First Things First…
Edward Norton as a turn-of-the-century illusionist? Count me in!
I saw this in the theater when it came out, but not since.
From what I remember about it, though, it came out right around the same time as The Prestige. Which was weird, because movies about magicians aren’t all that common.
I seem to remember most people preferred The Prestige. And even though I like that movie, too, I liked this better. It probably doesn’t hurt that Norton has been my favorite actor for a long, long time. Curious if it holds up. And maybe revisiting The Prestige soon, too, to get a proper comparison would be fun.
3 Things I Like
3. The Sword in the Stone
Eisenheim makes Leopold look like a fool in the most insulting way possible — where most of the room fails to notice, but they both know Eisenheim got the better of him.
I enjoy their budding rivalry, even though they shouldn’t be rivals. After all, Leopold is an aristocrat and heir to the empire, while Eisenheim is an illusionist who comes from nothing.
But Leopold thinks he’s smart enough to have figured out Eisenheim’s tricks, and suspects Eisenheim is a charlatan — all the while, he’s preparing to announce his engagement to the love of Eisenheim’s life.
So when Leopold challenges Eisenheim during a small, private performance and says, “Why don’t you astonish us, if you can, without all the gadgetry?”, Eisenheim embarrasses him with this sword trick — and I love anything Arthurian, so riffing on the sword in the stone is fantastic — and does just enough to piss off Leopold and get his show shut down.
Maybe he thinks he’s being more subtle than he is, because he relents before the whole room sees how he’s playing Leopold.
Or maybe he realizes forcing Leopold to bear the shame of being embarrassed privately will sting even more.
2. Magic
There aren’t enough movies about magic or magicians — especially old-timey ones like this. It’s just plain fun getting caught up in the mystery and spectacle of Eisenheim’s performances — especially the early ones, when he doesn’t seem despondent.
Could the magic look more realistic? Probably, especially if the movie came out today instead of 16 years ago. But I barely noticed that while enjoying his tricks.
1. They Could’ve Been Great Friends
The main cast members are all excellent, but what I love most is the connection between Eisenheim and Uhl.
It’s clear from Uhl’s enthusiastic applause at the first performance he attends that he’s impressed by Eisenheim’s skill. And when he inspects the theater the next day, and Eisenheim shares with him the trick of being able to “guess” which hand he’s holding the fruit in, Uhl almost has a sense of glee.
Their conversation at the restaurant, though, is when you get to see a sense of kinship.
Eisenheim tries to lower Uhl’s hackles by admitting he was just the son of the cabinetmaker who made the furniture for the Sophie’s family — and no romantic threat to Leopold. But he also comments on Uhl doing the dirty work for Leopold and, thus, being close to power. To which Uhl says…
“Yes indeed, they say I’m very close to the prince. But the simple truth of the matter is, Herr Eisenheim, I am the son of a butcher. He’s the heir to the empire. How close could we be to such as him, hmmm?“
I love that they’ve both risen beyond their supposed stations in life, and they seem to recognize that in one another.
You see it closer to the end, too, when it’s becoming increasingly likely Uhl will have to arrest Eisenheim. I Eisenheim’s new show — in which he appears to bring up apparitions of the dead — he brings up Sophie after her supposed murder and provokes the idea amongst the crowd that Leopold murdered her. Here, Uhl says…
“Eisenheim, I don’t want to arrest you. I’m a cynical man, God knows, but if your manifestations are somehow real then even I’m willing to admit you’re a very special person. And if it’s a trick, then it’s equally impressive. Either way, you have a gift. So don’t make me put you in jail!“
Uhl is conflicted, caught between his allegiance to Leopold and his station, and his admiration for Eisenheim. It makes for a fascinating dynamic.
0 Things I’m Mixed About
3 Things I Don’t Like
3. The Secret of the Locket
This is supposed to be a trick?
Eisenheim’s illusions are practically impenetrable, even to educated, intelligent people like Uhl and Leopold. Yet he talks about this “secret” way of opening the locket — and even has the diagram of it — and all it basically amounts to is twisting the two halves of it so it changes into the shape of a heart.
It’s a cool design. The work of an artist, really. But it doesn’t seem that hard to figure out how to open.
Does any of this affect the story even slightly? Not at all. I just found it funny the way this is presented.
2. Who’s in Jail?
After Sophie is thought to be murdered, and Eisenheim puts on what we later learn is an act, insisting Leopold must be guilty, Uhl mentions that they arrested another man — he even confesses — but we never see this man.
This is a big thing to gloss over so quickly.
What’s the story with this man? Did Uhl actually believe he was guilty? Or was he just trying to appease Leopold?
And does Eisenheim care that his ruse has put an innocent man in jail?
1. Uhl’s Moment of Enlightenment
There’s a very Usual Suspects quality to end of the movie, when recognition dawns on Uhl and he realizes he’s been played.
But if having the locket pickpocketed by Eisenheim while getting Eisenheim’s package delivered by a kid is what triggers his understanding, it’s not clear how.
We see all the missing pieces play out — Sophie drugging Leopold, the drugs used to make Sophie appear dead and then to revive her, the framing with the fake blood and the jewels from Leopold’s sword — and they’re shown in a way where it seems Uhl is piecing them all together. But that can’t be the case. It’s possible in that moment that he realizes Sophie isn’t really dead, and that they manipulated him into arresting Leopold, which leads to Leopold’s suicide. (And also into preventing a coup, so he should still be proud.) But there’s nothing to indicate to him exactly how they pulled the whole trick off.
It feels like an ending that on the surface is very clever, but when you pull at the seams you realize it doesn’t hold up.
Final Thoughts
I had a lot of fun revisiting this. It’s not a knockout, but it’s an underrated entry in Norton’s filmography. And Paul Giamatti gives the best performance in the movie as Chief Inspector Uhl. He’s prone to overacting sometimes, and this role has all the trappings that could’ve led to a cartoonish performance. But he’s subtle, understated, and always in control.
The other stars are good too. Jessica Biel is radiant. I think this was one of her first roles after 7th Heaven, and she proves she’s a movie star. And Rufus Sewell has just the right amount of menace bubbling below the surface to be an effective villain.
Plus, magic at the turn of the century is a great starting point for a story.
