The Illusionist (2006) User Reviews (735)

This is not a Review. This is only an Illusion.

[WriterDave · 8/10 · 21 August 2006]

"The Illusionist" is a unique film that combines two often stale genres into something fresh: the lush romantic period piece and the "AHA!" mystery thriller (a genre M. Night Shamalyan has single-handedly run into the ground recently). Helmed by a first time director (Neil Burger), based on a short story, and featuring an eclectic cast, "The Illusionist" had the perfect set-up to be a monumental disaster. With a graceful slight-of-hand, it ends up being something very good.

As with any run-of-the-mill period piece, there's a lavish attention to the set designs and costumes, here representing late nineteenth century Vienna. Director Burger puts a nice spin on the same-old, same-old with an acute attention to lighting (especially in the dreamily over-exposed flashbacks) and old fashioned camera techniques (witness the circular camera's eye closing to transition from scenes) to give the film the feel of being a fond memory of a classic movie from a bygone era.

The central romance where Edward Norton's title character and Jessica Biel's Dutchess are star-crossed lovers kept apart because of class and society, had all the makings of a snore-inducing cheese-athon. Executed in an understated manner that services the greater plot, it ends up being anything but. Norton's performance, especially in the second half of the film when he turns into a man of very few words, had the potential to be one-note. As an actor, he speaks volumes with his eyes. Biel, a former teen idol and TV star, seemed a horrific choice for this role. She pulls of the nifty trick of being quite good. Even better are Rufus Sewell as the tyrannical crown-prince and Paul Giamatti as the chief inspector. Using a short story as the source material, characterizations had the potential to be paper-thin, but these seasoned veterans make the most of their lines and scenes adding terror, humor, and gravitas through their vocal and physical deliveries where lesser actors would've been wooden and cold. The entire cast also worked together very well utilizing their odd, vaguely European and aristorcatic accent. Everyone used it so consistently and earnestly, it didn't seem to matter after awhile that the accent was unnecessary.

A more over-eager or pretentious director may have completely sabotaged the fantastic ending to "The Illusionist" and cheated the audience. Handled deftly by Burger, the grande finale where "all is revealed" is a wholly organic and satisfying conclusion that rewards the patient viewer and fulfills the lofty promises of the themes presented throughout the work.

"The Illusionist" boasts an excellent music score from minimalist composer Phillip Glass that easily rivals his great work done in "Candyman" and "The Hours." Norton and Giamatti treat us to some of the best "staring" since the days of silent films. The look on Giamatti's face and the positioning of his raised eyebrows as he watches Norton perform his illusions coupled with Norton's eyes as he pulls off his tricks are priceless.

Norton is mesmerizing

[maria-309 · 9/10 · 9 August 2006]

I am a long time fan of the old theatre magicians and have been fascinated by the wave of spiritualism that swept both continents around the turn of the last century. This movie plays off those real life happenings, with the added twist of court and political intrigue. The movie is lush - as a period piece should be - with terrific performances from a true ensemble cast. Edward Norton has the charismatic gaze that makes you believe in every thing he does. Jennifer Biel is tragic and compelling as a woman trapped by society and dubious duty. Paul Giamatti - who seems to be in every other movie these days - is wonderful as a conflicted man unsure of whom he serves. Rufus Sewell, as the Crown Prince Leopold, is that man, and he embodies the boo-hiss villain. Vain and driven, he is larger than life and not one to cross, as the illusionist comes to find out. The music of Philip Glass fits the scenes and add just the right amount of tension. Plus the horses are very old world with large hooves and a heck of a lot of presence. A compelling and beautiful film.

