The Illusionist (Sylvain Chomet, 2010)

[manicsounds]

UK release in February 2011 but on DVD only! (in this day and age?)

The 77 minute Q&A sounds enticing. but only 5 minutes of behind the scenes, all too short.
Let's hope Sony in the US does a better job, but that would be most likely coded for Region A only

[dad1153]

Saw this at the Paris Theater in NYC (right after "The Social Network" and before "Somewhere"). As a relative newcomer to Jacques Tati that saw and loved all his movies this year (starting with "Mr. Hulot's Holiday" in May) I can't help but wonder why writer/director Sylvain Chomet bothered to make this movie. It has such a narrow appeal that, even though it might work for new viewers unfamiliar with the Hulot character or Tati's life (for whom this will feel like the most depressing and existentialist animated feature since "Grave of the Fireflies"), you're missing its true worth unless you're familiar with the character/person behind the animated drawings. "The Illusionist" takes a running thread of the Hulot movies (a young woman with whom Hulot develops a kinship that borders on, but never fully blossoms into, true love), expands on it (Alice becomes the female character to spend the most time on-screen alongside Hulot if you count this as a Tati movie) and then wraps-it around a 'what if' scenario (Tati never becoming a filmmaker and continuing his stage act into has-been status) that is both magical, occasionally funny but also brutally depressing (which I liked). The movie's last 10-15 minutes skew humor for the type of heartbreaking pathos that the live-action Tati movies only hinted at. Yes, "The Illusionist" looks gorgeous (a lot of it invisible CG but mostly hand-drawn) and yes, it allows Tati fans a chance to experience the Hulot-like antics one more time in animated form (and without the super-deformed style that characterized "The Triplets of Belleville"). If you've ever liked the M. Hulot movies or are familiar with Tati's biography (or, like me, rushed out to buy the "Trafic" Criterion DVD when it went OOP earlier this year) then this is a must-see. Chomet wisely keeps the animated Tati tricks within the realm of human possibility (no exploding cigars or "Pink Panther"-type antics) which, like the Hulot movies, results in a steady trickle of small laughter moments. The rock musicians gag, which got extended into a jukebox Irish drunk joke (stay tuned until after the credits for these gags to pay off) was my favorite. For Tati enthusiasts (or fans of Chaplin's "Limelight," which "The Illusionist" often resembles).

[MichaelB]

UK release in February 2011 but on DVD only! (in this day and age?)

Both of Chomet's features are out on Blu-ray in France in February, but presumably Region B and unsubtitled.

Mind you, the lack of subtitles will probably only make a difference to the extras, as the films themselves barely have any spoken content (is any of it relevant?)

[dad1153]

Only at the very end when a hand-written note (which was redone in English for the U.S. theatrical release) delivers the movie's most pivotal thought. Besides that it's all mumbles and you wouldn't miss a thing; even the hand-drawn signs in Edinburgh's locales (movies, restaurants, jukeboxes, etc.) are in English.

[MichaelB]

Only at the very end when a hand-written note (which was redone in English for the U.S. theatrical release) delivers the movie's most pivotal thought. Besides that it's all mumbles and you wouldn't miss a thing; even the hand-drawn signs in Edinburgh's locales (movies, restaurants, jukeboxes, etc.) are in English.

Thanks for that - if it's just written French that matters, I doubt I'll have any problems.

[LQ]

I hate to admit it to myself because this was one of my most anticipated movies of 2011, but I was disappointed in The Illusionist. The look and feel of the film is undeniably brilliant- the animation is sublime and the fusion of Chomet's and Tati's visual styles beautifully harmonious, but the relationship between the young girl and the illusionist Tatischeff upon which the plot hinged was..very odd. Nor did it evoke any kind of emotional response whatsoever, and because of the film's insistence on pointedly elegiac musical cues and forced "sentimental" sequences in the final act, it ended up rubbing me the wrong way as a whole.

I didn't quite buy the relationship from the start; I couldn't accept that she would leave her job and follow him and that he would allow it, after only a few days dotted with mild pleasantness and admiration between the two + a kindly gift of a pair of shoes. That is, unless she just expected him to continue "magically" gifting her left and right, which is what the later developments would suggest. I found the movie's treatment of her naiveté and increasing materialism and selfishness rather bizarre, as if the audience is supposed to find it endearing when she pokes around in his dressing room, taking it upon herself to open a giftbox containing the very costly pair of heels she was begging for earlier, and then walking out in them..? Scenes like that compounded by the fact that there's really no development between them that doesn't involve handing over another gift...she never sits in the audience and watches his shows, they certainly can't converse! (besides the offhand vocabulary lesson)... leaves me cold about the whole affair.

