talkmagic.co.uk

oops sorry, it posted twice

azraelws6 wrote:There are many magic-effects on it but for the most part they are unfortunately just for the movies... and cannot be performed in actuality. Very impressive though....

The one prominent trick in the movie is where Eisenheim makes an orange tree instantaneously grow from a pot and produce real oranges. While the magic effects are fun to watch - they are quite a stretch...

This trick is real and has been performed for centurys. In Jim Steinmeyers book about the life of Chung Ling Soo (the Glorious Deception), it is detailed that he did this trick and also threw out the oranges to prominant members of the audience with a little message attached to them by a ribbon

Robert Houdin also did this trick, complete with butterflies but i cant remember where i read about it

I believe the actual, performed version of this trick is to produce real oranges from a PICTURE (drawing) of an orange tree....

Of course I could be wrong as I am in no way an authority on this matter!

Waiting for Mrs Seige to come watch Illusionist at the the pics.

After the rather disappointing and predictable 'Prestige' I'm not sure she'll be keen to watch another magic movie. She only watched the Prestige because Hugh Jackman was in it.

seige wrote:After the rather disappointing and predictable 'Prestige' I'm not sure she'll be keen to watch another magic movie. She only watched the Prestige because Hugh Jackman was in it.

I'm afraid Seige if you thought "The Prestige" was boring and predictable, you are not in for a treat.

I took the girly to see this on saturday and we both had the same sort of experience, although mine was slightly worse because I'd been told that Norton was intensively trained in sleight of hand by Ricky Jay "so they wouldn't have to use much CGI".

The whole damn thing was CGI. Other than a tiny, unimpressive coins from hanky and a bit of ball manipulation, almost every magical occurrence looks cartoony and fake.

Worse than that, the acting was wooden and dull... when *something* (censored to avoid spoilers!) happened that was supposed to be tragic and emotive, neither me nor my co-viewer cared whatsoever. Infact the whole film just felt like watching the (predictable) plot unfold, no emotional connection. The accents wavered between Austrian, South African and a poor Hollywood "posh" English, and contributed heavily I think to coldness of the two dimensional characters.

The best part of it was Paul Giamatti looking worried and boggle-eyed, I could watch that guy all day. Plus he has the best line as a policeman... "Are you totally corrupt?" "No! Not totally."

All in all, although it's nice to get to the flicks with the lady, we should have stayed in and hired "The Prestige".

Well, most of my own low opinion of the Prestige was that I found the whole thing to be a little too 'Hollywood'.

I enjoyed Priest's book, and I guess I had already gotten the storyline before I saw the movie.

But the movie seemed far more lifeless than the book, and a lot of the subtelty which is allowed in prose was lost in the adaptation.

Don't get me wrong, in it's own right the movie was fine. But I just felt that rather important links and ties were left unshown.

Ho hum, I guess I just had huge expectations. Mrs Seige simply had Hugh expectations, which she found in the movie.

Seige, while I realize that the movie is getting some bad karma in the UK, I'll just stress that the STORY is far better. I find you actually CARE about what happens to the characters - in stark contrast (for me anyway) from the Prestige.

...and yes that was true about the CGI effects - but that's not the important part of the movie.

I think its also a matter of style. The Illusionist reminded me in its shooting of the story-based, beutifully set, themed acts of the bygone eras of magic. The Prestige reminded me of the CGI, wham-bam, ellusionist-type street acts that are popular today

azraelws6 wrote:I believe the actual, performed version of this trick is to produce real oranges from a PICTURE (drawing) of an orange tree....

Of course I could be wrong as I am in no way an authority on this matter!

That version is the NEW version that was recently been released by John Moyer.

The ORIGINAL Orange Tree Illusion was created by Jean Eugene Robert-Houdin over 100 years ago. It was performed by Houdin (complete with the butterfly finale) as well as many of his contemporaries.

There was a special on television years ago that showed the apparatus and portions of the effect (though not the entire performance).

Demitri wrote:

azraelws6 wrote:I believe the actual, performed version of this trick is to produce real oranges from a PICTURE (drawing) of an orange tree....

Of course I could be wrong as I am in no way an authority on this matter!

That version is the NEW version that was recently been released by John Moyer.

The ORIGINAL Orange Tree Illusion was created by Jean Eugene Robert-Houdin over 100 years ago. It was performed by Houdin (complete with the butterfly finale) as well as many of his contemporaries.

There was a special on television years ago that showed the apparatus and portions of the effect (though not the entire performance).

Wow!! I stand (actually, at the moment sit) corrected in awe and astonishment!

Siege, I bet your Misses will like Illusionist much better. It's not much about magic like The Prestige. It's more of a love story involving a magician who at times makes you wonder if he is actually more than just a magician. He starts to feel a bit Rasputanish. The two movies are very very different. There is also no exposure in the Illusionist, with the exception of a hint during the sword trick. (Which I still don't think would work) I like the fact that the end is only though shown through the Police Chief imagination... or is it?

I have to say that Mrs dat and myself thought that the Illusionist was an excellent movie. Great story line and Edward Norton is on the road to becomming one of the greats.

I agree about Edward Norton being a great actor, but I found the movie just not bad. The plot is well thought of but it is quite predictable apart maybe from one sequence (know what I mean? ). Too much CGI. I didn't think "how did he do that?", but rather "bah, that was impossible in the 19th century". However, it would be very interesting if it would be possible to see the orange tree act. It is some nice piece of magic.