Worth the price of tickets

[maddie_brooks · 8/10 · 3 July 2006]

The Illusionist is a very entertaining movie. The beginning of the movie sets an awesome foundation for the rest of the film to work with, without making the rest of the movie predictable and pointless. Although the basic story of boy gets girl, boy loses girl may not be original, the way the plot is presented with the excellent magical imagery keeps one interested in Edward Norton's character. My only complaint would be that the movie needs a little editing towards the end as the creators seem to show basically the same scene over and over in an attempt to drive home Norton's character's emotional distress. Unfortunately, this gets a little monotonous for viewers. Still, Norton, Sewell, Giamatti (and surprisingly Biel) provide excellent performances that, along with the beautiful cinematography, make a great movie.

"Everything you have seen here has been an illusion."

[MadeOfScars · 10/10 · 6 September 2006]

And Edward Norton is absolutely right. Nothing in this movie is what it seems. I was floored by the end of this movie. This was a wonderful job by everyone, actors and director. I couldn't believe how it ended, I wanted to stand up and clap at the end because of how beautifully it was done. This movie really grows on you. In the beginning I wasn't really impressed, but by the end I was completely convinced that this was a real work of art. The acting was great. Norton, Biel, and Giamatti all did tremendous jobs in my opinion. This is the best fictional biography I have ever seen. This Eisenheim character seems like a real person and not someone based on a short story. Norton is slowly becoming one of my favorite actors, the guy has more range than I've seen from anyone in a while. He's always playing different characters and he always does a very good job. I think everyone should go and see this movie, it won't let you down.

Brilliant movie, exceptional all around

[cshuman-1 · 10/10 · 26 January 2006]

This movie was stunning in many aspects. Visually in terms of locations, inside and out, there was great consistency and a nothing seemed strained. The story weaved fluidly through these locations and seemed to make the locales a vital part of the story. Ed Norton was mesmerizing, a superb performance that allowed the story to unfold seemingly at his discretion. Jess Biel was very believable and stunningly beautiful. Paul Giamatti (sp) played an admirable role and took the viewer by surprise in many elements of the story. The story was fresh and imaginative, very intriguing. Not as predictable as you would think. We saw this at a Sundance screening and the entire theater of 500+ seats was full and when the movie was over all you could hear was excited and happy chatter, lots of applause as well. Director came out for a Q&A after and was very amiable in answering questions. Highly recommended!!!

Entertaining

[fred3f · 7/10 · 4 September 2006]

This film may not make cinema history, win an academy award or be lauded by the critics. But compared to the majority of films out there right now it stands out as good solid entertainment. It doesn't try to make a political point or manipulate the audience into being for or against Bush, global warming, animal rights, the plight of the three toed salamander etc. etc. etc. It does what Hollywood movies are best at by taking you away from all the tiresome simplifications of complex worldly issues and letting you enjoy yourself for an hour and fifty minutes. It is a story of lovers and their struggle to be together and to be in love - a story that has been told a million times (at least) and never wears out. The acting is capable, the lovers have good chemistry, the villain is sufficiently believable and evil, the hero is clever and the plot is excellent. This is storytelling at its best. So forget about the war, the economy, or if you are politically correct enough to survive in this crazy world and enjoy yourself. Go to the movies - or at least this movie. Walk out feeling good. It's therapeutic.

A beautifully crafted and gorgeous film!

[aaron_poubelle · 10/10 · 14 August 2006]

I went to this see this film knowing only the names of the actors, having seen no trailers and having read no reviews. It is one of the best movies I've seen in years! I was completely captivated, as were almost all of the others in the audience, judging by the loud applause. I love magic shows and was delighted by the authentic look of Eisenheim's illusions performed on a stage having at most a chair and a table, lit by limelights. Other reviewers have described better than I the beautiful scenery, music, visuals, and acting and have given the movie high marks..

Then there are the reviewers who post spoilers and others who claim to have "figured it out" way before the end and therefore give it low scores. They are kin to those in a magicians audience who cannot appreciate the illusion but spend all their time guessing how the trick is done and must tell everyone they know the secret. Ignore them! Go see the movie and be drawn in to a fascinating story!

A good little mystery with some very nice acting.