Perhaps my reaction is colored by my own effusively polite nature- I'd write a thank you card for a smile on the street- but it was genuinely puzzling to me, this confliction here: the movie obviously means for us to care about this ostensibly sweet father-daughter simulacrum of a relationship, but I can neither understand its origins nor can I latch on to it emotionally at all.


But it was very, very pretty and the evocation of time and place was wonderful.

[dad1153]

NOMINATED FOR BEST ANIMATED FEATURE ACADEMY AWARD (along with "Toy Story 3" and "How To Train Your Dragon"). Pleasant surprise, I was sure "Tangled" or some other popular CG flick would get in. This should do wonders for "The Illusionist's" meager box office receipts and a major boost for the home video release.

[jojo]

I didn't quite buy the relationship from the start; I couldn't accept that she would leave her job and follow him and that he would allow it, after only a few days dotted with mild pleasantness and admiration between the two + a kindly gift of a pair of shoes. That is, unless she just expected him to continue "magically" gifting her left and right, which is what the later developments would suggest. I found the movie's treatment of her naiveté and increasing materialism and selfishness rather bizarre, as if the audience is supposed to find it endearing when she pokes around in his dressing room, taking it upon herself to open a giftbox containing the very costly pair of heels she was begging for earlier, and then walking out in them..? Scenes like that compounded by the fact that there's really no development between them that doesn't involve handing over another gift...she never sits in the audience and watches his shows, they certainly can't converse! (besides the offhand vocabulary lesson)... leaves me cold about the whole affair.

I'm still flip-flopping in my head as to whether I like the film enough to want to buy it when it gets on DVD. Part of me says yes because, as you said, it does ooze a certain feeling of place and atmosphere, and it looks gorgeous at times. But there are a few things that keep me at arm's length and your pointing this out about Alice is a very good point. The film does seem to ask us to treat this relationship innocently, but even if you do, it sort of does make Alice seem a little materialistic and shallow. At times it seems to almost be going for a "Pretty Woman" fairy tale vibe with Tatischeff continually paying Alice off just for her company--but unlike that film, the relationship between Tatischeff and Alice never does really develop to any degree. Maybe that is the point? But that reading even brings forth new connotations. Is there any sexual motivation to Tatischeff's gift giving? The film stays clearly on the father-daughter end of the spectrum but the materialistic aspect of Alice's personality automatically plays into our cynicism.

I'm not saying this ambiguous relationship isn't intriguing to a certain degree, but there does seem to be a sort of divide between what the film wants us to think and how it actually goes about doing it.

[bottled spider]

Did anybody else find the animation a strain on the eyes? It was almost as if it had been projected slightly out of focus, but I didn't overhear any grumblings on the way out. I'm puzzled.

[knives]

The Illusionist, even several hours later, is still stewing away in my head. It's not as immediately gratifying as The Triplets of Belleville, but the mixture of pessimism and happiness in the small things of life make this ultimately the more satisfying adventure. Actually it is very subtle in all of the ways this improves upon Sylvain Chomet's previous adventures. The Tati element which he makes ample reference to, most prominently one of the most saddening laughs I've ever had, could be laid to blame for most of this, but I think that does Chomet a disservice. While he still plays with national stereotypes and grotesque marvels(look at the singer woman from the beginning) they manage a small part of the film and even works to the film's aid in making some of these people very sympathetic.
As to the film in it's own vacuum though I don't like the idea of considering a movie great just for the emotional reaction it elicits, but for each laugh there was a tear and that's about the only reason I have this automatic love for the picture. It actually got to the point where I wasn't sure what was making me laugh and what was making me cry with the pencil scene at the end being the hardest part to differentiate my emotions on.
The definitive moment for me though isn't that perfect, poetic ending, but in the scene where the girl puts on the white shoes. It speaks volumes of both characters, has a lot of distractions in the humour, yet keeps this somber melancholy that busted my tear-ducts. The character stuff is really important with the relationship of the two leads being the whole of the film. I suppose it's the smartest choice to make the relationship absolutely miserable. Tati puts up with the girl both because he is uncommonly kind and he feels pity. I love that he grows to hate her in way. Children are a burden to success and this almost comes across like a fuck you to the responsibilities that tied Tati down. So why keep up the role and ground oneself? The answer is probably in the explanation. These responsibilities you grow to loath are what makes you you and what allows you to succeed personally. By throwing that away your throwing away your dignity and humanity. It's a lose-lose situation for Tati and to be honest I don't believe he knows if a win is possible in life.
I disagree with this, but the movie puts up a very strong argument. Even in the ultimate success of the girl it takes the destruction of her innocence and her whole relationship with her false father before she can move on. This doesn't even go into the roads of the two other major characters(nor really the girl's side of things which when mixed with Tati's creates the ultimate emotional trip)of the second half of the film. Maybe it is better to be the loud, ignorant rockers who just do whatever they feel like with no concern over their surroundings or the second illusionist who's just happy being noticed and doesn't require any dignity or respect, but where's the experience in that? It's probably to risk having your being crushed than live in a cage.

