Left me unsatisfied.

The two main characters, played by Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale were neither likable enough nor evil enough to gain my empathy. Two thoroughly slimy magicians (one would have been Vincent Price in yesteryear) would have been more fun. Ditto for the leading ladies.

I'm usually charmed by Michael Caine, but he overdid the accent this time and I found myself looking for subtitles.

The holes in the plot were large enough to drive a Mack truck through, but the art direction was fantastic, if anything this will draw you into the movie. Lots of potential for figure kits, if the emotional draw were strong enough.

The use of Nikola Tesla (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla) as a character was inspired. This man is worthy of his own dark movie and they could dispense with the magic.

No spoilers here. If anyone else saw it we can get into plot details with appropriate spoiler tags.

Steve's right... I was disappointed as well, and figured out the plot twist about 20 minutes into the 2.5 hour film. I think the performances were all decent, but the film just doesn't deliver what it promises in the trailer. Bowie was very good as Tesla, and the production design was excellent.
Christian Bale does a pretty poor cockney accent for a British guy. You'd think spending this much time around Michael Caine it would have rubbed off on him.

The trailer knocked me out but reviews back up what you guys are saying. I'll wait and rent it.

Never count your cinematic eggs until they're hatched.

Read the script; loved it. Saw a rough cut; loved it. Just got back from seeing the finished picture; very disappointed.

I honestly don't know what happened here. This should have been a much better movie than it is. I could be wrong, but I suspect the studio may have "taken an interest," i.e. re-cut the film with an eye toward making it more commercial.

Whatever the reasons, "The Prestige" fails to deliver on the promise of its premiss.

That said, Bowie was terrific.

Interesting.

Saw "The Illusionist" a couple weeks ago. It was less commercial, but a more satisfying movie. Maybe they tried to pump up "The Prestige" and lost its soul along the way.

I really would like to see an embellished story about Tesla. Maybe get Bowie to reprise the role. He was dotty later in life (Tesla, not Bowie) but maybe that was a cover for his 'real' work. heh.

...figured out the plot twist about 20 minutes into the 2.5 hour film...

Show off.

Here there be spoilers.


I admit I had a 'oh my god no' moment when it dawned on me that

Angier was going to use the tesla machine to duplicate himself, killing the clone each time he performed the act.

shudder...

Read the script; loved it. Saw a rough cut; loved it. Just got back from seeing the finished picture; very disappointed.

Thanks for the heads-up, everyone. I'll wait and rent this one.

On a related note:

If nothing else, I'm glad that they're doing more and more accurate historical settings in movies. The wardrobe for that time period and others has improved tremendously. I hope we've seen the last of 1880s cowboys wearing pants with belt loops which didn't come around until the very early 20th century (to note one horrendous example of costuming).

Finally saw this and must say I enjoyed it. I was ahead of the movie on many of plot twists, but it wasn't like THE SIXTH SENSE where I figured out the twist as soon as I heard one. (Given the premise, I thought it was pretty obvious.)

Steve, what plot holes are you referring to? I thought the script was exceptionally strong. After seeing it only once, I can't think of any plot holes. Sure it isn't high on credibility, but I expect that in a movie like this. The only slight problem I had was the introduction of straight science fiction into the third act of a movie about deception and illusion. But if you want to see how this can be done badly see that X-FILES episode with the magicians.

And about your "oh my god" moment:

He wasn't killing the clone. He was killing himself and the clone continued on. Of course, since they were both identical, I guess it's a moot point.

BE,
You have it backwards - see the sequence with the cat again.

BE,
You have it backwards - see the sequence with the cat again.
So we can discuss this openly without hiding everything.

**ENTERING SPOILER ZONE**

My interpetation of the scene was that Tesla's machine was creating a duplicate of everything put into it at some distance away. What did I miss?

After seeing it only once, I can't think of any plot holes.

If nothing else Tesla could've made fortune as a haberdasher, thus providing the financial wherewithal for his other, more scientific pursuits.

BTW, the question re: the true nature of the replicas is as uncertain in this instance as it is in "Blade Runner." I quite can't put my finger on it, but the two films have something strikingly in common.

Finally saw this and must say I enjoyed it. I was ahead of the movie on many of plot twists, but it wasn't like THE SIXTH SENSE where I figured out the twist as soon as I heard one. (Given the premise, I thought it was pretty obvious.)

Steve, what plot holes are you referring to? I thought the script was exceptionally strong. After seeing it only once, I can't think of any plot holes. Sure it isn't high on credibility, but I expect that in a movie like this. The only slight problem I had was the introduction of straight science fiction into the third act of a movie about deception and illusion. But if you want to see how this can be done badly see that X-FILES episode with the magicians.

