Steinesongo Too many fans seem to be blown away

GarnettTeenage The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

abc-155 having studied the live of this remarkable man - Harry Houdini - I was looking forward to this movie. Unfortunately I was terribly disappointed. Too many facts are totally wrong and they makers have not done justice to the genius Houdini who has invented several great Illusion tricks for magic. Houdini was a true fighter against fakes and mediums who claimed super natural power. This had nothing to do with his wish to speak to his mother after she died. I do not mind some freedom while filming a biography but somehow the story must fit the truth. Houdini's brother was a fine gentleman and not a bit like this movie figure, Houdini's wife Bess was absolutely loyal to her husband and further more, Harry Houdini knew Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for many years, and not just for a dinner, as shown in the film. This film is useless. Sorry.

Rosabel This film did a good job creating the atmosphere of the turn-of-the-century show business world Houdini moved in when getting his start. I had high hopes at the beginning, which covers his early career performing with his brother, then later with his young wife, Bess, as they go from one fleabag music hall to another looking for their big break. Jonathan Schaech is very convincing in his portrayal of Houdini as a consummate professional and egoist, driven to succeed and be the very best at what he does. The movie starts to lose focus at the moment Houdini's career takes off; from this point on, it takes on a soap-operaish tone as it turns its attention away from his performing and towards his private life. The Great Mystifier turns into a slightly pathetic character, torn between his inflexible mother and his grouchy wife, and his fascinating career recedes into the background, where it serves as a mere backdrop to the story of his troubled relationship with Bess. Not only do the filmmakers ignore Houdini's unique position in the world of the theatre in favour of a rather hackneyed romantic drama, they go on to change the facts to fit their theme. Bess was not a perpetual wet blanket on Houdini's career; she was a theatre performer herself, and she often worked as his assistant. Though she must have been anxious for his success and safety in his work, it is inaccurate to portray her as frequently on her knees in a Catholic church, like the wife of a mafia don, imploring divine intercession to help an unendurable situation. By all accounts theirs was a generally happy marriage. Nor was Houdini's brother the incompetent and failure he is portrayed as here; as Hardeen, he was himself a successful magician, though never as celebrated as his older brother.But these failures are as nothing compared with the ending, which completely turns on its head everything we know about Houdini, and depicts a seance succeeding in bringing back his spirit after death. It is well known that seances conducted for several years after his death were a complete failure, and Houdini himself had only scorn for the spiritualistic frauds who preyed upon the public. It is even more confusing to have the seance succeed, when at the same moment it is being proved that the medium in charge is a phony. I think that, in the end, the film makers simply did not know what really to make of Houdini, and threw everything they could lay their hands on at him, hoping that something would stick. A film with lots of opportunities, most of them missed.

Erewhon 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.

Chris-150 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!!