[LQ]

knives, although I can't quite understand everything you wrote, your major argument for why you found the film successful is very compelling but all the same I wonder if we didn't see two different movies. My problem was that the relationship ostensibly was miserable, but in thinking so I feel like I was going against the grain of the film, which seemed to celebrate the relationship throughout even into the finale where Tati sees that "his girl" is ready to move on to adulthood, romance.. and no longer needs him, the ultimate poignant realization for every father (I guess..). I didn't at all see instances of Tati growing to hate her; if those had been more apparent then perhaps I wouldn't be so ambivalent about the movie. If Chomet had meant to make a film expressing what you noted above then he should've re-worked every single musical cue and ancillary plot device in the entire film, IMO.

The definitive moment for me though isn't that perfect, poetic ending, but in the scene where the girl puts on the white shoes. It speaks volumes of both characters, has a lot of distractions in the humour, yet keeps this somber melancholy that busted my tear-ducts

The white shoes scene was a definitive moment for me too, I had mentioned it in my initial post. I was struck with how horrid the girl was becoming, but the film seemed to bathe her in this innocent, exuberant aura while she was tipping around on the heels.

I didn't mention this before because it's secondary to my main problem with The Illusionist, but there is so much schmaltz shoved into this movie. Everything from the clown just about to commit suicide, saved by a bowl of soup, to the ventriloquist dummy marked down more and more at every passing shot, there is so much blatant emotional manipulation surrounding the main core of the movie that it makes me bilious just to think back on it.

***

Did anybody else find the animation a strain on the eyes? It was almost as if it had been projected slightly out of focus, but I didn't overhear any grumblings on the way out. I'm puzzled.

Must've been projected incorrectly, bottled spider. The animation was lovely and very much in focus when I saw it- the only part of the movie that didn't disappoint

[knives]

The definitive moment for me though isn't that perfect, poetic ending, but in the scene where the girl puts on the white shoes. It speaks volumes of both characters, has a lot of distractions in the humour, yet keeps this somber melancholy that busted my tear-ducts

The white shoes scene was a definitive moment for me too, I had mentioned it in my initial post. I was struck with how horrid the girl was becoming, but the film seemed to bathe her in this innocent, exuberant aura while she was tipping around on the heels.

I didn't mention this before because it's secondary to my main problem with The Illusionist, but there is so much schmaltz shoved into this movie. Everything from the clown just about to commit suicide, saved by a bowl of soup, to the ventriloquist dummy marked down more and more at every passing shot, there is so much blatant emotional manipulation surrounding the main core of the movie that it makes me bilious just to think back on it.

I do see how you could get that out of the film and relationships and I think one of the problems that an audience member could run into is that the girl is a stand in for most of the movie for some one much younger. A little kid who doesn't know any better than to ask for clothes and food. It's a bit of a fantastical element that either one can role with or not. I recognized her own horribleness, but since I was treating her like a little girl(which she obviously is not)I was able to treat her like someone suffering through the selfishness of youth rather than the little monster someone actually her age would be in that situation. Also to clarify one tiny thing if I said hate in regards to their relationship that was me misspeaking, was more like an annoyance that he really didn't want to put up with but felt the obligation to do so anyways.
Finally I didn't really find any schmaltz in those two side characters. Had they not been developed I would have agreed, but they got plenty of screen time considering how short the movie was. They're not really characters so much as reminders and reflections to Tati of the potential failure even without the girl he could have. It's as if the universe is pushing him to take up this responsibility which for me makes the ending all the more damaging. The stories of those characters were the more intellectual part of the story for me at least.

