|
"Can You Spot Where
He Hid the Rabbit?" |
 |
Directed by Christopher
Nolan - Written by
Christopher & Jonathan
Nolan
Starring Hugh Jackman,
Christian Bale, Scarlett
Johansson, Michael Caine
David Bowie, Piper
Perabo, Andy Serkis,
Samantha Mahurin
Distributed by Newmarket -
2006 - 128m - Rated PG13 |
| |
|
Are you watching closely? |
| |
This phrase is uttered
throughout “The Prestige.” In addition to it being dialogue, it is a
message to the audience. This is a mystery that is not only
fascinating and complicated, but possible to figure out early if you
take note of various subtleties, character quirks and…good God, I may
have already said too much!
2006 is finally starting to really kick off. Two weeks ago, I thought
that it would at least take a few more weeks into Oscar season for a
movie to even attempt to top “The Departed” for the second best film
of the year (the number one spot still belongs to “United 93”). Less
than a month later, here's a film that tops it.
I read the source novel by Christopher Priest about a year ago and
found it to be an intriguing, dense and complex mystery. However, it
seemed like an impossible adaptation.
Well, Christopher Nolan and his brother Jonathan Nolan have not only
adapted the book, but have managed to improve on it. They have
reworked the plot to fit this medium and in the process have made a
really interesting concept into a great one.
I feel really nervous about telling you about the plot for “The
Prestige.” Every moment hides a surprise. Every line of dialogue is
part of the overall mystery. Every character is hiding something or
another.
Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale play feuding magicians in turn of the
century London. The supporting actors include Michael Caine, Scarlett
Johansson, David Bowie and Andy Serkis. That is all you need to know.
The less you know, the more this movie will hit you in the gut like a
sledgehammer.
I mean that sledge hammer comment in good way. This is not a silly
movie, although it does contain elements that could be perceived as
such. This is a dark, brutal and altogether unsettling piece of movie
magic. This is Christopher Nolan’s fifth film and the fourth time I
have given him an “A.” He is fast becoming one of the finest directors
currently working on the mainstream side of Hollywood. Hell, this is
the man who made the superhero film an art form with “Batman Begins.”
Like Nolan’s “Memento,” “The Prestige” is told through a fragmented
timeline. There are flashbacks. Then there are flashbacks within
flashbacks. I think there was even a flashback within a flashback
within a flashback. Amazingly, this never gets gimmicky or confusing.
The story may be veiled with secrecy the entire time, but it never
outright confuses. This method of storytelling also goes right
alongside with the stages of a magic trick.
As the film tells us, the first part of a magic trick is the Pledge:
the audience is shown something normal. Then there is the Turn, where
something remarkable happens. Then there is the Prestige, the result
of the trick. Nolan tells this story in layers. We see the basic
storylines from a basic angle. We see a lot of remarkable things
happen.
And then we end up with something astounding, our jaws at out feet,
wondering why we did not see this coming.
Having read the novel, I was privy to many of the movie’s secrets…but
the force and pace of the storytelling still managed to catch me off
guard.
The cast here is just as good as those in “The Departed,” but they
sadly will most likely not see any Oscar nods. Jackman is the ultimate
movie star who also happens to be a great actor. Bale is the ultimate
actor who also happens to be a great movie star. Without saying too
much, this makes them perfectly cast. These characters do a lot of
horrible things throughout the course of the movie, but they remain
sympathetic the whole time.
Caine does his usual thing (the wise and kind older gentleman), but it
serves the character and works wonders. Johansson has some nice
moments as the female lead, but she barely has any screen time and
does not make much of an impact. The same goes for Piper Perabo. The
driving female force in the film is Rebecca Hall, a relative unknown,
who carries sections of the film that could have fallen apart with a
lesser actress.
