Twenty-six years later, the Owens sisters are back—and so is Hollywood's love for sequels nobody saw coming. But does anyone actually remember the first movie? (Hint: the box office didn't.)
Remember when Warner Bros. announced a “Practical Magic” sequel? Me either. I was busy being alive in 2014, probably watching “True Detective” and pretending to like kale. But here we are. Production's rolling. Sandra Bullock and Nicole Kidman—still impossibly beautiful, still pulling off the “witchy sister” thing—are hugging by a gravestone in a cemetery. The TikTok caption: “The witches are back.” Cue the nostalgia, cue the cult followers, cue everyone Googling “what happened in Practical Magic again?”
Let's be real. The original limped out of theaters with a shrug. $68 million worldwide on a $75 million budget? Oof. Critics didn't hate it, but they didn't love it either. It was… fine. The kind of movie you catch on cable at 2 a.m., half-asleep, wondering if Dianne Wiest is everyone's aunt or just mine. But here's the thing: “fine” movies age like wine—or at least like decent boxed wine—if you wait long enough. The Atlantic, Vox, Vanity Fair have all revisited it, calling it a “cult classic.” Sure. If by “cult” you mean “people who remember it exists.”
Now, Susanne Bier's directing. She's got range—Oscar-winning “In a Better World,” that Netflix “Bird Box” thing, some TV soaps. She's worked with Bullock before, Kidman too. Feels… safe. Akiva Goldsman's back writing, which is either a good sign or a sign that no one else wanted the job. His resume's all over the place—one minute “A Beautiful Mind,” next minute “Batman & Robin.” Exactly.
So what's the angle here? Two sisters, magic, a cursed love life, small-town weirdness. Bullock's Sally, Kidman's Gillian. The aunts are… presumably still charming and odd. It's a reunion, sure, but also a gamble. Hollywood loves a legacy sequel, especially when the stars are still A-list and the fans are… let's say “devoted.”
But here's the kicker: the bar is subterranean. The first movie wasn't “The Exorcist.” It wasn't even “Hocus Pocus.” It was a cozy, mid-budget '90s flick with some charm and a lot of eyeliner. Can you recapture that? Should you? I mean, I liked the midnight margaritas scene as much as the next guy, but a sequel? In 2026? That's a full generation later. My kid was in diapers when the first one came out. Now he's got a mortgage.
And yet. There's something oddly comforting about it. Maybe it's the nostalgia. Maybe it's the promise of seeing Bullock and Kidman together again, doing that sisterly chemistry thing. Or maybe it's just Hollywood's latest attempt to cash in on the “remember this?” economy. Either way, the release is set: September 18, 2026—just in time for spooky season.
Look, I'm not saying I'll be first in line. But I might watch. Maybe with a cocktail. Maybe in the middle of the night. Maybe just to see if they finally lift that love curse.
