The Illusionist (2006)

No, not the 2010 animation written by Jacques Tati. Like Infamous, this movie got overshadowed by a similarly themed movie out around the same time, in this case The Prestige. (Scoop also focused on magic that year, but despite the Woody Allen label, it didn't enjoy as much popularity as either competitor.) Regardless, TI has pretty high ratings, so it must have...cast a spell on some viewers.

In the Austro-Hungarian Empire late in the nineteenth century, Eduard Abramovich (Edward Norton) is a magician with the stage name of Eisenheim. One night, his volunteer from the audience is Duchess Sophie von Teschen (Jessica Biel), once his teen sweetheart until authorities forced them apart due to his lower class. Alas, she is betrothed to Crown Prince Leopold (Rufus Sewell), who has a reputation for physically abusing women, is believed to have killed one, and plans to usurp the throne. Leopold takes little time to grow suspicious and sends Chief Inspector Uhl (Paul Giamatti) to snoop on Eisenheim and look for an excuse to arrest him. Rescuing Sophie and/or bringing Leopold to justice would take an extraordinary feat of magic....

Compared to TP, where two antiheroes plot against each other such that you don't know whom to root for, TI seems almost overly simplistic in its assignation of hero, damsel, and villain. The most morally complicated character is the "not completely corrupt" Uhl, who admires Eisenheim enough to wish him well but would hate to throw away the chance to gain an even higher position under the next emperor. Leave it to Giamatti to provide a treat.

Speaking of treats, what tricks! I could have sworn that Eisenheim was using some "real" magic, made possible only by cinematic technology. Instead, AIUI, only his imagined origin story shows truly impossible stunts. The filmmakers didn't rely on CG; they called in expert magicians to guide Norton. I find it quite a relief from TP, which features mostly botched acts and straight-up fantasy/soft sci-fi.

For all its attempts at authenticity (e.g., strict kerosene lamp lighting), it's not exactly based on true events. Both Eisenheim and Leopold were inspired by historical figures, but the two never interacted so. The film also diverges a little from the short story by Steven Millhauser, particularly in the scheming. Viewers have found a number of errors, but I don't think any of them call for excessive suspension of disbelief.

There is one odd enhancement to the visuals: a yellowish tint. That's putting aside the sepia of a flashback. Ordinarily, I don't care for unrealistic tinting, but it does suit the world of an illusionist.

If you think the structure is too simple for missing Christopher Nolan's gratuitous time jumps, just wait until the ending. Then you'll see why I and IMDb include "mystery" among the genres.

So count me among the few who prefer TI to TP. More than that, I enjoy the former on its own terms. It succeeds where a lot of fiction should hope to: in feeling like a fairy tale without actually being one.