[A_Roode · 7/10 · 10 August 2006]

Although I spotted the inevitable conclusion coming about half way through the film (Jessica Biel and Ed Norton are discussing a possible future together; her pragmatic analysis of what would need to take place set off alarm bells for me that ultimately proved my instincts correct), it is a testament to the film that I was still engaged enough to see how all of the pieces in the story would fall into place. 'The Illusionist' is a fairly decent example of a script that sets up a certain number of expectations and then toys with the outcomes before knocking them all down like dominoes.

There are three main reasons to watch 'The Illusionist.' The first reason is that the script isn't too bad. I was with a group of friends. Two of us guessed correctly how the film was going to develop. The other five were quite surprised by the film's ending. None of us were disappointed and the film got an ovation from the audience when it was over. I would describe 'The Illusionist' as a mystery or a puzzle. If you like films that make the grey matter between your ears do a little work, you might just find yourself pleasantly surprised -- that said, there isn't anything so taxing here as to make the film overly complex or convoluted.

The second reason to watch this film is the involvement of Ricky Jay. He's in the credits for consultation and as one of the best magicians working today in Hollywood, it is worth your time to take a look at the film to see some of his influence. I'll be interested when this comes out on DVD to find out the degree of involvement. If the producers were smart, they probably listened a lot to a man who is in the Guiness book of World Records for his use of playing cards as weapons! My third reason to recommend 'The Illusionist' is some excellent work from the three main male leads: Paul Giamatti, Ed Norton and Rufus Sewell. As a qualifier, let me add that Jessica Biel does a pretty good job too -- I just found that the energy and zeal with which her male counterparts performed ate up the screen and left her adrift. There's a little joke in there you might find funny after you've watched the film. Ed Norton is very controlled and restrained here, Rufus Sewell seems to relish every scene he's in with villainous delight and Paul Giamatti shines as the police inspector with a taste for amateur magic. Giamatti has a gift for facial expressions and, as a friend of mine hilariously put it, in his final scene his facial expression is 'six degrees of crazy.' I love that! These are three compelling performances and although you might see your way through the contrivances of the script, the good performances should be more than enough to keep you entertained.

'The Illusionist' isn't bad. A good little mystery with some nice acting all around.

Must see mystery!

[rublico · 10/10 · 30 April 2006]

I just saw this wonderful film at the San Francisco Film Festival as a surprise entry. Beautifully shot and realized, it keeps you guessing until the end as to the true outcome. It was throughly entertaining and innovative. This movie has it all: romance, suspense, star crossed lovers and supernatural illusions. Edward Norton is perfectly cast as Eisenheim The Illusionist. His accent flowed seamlessly and he simply disappeared into the role. The real revelation to me was none other than Paul Giamatti. Paul's richly accented role was not altogether unlike Tommy Lee Jones' role in The Fugitive. I found his scenes with Norton full of respect and begrudging admiration. It was an absolute joy to see these two pros at work. I will definitely be paying to see this one again when it's released theatrically.

Not much more than mediocre

[sarastro7 · 6/10 · 3 January 2007]

I have to say I was a little bit disappointed with The Illusionist. It had top-notch production values and a classy cast, but it was not quite enough. It was more of a crime/love drama than a magician story. I'm sitting there waiting for more magic tricks, and explanations for the ridiculously great acts he performs, but the story won't go there. It just focuses on the love story, like a hundred thousand other movies. To me, it was boring. It didn't deliver. Sure, I didn't see the end coming, and it was logical enough, but not that impressive. How did he create those intangible holograms? No explanation. That's just silly.

I went to see "Perfume - The Story of a Murderer" on the same day as I saw The Illusionist, and the former movie was much superior. An art movie. Whereas The Illusionist is just well-produced fluff.

6 out of 10.

