oracle86 wrote:According to Wikipedia-

Author Christopher Priest saw the film three times as of January 5, 2007, and his reaction was " 'Well, holy shit.' I was thinking, 'God, I like that,' and 'Oh, I wish I'd thought of that.' "

In some ways, the film of The Prestige is quite different to the book. How do you feel as a writer about film directors altering your work?

They do their job and I do mine. I deliberately did not involve myself with the adaptation of The Prestige, because I was interested to see what Christopher Nolan would do with it. At the time I thought he was a serious and interesting talent. (He's gone downhill a bit since those days. Too many Batman films, and all that.) Also, I wanted to see what Hollywood would do with something I thought was highly unlikely as a Hollywood project. With hindsight, I wish I had known what Nolan was going to do with the ending (he takes a huge chance with it), and would have said a few things to him about that. But on the whole, I feel it is "his" film, just as the novel is "mine". The only thing that seriously irritated me was Nolan's attitude that the book hadn't existed before he came along and made the film. In fact it had been in print for twelve years, and was in translations around the world. In several interviews he urged people not to read the book, as it "ruined" his film. You don't feel warm to someone like that.

Insomniac wrote:
Christopher Priest seems to have cooled on the film since then though:

In some ways, the film of The Prestige is quite different to the book. How do you feel as a writer about film directors altering your work?

They do their job and I do mine. I deliberately did not involve myself with the adaptation of The Prestige, because I was interested to see what Christopher Nolan would do with it. At the time I thought he was a serious and interesting talent. (He's gone downhill a bit since those days. Too many Batman films, and all that.) Also, I wanted to see what Hollywood would do with something I thought was highly unlikely as a Hollywood project. With hindsight, I wish I had known what Nolan was going to do with the ending (he takes a huge chance with it), and would have said a few things to him about that. But on the whole, I feel it is "his" film, just as the novel is "mine". The only thing that seriously irritated me was Nolan's attitude that the book hadn't existed before he came along and made the film. In fact it had been in print for twelve years, and was in translations around the world. In several interviews he urged people not to read the book, as it "ruined" his film. You don't feel warm to someone like that.

Insomniac wrote:Christopher Priest seems to have cooled on the film since then though:

In some ways, the film of The Prestige is quite different to the book. How do you feel as a writer about film directors altering your work?

They do their job and I do mine. I deliberately did not involve myself with the adaptation of The Prestige, because I was interested to see what Christopher Nolan would do with it. At the time I thought he was a serious and interesting talent. (He's gone downhill a bit since those days. Too many Batman films, and all that.) Also, I wanted to see what Hollywood would do with something I thought was highly unlikely as a Hollywood project. With hindsight, I wish I had known what Nolan was going to do with the ending (he takes a huge chance with it), and would have said a few things to him about that. But on the whole, I feel it is "his" film, just as the novel is "mine". The only thing that seriously irritated me was Nolan's attitude that the book hadn't existed before he came along and made the film. In fact it had been in print for twelve years, and was in translations around the world. In several interviews he urged people not to read the book, as it "ruined" his film. You don't feel warm to someone like that.

There is hardly a line of dialogue or moment of action in the film that can be traced back word-for-word, yet the whole thing is faithful to the novel in spirit, in story and in effect. I have differences with the screenplay in places, but none of those detracts from my general impression that it is a classic film adaptation of an existing novel, one which intending screenwriters would do well to study alongside the novel.

Pratham wrote:http://www.christopher-priest.co.uk/boo ... tige-film/
I agree about credit song which is totally out of place. Rest disliked parts... Strongly disagree. And I simply hate what he has written about Nolan's other films.

Pratham wrote:http://www.christopher-priest.co.uk/boo ... tige-film/