And about your "oh my god" moment:

He wasn't killing the clone. He was killing himself and the clone continued on. Of course, since they were both identical, I guess it's a moot point.

The plot required a god machine (literally) to close the hole. That is Angier needed a trick, went to a physicist, and wound up with a defective transporter from Star Trek (aka magic or SF as you point out).

Angier had to be wealthy to bankroll Tesla, fabricate all those water tanks and pose as nobility (did I miss something in the story?). His earlier life (a few years earlier) where he was shilling for another magician when his wife was killed didn't support this trend.

When Angier went to meet Tesla, Tesla's assistant said something about 'the machine for the other magician' leading you to think that they had fabricated something for Bale's character. Maybe a red-herring but how else would you explain Bale's perfect double? An identical twin brother that was kept secret all his life?

'The Illusionist', the other period piece about magic relies on story (and a few CGI effects to portray fanciful, but possible tricks). I think possibly they pumped up 'The Prestige' too much to compete with this other movie. The only thing I found wanting was the use of CGI, they should have fabricated some fanciful tricks and used those. I found myself caring less about how they did things knowing it was just fx in 'The Illusionist'.

You're right! But he only killed himself once: the other 100 times it was his clone.

Note to Hank: the spoiler feature seems broken; it's causing unnecessary horizontal scrolling...

If nothing else Tesla could've made fortune as a haberdasher, thus providing the financial wherewithal for his other, more scientific pursuits.

BTW, the question re: the true nature of the replicas is as uncertain in this instance as it is in "Blade Runner." I quite can't put my finger on it, but the two films have something strikingly in common.

They missed an opportunity for a seriously disturbing twist:

they were cloning the clone after he killed himself the first time. As they were using some sort of analogue process, imperfections introduced each time would increase with each iteration. It could have made for some particularly messy/gruesome/awful effects.

SPOILER ALERT


The plot required a god machine (literally) to close the hole. That is Angier needed a trick, went to a physicist, and wound up with a defective transporter from Star Trek (aka magic or SF as you point out).
The only trouble I had with this is the bending of genre. It's not playing by the rules to introduce science fiction into a story in the third act. However, if we accept this element, it is introduced and developed logically. Both magicians were at the aborted Tesla demonstration and saw each other, so they both knew the other was interested in Tesla. Bale's character knew Angier didn't accept the most obvious (and correct) solution to the Transporting Man effect and was obsessed with learning the secret. Tesla had a reputation as a mad genius who could do impossible stuff, so Bale sent Angier on a wild goose chase to America. However, Tesla was a mad genius who could do impossible things, and was able to build the machine Angier wanted. It just didn't work as expected. As I said, it's not high on the credibility level, but it does make sense in the context of the story.

Angier had to be wealthy to bankroll Tesla, fabricate all those water tanks and pose as nobility (did I miss something in the story?). His earlier life (a few years earlier) where he was shilling for another magician when his wife was killed didn't support this trend.
Angier wasn't impersonating nobility, he was a noble. Remember in the early backstage scene after the first water tank scene, it is clear that they didn't know where he came from. In the following scene with his wife, he said he had to use a pseudonym to spare his family the embarassment of having a stage performer in the family. And when he shows up at the jail, he states that he always was that lord.

When Angier went to meet Tesla, Tesla's assistant said something about 'the machine for the other magician' leading you to think that they had fabricated something for Bale's character. Maybe a red-herring but how else would you explain Bale's perfect double? An identical twin brother that was kept secret all his life?
I don't remember the assistant saying this, but he later denied saying they had built a machine for the other magician. The assistant was pulling a con job. He knew that if he said they hadn't built the previous machine, Angier would have taken his money and left.

And they were identical twins. They didn't have to keep it secret their entire life, just from the point that they decided to become a magician. (And that sentence is grammatically correct in the context of the story.) This is hinted at when he claims that the Chinese magician is pretending to be a cripple for the sake of his act. It also explains why he said he didn't know which knot he tied in the water tank tragedy. Something he verified in his journal. It also explains how he was able to apparently instantly get into his future wife's apartment.

The story may be something of a clockwork construction, but it is a very well designed one.

SPOILER ALERTThe only trouble I had with this is the bending of genre. It's not playing by the rules to introduce science fiction into a story in the third act.

I agree.

In fact, the sci-fi element is introduced ten minutes into the film with Angier’s request that Tesla build him some sort of mysterious “machine.”

