Houdini (1998)

Beautiful, moving film.

A Disappointing Continuation

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

It is not a biographic movie. It is not homage to a great artist. It is only exploration of a myth. With errors, good intentions and a lot of exaggerations. A film for Johnathon Schaech's charm and for beginning of childhood dreams taste. Delicate and sweet, for who knows than magic is an ingredient of existence. For dreamers. And for remember a name. Old, lost, fascinating. It is not a film about Houdini. It is a short story about a character with his name but others ways of life and different nuances of facts. May be a Rider Digest material. About a shadow of a strange time for who the limits are fiction. "Houdini" is not a bad movie. And not a masterpiece. Only a show, very delicate with details but , in fact, a beautiful stamp, it is first step to discover a impressive science to broke the limits and to understand the days more than a summer rain.

Below average drama which tells the real-life story of Harry Houdini, the man who was known as the greatest wizard of the world. Although the theme here is very curious and interesting, the movie goes on and on only developing a series of performances made by Houdini in his long career. The movie does not give a more deep look in the personality of the controversial magician and the last scene is a obvious and not original approach toward one of Houdini most important concerns: life after death.I give this a 5 (five).

When Tony Curtis played Harry Houdini in the 1953 George Pal movie, the fact that it wasn't historically accurate wasn't of serious concern, and the movie is entertaining for what it is.The TV movie THE GREAT HOUDINIS was a hasty little film of no particular interest; it's hardly memorable. But by the time 1998 rolled around, the opportunity existed to tell an accurate version of Houdini's life -- and Pen Densham not only wildly blows this, he made a movie that's actually insulting to Houdini's memory, which wasn't true of the earlier versions.The movie falsifies every relationship it depicts; Houdini's brother wasn't a whining ingrate, Houdini's wife Bess was steadfast and loyal, Houdini knew Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for many years, not for the single lunchtime meeting shown in the movie.But the insulting aspect is the element of spiritualism; Houdini spent years debunking it, and NOT just because mediums couldn't put him in touch with his mother. For the movie to show that survival after death is REAL is a betrayal of one of the main aspects of Houdini's life.And they also treat his career all wrong. Where was the Handcuff King? Where was the magician who created gigantic illusions, like walking through a wall or making an elephant disappear? Like the George Pal version, this one also invents a lot of malarkey involving the Chinese Water Torture.Houdini was a very interesting and colorful performer, and he deserves a reasonably accurate biography instead of more claptrap like this.

This was such a great movie! I am not a fan of magic and didn't think I'd like Houdini...however, it was such a sweet love story...I couldn't get enough of it...definitely a movie I'd love to see again. Johnathon Schaech was so believable as Houdini I can't wait to see his other movies. Great job!!