I remember seeing most of this movie when I was about 12 (10 years ago now) and am curious as to how accurate it was. I just finished reading a great book on Houdini and he was less obsessed with the occult than obsessed with outing frauds.
"Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the gun."
-Ashley J. 'Ash' Williams (AoD)
If it's the tv movie where Houdini dies in a see-through water tank on stage, performing one of his stunts and unable to pull it off because a man had punched him hard in the belly, then that bit is not accurate. Or rather, the point that he was punched in the stomach offstage by some man, fell ill later and died shortly after is said to be true (urban legend?) - but not the story that he performed right after and paid "in action". I remember feeling infuriated by that obfuscation when I saw a Houdini biopic (could be this one) on tv.
shareThough a great movie, and one that formed my interest in magic for the rest of my life, the movie is terribly inaccurate. Like many Hollywood versions of real people, it has dramatic embellishments that make it much more "interesting". I was so influenced by that movie, that I started learning simple tricks and escapes-- then did a thesis on Psychics later in life. Problems with the movie include:
There was no Minister/Priest (Bill Bixby) that spoke with Harry (postmortem); Bess stopped trying to reach him years before her death; He did not fail to do his last escape from the Water Torture Cell (he finished, then collapsed off-stage-- then hung on for days in the hospital. Most of the errors are harmless drama-- except for the last performance. He never had to be "saved" like that. He went a long time after being punched, but ignored it until it was too late. I suffered the same injury (different cause), and spent 10 days in the hospital from it. Ruptured appendix-- serious business. Although one of the least accurate, it's still my favorite film about Houdini, and I hope it hits DVD at some point.
I really like this movie, but... Bess tried for 10 years to reach her husband through spiritualists, and gave up in 1938. Unlike in the film, she always contended (until her death) that no one ever delivered the code they had agreed on before his death. So that part of the film his grossly inaccurate.
shareActually, Although it is STILL debated, the "Priest" played by Bill Bixby , is actually Arthur Ford , a real spiritualist minister, who delivered (initially) the message that Houdini had waited for all his life, from his mother...the word on her deathbed "Forgive". Arthur Ford is still hearalded by spiritualists as the minister who "broke the Houdini Code" and delivered the message (in the agreed upon code) AT a seance, in Bess Houdini's home. Magicians still carrying the banner that all mediums and spiritualists are frauds (i..e..The Amazing Randy and Penn and Teller and several skeptics columnists) have muddied this claim, saying that Bess Houdini was ill at the time and didn't know what actually happened , and that Arthur Ford had some sort of "prior knowledge" of Houdini's life and the code. However, Arthur Ford DID conduct a seance with Bess Houdini. They still conduct seances (they being many in the Magic community) on Oct. 31rst. I don't believe they really expect to hear from him (although I keep hoping one night they all be pleasantly surprised)..I think it's an exercise to show the general public that mysticicm is a bunch of malicious who-ha...
💗
Wish you were here....
That being said, I don't think that any bio film is completely accurate. It's impossible to do when filming a movie of someone's life.
A book? I'd expect an accurate accounting and facts.
This is a TV movie. They took certain aspects of his life and wrote a script. A pretty good one too!
I see that others here have answered the OP quite nicely. I find these posts informative. Just thought I'd wake up this board for those of you who have not seen this movie in a long time.
For those who have never seen it, I highly recommend it. It's actually very good!
I've not seen this one yet Margo but I did see a sort or procedural investigative drama centered around Doyle and Houdini.
It was fun but it's far removed from the sentiments of the time that both were successful and that is something which I don't think is recaptured easily. One has to immerse oneself in the literature, religions and economics of the era to get an idea of what life may have been like.
The Fox sisters had rejected their invention of Spiritualism but it had gotten its own feet, Mesmer had made people believe in the supernatural and Darwin had not long refuted creationism. This was also at the height of the British Empire in London. A lot of stuff to conceptualise.
Does this movie make any effort to illustrate that MMC?
💗
From what I remember of this film, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is a friend of Houdini, but when Houdini tries to convince them that their efforts to contact their loved one won't work, they have a falling out.
There are several instances in this film where he exposes certain mediums. It also touches upon a trial where he testifies against the charlatans.
I sent you a link to the movie. I'm just watching it now after about 20 years. LOL!