Made my night

[annaclara-1 · 10/10 · 13 April 2007]

Tonight was one of those night I had gone to the movies just because I wanted to, no specific title in mind. I get there, and The Illusionist, which I had heard nothing about except that it had been compared to The Prestige, as they were both about magic. I went not knowing what to expect, and for most of the movie, the plot seemed very linear and although it had many good parts, it was nothing amazing. And then (SPOILER ALERT)the ending started. At first I didn't understand what was going on, what the the Orange tree business meant. And then as the images started to flow, I started to understand. I'm majoring in movie directing, and I have an insight in some of the most used tricks in the business, and I usually catch on pretty fast. But here, the director was so good at hot and cold showers, I swallowed everything... line, hook, everything. He tells time and time again in the movie that it's all fake, it's a trick, it's nothing but that. And in the meantime he convinces you that you are witnessing real magic, that he's a sorcerer instead of a magician. But the trick is what the director pulls on the audience. When the titles started rolling nobody got up to leave. And I mean NOBODY. I was happy all the way to the car. Just glad to have been made a fool of, because really isn't that why we all go to the movies? To believe?

there's more potential than is really tapped into in the Illusionist

[Quinoa1984 · 6/10 · 14 October 2006]

The Illusionist is actually more than anything an actor's movie, which is a little ironic considering how much romantic sweep and movement there should be in the writing and directing. In terms of Neil Burger's direction, it's never really bad at all, and is very competent most of the time (aside from a couple of notable instances involving the 'soft focus' around the edges of the frame in flashbacks and one sex scene). The writing, however, is a little more lacking even if it's also never annoying or deterring from what's watchable in the film. But there's contrivances as well, through all that is supposed to be seen as complex and very intricate and exquisite. The latter of those can be tapped into in the period setting of early 20th century Vienna, and it's always professionally done. But there's something lacking to it as well- a real driving force through the romantic core of the story, and that supporting characters are more interesting than the main characters, almost in spite of the performances.

And as mentioned, if there's any reason more than anything to see it it's for the acting, where Edward Norton makes a character who's own purpose and need in the film is very narrow (to make his illusions, but more than anything all for the possession and togetherness of another woman, played by Jessica Biel). As a child he, Eisenheim, and Sophie meet and fall in love, but are separated by the boundaries of class. Years pass, and she comes back into his life by chance, but now she has a suitor, a Prince played by the icy Rufus Sewell. When a certain tragedy befalls the situation of the Prince and his bride-to-be, this sets Eisenheim off into a whole new direction with his illusions (Norton often in a trembling, shocked trance look that is always convincing) by conjuring up lost souls. This the sets off Paul Giamatti's inspector character, and the ties become all the greater to what may become of the central question, however elusive it might seem.

All of this might be even more compelling if the actual romantic plot felt stronger. But despite the impeccable skills of Norton, who makes this bland character driven and intuitive (his choices as an actor are very good here if not great), and the OK presence of Biel, their characters aren't as interesting as the tricks and leap-of-faith sized wonders that Eisenheim creates on the stage. If anything at times the film felt stronger and with a better purpose and strength with Giamatti on screen, as he is more than anything the part of the audience, trying to figure things out. By the end his own revelation is probably the biggest leap of all, almost Shyamalan-sized, yet I find his performance is what sticks with me as opposed to the twists and surprises thrown to the audience. It's almost as if the iron-clad conventions of the plot and the intensity, passion and creativity of what goes on in Eisenheim's total control battle it out for dominance. I'd recommend the Illusionist, but with some reservations that not the spectacular event that it might seem to be. Its got skill and tact and a very fine sensibility with Norton and Giamatti and even the dastardly done Prince by Sewell. Though at the same time it's really got nothing up its sleeve. Grade: B

Elaborate shaggy dog story

[Leofwine_draca · 5/10 · 1 November 2011]

I watched THE ILLUSIONIST for the magic, I'll make no bones about that. The added romance and political intrigue where neither here nor there. The whole draw of the film is watching a magician carry out spectacular trick after spectacular trick, and admittedly the special effects used to achieve these ends are great. But, as the movie progresses and we move no closer to finding out the reality behind the magic, I realised I was watching an elaborate shaggy dog story.

