Monday, September 16, 2019

NEW REVIEW: "The Illusionist" (2006)


MRMOVIESETC REVIEWS:

“The Illusionist” (2006)


"I'm a cynical man, God knows. But if your manifestations are somehow real, 
then even I am willing to admit you're a very special person."


“Dante’s Peak” vs. “Volcano” = “Dante’s Peak” wins, but it’s close.

“Armageddon” vs. “Deep impact” = I’d say “Deep Impact”, but again, it’s close.

“Madagascar” vs. “The Wild” = Damn, Disney, sans Pixar, the 2000s were rough for you, huh?

“The Prestige” vs. “The Illusionist” = ?

*** 

Okay, we all knew the answer to that question beforehand, and this was the first time I had seen “The Illusionist”. I’m not sure why it took me so long either considering that Paul Giamatti could probably sell me ice in a Midwestern blizzard (yes, even roleplaying as Cleveland Heep). Casting-wise, “Prestige” held a slight advantage with Bale, Jackman, Caine, and even David Bowie as Nikola Tesla, because the other three names just weren’t enough. But hey, Nolan just came off one of the best Batman films ever made, for at least three years until 2008, so one could say the scales were tipped from the get-go, leaving “The Illusionist” somewhat in the shadows.

Really that’s kind of a shame, because while it’s had plenty of time to finally reach a bigger audience, “The Illusionist” has many of its own charms to appreciate. Rather than be loaded with twists and turns like “The Prestige”, “The Illusionist” banks all of its efforts on building up to one central conceit, and it’s not half-bad at all.

Per legend, and before he became the popular illusionist known as Eisenheim (Edward Norton), Eduard Abramovich (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) was the lower class son of a cabinet maker in rural Austria-Hungary before he met a lone magician that strikes a fascinating chord with Eduard. Before long, he begins mastering the art of magic and illusion at a remarkably young age, and soon catches the eye of Sophie (Eleanor Tomlinson), a girl of greater wealth and class whom he is forbidden from socializing with. After breaking said boundaries and being forcibly separated from Sophie, Eduard leaves his village and travels abroad to gather an audience with his talents.

Around fifteen years later, he returns home with his new name of Eisenheim, and is gaining considerable popularity at the local theatre. He even catches the eye of Chief Inspector Walter Uhl (Paul Giamatti), whom would love nothing more than to figure out how Eisenheim conducts his illusions. One evening, he performs in front of the highest of guests, Crown Prince Leopold (Rufus Sewell), a wicked, proud, and violent man whom is not at all thrilled about Eisenheim being able to push his buttons without being to pinpoint how he does his magic. He’s especially bitter about how Eisenheim seems to have an eye for his bride-to-be, the now Dutchess Sophie von Teschen (Jessica Biel). The closer the two former childhood lovebirds come to rekindling their romance, the more dangerous the Crown Prince becomes, to the point that both Eisenheim and Sophie become targets of his deadly rage that Eisenheim must use his powers against.

As I say most every time with these kinds of films – copy and paste – there’s considerably more to the plot than this, but I’m starting to lean against the SPOILER wall, so that’s my queue to stop.

I’ll get to the other particulars in a moment, but I wanted to start with what really stuck out to me the most, and it’s kind of minor, but I absolutely loved the editing in this movie. During the flashback scenes, the coloring was made to look faded with noticeable framing transitions like something you would have seen back in the early silent film era. I’m glad it was not used for the film’s entirety as that would have gotten hard on the eyes with all the dark and dreary backdrops the set pieces had already. It’s certainly not something they needed to do, but it was a really crafty touch that I wish more modern filmmakers would embrace. Then again, we are getting “The Lighthouse” soon, and that appears to be going all out on this aging method, so there you go.

As I said in the beginning, “The Prestige” may have had the advantage bolstering a hugely talented cast, but “The Illisionist” has its own set of guns, too. The accents were a little shaky, if I were to be perfectly honest, and I am fairly positive I heard Norton’s crack a few times, but overall everybody carried it well enough. Norton’s turn as Eisenheim was well done and quieter than most of his lead performances, Giamatti as the not-quite-fully-corrupted Chief Inspector was solid like everything the man does in his career, and Biel does not have the high presence that the cast list invites one to think, but she plays a believable Juliet to Eisenheim’s Romeo. All three actors are fully in to sell this, and as one can picture with a premise like this one, poker faces make all the difference.

I would have liked to have seen Sewell’s Crown Prince be a better-written antagonist. Sewell’s characters tend to get this way in some of his past features regardless, but he is a full-on cartoon in this movie, especially in the second half. Far be it for me to suggest Director Neil Burger not let him off his chain; he’s just not as intimidating as he should be and really is when he is more subdued and hissing in an almost whispered tonal authority. I will say that his arc comes to an intriguingly dark peak that I did not see coming at all for reasons I wish I could say.

I do wonder how long the mystique from “The Illusionist” is going to stay with me. When I was reflecting on it afterward, I wanted to compare it to a nice fireworks show: A purposefully steady buildup of drama, suspense, and mystery that concludes with the Big Spectacle finish, and then it’s over. The whole experience was a good time and had all the right pieces, yet it starts to fade from memory once the adrenaline wears off.

While that may sound like a slant against the film, I want to emphasize that it is not – at least not entirely. “The Illusionist” is good and there is plenty about it to enjoy, but it is not quite great either. If this and “The Prestige” were placed in front of me and I were asked to watch one or the other for a total of ten viewings, I’d likely pick “Prestige” eight of those times. Timing may have been against “The Illusionist”, but that can’t shoulder all of the blame; “Prestige” is the superior.

Still, if you are like me and haven’t given this one a shot over the past decade for one reason or another, I do recommend it as a stream or rental. It does certainly deserve a fair shake.

“The Illusionist”: 7.5/10

No comments:

Post a Comment