Finally, in two small, but very important roles, David Bowie and Andy
Serkis absolutely shine. Bowie plays Nikolas Tesla…yes, the Nikolas
Tesla. I think that it is a widely known fact that David Bowie is one
of the greatest things ever to hit popular culture, but I don’t think
that enough people know what a great actor this man truly is. Looking
and sounding nothing like himself, Bowie’s Tesla is fascinating and
slightly bizarre. He also has the best entrances for any character
ever. Serkis plays a relatively irrelevant part (Tesla’s assistant),
but he pumps it full of humor and quirks.
Of course, this being a Nolan film, everything is filmed on a dark and
dreary color palette. And since this is a Nolan film, everything is
gorgeous.
Ultimately, this is a film that fulfils ever reason for my going to
the movies. Great acting. Great direction. Great writing. Interesting
themes. Emotional connection. Something to please my inner geek
(MAGICIANS! DAVID BOWIE!).
I look forward to seeing this again in the future. That is the highest
compliment I think I can give a movie. |
| |
|
© Written by Jacob Hall -
Email
Me! |
TC Candler's Comment
Do not read
this until you have seen the film!
I have given
this film two grades -- an A and a C. It depends on
one thing, a plot point open for debate -- and I
could still be convinced one way or the other.
I won't linger too long on the review
itself... The story is a fascinating one -- a classic
battle of wits between two vengeful foes. Turn
of the century magicians trying to top each
other's tricks, each comprising the pledge, the
turn and the prestige -- the three part
structure of any great trick.
The film is superbly made. Sumptuous
cinematography and gorgeous sets showcase a
terrific cast. I doubt anyone could complain
about the technical skill of Christopher Nolan's
latest effort.
I was a tad disappointed with the ways in
which the film manipulated me. I don't mind
being manipulated... I just don't want to know
that it is happening. At times, the plot felt
like that conversation we have all had -- "I
knew" -- "Well, I knew that you knew" -- "Well,
I knew that you knew that I knew" -- "Well, I
knew that you knew that I knew that you knew"
etc etc etc.
I was also a little frustrated with the lack
of heart and emotion in this film. Clearly, that
heart could be found in the female characters,
Scarlett Johansson, Piper Perabo & Rebecca Hall.
Unfortunately, Nolan decided to focus too
intently on the unsympathetic leading men, resulting in a cold
story with little to root for or care about.
And now the crux of the matter.
Please keep
these quotes at the forefront of your mind...
Narration --
"Now you are looking for the secret. But you
won't find it, because, of course, you are not
really looking. You don't really want to work it
out. You want to be fooled"
Borden --
"The secret impresses no-one; the trick you use
it for, is everything."
It all comes
down to whether this film takes a ludicrous trip
into science fiction... or brilliantly tricks
the audience into believing that it takes said
trip.
If the film
actually uses a magical cloning machine, it all
seems tremendously cheap -- on a par with the
"it was all a dream" scenario. It would
feel a like a tremendous cheat if that were the
case.
However, I think the film itself is a
marvellous magic act if there aren't really any
clones and there is no incredible machine.
Think about it -- were you fooled by the
director?
Ask yourself
these questions...
Why did Borden send Angier to Tesla? Was it
just to get him away on a wild goose chase? Was
it just an astonishing coincidence that the machine worked?
How many
Angiers do you really see in tanks at the end of
the film? Do you see many? Do you
see one? Do you see any at all? What
happened to the look-alike?
Were the
flashbacks actually memories or storytelling
imagined in the mind of the listener?
Why is the
narration so adamant about the fundamentals of a
great trick? Why does it constantly
challenge you in the audience to pay attention
-- to question what you are seeing?
What makes a
better film -- a magical cloning machine in the
18th century or a tremendous slight of hand by a
great director and a very clever screenplay?
The rest of the film is all about illusion
-- there is no real magic anywhere else.
Why would it slip in a silly magical cloning
machine?
Listen
-- I am open to the possibility of both --
However, I am leaning toward the machine being a
red-herring. I certainly think it makes
for a better film.
Can you prove
that the machine works based on what you saw in
the film? I bet that I can refute any
proof you think you have. Feel free to
email me.
Which do you think it is? Others I
have spoken with are now questioning what they
really saw.
Richard Propes' Comment
n/a
|
