More than just Prestige

What is it more to the Prestige?

The more I think about it, the less important it is that which Angier clone is killed. Then again maybe not.

Since they share the same memories, I like the idea of Angier being uncertain of which of him is going to die. I think it doesn't really matter to him that much because of a couple of things.

1. Angier wants the Prestige applause for himself. Does it really matter who dies since there is no way to distinguish the two anyway? He didn't have to keep on killing his clones. He could have simply just made one clone or two or three. He's rich; he can pay for their lives. Heck, legally, they all could be Lord Codwald or whatever his name is.

Killing I suppose can be or as been attributed to two things. One being the stronger argument or could simply be a combination of both.

A. Angier keeps killing himself, waiting for Borden (Freddy) to come backstage to be framed for his murder. Cutter wouldn't have gone down anyway if Freddy hadn't gone backstage. The problem with this is that how did "prestige" Angier know that that was the show that he was supposed to die? Is there any hint in the film that suggests that "prestige" Angier was watching Borden (Freddy)rush into backstage?

B. Angier just simply wanted the applause all to himself. Rather Angier has become so consumed by revenge and the "art" that he would kill himself every night. I don't think this was Angier doing penance for his wife's death. I think his wife's death isn't the primary conflict, but just a catalyst. He is more obsessed with Borden by the climax of the film.



Hence, more meat for the twin argument. Does it matter which Angier dies? Not really, since they're all the same person. They only become different because one dies and the other lives. This again is a strong point for the Bordens are twins argument. That fact that we (and Sarah as well) can distinguish between the two. This is why the cloned Angiers are such important contrasts to the twins. Angier is unwilling to share the Prestige with the other Angier. It's not about the trick or the applause anymore. It's about Borden.

Apparently a Borden he did not expect, because like us, Angier believed the pledge, that Borden is just one ordinary person. They shared the Prestige, a critical difference between the twins and the clones.

What bothers me is the apparent willingness of each Angier to perform the trick, knowing full well that he will fall into the trapdoor. The whole scheme's in his head as he delivers his patter. He knows one will die. How could he do that knowing what he knew? Especially if he knows it will be him. I suppose that's where the mourning reading comes from, but again it's much more (albeit less noble) than that. I suppose that's the risk that Angier talks about in the end.



So for the last time, does it matter which Angier is which? I think not. I feel that since they are exact genetic, emotional duplicates of each other, there is no way to tell them apart. On the other hand, the X-factor of the Borden twins is that they're just that, twins. Genetic duplicates, but clearly not the same emotional person.

A further, more disturbing implication, is the consciousness of Angier is unaware of who he is. It simply boggles that mind to try to draw the line somewhere between, original and copied (maybe this is really a statement on the state of piracy in the context of a developing society!). RnnBys on the imdb The Prestige boards, makes an excellent point:

When Angier is waiting for his machine to be built by Tesla, he is treated to a demonstration. First with his hat, then with the cat. In the original construction of the machine, there was no trap door. The original stayed inside the machine, and the clone was outside (which needed to be "calibrated" by Tesla later so he could place those clones where he wanted). So, to be clear, the original stays inside the machine, clone reappears somewhere else.

Now you must think of the mindset of that clone. Suppose it is you or I that is being cloned. Also assume that all of the memories and idiosyncrasies are copied and given to that clone. That would mean when the clone reappears at some other location, he would believe he was the original and he was merely transported. The real one inside the machine would [correctly] believe he is the real version. So now you have 2 seperate entity's believing they are the original.

This is why the clone who falls into the water struggles and doesn't appear to want to commit suicide. He doesn't at all. The night before, he was the one who appeared off stage on the balcony. And as we already established, he believed he was the original. So when he steps into the machine tonight, he believes he will be the one who is transported, since he was convinced the night prior that he gets transported. He doesn't. The original falls through the trap door he set up for the clone, but it does not turn out that way. Every night one gets to experience the prestige, and the next night unwittingly dies to allow his clone to repeat. Proof: Angier says that he does not know whether he will be the man in the box or the man who recieves the applause for the prestige.

If I am correct, then the particularly tragic part is the original, unadulterated Angier (the one we see most of the movie until Angier starts performing the trick) is the only one of all of his versions to have never seen the Prestige, because he was never actually teleported.