THE PRESTIGE, a rival film dealing with 19th century magic that came out at the same time, annoyed me because it resorted to some ludicrous science fiction premise to explain the magic at work. I felt cheated. THE ILLUSIONIST doesn't even do that – there's no explanation or big reveal, which is a cheat in itself as you're left wondering. Instead, this is one of those films where it's all about the plot twists, which is fine when the twists work and make more sense on a second watch (THE SIXTH SENSE and THE USUAL SUSPECTS being perfect examples). The twists in THE ILLUSIONIST rely on suspension of disbelief because they're frankly unbelievable, and at that stage the film lost me.

It's a shame, because there's a lot of good stuff on offer here. The sets and costumes are sumptuous, as is the period atmosphere. The supporting cast is excellent, although Edward Norton's mysterious Eisenheim is never more than a one-dimensional figure and Jessica Biel never more than the damsel in distress. Paul Giamatti and Rufus Sewell make up for it, with their customary great acting and nuanced, mannered turns as detective and prince respectively. It's just a shame the script decided to veer into contrivance and 'clever clever' make believe instead of developing a truly original story.

Life and death. Space and time. Fate and chance. Theses are the forces of the universe.

[hitchcockthelegend · 8/10 · 2 February 2019]

The Illusionist is directed by Neil Burger and Burger adapts the screenplay from "Eisenheim the Illusionist" written by Steven Millhauser. It stars Edward Norton, Paul Giamatti, Jessica Biel and Rufus Sewell. Music is by Philip Glass and cinematography by Dick Pope.

How splendid, a period romantic mystery that's filled with the mysticism of magical conjurings and political volatility. Plot essentially has Norton as Eisenheim The Illusionist, who later in life runs into Sophie (Biel), his childhood sweetheart, and finds that she's on course to marry Crown Prince Leopold (Sewell). Leopold has a bad reputation and it's not long before Eisenheim comes under Leopold's disdain, forcing Eisenheim to try and pull off the ultimate magic act to save Sophie and himself.

Creator Neil Burger crafts a picture that has everything going for it. The story is rock solid with intrigue credentials, where appropriately for a story based around magic tricks nothing is ever as it seems. The period flavours are smartly assembled, the Czech Republic locations smartly standing in for turn of the century Vienna, the art production is on point with the era of setting, as is the costuming. Glass drifts a tender melancholic score over the piece, while Pope's cinematography is simply gorgeous, offering up colour lensing that's aura enhancing, the kind you could get lost in for days.

The magic tricks are beguiling, as they should be and are in fact required since the narrative tantalisingly suggests Eisenheim may have supernatural powers? The story itself has no historical worth, but is fascinating none the less. It all builds towards its revelations, and much hinges on if the pay off is worth the admission fee? Most assuredly so it is, even if from a personal point of view this writer wouldn't have minded if pic had finished five minutes before the final revelation.

Either way, and with smart acting (Giamatti as the police inspector standing out) without histrionics holding things at the top end, this is delicate film making that engages the emotions fully for entertainment rewards. 8/10

A Wonderful, suspenseful, sensual escape from reality

[coolpop54 · 10/10 · 16 September 2006]

I love movies of all type for different reasons. Action movies to become stimulated physically, comedies to laugh my troubles away, suspense to sit on the edge of my seat. But mostly, I attend movies to escape from a humdrum and dangerous world. "The Illusionist" is the ultimate in escape movies. It is gripping from he opening scene and the grip lasts until the final realization. The story is masterfully crafted and the screenplay intriguing. The special effects and illusions are entertainment enough. But all of this surrounded in the backdrop of the story, it's movement from one idea to another is an added treat. First there is the marvelous acting of all the major actors, surrounded by great support. The cinematography and music are awesome. This movie is filled with entertainment, suspense, romance, sensuality tastefully done, treachery and surprises. I have not been so entranced by a movie since the first Banderas Zorro movie. I didn't look at my watch once and the one hour and forty-five minutes flew by in delight. I want to see this movie over and over again. and I will still marvel at its perfection. You all must go and see it.