Later in Act I, Alley remarks that Tesla has built “unusual machines for unusual people;” another hint that something technologically dodgy is in the works.

And then there’s Tesla’s “Man’s grasp exceeds his nerve” speech at the top of Act II, during which he agrees to build the ominous gizmo for Angier in spite of his better judgment.

We may not have see the machine function until Act III, but its fantastical nature is amply foreshadowed prior to that time IMO.

SPOILER ALERT



The only trouble I had with this is the bending of genre. It's not playing by the rules to introduce science fiction into a story in the third act. However, if we accept this element, it is introduced and developed logically. Both magicians were at the aborted Tesla demonstration and saw each other, so they both knew the other was interested in Tesla. Bale's character knew Angier didn't accept the most obvious (and correct) solution to the Transporting Man effect and was obsessed with learning the secret. Tesla had a reputation as a mad genius who could do impossible stuff, so Bale sent Angier on a wild goose chase to America. However, Tesla was a mad genius who could do impossible things, and was able to build the machine Angier wanted. It just didn't work as expected. As I said, it's not high on the credibility level, but it does make sense in the context of the story.


Angier wasn't impersonating nobility, he was a noble. Remember in the early backstage scene after the first water tank scene, it is clear that they didn't know where he came from. In the following scene with his wife, he said he had to use a pseudonym to spare his family the embarassment of having a stage performer in the family. And when he shows up at the jail, he states that he always was that lord.


I don't remember the assistant saying this, but he later denied saying they had built a machine for the other magician. The assistant was pulling a con job. He knew that if he said they hadn't built the previous machine, Angier would have taken his money and left.

And they were identical twins. They didn't have to keep it secret their entire life, just from the point that they decided to become a magician. (And that sentence is grammatically correct in the context of the story.) This is hinted at when he claims that the Chinese magician is pretending to be a cripple for the sake of his act. It also explains why he said he didn't know which knot he tied in the water tank tragedy. Something he verified in his journal. It also explains how he was able to apparently instantly get into his future wife's apartment.

The story may be something of a clockwork construction, but it is a very well designed one.

yeah, I think you're both right. Mainly I was offended by the introduction of fantasy/SF in a vehicle that didn't need it.

If nothing else Tesla could've made fortune as a haberdasher, thus providing the financial wherewithal for his other, more scientific pursuits.

Of course the problem with this is all the hats would be the same size and style. And I suspect the power requirements would make them more expensive to produce than a regular hat.

BTW, the question re: the true nature of the replicas is as uncertain in this instance as it is in "Blade Runner." I quite can't put my finger on it, but the two films have something strikingly in common.

I'm sure that someone knowlegable in quantum physics could come up with a (pseudo-)scientific explanation for how the machine worked, but it seemed to me that instead of moving an object from one place to another, it made the object exist in two places at once. Remember when he tells Angier not to forget his hat. "Which one is mine?" "All of them are." I think fundamentally the two versions are identical, down to the subatomic level, so which is the original and which is the duplicate is essentially meaningless. But the end result is the same. Angier is committing suicide each night for the sake of the act.

Of course the problem with this is all the hats would be the same size and style. And I suspect the power requirements would make them more expensive to produce than a regular hat..

Yeah, I was being facetious with the haberdasher comment.

I think fundamentally the two versions are identical, down to the subatomic level, so which is the original and which is the duplicate is essentially meaningless. But the end result is the same. Angier is committing suicide each night for the sake of the act.

Yup.

Far from being intrusive or unnecessary, the machine provides an imaginative means by which to examine the moral issues associated with rivalry and obsession.

Ya'll are making this movie sound like a worth-see.

I must admit, my reaction to this film continues to catch me by surprise.

The script really got me hyped, but I left the theater feeling underwhelmed. Now I’m starting to think it’s actually a pretty good flick after all.

Thing is, as distant and remote as I thought the story played on an emotional level, something about it has really stayed with me.

The last film that had me flip-flopping like was, in fact, “Blade Runner.”

it's making for some good discussion anyway...

I must admit, my reaction to this film continues to catch me by surprise.

The script really got me hyped, but I left the theater feeling underwhelmed. Now I’m starting to think it’s actually a pretty good flick after all.

Thing is, as distant and remote as I thought the story played on an emotional level, something about it has really stayed with me.