We, as an audience, are meant to deceipher which Borden twin is which, possibly not meant to tell the two Angiers apart. Each and every Angier had the same expeirence and the exact same motivation. Freddy and Fallon, on the other hand, clearly have different goals on one level as shown by Olivia and Sarah. However all three (or four or five or dozen) men share the same goal of delivering the definitive performance of the Transported Man. Their methods were different, but ultimately only one gets transported to the end to take part in the prestige and that man is Fallon.

The Prestige: the Magic of Filmmaking in Three Acts

If you haven't seen "The Prestige", which is Christopher Nolan's new film, stop reading this spoiler-filled entry and WATCH IT NOW.

Of course a great reason to watch this is to fawn over Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale, but the real meat to this is the masterful storytelling that Nolan achieves.

If you've seen it, proceed and let the melting pot of ideas brew.



Many people have discussed the merits of the film, but the most baffling aspect of it is the nature of the character/s of Borden.

I don't believe in a "good" or "bad" twin, simply because it's too simple, for a person to be black and white.




I see this movie as having three inherent themes:

1. MAGIC: The movie itself as a magic act, wherein Nolan is the illusionist- many reviews have already said this, but what takes it further is that, the movie itself has it's own Pledge, Turn and Prestige.

It's easy to talk about the Turn and Prestige.

The Prestige for each character is when Angier appears as Lord, "coming back from the dead" and when Fallon appears to shoot Angier. From a narrative point of view, it's when the two "come home" or apparently reveal their true selves.


The Turn is when the "ordinary" object, in this case the film (or the journals, as these are the ones that tell the bulk of the story) do something extraordinary. I think this is shown for both characters when each character discovers the end of the "self-aware" journals. It is when the audience is left baffled after being led to believe that film was going down this one road.

The Pledge is this one road, we are led to believe, initially that Alfred Borden is guilty of murdering Angrier. Most of us probably never questioned that idea, because all that is revealed to us initially is how Angier perceives the events.

However, remember that as a magic act, the audience believes what we want to believe.

Nolan's genius is that scene where the young boy cries at the disappearance of the bird in the cage. "He killed it!" the boy cried. I don't know about you, but the majority of the audience in the theater, myself included, chuckled at that ridiculous thought. After all, it's only magic right?

Cut to the reveal of the bird carcass being thrown to the rubbish bin.

We are instantly revealed of being guilty of believing what we want to believe. It is the innocent, "ignorant", young boy who was right all along. This is because he values the bird inside the cage, or the man inside the box.

In our desire to want to see magic, we believe many things. I think Nolan pulled this off throughout the entire film, not just in the plot itself, but in the characters.

2. OBSESSION/PASSION: It depends on how you want to look at it, if it's healthy it's a passion, but the moment it becomes scary, it is an obsession. This idea is also pretty obvious as the idea is thrown around a lot. How far would you go to achieve your goal?

The movie clearly presents Angier's answer. He would kill himself, or rather sacrfice other people. I don't think he really cared that much about those other Angiers. I have entertained the thoughts of the original Angier being killed off initially or when he presents himself to the producer, but for the strength of this point does not depend on what really happens, but rather why they happen.

He was willing to get his hands dirty. Ultimately, I think Angier is more selfish than Borden. He willingly kills people. Now I'm not saying Borden's a saint, but the respect that was unwilling to give his double. Borden's in it for the applause. He's a showman after all. Borden's in it for the illusion itself.


3. IDENTITY: This hasn't been discussed yet, but is an important point when you consider the nature of all the discussions on the twin/clone agruments.

What is the nature of Identity? This is especially important in the parting words of the condemned Borden to Fallon. Live for the both of us.

What kind of a brother would do that? What kind of a clone would do that? In both cases, the answer is still unclear. Either way, the answers will be unclear, unless you consider one possiblity.

There is no such person as ALFRED.

Let's re-examine the Pledge of the film. Most of us entered the cinema knowing that the plot involved two rival magicians. Of course in the end, we realize that there are actually three. It is the nature of the third one that is in question.

We are definitely sure that there is a Rupert Angier/Lord Codlow. I don't think there will be many arguments on this point. However what about Borden?

