Why Must Innocent People Pay For The Hero's Love Life? It's Unconscionable!

Rating: 3/10 (10 September 2006)

Ultimately I disliked this film because I felt queasy about the single-minded quest of our illusionist hero Eisenheim played by Edward Norton to muscle in on the romantic affairs of the Crown Prince Leopold. Presumably with a childlike taunt of "I saw her first", Eisenheim feels that he has the right to have Jessica Biel for himself even though she is betrothed to the Crown Prince. Taking his cue from other amoral, selfish types who think their own desires are the only ones that need fulfilling, when Eisenheim is finished, we have an innocent man in jail for murder (who will presumably stay there) and the suicide of another man who is made to think he killed someone who is actually still alive.
All of this is perpetrated so Norton and Biel can go off together and live happily ever after. Why did so many innocent people have to suffer for their love? Couldn't they have just eloped or run away? I actually heard people in the audience cheer and applaud when the Crown Prince (Rufus Sewell) shot himself. Suicide should not be laughed at in this manner.
Maybe I'm old fashioned that way, but whatever the Crown Prince's crimes, they were not worth a bullet in the head. It is not OK to trick the Crown Prince simply because he is alleged to have beaten up his girlfriends from time to time. Key word there is "alleged", we never actually see him do anything violent, even if he is a bit of a jerk. Sadly, being a jerk is not against the law or our prisons would have long since been over filled.
There are other unbelievable things in this story; for example, it was only fifteen years since the heroine played by Jessica Biel laid eyes on her childhood friend Eisenheim, so it is not believable that she did not recognize him at all when she saw him again as an adult. I mean, she kept a picture of him in a secret locket that she no doubt looked at from time to time, but she couldn't recognize him when she finally saw him? She couldn't figure out who this guy is right away? How many sleight of hand masters does she know?
Plus, how much did he really love her if he couldn't wait to run away for fifteen years in the first place? Now all of a sudden he thinks he can't live without her? Also, wet rope makes more sparks than the chemistry between Norton and Biel, even though both are good actors.
Consider what actually happens in this film: Ed Norton's Illusionist breaks up a prosperous and seemingly OK engagement (what couple doesn't have occasional fights?). He has a man put in jail on false murder charges and forces another man to kill himself, all to satisfy his romantic jones. How long were they going to let the poor innocent man rot in jail for the murder of Jessica Biel's character before mentioning that "Oh by the way"; she's not dead and he's in jail on false pretenses? This is unconscionable in every way.
Wisely, the filmmakers never show us the poor sap who was jailed for Jessica Biel's alleged murder. I can only presume that he is not having a good time. If we in the audience ever connected the poor fellow to someone with a life and a family, we would not be so sanguine that Norton and Biel find their happiness at his expense. Now, with the Crown Prince dead, and Biel gone, will Paul Giamatti's police chief finally realize and admit he screwed up the case and release the innocent man? I doubt it.
Also, the "Sixth Sense" like ending where every thing is explained is a bit clumsy and Giamatti should have already figured it all out anyway. Other wise, the film has a power, I could not take my eyes off the screen despite the fact that no sparks fly between Norton and Biel at all. The magic scenes were interesting, but not so compelling as they would be in a live stage performance. I know how they do tricks in movies; I don't know how magicians do it on a live stage. Phillip Glass's score is only ordinary; I had hoped for more. But that's obviously a paradox; more from a minimalist.