Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

The illusionist (merged)

Community
Search
Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

The illusionist (merged)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-29-06 | 10:53 AM
  #76  
exm
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Long Island
Let's give this one a bump. Saw it last night and loved it. Great story & acting.
Old 01-10-07 | 08:57 AM
  #77  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: In the mouth of madness.
The Illusionist? (slight spoilers)

I just saw this and liked it ok
Spoiler:
and think the ambiguous ending was a little pat and too cut and dryly explained.

What I want to know is, there wasn't any explanation given for how he performed the illusions, especially the apparitions.

Is there any physical way those can be performed and was it explained anywhere?



[Edited to add spoiler tags, just in case. D-]

Last edited by Dead; 01-10-07 at 10:38 AM.
Old 01-10-07 | 09:01 AM
  #78  
Suspended
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Toronto
It's out on DVD. I liked the atmosphere, I liked the colours and photography. I liked the art direction. I liked the story-telling. I liked the fictitious universe. (There never was a Crown Prince of Austria named Leopold in that era, by the way, although there was a suicidal Prince Rudolf he seems modeled on.) I was captivated. There is not a single misstep in the whole story. Edward Norton coasts on his good looks and elegance but that's part of the charm of this film. A very finely crafted work of art from a young director who can only go far.

I even liked it in spite of Philip Glass's score. Mr. Glass is a hack whose "music" gives me a rash but he is getting very good lately at recycling those same two ot three simplistic chords for mysterious effect.

I can't wait to see The Prestige for comparison purposes.

Last edited by baracine; 01-10-07 at 09:09 AM.
Old 01-10-07 | 09:16 AM
  #79  
Suspended
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Toronto
Originally Posted by ShaunoftheDead
I just saw this and liked it ok
Spoiler:
and think the ambiguous ending was a little pat and too cut and dryly explained.

What I want to know is, there wasn't any explanation given for how he performed the illusions, especially the apparitions.

Is there any physical way those can be performed and was it explained anywhere?



[Edited to add spoiler tags, just in case. D-]
You know we will get witch-hunted if we go on with this second thread on the same film but my answer is...

Spoiler:
Since the orange tree trick appears (in the film) to have had a very complicated mechanical explanation, we must assume that all the other tricks were the result of careful planning and hard work and "before their time" innovations. The fact that the magician is surrounded by a legend that he may have learned mystical tricks from mysterious otherworldly strangers and that he has lived in "the Orient" is just so much second-hand window dressing designed to keep you wonderstruck all through the film and believe in the supernatural long enough for the hero to effect his very real, very carefully-planned and very practical getaway. He does everything he does in order to elope with a woman of flesh-and-blood after all, not a ghost.

Also note that the magician fires his manager and replaces him with a crew of Chinese stagehands in order to keep his methods secret, not only from the public but also from any pressure coming from the police to divulge them. He trusts the manager with his money but not with his secrets.

The film's story also exploits the myth and mystery surrounding famous stage magicians of the XIXth century whose best tricks have been kept secret for generations by the magician's oath and never publicly revealed , some of which still seem impossible today, like one magician, David Douglas Home (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Dunglas_Home ), who was reputed to have levitated out of a third-storey window and flown back in through another window in front of at least a hundred witnesses who never asked for their money back.


Last edited by baracine; 01-14-07 at 10:48 PM.
Old 01-10-07 | 09:21 AM
  #80  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 46,621
Received 1,371 Likes on 1,076 Posts
Entertaining. I liked the darkness of The Prestige, but the Illusionist had a better connected (tho predictable... they really did foreshadow the hell out of it, starting 10 minutes into the thing) conclusion.
Old 01-10-07 | 01:12 PM
  #81  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShaunoftheDead
I just saw this and liked it ok
Spoiler:
and think the ambiguous ending was a little pat and too cut and dryly explained.
...
Hmm I came away with a different impression.
Spoiler:
I did not find the ending ambiguous at all, what was ambiguous about it to you? They revealed that his magic was tricks not real magic. The two lovers planned the whole thing and set the prince up. They both got away scott free. What's left to be ambiguous about?
Old 01-10-07 | 01:44 PM
  #82  
Suspended
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Toronto
Originally Posted by Nuff
Hmm I came away with a different impression.
Spoiler:
I did not find the ending ambiguous at all, what was ambiguous about it to you? They revealed that his magic was tricks not real magic. The two lovers planned the whole thing and set the prince up. They both got away scott free. What's left to be ambiguous about?

I think what ShaunoftheDead meant was that the tricks looked so supernatural, he wondered if they were or if there could be a rational explanation for them. By saying
Spoiler:
"they were not real magic", you are actually saying yourself that a successful stage trick is "false magic" but that supernatural manifestations are "real magic".
I don't think professional magicians would agree with that definition. But the film succeeds in blurring the line between the two concepts.

Last edited by baracine; 01-10-07 at 02:31 PM.
Old 01-10-07 | 10:49 PM
  #83  
lxl
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 813
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: San Jose, CA
I am a little disappointed.

Spoiler:

I don't really think the ending is ambiguous, it's also too predictable.

I don't quite like what the illusionist and the girl did to the prince. The prince was not a great man, but he certainly did not deserve that.
Old 01-11-07 | 12:11 AM
  #84  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,251
Received 487 Likes on 350 Posts
Originally Posted by lxl
I am a little disappointed.

Spoiler:

I don't really think the ending is ambiguous, it's also too predictable.