Most people look at it this way, there is Borden and Fallon. Two distinct people, but both of them have been played by both individuals.

What then would drive a person, or rather two persons to carry on this burden? The answer of course is Obsession/Passion. To live your art.

I believe that many of those vaudeville Chinaman/Oriental (forgive me Edward Said) performers ham up their acts. They capitalize on their "exotic" features and force themselves to live heavily altered existences. Their lives have become an act.

The great act is not so much the Transported Man, but the character of Alfred Borden. He is the shared work of two magical geniuses, who share an obsession with their art. The only thing that they don't share is their love.

I personally believe that the distinct difference between Borden and Angier is that Borden has always been a "natural magician" and Angier a "nurtured magician." In addition to this, I think clones, seeing that they share memories, will also share the same tastes. So right now in my head, the clone theory (which was the one I leaned towards initially) doesn't hold water.

For their magic act to work, and for them to share the glory as well (as shown by them switching disguises), they must create a new character. Angier does this as well, hence the adopting the name the Great Danton or something like that. The twins, must create a new person whom they can both play and live out. Assuming that Freddy is the one that loves Olivia and Fallon is the one that loves Sarah, one can take the first syllables of their name and they can be combined to form one name. FAL-FRED. Cut the F, and you get their alter ego, Alfred. Someone they can both control, unlike the stand-in that Rupert Angier had.

What's important to look for in a second viewing of the movies is who is who? Who is Freddy (the dominant one) and who is Fallon (the subdued one)? I don't think this overanalyzing (if this is overanalyzing, then we'd all have been long guilty of it) because there have been many texts, films, books, studies that have dealt with twins assuming one personality and with twins having dominant and subdued personalities. Much like Chung Ling Soo, their magic will only work if the public believes what they want them to believe.

Why then did Freddy ask for Fallon's forgiveness? How could Fallon let Freddy die? This is because at this point, they've become individuals. The magic act is over. Freddy is apoligizing because his death is the death of their act, or rather their final act of "The Transported Man" - from gallows to theater. It's "all right" for Freddy to die because it was his "fault" for nibbling on the bait that Angier dangled. It doesn't make it just, but if the trick requires one brother to die, then so be it. The difference between the Bordens and Angier is the consent (or at least acceptance of his fate) that Freddy has as opposed to the Angier clones who were esentially trapped into the water tanks.

The limitation to this theory is that since they both played Alfred and Fallon, then Fallon himself must be a character as well. I think that the series of events, particularly the suicide of Sarah and the execution of Freddy, lends credence to the idea that Fallon could have been based on the personality of one of the twins.

The questions of identity is this, what is one's the real identity? The one we show to other people? Or the one we are inside?

In magic, it doesn't really matter. It's the trick that entertains and enthralls us, not the secret.

Oh yeah, and what would you do in bed with two Christan Bales?

And so we continue to discuss.

Me Likey...

I like sexually explicit indie movies. Maybe that speaks volumes of my repressed state or secretly liberated state of mind, but a crappy film cannot hide behind oodles and oodles of sex. The sex might make the unwatchable servicable, but it will bring about more than a passing fancy.

I've seen so many "gay" movies that try to mean more but just end up piling on one cliche after another. One film that transcends this is "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" by John Cameron Mitchell. It is quite difficult to swallow (or follow) at times because of its very surreal...everything, but a worthy watch nonetheless.

John Cameron Mitchell's new film, Shortbus, takes on a similar challenge of exploring sexuality but this time it's heralded by the hype of it's real sex scenes. As with anything that is similarly promoted, there will always be two kinds of viewers, those who just want to see the sex and those who think they're above the sex aspect.

The truth is that it is difficult, if not impossible, to dissociate the two. Given that the topic, wait not the topic but rather the treatment, is so taboo the curiousity of one person is what will usually entice a viewer, no matter what his or her values are, to give this film a try. What remains to be seen is if the film itself will take the viewer away from the erections and cumshots to find the very real and very ordinary struggles with sexuality.

If you anyone hears of this movie playing locally, give me a ring.



If you somehow felt shortchanged by that, another trailer exists, but it's not good for public consumption. However, if you're brave enough and are in a safe place, click here for the uncensored trailer.