Directed by:
Neil BurgerScreenplay:
Neil BurgerCinematography:
Dick PopeComposer:
Philip GlassCast:
Edward Norton, Paul Giamatti, Jessica Biel, Rufus Sewell, Eddie Marsan, Jake Wood, Tom Fisher, Karl Johnson, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Eleanor Tomlinson (more)VOD (4)
Plots(1)
The acclaimed illusionist Eisenheim (Norton) has not only captured the imaginations of all of Vienna, but also the interest of the ambitious Crown Prince Leopold (Rufus Sewell). But when Leopold's new fiancée (Jessica Biel) rekindles a childhood fascination with Eisenheim, the Prince's interest evolves into obsession...and suddenly the city's Chief Inspector (Giamatti) finds himself investigating a shocking crime. But even as the Inspector engages him in a dramatic challenge of wills, Eisenheim prepares for his most impressive illusion yet. (official distributor synopsis)
(more)Reviews (11)
If it weren't for (and this is my eternal problem) the unsympathetic Norton, it would have been better. This magical thing boasts a nice period atmosphere, music and ubiquitous illusions that make it almost a fairy-tale spectacle. But the film is slow, rather long and often boring. The filmmakers must have realized this, so in the last third they got things going again. Due to this the end is... Better. But it won't save The Illusionist.
()
As a historical blockbuster for the consumerist audience, The Illusionist features oversimplified characters and emotions created by tacky lighting that blurs the image beyond their faces, like in the worst soap operas. On the other hand, the story is nicely fast-paced and Bratislava and Prague on the background of Philip Glass’s music seem irresistible, almost fairytale-like. It’s a bit surprising that the most remarkable character (and performance) is not delivered by Edward Norton, but by Paul Giamatti. Had it not been for the lame attempt to impress us with the point, which any thinking viewer can guess at least ten minutes beforehand, and especially all the plot holes and half-baked execution, I might have given it a “guilty” four stars.
()
I wouldn't have expected such a bland performance from Norton (another Italian Job?), and maybe he didn't even know what ear-splitting lines the script would force him to let out of his mouth. The only thing that keeps this below-average fable afloat, with the look of a slightly more expensive TV production, is the great (and better from film to film) Giammatti, while the final Shyamalan-like twist stands on very shaky legs. And I might rename the whole film to "Hologram Man" – Eisenheim's stunts in the second half were closer to science fiction than to illusory shenanigans (nasty nitwit Lima).
()
A fairytale dressed up as an ingenious show for adults. The Illusionist shows its colors in the title. For most of the movie it pretends to be something different than what it is. It seems to be a clever and well thought out picture until the last five minutes when it pulls out its true colors and it turns out to be woefully dumb. I mean the explanation for idiots at the end is so pointless when everything was obvious an hour before the end. I’m more fascinated about the fact that the creators all of a sudden ignore the only part that would have demolished this like a house of cards: the “spirits". This certainly is no disappointment in terms of the acting, but I must admit that I was expecting something more from such a cast. Up until his performance at the Hofburg in front of the nobility, The Illusionist is outstanding, then it is just good and at the end almost ridiculous. Apart from that, it’s a bit longer than is needed to be. But what makes it interesting for the Czechs among us are the filming locations and, for everybody, Glass’s music which occasionally does too much the work itself.
()
Surprisingly more entertaining than The Prestige for me. Edward Norton steals the whole film for himself, he is intelligent, charismatic, insightful and a very talented illusionist. The period in which the film takes place suited me very well, the romance is apt and not annoying and the overall flow of the plot is very brisk and not boring, so for me I'm satisfied, I don't even know why I put the film off for so long. Very good. 80%.
()
The Illusionist is very unlucky, since it directly clashed in time with another film about magic, Christopher Nolan's The Prestige, against which it doesn't stand a chance, even without closer examination. While the second film is characterized by its darkness and nerve-wracking complex twists, Neil Burger makes do with only a slightly mysterious atmosphere and simply drawn characters – good-evil-righteous-beautiful. Nevertheless, I liked this straightforward fairytale, even though it has serious flaws of logic in its explanations, but thanks to the suitable magical mood and clearly defined genre rules, it is more than pleasant in its simplicity.
()
A beautifully shot and exceptionally well-scored mysterious film, filmed in the South Bohemian region, which chose a fictional speculative story from the old Austro-Hungarian Empire as its subject. Thanks to the camera work, special effects, and the mentioned music, it's a very consumable film, and perhaps only the casting of Jessica Biel in the lead female role didn't quite sit well with me. It's a standard Hollywood affair with several enjoyable plot twists. Overall impression: 80%. A film about love and, above all, magic.
()
A Czech fairy tale with Edwad Norton in the lead role. Neil Burger obviously learned the style from other, and mainly cheaper, Czech productions.
()
The illusionist is not as good as The Prestige. While Nolan throws the viewer into an indescribable atmosphere, visual precision, and script sophistication, The Illusionist relies on the captivating backdrop of Prague and the Czech countryside. The result is naturally not the same, and it is clear who comes out on top. Edward Norton doesn't play a great role, and Jessica Biel is more of an ornament. Some parts movie bored me outright (surprisingly, including the ending) and the deficiencies in terms of unfinished sets and not always fully optimal production design are all too evident. What sets The Illusionist completely apart from The Prestige is the concept of the story. The former has its greatest weapons in originality and being “different”, while the latter film, in a relatively solid yet still quite unexplored realm of magic, only shows classic and well-worn values without anything extra, which is by far not enough. So, if I were to rate the first film only based on its relative drowsiness and tediousness, I cannot do otherwise than give it a below-average rating.
()
A well executed mystery film that is one big illusion with a meticulously crafted plot and a surprising ending. There is nice music, beautiful costumes and period atmosphere. And most of all, perfect illusions whose explanation is just another illusion. In short, a film to get swept away with a lovely cast and a great story.
()
Quite an interesting subject. I've always liked wizards, and setting it in the era of Franz Joseph is quite fitting. There are interesting actors involved, and the magic is connected to a death case. It's not bad at first glance, but it's all done inconsistently. It's neither a proper thriller nor a proper romance, and even the magic feels overly reliant on special effects. Edward Norton is excellent, as always, and Giamatti, he's consistently great. Overall, though, I have mixed feelings rather than enthusiasm.
()
Ads