Death Defying Acts

Another magician movie? But The Illusionist and The Prestige were great movies, so why not? Catherine Zeta Jones plays a foxy, yet poor, mother, scamming away through life pretending to be a psychic. When Guy Pearce's Houdini comes into town to prove or disprove the existence of the paranormal, they come into contact.

It is both a sad and a hopeful movie. A little too "psychic" for me and too little about the true nature of Harry Houdini except his fascination for his dead mother. The script itself does not lend itself to praise, but the atmosphere and realisation are top notch.

Bottom line: watch it when you are in a mood for a rom-drama, but you don't care much about the subject.

This film is about a woman who works as a con artist trying to deceive Harry Houdini into believing that she has psychic powers.

"Death Defying Acts" sounds like an action movie, but the poster looks more like a romantic film. In fact it is neither. It is a slowly unfolding drama about how Mary attempts to con Harry, and how harry falls for her.

As Houdini is the greatest escape artist of all times, a film about him should have been exciting, thrilling and even death defying. However, this film has none of these attributes. The plot is slow, plain and not exciting at all. There is not much tension or drama to captivate me. I do not care about the characters, and whatever relationship they have between them. There is little chemistry between Guy Pearce and Catherine Zeta-Jones. Frankly, I think they are both miscast. Fortunately, Saoirse Ronan is delightful as the psychic sidekick. She is the one who save the film.

"Death Defying Acts" turns out to be a bore. I am quite disappointed by it.

Gillian Armstrong makes fine movies: she is a director who knows how to tell stories and enhance what appears on the surface to be reality with a healthy dose of fantasy. Her sense of pacing and image creation adds substance to her tales that sometimes border on bizarre.

DEATH DEFYING ACTS uses the character of Harry Houdini as the stimulus of to tell a story about the folk of Edinburgh, Scotland at a time when stage shows were embraced much the way America was using vaudeville - an escape from the rather dreary state of living to a world of entertainment and love of magic. Mary McGarvie (Catherine Zeta-Jones) and her daughter Benji (Saoirse Ronan) survive in Edinburgh by picking pockets not merely for cash but for information to use in their act in the little theaters. Mary does exotic dances then uses her 'gifts' to see into the 'other world' of people in the audience ( Benji does the investigative work and is the prompter for the séance like acts Mary performs). Their idol is Harry Houdini (Guy Pearce) and when they learn Houdini is coming to Edinburgh to 'perform', they discover Houdini is promising $10,000 to anyone who can prove they have the ability to look into the future (or past). Houdini's manager Sugarman (Timothy Spall) arranges Houdini's water tank escape acts and other acts of 'magic', and when Mary and Benji arrange to meet Houdini, Sugarman is aware they are charlatans. How Mary and Benji work their way into Houdini's belief system and love life with their con game forms the meat of the sparing.

The atmosphere of the film is well captured by cinematographer Haris Zambarloukos who understands who to balance the mire of the streets of 1926 Edinburgh with the gorgeous fantasies used during Houdini's escape acts. The musical score by Cezary Skubiszewski is a terrific mixture of Scottish tunes and instruments with solid melodramatic mood music. Pearce, Zeta-Jones, Spall and Ronan turn in excellent performances. This is an unjustly overlooked film that, while not being a masterpiece, serves up a fine story well told. Grady Harp

i do not know why this film is flushed with negative reviews. First of all this is not a film about Houdini, there is no reason why this film should dramatically display the amazing acts and potentials of the artist himself; Secondly, i do not see why 'there is no reason for the creation of this movie' is justifiable, this film is just a testimony on how characters carry on with their lives and that itself is enough to make a film meaningful...in fact films like 'Atonement' (where the girl is also in) deserves this statement better where everything is just so FAKE. Third, i haven't watch the illusionist but i have to say this is richer in detail, and thus better than the Prestige--a film which displays too much magic 'action' but no depth to the characters or the plot at all, like an eggshell without the yoke inside...Lastly, this is a decent film where everything is well-made, well presented, well acting performances (exception of Catherine's dramatically 'fake' acting at times), and a good score

Gillian Armstrong's 'Death Defying Acts' is somewhat of a letdown. It tells the fictional story of a poor but beautiful psychic-wannabe and Houdini through her daughter's point of view. One must be warned that this film is fictional and thus, Pearce's Houdini does not bear much resemblance to the real one. This one lacks the enigma that made the real Houdini so fascinating. Nor does 'Death Defying Acts' stay true to the historical facts. The focus is much more on the psychic aspects (which wasn't that well explored either). The romance between Houdini and Mary is a little repetitive as it moves back and forth between trust and mistrust and then it becomes confusing. There was something lacking. On the plus side, Timothy Spall, Saoirse Ronan and Catherine Zeta-Jones perform well. The sensual Zeta-Jones does part of a scintillating dance as well. Guy Pearce performs good sometimes but he looks confused in many other scenes. The visuals and cinematography are stunning. The background score is whimsical and pleasing. Overall, it is an average movie that could have been better. One ought not to watch 'Death Defying Acts' as a true account but rather try to enjoy it as a work of fiction.