A movie about magic should be believable

[implaxible · 6/10 · 19 April 2009]

Why is it that two movies about Victorian-era magicians pulling a fast one came out at the same time? I saw The Prestige several months ago yet I think I will still have a hard time separating them.

This one was more about fantasy than magic. Granted, you aren't supposed to be able to figure out how tricks are done, but when most everything shown is obviously accomplished through CGI it takes away from the verisimilitude. It bugs me when a major factor in the movie (the locket) is an impossibility. There is no way it could be twisted and adjusted and the picture inside could remain intact. It's not magic, it's "movie magic". Don't get me started on the "holograms"...

Not a bad movie, but in one about magic you'd better provide a strong suspension of disbelief or everything about it suffers.

One Of The Classiest Films You'll See All Year

[ccthemovieman-1 · 10/10 · 15 January 2007]

First of all, let me say this was a beautifully-filmed movie, just gorgeous from first to last frame. That gets big points with me. Just as impressive was the story, a fantasy-mystery- romance-drama combination set in Vienna, Austria, around the turn of the 20th century.

It is a story that should keep most viewers intrigued all the way and perhaps surprised quite a bit at the end. Edward Norton does his normal job of making you fascinated with whatever character he's playing, this time a magician with almost supernatural powers: "Herr Eisenheim." The character he plays, and the tone of the movie in general, is pretty low-key with next to nothing in (on screen) violence or profanity.

It's simply a classy film and a modern-day one that older folks would very much enjoy as well as younger adults. Paul Giamatti also is very interesting as the police inspector, torn between his allegiance to the villain crown prince and to the truth and what is the right thing to do. The movie, however, belongs to Norton.

In a nutshell: good stuff, classy film. I haven't talked to anybody yet who watched this and didn't like it.

If this were a beer it'd be called Prestige Light.

[kreamykonez97 · 6/10 · 25 January 2007]

THE ILLUSIONIST 2006 (EDWARD NORTON, JESSICA BIEL, PAUL GIAMIATTI) DIRECTED BY: NEIL BURGER ~ THE RUNDOWN: A well acted, nicely polished piece of entertainment, but made with little passion and little drama. ~ It's hard to say exactly what this movie's missing; the performances are fun to watch, especially that freaky Rufus Sewell guy, and, as always, Edward Norton is amazing as well as Giamatti; it is entertaining in an old-fashioned, mystery type of way; and it's beautifully shot, but I think that's part of the problem - it's too beautiful...too old-fashioned...too much like a movie that tries too hard to impress us with its image and not engage us enough with its story. To compare it with 2006's The Prestige, a film about the same subject, the Prestige simply crushes the Illusionist when it comes to "movie magic", relying very little on CGI and reaching our hearts through an amazing script about humanity...the strive for success, the need to be loved and at the same time showing us how magic really exists in our modern world. The Illusionist, on the other hand, is simply more superficial in nature and would work better as like a thirty-minute TV show. The big twist at the end would be very satisfying for avid TV watchers just after a commercial break, but, seriously, when your making a movie around it you shouldn't just have the viewer sit and wait with little to no hints just to fill up time and then hit them with it and expect a big hooray. ~ Overall, this actually is worth watching because it is indeed entertaining, well acted and interesting, but don't feel bad either if you decide to skip it.

A Truly Outstanding Movie

[wmjaho · 9/10 · 24 January 2006]

Hats off to director Neil Burger. He bit off a big challenge with The Illusionist, and he pulled it off admirably. This is a very liberal adaptation of a Steven Millhauser story about a magician in Victorian era in Vienna. Shot entirely in the Czech Republic at gorgeously befitting locations, this is a beautifully made period piece, complete with genuine turn-of-the-century illusions, a wonderful soundtrack, lovely cinematography and an intriguing story.

