Elaborate shaggy dog story

Rating: 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.