Illusionist

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Illusionist

    A decent movie, quite a line up to the theater, a lot had heard the buzz.




    **spoilers**


    So they never explained the ghosts. All smoke and mirrors. I didn't buy it.

  • #2
    Re: Illusionist

    Well they didn't have to totally explain it. The scene with the police chief and the guys doing a very rough around the edges version with a projector just offered the idea that there deffinately are ways it can be done. In my opinion it was a far better choice to leave it up to the viewers imagination. The only way a film like this could really work is if sufficient weight is leant to the magic.
    Frosties are just Cornflakes for people who can't face reality.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Illusionist

      Great film. I just saw it today. Packed house of all ages. People were actually clapping afterwards -- and I don't see that often.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Illusionist

        Originally posted by Copywriter2
        Great film. I just saw it today. Packed house of all ages. People were actually clapping afterwards -- and I don't see that often.
        Same here.

        I also didn't like that how mostly all of the illusions were actually done was never explained. The orange tree, for example...how did that produce real oranges? What about the kid running around? There was too much left unspoken, and my guess is that's because there was no logical way to explain certain things...and to me, that's cheating.

        I must say that I hate when (new) movies start with a scene from the middle. That was cool about 20 or 30, or even 40 years ago...now it's a cliche. Find a better way to start with a bang instead of simply reusing one.



        SPOILERS BELOW



        It was also quite obvious what was going to happen at the end, especially after seeing the ghost of the dead girl. The fact that the prince wasn't shown killing her was a dead giveway that he was innocent, and Uhl had no motive and nothing to gain...who was left?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Illusionist

          Sometimes you just have to suspend your disbelief. I did -- along with most in the audience when I saw it. They were genuinely enthusiastic after it ended -- and on the way out of the theater. Of course, that doesn't mean it's a perfect film with no holes. But it was a crowd pleaser, and well done in my opinion.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Illusionist

            Not only did people applaud after this ended, but they were talking about in the restrooms and on their way out.

            Ed Norton is a genius, plain and simple. I really enjoyed his performance. I didn't care that they didn't explain how he did every trick, to me this was not a film about how he pulled off minor illusions. This is a film about pulling off 1 huge illusion that changed the course of history.

            Great film.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Illusionist

              $16.5M budget. A period piece laden with special effects featuring three legitimate stars. How the hell did they pull that off?

              Really enjoyed this despite seeing it at the Angelika (subway rumble under the theater floor) in the 2nd to last row of a packed house (noise from lobby, outside the surround sound speaker setup, big haired guy in front of me). Leaving the illusions unexplained didn't bother me at all, because I got lost in the story. I saw most of the turns in advance, but I failed to see the grand illusion coming at the end.
              http://confoundedfilms.com

              http://www.myspace.com/confoundedfilms

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Illusionist

                I guess the denial of information regarding the tricks bothered me because I have somewhat of a passing interest in magic, and I love finding out how tricks are done. Without any real way to explain them, it felt like a cheat to me.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Illusionist

                  I'm guessing it was CGI. Does that make you feel better?
                  http://confoundedfilms.com

                  http://www.myspace.com/confoundedfilms

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Illusionist

                    I also did not see the twist coming. In hindsight i guess it was predictable enough but i was not thinking about what might happen, i was just really enjoying watching what was happening.
                    Frosties are just Cornflakes for people who can't face reality.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Illusionist

                      This movie had some serious flaws.

                      First, I saw the twist ending coming a mile away. I almost never see the twist ending coming because I'm usually engrossed in the story. It's only when I'm bored and I start looking for clues.

                      Second, Leopold was a boring, one-dimensional cliche. There was some mention of him being intelligent and possibly a reformer, but it was mostly in passing and was never shown during the movie.

                      Third, neither Leopold nor Uhl seemed to pose any real threat to Eisenheim. He was just running circles around them and it sucked the conflict out of the movie.

                      I liked the look of it and that the tricks weren't explained (thus taking the magic out of it). Good performances by Norton and Giamatti. Overall, I was not impressed.
                      "If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you"
                      "If I didn't have inner peace I'd totally go psycho on you guys all the time." - Carl Carlson

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Illusionist

                        Originally posted by Hairy Lime
                        I'm guessing it was CGI. Does that make you feel better?
                        No.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Illusionist

                          I enjoyed this film, guess that's the point of art isn't it? A master peice of deception and excitement!

                          A fantastic job!
                          D. Alin
                          http://alinproduction.blogspot.com Sci-Fi/Fantasy (Basically) [Skype me at "Buyitpc" - I will surely love to talk!]

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Illusionist

                            That was a pretty tired twist. Right up there with "It was all a dream."
                            "Forget it, Jake. It's Hollywood."

                            My YouTube channel.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Illusionist

                              Originally posted by Signal30
                              That was a pretty tired twist. Right up there with "It was all a dream."
                              thats the feeling i got at the end. it was a good movie but i couldve waited until the DVD.

                              i liked the love story element more than the actual illusions i guess because i guess i was expecting something different. ed norton is definately a good actor and i liked jessica biel's performance in this as well. i never really paid her any mind before.

                              all in all it was pretty cool. i think The Pretige with Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman will be much better though.
                              One must be fearless and tenacious when pursuing their dreams. If you don't, regret will be your reward.

                              The Fiction Story Room

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X