[karmajuice]

Just got back from seeing this. I won't talk about the film's visual beauty, which is self-evident -- though I may discuss a few stand-out moments at the end of my post. Mostly I want to address some of the issues LQ brought up.

I disagree with your assessment of their relationship and how it's supposed to play for the audience. It begins with childhood, nostalgia, and innocence, but very quickly the film forces us to question their legitimacy. The girl is a gold digger who capitalizes on Tatischeff's nostalgia for childhood (rather than sexual needs). We may not realize this immediately, as we are inclined to share Tatischeff's nostalgic perspective, but it becomes quite evident as the film goes on. Even so, Chomet doesn't demonize her. She is on occasion sweet and considerate, and I think she genuinely admires Tatischeff. Nor do I think her cruelty is intentional. She is a teenager, with all the concerns of that age, which we might consider trivial: she wants to look pretty, she wants nice things. She's merely careless and a little self-absorbed, as many people tend to be at that age. She's just a girl, and I don't think the film makes her better or worse than any other girl.

Their relationship illustrates a theme which permeates the whole film. Tatischeff is part of an antiquated world: a common Tati theme, but even more melancholy here than Tati's films ever were, suggesting that this outdated world is on the verge of death. We see signs of this everywhere: the popularity of rock and roll, the light bulb* and the jukebox in the pub, the televisions, the fancy cars, the empty seats in the music houses. To Chomet's credit, these elements never feel obtrusive, but they are persistently present. We get a sense of Tatischeff's increasing irrelevance in this changing world (and, by extension, we may also think of Tati's decline and the decline of Chomet's chosen form, 2D animation). Tatischeff has opportunities to adapt to this world, namely through his job as a living advertisement, but he rejects these capitalist enterprises (the mainstream) in spite of their fecundity. He prefers what he is familiar with, which means something to him even if it's fading.

This is made manifest in the relationship with the girl. She may be charmed by his show, but her primary interest lies in consumer culture, the commodities of the modern world. He is part of the old world, she is part of the new one. Notice that they hardly spend any time together in Edinburgh. Their few shared moments are pleasant enough: the giving of a gift, rabbit stew, their initial encounters in the Scottish village. Even these moments, though, are unexceptional. The girl is friendly, Tatischeff is kind; that is all. If you complain that their relationship lacks depth, well, I say that's exactly the point. They don't know each other and they make little effort to. Their relationship resembles a father/daughter relationship, but it's a tenuous one and I don't feel like Tati's departure at the end is "letting go". It's abandonment. The initial impulse to give her gifts and let her tag along was paternal, but her shallowness tries his patience and soon he's paying her off to leave him alone. The tension suggests a very troubled father/daughter relationship, not an idealized one.

This father/daughter matter is further complicated by the photograph Tatischeff carries with him. It presence is subtle, easily overlooked. He glances at it maybe two or three times in the entire duration of the film (once, significantly, after the girl makes off with the white shoes she finds in his dressing room). We see the picture finally just before the end credits (with its accompanying dedication): a picture of a young girl. We have no idea who this girl is, although on a metafictional level we can associate her with Sophie or the abandoned Helga. In the film world, however, we can only assume that it is a daughter that Tatischeff lost or abandoned, and perhaps it is the guilt or emptiness he feels in relation to her absence which makes him assume the half-hearted fatherhood with Alice. This makes their strained relationship and his eventual abandonment that much more tragic.

I think that's enough about that, for now. I do agree with some of your criticisms, LQ. The music is overbearing, especially toward the end. The film indulges in sentimentality, although Chomet manages enough grace for me to forgive him. The scene with the suicidal clown and the soup is a low point, though the clown himself is important. The clown and the ventriloquist reflect the decline of the old ways, the outmoded music hall days, and they foreshadow the inevitable course of Tatischeff's future.

