I wish this film had a higher rating on RT, it doesn't deserve a 75% (not sure what the exact percentage is).

An 85% perhaps.

I bought it on Blu-ray a few days before (though I already owned it on DVD), and I'm watching it now, it's fascinating.

ChristopherNolanFan wrote:Besides The Dark Knight I think all of Chris's trailers have been quite poor. And I agree, The Prestige is far better on second viewing, especially the scene where Borden is being taken away to be hanged. That scene becomes so much more powerful when you understand what he is saying, eg "I'm sorry about Sarah, I didn't mean to hurt her" etc.

after the 50th view, i cried in that part

no matter what happens, everytime you see it it gets better and better

DHOPW42 wrote:Oh, and another thing. I noticed that Nolan made a reference in this film about The Dark Knight!

In one scene a character (I think Cutter but I can't remember) mentions the Moscow Ballet. Could this be a direct reference to his upcoming film, the TDK?

it's the owner of the theatre where angier performs his 100 shows

sorry, i know, i saw it a lot of time

i agree
on my second viewing i spotted things i didn't before like
spoiler
-
-
-
- just something you can pick up.

definitely, i've seen it 6 times or more, and i never get tired of it, every time i enjoy it more than before.

im watching it 2nite for like the 20th time lol

Anti-Gravity85 wrote:I'm new to this forum but by no means new to the work of Chris Nolan. I strongly believe him to be a director who redefines film through his incredibly unique directing approach, but I also see him as being a landmark director thus far in the new millennium. He's singlehandedly created a new generation of film viewership since his inception (pun possibly intended) into the mainstream film world with 'Memento' in 2001.

That being said, I find 'The Prestige' to be his most universally-complex and thought-provoking film -- even more so than 'Memento' -- due to his innate ability to direct the film in the same confusing, puzzling, and questionable manner in which the story itself is presented. This film is so multi-layered that entire papers, dissertations, and theses could be written about it.

I read the novel beforehand, which to its credit, was a fantastic read (and I highly recommend it if you're curious of the differences), but Chris and Jonah's departure from the source material in certain areas actually makes the film even that much better than the novel. They took the skeletal framework of the story (the diaries of each magician; the Tesla machine) and created a dense storyline that brought so much more to the table, thematically speaking.

Nolan even opens up the possibility throughout the film that what he is presenting is in itself a magic trick -- and illusion -- but as viewers we constantly draw our attention elsewhere, attempting to find reasons why Angier is doing what he's doing, and Borden the same. We're so focused on the duality of the two men, when we later come to find that the truth lies in the details. The film has its own Pledge, Turn, and Prestige. It's one of the most remarkable films I've ever seen, and one of my absolute favorites.

First and foremost, welcome to the boards. I'm new here as well and I'm seriously enjoying the insight of the postings I'm reading.

I personally believe the key that makes him such a great film-maker is his natural ability to be a great storyteller. This is how Nolan can do so much more with so much less. Once he got the incredibly talented actors for his films, they literally took on and made a world of their own. All he needed was Guy Pearce in Memento, and Insomnia (albeit I wouldn't recommend Robin Williams for such a role) was put on the back of Al Pacino.

That is one thing that I always look for when I go to see a film, is a good story. Movies along the lines of Fantastic 4 and Transformers can burn in a building and never been seen again for all I care. This is why I'm attracted to Nolan's movies so much, is that there is an incredible amount of substance in his work, leaving you asking questions about the story, characters, circumstances, etc.

Anyways, one of the points I was going to make was that you mentioned the fact that he changed certain things from the original novel which are canon and seems to be changed for a better story. I was emphasizing that on account that he is a brilliant storyteller and knows how to change aspects of a story to better the interest of the viewer/reader and add more dimensions to it.

NothinButM wrote:I personally believe the key that makes him such a great film-maker is his natural ability to be a great storyteller. This is how Nolan can do so much more with so much less.

Exactly. I never would've imagined before Nolan that the Batman franchise could see a new film -- much less two films -- that could have the ability to be as philosophically, psychologically, and morally complex as the source material (i.e. the comics), while still maintaining the inherent action-blockbuster qualities necessary to keep audiences engaged. And obviously David S. Goyer has been a huge component to Nolan's Batman universe, but Chris and Jonah truly are the brilliant minds at work here.

NothinButM wrote:That is one thing that I always look for when I go to see a film, is a good story. Movies along the lines of Fantastic 4 and Transformers can burn in a building and never been seen again for all I care.

That's the beauty and the universal appeal of cinema. I frankly wouldn't be caught wasting my money watching 'Transformers' in theaters; I might waste a couple hours on it sometime in the future, but I don't feign interest for films that lack so much. That's not to say I don't want others to go out and enjoy those kinds of movies; I'm by no means a "film" snob. I would just rather narrow down my choices of films to those that are going to make me think and engage my attention the entire time. I want my intelligence to be tested, not insulted. I don't like the idea of films being a sort of "mindless entertainment," as that implies that when watching said films you're letting your mind go -- letting logic go, even -- and that's almost a form of mind-control if you ask me. No thank you.

NothinButM wrote:Anyways, one of the points I was going to make was that you mentioned the fact that he changed certain things from the original novel which are canon and seems to be changed for a better story. I was emphasizing that on account that he is a brilliant storyteller and knows how to change aspects of a story to better the interest of the viewer/reader and add more dimensions to it.

Adaptations, especially in the film form, are especially hard. Most directors would like to stay as true to the source material as possible. That's a given. When the original novel or short story is an exceptional work, the task is literally magnified, as that almost always means you're dealing with very textured material. If you leave out, say, an important event or a character that appears insignificant to the plot -- but isn't, you've completely disrupted the story. As a result, the adaptation is hardly faithful and branches off as just another 'director interpretation.' But, when a director can keep the framework of the original story present, keep the characters the same, and then create an even more engaging story built around those premises ... you've got a film that's going to challenge you. 'The Prestige' as a film was better than the book because it took all the major themes and meanings from the novel and transcended them into a story that was altogether challenging.