Houdini le grand magicien

Tony Curtis was the proper person to play Harry Houdini when this movie was made. He had the right attitude. Janet Leigh, his wife in real life then, was outstanding as Bess Houdini and the sparks between them show on this film. To me the problem is the script.

The real Houdini's life was much more interesting than the points of his life presented here. The story covers some highlights of Harry's life, and a little of the special relationship with his mom. It totally leaves out Harry's brother, the great Hardine. It doesn't get into the barn storming career or the great tricks Houdini did enough.

The film also fails script wise to show how well Erich Weiss promoted himself enough. I think the script was designed for Curtis & Leigh and misses the best parts of Harry's life. From what I have seen and read about Houdini, a much more interesting story is there to be told. This story does not tell it entirely.

I am glad they tried to do what they did here. For Curtis & Leigh fans this is a great showcase. If it were to be remade, there are more highlights of Houdini's amazing life that could be written to make a better film. I'd challenge Hollywood to tackle that. For now, this is the best we've got, but I have to wonder what could have been with a better script.

Tony Curtis is almost always good in whomever he plays, and he was fascinating in here as the famous magician "Harry Houdini." Curtis had a number of good roles in his prime. Speaking of "prime," Janet Leigh didn't look too bad in her prime, either: a very pretty lady.

I don't know how accurate this biography was, but I do know that this movie should have been longer. I usually say the opposite about films, but in this case, I would like to have seen more details about his life and death. His failure to communicate with dead - Houdini's misguided belief - wasn't discussed much.

I guess there were a couple of more modern-day films on Houdini, but they must not have been anything much since I never heard about them. Too bad, because a good re-make of this movie might be something to see.

Even over 80 years after his demise the name Houdini is still the standard by which magicians of all kinds are measured. David Copperfield, Rick Blaine, these guys are nothing in terms of popularity that Harry Houdini earned. The tricks he did are still being performed or attempted by magicians who want to make a name for themselves.

Paramount obtained the rights to the Houdini story from the estate of Harry Houdini from the guy his widow Bess gave it to after she died in 1943. They shelled out some big money at the time to obtain loan out services for Tony Curtis from Universal and Janet Leigh from MGM. The two of them had gotten married the year before and as a couple were getting a lot of publicity as young Hollywood marrieds. Houdini turned out to be the first of five films they did together, six if you count the joint appearance they did in the all star Pepe.

Back then, young and in love, Tony and Janet function beautifully as a team as Harry Houdini and his beloved wife Bess. Angela Clarke plays Houdini's mother who was also important in his life. What's not shown is the tension between the two women, they were not friendly. But that's one of several inaccuracies.

In fact this biographical film is mostly a work of fiction. But it's pleasant enough entertainment and it was the first film that Tony Curtis starred in that could be considered an A production. In his memoirs he recalls the experience as a pleasant one because of Janet and director George Marshall who he says was a good man to work with and an under-appreciated talent.

One thing that is shown is Houdini's interest in the occult after the death of his mother in 1920. He did in fact go around debunking fakers in the field which is field that is saturated with them. One thing not in the film is the fact he came into conflict with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, creator of Sherlock Holmes, and fervent believer in the reachable spirit world. That in itself would make an interesting film.

I'm sure if Harry Houdini were able to comment he'd probably say he liked the film. He'd have to wait for a more accurate film about his life in the Eighties from Paul Michael Glaser and Sally Struthers. But I'd be flattered all to heck to think Tony Curtis was my type.

If it wasn't for the movies and the books on Harry Houdini's life he would fall into a category of un-interesting performers who only could do one thing perform

He lived in a time where his talents were in great demand and despite the fact that this film is not accurate it is lovingly presented by Paramount a **Color Film** in a time where Black and White films were still commonplace, Tony Curtis and Janet Leigh at the peak of their building careers and George Marshall a veteran director of close to 120 films

They knew what they were doing when the movie partially fictionalized Houdini's life possibly because he was a one note person, a magician, an escape artist, a performer

The movie is excellent!! and that is all that matters, if I am not mistaken almost every remake has fictionalized his life in one way or another, this movie is a true gem!!

'Houdini' was partly seen because Harry Houdini was a very interesting man and his life, cut short too early in tragic circumstances from peritonitis/complications from a ruptured appendix (although it is also believed it was caused by being punched in the abdomen), even more fascinating.

Found myself quite by accident seeing a number of Tony Curtis films and it's turned into something of a quest. It is interesting to see Curtis and then-wife Janet Leigh together on film, and 'Houdini' is the first of five pairings. It certainly serves them well and one can see what the appeal is. While 'Houdini' is very well made and entertaining on its own as a film, the man himself and his life, of which the film is very loosely based upon, are not as well served.

A longer length would have benefitted, so that the script could have gone into more detail and depth with what is presented while also including more. Houdini's life was much more colourful and interesting than this intriguing and fun if slightly "cliff notes" depiction, and with a longer length the film would have been more detailed and not as rushed structurally.

There are also liberties, some of them not hurting the film much but the more dramatic licenses do and distort a bit, especially the over-dramatic ending. Didn't see the point of the change, it would have been more moving if the truth was intact.

On the other hand, Curtis puts a lot of energy and passion to the title role and his performance is one of his best early ones. Leigh is incredibly charming and their romantic chemistry sparkles and moves, one does feel like they're in love. This is something very important, seeing as this is an element of the story that is focused on sizeably. Torin Thatcher is particularly good of the solid supporting cast.

Furthermore, 'Houdini' looks great, the sumptuous period detail and vibrant colours are a feast for the eyes. The story moves efficiently and still remains absorbing and easy to engage and identify with. The script is thoughtful, is a lot of fun and doesn't fall into cloying sentimentality, with elements of Houdini's life that do really intrigue (i.e. Houdini's campaign against anything supernatural) and the stunts/escapes are genuinely awe-inspiring and suspenseful, some edge of your seat stuff there. The characters engage, Houdini is a source of admiration and inspiration, and the direction shows visual and dramatic skill.

Summing up, good but not great, Curtis, Leigh, their chemistry, the visuals and stunts make it a worthwhile watch. 7/10 Bethany Cox