What Brett Watched

The Illusionist (2006)

Abracadabra! In a year of magic in film, the only trick Neil Burger’s The Illusionist conjures is to fool audiences into seeing this movie. Burger seems not quite sure what themes to highlight and in the end, with some slight of hand, we are left wonder about the role of magic and illusion in this film.

Written and directed by Neil Burger, and based loosely on Steven Millhauser’s short story, “Eisenheim the Illusionist,” The Illusionist brings an impressive cast, starring Edward Norton as Eisenheim, Paul Giamattie as Chief Inspector Walter Uhl, and Jessica Biel as Duchess Sophie Von Teschen. Set in Vienna in 1889, Burger’s film wants to develop a theme of class early on, presenting a forbidden love between young Eisenheim, the peasant son of a cabinet-maker, and Sophie, the daughter of an aristocrat. But alas, the two love-birds are separated and the resulting despair is what drives Eisenheim to wander the earth, eventually learning the secrets of illusion and magic.

It is during a performance by Eisenheim the Illusionist, who has made quite a name for himself, that we are introduced to Giamatti’s Uhl, a pragmatist, who none the less is quite enthralled by Eisenheim’s sorcery. Also attending the show is Eisenheim’s lost love Sophie, now a Duchess who is expected to marry Crown Prince Leopold, played acutely by Rufus Sewell. The meeting of these two star-crossed lovers sets the stage for a tale of lost love; or is it a tale of magic and illusion? It appears I’ve been hypnotized, because I’m not sure.

It’s unclear whether or not the magic is supposed to set up the social love story, or the other way around, but it feels that social structure is emphasized purely to drive the love story, but in the end, did it matter? In one scene, Giammati’s Uhl counters Eisenheim, saying that he’s a butcher’s son, a neat fact, but one that doesn’t matter to the story, other than to paint Uhl and Eisenheim as civil equals playing a game with royalty.

Concerning the magic, the film does have a chance to explore the mythology or mystery of it’s illusions, but either immediately dismisses them as mechanical illusions, or fails to explain them at all, despite Eisenheim’s illusions being quite impressive and seemingly impossible. (Cinematographer Dick Pope’s sepia saturated picture, while providing a filmic and old fashioned presentation, wears thin throughout the length of the film, giving it a tin-like ersatz feel, but the films illusions and magic shine with little CGI.) By the time of the big reveal, the illusions and magic take a back seat to the love story, and with little to no explanation of the tricks, the viewer is left to wonder how and why?

The lack of exposition causes the reveal to ring hollow, as we get twenty seconds of disparate images that tell us what happened, and even then it’s difficult to understand or get excited about, despite Giamatti’s Uhl laughing with a “they got me!” shrug. We’re expected to forget most of what we’ve seen for the last hour and a half accept this happy ending love story. Or was it a magic story? I’m still not sure.

As for the acting, Giamatti brings the best chops here, using tone and idiosyncrasy to overcome a weak script, and he often outshines Norton, who brings a wooden performance where a showmen is needed. Biel is forgettable and washed out; essentially a plot device to propel the story, and out-shined by her A-list co-stars. Rufus Sewell gives a strong performance, as does Eddie Marsan who plays Eisenheim’s manager.

In year that saw another magical movie in Christopher Nolan’s far superior, The Prestige, The Illusionist brings a strong cast with decent acting, but that’s about it. Burger’s film is uneven, and ultimately, undecided about what it wants to be. With a too little too late reveal appearing to explain the film’s mysteries, all mystique and curiosity fizzles and disappears like a rabbit in a hat.