National Post (National Edition)
HOCUS BOGUS
Everyone knows it’s rude to talk during a movie, but once the credits roll, you’re bound to have an opinion that needs, nay demands, sharing. Every other week in Post Movies experts, artists and movie buffs dissect a recent release. It’s fun. It’s healthier than nachos. It’s the Popcorn Panel.
This week’s panel
Alison Broverman conjures up the Popcorn Panel in these pages.
Eric Woolfe is the artistic director of Eldritcth Theatre (eldritchtheatre.ca), a Toronto company specializing in blood-churning horror plays that combine live actors, puppetry and parlour magic.
Billy Kidd is a professional close-up magician and street performer based in the U.K. She hosts the Discovery Channel’s Breaking Magic. Find her online at billykiddshow.com.
This week’s film The Incredible Burt Wonderstone
First of all, a 2013 comedy about magicians and there is no Will Arnett/GOB cameo and no cracks about tricks vs. illusions? Come on! But that only scratches the surface of the disappointment that is The Incredible Burt Wonderstone. The movie starts strong, with a sweet friendship montage of two bullied kids who take refuge in their shared enthusiasm for magic tricks and build a career as a magic team. But instead of showing us a satisfying character arc, the movie takes the lazy “10 years later” way out, fast-forwarding to them being out-of-touch, arrogant and oversexed. Yuck.
Eric It was terrible letdown going from the charming child version of Burt to Steve Carell’s utterly unpleasant adult incarnation. I kept yearning for the movie to be about one of the supporting characters. Any of the supporting characters would have been an improvement. You know a movie is in trouble when you want the titular character to disappear so you can spend more time with the lousy comedy magician from the bar, or the old retired Alan Arkin character. And for a movie that is ostensibly about a jerk who is redeemed when he rediscovers his love of magic, it was conspicuously lacking in good magic.
Billy As a magician I was hoping for more magic, more storyline and more character — all of which this movie lacked. There was a bit of hope at the beginning when they showed the practice, hard work and wonder that one goes through when learning their first magic trick. However, all this ended quickly. From a magic perspective I did enjoy watching “magicians” on the big screen. Unfortunately the cheesy stereotype that lay people categorize us in is all too true in this film. I just wished I cared more about the characters. No heart in this film. Alison There were tiny hints of heart throughout — I found the storyline at the old folks’ home quite sweet. I also wanted way more Arkin. And Olivia Wilde exhibits a certain wide-eyed charm as an aspiring magician and expert pickpocket. But the writers Jonathan Goldstein (not that one) and John Francis Daley seemed more concerned with their lame jokes and with just how disgusting they could make Jim Carrey’s awful grossout street magician character. At least Carrey is believable — my skin was crawling every time he was onscreen. Eric Sure, there were glimmers of heart, but they all came from the supporting characters. I would have been much happier watching two hours of Arkin teaching Wilde and Steve Bucemi tricks from his magic set. It would have made for a much more entertaining film. I had a problem with Carrey’s character too. If they are going to establish Carrey’s geek acts as the antithesis of good magic, lacking wonder and joy, then Burt and Anton’s final comeback act ought to be something more mystical than the stupid stunt they come up with — especially in a world in which an old guy in a retirement home can perform an impromptu Live Dove from Salt Shaker trick. Billy If they concentrated on this being less of a comedy and more of a drama I wonder if this film would be more successful. The struggles of a female magician were bang on. Everything they mentioned was very truthful. Obviously Carrey’s character was a parody of Chris Angel and David Blaine. I thought that was actually really funny. But I’m thinking from a magician’s perspective. I think magicians will get more out of this film than others. Eric Speaking with my magician glasses on, the trouble with Blaine and Angel isn’t their style, it’s their reliance on cameras and the editing suite. The film doesn’t even touch on that. In fairness, it wouldn’t really serve the story if they did. However, it adds to the overall feeling of inauthenticity. If you are going to satirize a branch of show business, you should first understand it. Or at least read a book about it. Alison Agreed. To make an effective comedy (or any movie, really) about something, a writer needs to start with a genuine love of and interest in that thing. And of course it’s possible to love magic while still appreciating the absurdities of its world. But Goldstein and Daley start at a place of contempt and ignorance, and as a result, the majority of the jokes are simply not funny.