The whole trick was so obvious and the overobvious ending, lacking any subtetly made it even worse. The ending might've been somewhat decent if they had done it a little more suggestive instead of just blatantly showing it all like the watcher is a 5 year old with the mental capacity of a 2 year old.
They moved the story the other way,while the real plot was extremley simple.Thats what i liked about it.I didnt expect it all to come to a 'Its all an illusion' end.
They moved the story the other way,while the real plot was extremley simple.Thats what i liked about it.I didnt expect it all to come to a 'Its all an illusion' end.
Yes its called the Illlusionist.But you dont expect it all to be simple.I didnt atleast.I thought it would be a bit more complicated..which it wasnt.Which is where the brilliance lies.
And The Prestige and The Illusionist arent similar at all.The only thing they have in common in is magic.Otherwise the storylines are completley different.
Yes its called the Illlusionist.But you dont expect it all to be simple.I didnt atleast.I thought it would be a bit more complicated..which it wasnt.Which is where the brilliance lies.
You expected something else,but it turns out the other way.In most great movies,the twist is complicated.In the illusionist it was completley opposite.
Yes its called the Illlusionist.But you dont expect it all to be simple.I didnt atleast.I thought it would be a bit more complicated..which it wasnt.Which is where the brilliance lies.
.
You expected something else,but it turns out the other way.In most great movies,the twist is complicated.In the illusionist it was completley opposite.
And The Prestige and The Illusionist arent similar at all.The only thing they have in common in is magic.Otherwise the storylines are completley different.
If they are not similar, why did you immediately ask me about the prestige? As I have seen so many times, if someone brings up one, the other is brought up too.
No.I thought that Rufus Sewell had actaully murdered Jessica Beil.I also thought that Norton was dabbling in something more than simple magic when he brought Beil back as a ghost.None of this was true however.It was all very simple,which is what caught me by suprise.
And the two movies get mentioned a lot together because they are probably the best known new movies on Magic.Ok,maybe they do have some things in common,but its not all that similar
The way I undertood it is that you expected something that you thought would make it good. Instead you got something else, and then you managed to convince your stubborn self that this was even better and that in fact it was this other thing that really made it good.
Sounds a bit like Galliani when he says we won the World Club Cup so our season was a success.