caper, the charm of the cast, all of it. It was true entertainment. I had made three movies with Jesse and three movies with Woody prior to “Now You See Me: Now You Don’t,” so I think it was a natural fit when they were looking for a director for the third installment.
Are you a fan of magic?
I love magic. I’m not ashamed to admit it. I find that going to magic shows is one of the most fun experiences you can have as an adult because it gives you this feeling of wonder that you only get as a child. As a cynical adult, there’s very few opportunities in my general day-to-day where I get to be dumbfounded and amazed.
How do you stay ahead of the audience without confusing them?
It’s a trial-and-error process. It’s an interesting line to walk in terms of wanting to give an audience enough to feel invested but not wanting to reveal too much. You can adjust based on test screenings throughout the process, taking feedback from the audience. If we’ve tipped our cards at all, we can always pull it back. Or if there’s confusion, which is never a good thing, we can layer in more breadcrumbs.
Was there pushback from the studio about putting “Now You Don’t” in the title?
There was a few things we had to set the record straight on if we were going to make a third “Now You See Me,” and certainly the title “Now You See Me: Now You Don’t” was among the top of the list. It seemed like a missed opportunity with the second one. We felt strongly that this was the best title, and I’m so glad the studio agreed. I also wanted to rectify how Isla Fisher in the first movie and Lizzy Caplan in the second had been swapped out with just a line of exposition. [Note: Fisher wasn’t in the 2016 sequel due to scheduling conflicts, so Lizzy Caplan replaced her as the group’s sole female member.]
Whose idea was it to use Lady Gaga’s “Abracadabra” as a needledrop?
I’ll take credit for that one. I kept hearing it on the radio, and it felt like we would have been negligent not to include it. I had to resist the temptation to also include Eminem’s “Abracadabra.” I felt like I was only allowed one “Abracadabra” pop song in the movie, and Gaga won out. It brings a burst of energy to that sequence.
Was AI used to pull off any of the illusions or magic tricks?
No, we didn’t use any AI. The opening sequence nods to deep fakes. I think you can assume the characters in the movie used AI to generate the holograms of the Horsemen from scratch, but we did it the old-fashioned way, which was shooting them on green screen and then compositing them into the scene, which didn’t require any AI whatsoever.
You’ve had a lot of commercial success throughout your career. Do you get recognized in public?
Absolutely not. I am, thankfully, very anonymous. There’s no threat whatsoever, I promise you, of anyone recognizing me. I live in Montclair, New Jersey, and that has ensured my privacy.
Audiences are clearly responding to your movies, but some, like “Venom,” were piled on by critics. What do you make of that divide?
I grew up loving commercial movies and blockbusters of the 80s. That’s what informed me as a filmmaker. My desire to make movies is for the audience. Critics can be arbitrary, and I think as evidenced by “Venom” or “Uncharted” or even the previous two “Now You See Me” movies, which I wasn’t involved with, there’s often a big gap between the audience’s and critics’ appreciation for films. That is not anything new. There’s certainly a different metric that more arthouse or awards fare is evaluated by. I think that commercial films are held to an unfair standard. I think a movie should be judged by the execution of its intent. I set out to make a fun movie that’s a thrill ride for audiences and anyone who loves magic. I’ve seen the movie enough with audiences to know that it was successful as far as delivering on the promise of the “Now You See Me” franchise. If, for whatever reason, critics don’t appreciate that fact, I can’t change their minds.
Do you read reviews?
I do, to a degree. Now with the aggregation of reviews, it has become a little overwhelming because there’s so many of them. But I’m always curious to know what respected critics can take or leave from movies. Reviews just broke today on “Now You See Me,” and for the ones that are negative, I don’t know what movie they were expecting to see. All their criticisms are pretty much like… they didn’t even need to watch the movie to evaluate it. They’re judging it on things that are inherent to the premise.
.png)
Follow Us