Chomet juggles Tati's sensibility with his own quite well, although he only occasionally manages to elicit the charms of a true Tati film and never really matches Tati's level of artistry -- at least not on Tati's terms. However, the film has two remarkable moments I'd like to mention. Neither is especially Tati-esque; they are great, but they are great on their own terms.
The first is slightly reminiscent of Tati, as it's a visual gag where a character mistakes one thing for another. Down feathers are blown by the wind and Alice mistakes them for snow. It doesn't provide much development or insight into anything, but it is one of the few moments in the film where genuine magic pierces through the illusions (by, paradoxically, manifesting in illusion).
The second is very near to the end of the film and resembles nothing in Tati's oeuvre. Tatischeff has left, Alice has gone off with the boy, the room they stayed in is empty. But Chomet brings us back to this empty room, where a book lies on the table. In a burst of motion, the window flies open and the wind blows the pages of the book. At the same time, a light comes through the other window and casts a moving, morphing shadow of the fluttering pages on the opposite wall. If the light had a clear source, I didn't catch what it was. It seems to come from nowhere, and its purple tint gives the sight an ethereal edge. It's an enigmatic moment which lacks any clear motivation for its inclusion, but it's absolutely beautiful and adds some indefinable but essential quality to the film's resolution.

* (I love how the lighting shifted in this moment, from the nostalgic warmth of the oil lamp to the pale, washed out electric light.)

[LQ]

Karmajuice, as with knives' post(s), I found what you wrote much more compelling than what the movie itself offers. I can certainly buy into and agree with your reading... Tatischeff losing his place in the world as the girl is finding hers... but it doesn't convince me that the fabric of the film aided in this conclusion at all. Throughout the film I felt forcibly directed into emotions that the actions on screen did not themselves inherently convey. It may have been my personal misinterpretation but all around me I felt this palpable sense of awww! when Alice was teetering on the white heels; "poignant sadness" when Tatischeff secretly follows the young couple near the end. Etc.

Their relationship resembles a father/daughter relationship, but it's a tenuous one and I don't feel like Tati's departure at the end is "letting go". It's abandonment. The initial impulse to give her gifts and let her tag along was paternal, but her shallowness tries his patience and soon he's paying her off to leave him alone. The tension suggests a very troubled father/daughter relationship, not an idealized one.

The only moment where Tatischeff shows any kind of emotion that could be construed as annoyance that I can recall is when Alice sees him performing his lowest, most demeaning job and as he's driving off he offers her a coin when she holds out her hand expectantly- but his ducking away could easily be taken as embarrassment. For me, there wasn't enough direction surrounding the characters to fully support the conclusion that you make; rather, the direction/music seemed to counteract and undermine said conclusion at times. You say Tati's departure isn't about 'letting go', he's abandoning her, but why direct him to take leave after we have watched him painstakingly follow Alice and her beau with what I took as paternal interest moving into poignant, resigned acceptance that she has moved beyond their 'father/daughter' relationship and has come into her own as a woman with a romantic prospect that will take care of her?

Additionally I'll add that the reading you gave makes the relationship seem all the more forced, an inorganic contrivance set up to function as a metaphor for the film's thesis. I saw no discernable reason for the girl to leave her life and follow Tatischeff, nor for them to live together with such a slight, empty "bond".

I'm glad that you were able to enjoy it though, and glean something meaningful from it, really! As I said before, I went into the theater totally expecting to love it. Whether by its fault or my own, it just rubbed me the wrong way and it stands in my memory as a poorly plotted, oddly directed, emotionally overindulgent, but stunningly animated film.

[manicsounds]

Ugh... just couldn't bear with the US BD to not go down in price anywhere, and with the Japanese BD from Studio Ghilbi announced with similar minimal extras, I had to go with the UK DVD(!) which is cheaper and has a lot longer exclusive extras.

[manicsounds]

The UK "Illusionist" DVD:

Image is great, no problems here. The case lists 2.35 but it's definitely 1.85:1
Sound, Dolby 5.1 English (barely), and 2.0 audio descriptive.
(the back cover also states English subtitles, but there aren't any)

Extras are the 3 minute silent making of, same as the Sony disc, UK theatrical trailer, and the meatiest extra is the 76 minute Edinburgh Film Festival Q&A with Chomet, in English. Great stuff, but someone who controlled the audio recording didn't do their job properly. Lots of feedback sounds during the entire time. Still worthy to hear. Also there is a photo gallery.