**Spoilers**

The Prince didn't actually do anything to warrant his death until after Eisenstein had already began plotting against him. That kind of villianous role is difficult to pull off without going over the top. Bravo.

Reasons The Prince deserved to die:

1) The Prince was reported to have beaten a woman to death.
2) The Prince was seriously plotting to kill his own father
3) The Prince slapped The Illusionist's love interest around
4) The Prince was a mainliner
5) The Prince was stupid enough to think that a hat and a pair
of fake glasses could disguise him from the public at large
6) The Prince was so weak he could barely lift a sword off the floor.

But here is what I really think. I checked out the flic on Saturday.

Great casting, great acting, great cinematography, great costume and set design,
decent direction.

The plot, however, was rather weak, and quite predictable, even
without the "teaser" given at the very beginning.

The major flaw of the entire endeavor, IMHO, was the Director's
choice to make The Illusionist's seeming miracles so damned good.
They were acts of magic that could not be duplicated in the here
and now, in 2006, by the best stage magicians around, and their
ultimate lack of explanation/justification by the end of the movie
turns out to be one huge copout, and a major distraction from
the love-triangle's denouement...

All in all, definitely worth a matinee-priced ticket, or DVD rental.

Mike out

*poof*

**Spoilers**



Reasons The Prince deserved to die:

I don't know if you're being serious with some of these or not.....

1) The Prince was reported to have beaten a woman to death.
Agreed, but we didn't see this, so it has no emotional resonance with the audience.
2) The Prince was seriously plotting to kill his own father.
Same as above. We don't see this. Also, were we aware of this before Eisenheim began plotting?
3) The Prince slapped The Illusionist's love interest around.
Didn't this happen near the end, after plotting was well underway? It confirms the basis for the plot but not the initiation.
4) The Prince was a mainliner.
I don't know what you're referring to.
5) The Prince was stupid enough to think that a hat and a pair
of fake glasses could disguise him from the public at large.
This warrants being disgrace to the point of ...... ? Again, this happened late in the plot.
6) The Prince was so weak he could barely lift a sword off the floor.
This one you are obviously joking. :p

But here is what I really think. I checked out the flic on Saturday.

Great casting, great acting, great cinematography, great costume and set design,
decent direction.

The plot, however, was rather weak, and quite predictable, even
without the "teaser" given at the very beginning.

The major flaw of the entire endeavor, IMHO, was the Director's
choice to make The Illusionist's seeming miracles so damned good.
They were acts of magic that could not be duplicated in the here
and now, in 2006, by the best stage magicians around, and their
ultimate lack of explanation/justification by the end of the movie
turns out to be one huge copout, and a major distraction from
the love-triangle's denouement...

All in all, definitely worth a matinee-priced ticket, or DVD rental.

Mike out

*poof*

I agree with the plot being weak. Like I said above, it seems like it's been used often, in various forms maybe. As for the method of the tricks. Yes, I think they could have been duplicated "mechanically" in the here and now. Basically, they fooled people because they used unknown, cutting edge methods that people would not have been aware of at the time.

SPOILERS
They were acts of magic that could not be duplicated in the here
and now, in 2006, by the best stage magicians around, and their
ultimate lack of explanation/justification by the end of the movie
turns out to be one huge copout, and a major distraction from
the love-triangle's denouement...

I thought they were explained when he gave the police inspector a diagram of the orange tree trick at the end. :confused:

Ressurrecting this thread to say that I saw The Illusionist last night on DVD and I really, really liked it. Yes, the ending was telegraphed, but I thought Ed Norton and Paul Giamatti were so good that it didn't even matter to me. It was also a beautifully filmed movie. The only thing that was distracting to me was how much Rufus Sewell looked like Freddie Mercury.

... The only thing that was distracting to me was how much Rufus Sewell looked like Freddie Mercury.

OMG, YES! I thought the same thing! I enjoyed the film, glad you did, too. I love Ed Norton.

Today I saw The Illusionist in a theatre. I really enjoyed it because I like illusion show. His final illusion show surprised me. I gasped at that moment.

Edward Norton was great as usual (I can't wait for his Hulk!).

...bored me to tears and as much as I like both Norton and Giamatti, I would rank their performances here as completely forgettable. I don't think Jessica Biehl is a good actress at all.

The Prestige was much better IMO.

I liked the prestige much better also.
I fell asleep during the illusionist, so I cant really say how good of a movie it was.
but it sure was good enough to put me to sleep

1) Prestige was better
2) Still a good movie