Edward Norton plays Eisenheim, the magician who lost his first love as a young boy because they were separated by classes, but years later when he is touring Vienna rediscovers her in the form of Princess Sophie (Jessica Beil). Unfortunately, Sophie is engaged to be married to the unseemly Prince Leopold (Rufus Sewell), who immediately takes a dislike to Eisenheim, chiefly because he fails to debunk his illusions. Prince Leopold, not one to do his own dirty work, relies upon Chief Inspector Uhl (Paul Giamatti) to handle Eisenheim.

Edward Norton is great as Eisenheim. (That shouldn't be surprising as he's turned in some truly remarkable performances in the past—Fight Club, American History XXX, Rounders and The Score.) And of course Paul Giamatti is excellent as well, although his role is something of a departure for him. But perhaps most surprising is Biel, who is not only radiantly beautiful in this movie, but shows surprising talent as well, and holds her screen presence toe to toe with Norton.

Burger has managed to pull off really a remarkable film. The plot moves along steadily. There is also a very consistent tonality--a foreboding dreariness that perfectly matches the subject matter and the period. (In the same way that David Lynch did with The Elephant Man.) The illusions are captivating and almost believable. The love story is touching. And Eisenheim is a compelling and sympathetic hero, blessed with such unconventionally heroic talents that the entire movie feels fresh and alive.

A compelling mix of magic and mystery.

[JOHNAMI · 7/10 · 22 January 2008]

Edward Norton's characterization of the title character provides a great deal of the credibility for this highly romantic mystery film. The illusionist, Eisenheim, is a confident, arrogant man who reserves and guards his emotions for the things he really loves. His self-assuredness does not derive from insecurity or some other psychological weakness, but from his achievement of perfecting his skills to an extremely high level of mastery. He creates magic that baffles the mind and only he fully understands the science behind his illusions.

Overall "The Illusionist" is very enjoyable. It is also unsatisfying. That is caused by cliques in the plot and in the behavior of the characters. It is sometimes all too clear what will happen, and the characters sometimes do things that contradict their otherwise insightful personalities.

"The Illusionist" is a good looking film, with good performances and smooth direction. The magic is especially enjoyable, and the mystery, though not imponderable, is enticing.

Simply a wonderful film! Absolutely stunning Cinemaptography!

[michaelzstuff · 10/10 · 16 September 2006]

I loved this movie. It's just that simple. I've seen it several times and the charm never wears off. Yes, it ultimately is a 'feel good movie', but is that so wrong? It keeps you mesmerized until the very last scene. This film is destined to be a classic.

As I read some of the other comments about this movie on IMDb, I realize that cynicism can easily get in the way of just enjoying a movie for what it is. This is a magnificent film! Edward Norton and Paul Giametti are terrific and so is the rest of the cast. The cinematography was stunning. The script was superb. The direction was outstanding. I really can't say anything bad about this film. I thoroughly recommend this movie! I could give it no less than a 10.

Captivating story with a touch of magic

[KineticSeoul · 7/10 · 19 February 2011]

This is a film about love and magic. The thing is the magic that is performed in this movie makes it seem like it's real magic and doesn't really give the benefit of the doubt for the audiences in the movie that watches the magician at work. Although most people don't believe in magic in real life and in this film, so they try their best in this story to doubt it as much as possible. When I first saw pictures of this film in a magazine hyping this film up, it worked for me I really liked the premise of it all which involves a magician. And especially because it has Edward Norton in it, who is one of my favorite actors. And for the most part it meet my expectations. This film is magnificent and mesmerizing at times, with a good amount of mystery behind it while it's played off very well. 2006 was really a good year for movies about magic, cause another magnificent film "The Prestige" which was a real thrill ride. Ed Norton is magical and mysterious in a good way and Paul Giamatti put on a excellent performance playing the Chief Inspector. This film sort of feels like it moved along a bit slowly but it's still a captivating film with lovely story with a touch of magic.