I don't quite like what the illusionist and the girl did to the prince. The prince was not a great man, but he certainly did not deserve that.
Didn't the police inspector say to someone (about the Prince) "He will kill her, he's done it before". I just watched it for the second time and I'm pretty sure he did. If that's the case, the Prince deserved what he got. Especially if he got away with it. I know for a fact it was told he beat his women.
Old 01-11-07 | 08:20 AM
  #85  
Suspended
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Toronto
The Prince being all-powerful and practically immune from prosecution besides being a very bad, devious and self-centered person
Spoiler:
had it coming
. And I couldn't have foreseen the ending. I was too "entranced".
Old 01-11-07 | 04:03 PM
  #86  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by baracine
...But the film succeeds in blurring the line between the two concepts.
That's what I disagreed with. The ending removed any blur between the two and made it clear (IMO).
Old 01-11-07 | 04:58 PM
  #87  
Suspended
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Toronto
Originally Posted by Nuff
That's what I disagreed with. The ending removed any blur between the two and made it clear (IMO).
The fact is no illusionist, even today, could create this kind of illusion on stage so the viewer may be forgiven for believing in the supernatural for at least that part of the film.
Old 01-15-07 | 07:15 PM
  #88  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,935
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Movie was okay. First half was really good, 2nd has was predictable and bland.

Spoiler:

Use of CG in the magic tricks ruined the movie because it takes you out of the movie. Plus when I saw the CG I thought the filmmakers were going to explain what Norton was using, but evidently was suppose to be "real". I can't recommend a movie that is about practical magic yet uses CG. Just defeats the whole purpose of the film.

Last edited by matrixrok9; 01-15-07 at 07:36 PM.
Old 01-16-07 | 01:39 AM
  #89  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,437
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
When Giamatti was going through Nortons shack at the end I noticed
Spoiler:
a model head that looked like that of the little boy who walked through the theater as a ghost. this would indicate that Norton was using dummies or prosthetics as part of his ghost illusions.

That may go some way towards explaining the magic he was doing.
Old 01-16-07 | 09:31 PM
  #90  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 35,901
Received 276 Likes on 226 Posts
From: East County
Just watched this tonight - not a bad flick. Predictable, but good none-the-less. I really enjoyed Norton and Giamatti (as always).
Old 01-16-07 | 09:59 PM
  #91  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,592
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: MN -> TX -> SoCal
I didn't find it predictable at all.

Actually, I couldn't believe it.
Old 01-24-07 | 11:30 AM
  #92  
Setzer's Avatar
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,770
Received 6 Likes on 2 Posts
From: The Great Northwest
I watched this for the first time last night. Loved it. Makes me wish I would have seen it in theaters! Norton and Giamatti gave outstanding performances. This is easily one of my top films of '06.
Old 07-09-07 | 09:42 AM
  #93  
Suspended
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I just watched this. I really enjoyed it and i thought the way it went down was awesome. Nortons character was well devised and
Spoiler:
I really liked the magic he used and even i doubted if it was fake or not with the ghosts. And those model heads in his house really showed theres more to it then simply amazing spiritual powers. I mostly thought that norton was setting up the prince to pay for killing her, but the ending with her being alive even surprised me.


Overall, very nice flick and a enjoyable time.
Old 07-09-07 | 10:03 AM
  #94  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 30,012
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
From: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
I just watched it a second time with a bunch of my wife's relatives who were visiting. They have widely varying tastes and it was one of the few movies I've shown them that every one of them liked. And while I did guess the "twist" very early when I first saw it in the theater, none of them did. Not a great film but good and enjoyable on a repeat viewing even knowing everything.

Spoiler:

I didn't mind that, while it was obvious the film was saying everything Eisenstein did was a trick, it was equally obvious what he did was too good to have been so. Dramatic license.

Last edited by movielib; 07-09-07 at 10:08 AM.
Old 07-09-07 | 10:41 AM
  #95  
TheMovieman's Avatar
DVD Talk Legend
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 13,595
Received 302 Likes on 242 Posts
From: Oregon
In his commentary Neil Burger said
Spoiler:
the ending was how Giamatti's character thought how the whole thing played out. That's why when we see Norton meeting Biel, it looks hazy. IIRC, he said it was possible Norton just disappeared and went to live alone somewhere in the countryside.


Not saying I agree with it, but that's how he interpreted and (I guess) filmed it.
Old 09-03-07 | 01:06 AM
  #96  
Jack Straw's Avatar
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Joined: May 1999
Posts: 5,208
Received 17 Likes on 13 Posts
From: So. Calif.
Can someone explain to me how
Spoiler:
a doctor and chief inspector who supposedly weren't in on the "trick" examined a body with an apparent slit throat who was really still alive, and both found no pulse or other evidence indicating this woman was faking? Lame.

Last edited by Jack Straw; 09-03-07 at 01:10 AM.
Old 09-03-07 | 03:55 AM
  #97  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,437
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Jack Straw
Can someone explain to me how
Spoiler:
a doctor and chief inspector who supposedly weren't in on the "trick" examined a body with an apparent slit throat who was really still alive, and both found no pulse or other evidence indicating this woman was faking? Lame.
Spoiler:
The family doctor was in on it, and shooed away anyone else who tried to get a close look at the body.
Old 09-03-07 | 02:33 PM
  #98  
The Antipodean's Avatar
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 6,769
Received 246 Likes on 176 Posts
From: Auckland, New Zealand
Originally Posted by Jack Straw
Can someone explain to me how
Spoiler:
a doctor and chief inspector who supposedly weren't in on the "trick" examined a body with an apparent slit throat who was really still alive, and both found no pulse or other evidence indicating this woman was faking? Lame.
They made it pretty clear at the end that
Spoiler:
the doctor was in on it
.
Old 10-15-07 | 01:39 PM
  #99  
DVD Talk God
 
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 133,141
Received 896 Likes on 740 Posts
From: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Just watched it. Pretty good. I really like Giamatti.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.