7.9/10

A blaring disappointment.

[MGLevandoski · 5/10 · 10 January 2007]

I was very much looking forward to seeing The Illusionist when it came out on DVD, as I missed its run in theatres, and with grave regret I have to say that I did not like this movie. I wanted so badly to love it, but as it turns out the ending made it impossible for me to do so.

Edward Norton, in typically great form, plays Eisenheim the Illusionist, Jessica Biel plays The Duchess, Eisenhiem's love interest and fiancé to the power hungry Crown Prince(Rufus Sewell), and Paul Giamatti plays the Chief Inspector of Vienna who is in charge of trying to solve the mysteries behind the eye popping feats of Eisenheim. Every actor involved does a splendid job. The story is a love story, with betrayal and mystery, with all sorts of magical sights and sounds. It touches on the mystical/spiritual side of Eisenheim, but fails miserably at following it up with any sort of substance.

The most interesting part of the film, which I bought into, hook, line and sinker right from the get go, was the fact that magic seemed possible. It seemed real. It rooted itself in the supernatural, and then failed to grow. It planted the seed of the magical orange tree in your mind and then forgot to water it.

The movie forgot that it was a work of fiction, and would not allow itself to be anything but reality. It took no risks, it took no chances, it did nothing fantastical and amazing other than showing how fantastic of a let down an incredibly masterful and atmospheric movie can be when the director wimps out and decides he has to make everything explainable and real in the end. All of the hard work and obvious skill that went into making this film into a mysterious and wondrous love story was wasted by the most incredibly copped out ending I have seen in years.

Like the Moody Blues song asks--"real or just an illusion?"

[mkane5 · 9/10 · 9 August 2006]

Kind of a strange movie but very original and entertaining! It was a Gothic-romance period-piece drama-mystery, and quirky characters and a bizarre--or at least unusual--plot held my interest.

Edward Norton's character plays an inscrutable but romantic master illusionist. But is he just a master illusionist or has he developed powers to effect the creepy conjuring of those who have passed on? (Regardless, the guy is so easy on the eyes.)

Jessica Biel is beautiful and good in her role but I couldn't help thinking, "Hey, Jessica, Scarlett Johanssen called. She wants her lips back."

Paul Giamatti bothered me just a tad at first because he spoke in a near-whisper and had a scruffy beard so you couldn't read his lips. He got louder and his character developed pretty darned well, thank goodness. Actually, he was fantastic (so what else is new?).

The makers of this movie did the same thing the makers of Little Miss Sunshine did--made me want to see the film twice, but for different reasons: LMS because the first time I saw it, I laughed so hard I cried, and I really needed a laugh again (and got it); The Illusionist because I was like the audience for the title character's shows the first time I saw it--just kind of naive and awed and staring up at the action with my mouth hanging open. So I'll have to see it again and pay attention. Kind of like when my daughter told me to go see The Sixth Sense again and pay attention to what Bruce Willis's character was wearing. (Plot-wise, this is unrelated, folks--just a movie watcher's analogy.)

At first, the old-fashioned circle wipes seemed a little distracting, but in retrospect, they were part of the excellent movie-making decisions that created the illusion of time and place in this film. A really good story with really good art direction and really good actors, costumes and settings. Definitely worth a go-see--or two!

Everything Was Magical!! -

[papanloveu · 10/10 · 29 July 2021]

My ultimate favorite movie! A time piece and "modern" classic. This is intelligently written and the execution of the storyline by the actors were beyond mere brilliance. This is Captivating, romantic, magical, powerful, and believable lol.

An absolute classic. One of the best movies ever produced. To understand this, one has to have a literary mind and sincere appreciation for English/European literature. Just a Masterpiece. I have watched this maybe 10 times...and I always feel as if I need to applaud when it has ended... lol. A must watch.