The last film that had me flip-flopping like was, in fact, “Blade Runner.”
Maybe it seemed "distant and remote" emotionally is because it required so much intellectual investment. The story essentially told us up front that it was going to fool us. On top of that, it has a circular flashback within a flashback structure. It takes a lot of mental energy just to 1) figure out what is going on, and 2) figure out what is really going on. For instance, as soon as Phalen (sp?) showed up, I assumed he was someone in disguise. Everytime he appeared I was trying to figure out who he really was. This is going to take away some of the emotional investment. I'm interested in seeing the movie again, to see if the mechanics of the story hold together and whether it plays differently once you know what is really going on.

Maybe it seemed "distant and remote" emotionally is because it required so much intellectual investment.

I can't speak for others, but having already read the shooting script a couple of times prior to viewing the final cut, I was pretty much up to speed with regard to the more cerebral aspects of the plot.

The problem in my case wasn't the intellectual burden of having to track with the story. My issue stemmed more from the disconnect I perceived between the movie I imagined (expected), and that which the filmmakers delivered. It's a trap I normally manage to avoid, but in this case my preconceived notions appear to have gotten the better of me.

So who won, Batman or Wolverine?

Alfred won.

I'm sure that someone knowlegable in quantum physics could come up with a (pseudo-)scientific explanation for how the machine worked, but it seemed to me that instead of moving an object from one place to another, it made the object exist in two places at once. Remember when he tells Angier not to forget his hat. "Which one is mine?" "All of them are." I think fundamentally the two versions are identical, down to the subatomic level, so which is the original and which is the duplicate is essentially meaningless. But the end result is the same. Angier is committing suicide each night for the sake of the act.

No, I think the scene with the cat was included to illustrate that there is a distinct original and a copy - the cat was hissing and pissed off while the lightning storm occurred inside the machine - hackles up, sweaty looking (do cats sweat?) - the abrupt end of the lightning showed a perfectly calm cat, but the cat that was outside in the "dumping ground" was obviously the same cat that had endured the effects of the machine - agitated and harried.

I'm with Carson on the whole Blade Runner thing - I originally hated BR when I saw it in the theater for the same reason I think I wasn't very impressed with The Prestige - I had envisioned a much different film based on the information I had before I saw it. I didn't really appreciate Blade Runner until the fourth viewing.
I may have misjudged this movie a bit - but I was still not surprised by much as the story unfolded. I think that's what disappointed me the most about it - that I wasn't awed by the spectacle of a truly unexpected twist in a film that was touted as being impenetrably twisty.
If you throw out that expectation it's really a decent film.

No, I think the scene with the cat was included to illustrate that there is a distinct original and a copy - the cat was hissing and pissed off while the lightning storm occurred inside the machine - hackles up, sweaty looking (do cats sweat?) - the abrupt end of the lightning showed a perfectly calm cat, but the cat that was outside in the "dumping ground" was obviously the same cat that had endured the effects of the machine - agitated and harried.

So instead of Schrodinger's cat, which is in a state where it is both alive and dead, we have Tesla's cat, which is in a state where it is both calm and pissed.

I don't remember the scene well enough to argue the point, but it does seem to me an overly obscure and complicated addition to the story. On the other hand, in support of your theory, I do seem to remember the hat briefly disappearing in the first experiment.

So why would you have the agitated and calm cat? Perhaps because the calm cat didn't experience the electrical effect. Perhaps this is related to the idea that time is not fundamentally different from spatial dimensions. So what Tesla was attempting to do was move the an object spatially, but with no passage of time. Thanks to some quantum preservation of matter and energy, it also kept the object in the same location but moved it forward in time.

Or maybe we should take the FUTURAMA approach. In one episode, Fry wondered how aliens could receive a thousand year-old television transmission.
PROFESSOR: "Well, you see, their planet is a thousand light years away. And the transmission travelled at--
FRY: "Got it. Magic."

I'm with Carson on the whole Blade Runner thing - I originally hated BR when I saw it in the theater for the same reason I think I wasn't very impressed with The Prestige - I had envisioned a much different film based on the information I had before I saw it. I didn't really appreciate Blade Runner until the fourth viewing.
I may have misjudged this movie a bit - but I was still not surprised by much as the story unfolded. I think that's what disappointed me the most about it - that I wasn't awed by the spectacle of a truly unexpected twist in a film that was touted as being impenetrably twisty.
If you throw out that expectation it's really a decent film.

I've pretty much given up on movies being able to fool me, especially if I know there is a twist. I think the last movie that took me completely by surprise was FIGHT CLUB.

I don't remember the scene well enough to argue the point, but it does seem to me an overly obscure and complicated addition to the story.

The scene in question is not the film's strongest, containing as it does more than its share of the sort of muddy verbal exposition usually found in a half-baked "X-Files" episode.

With regard to the nature of the duplicates, I think the scene's final exchange of dialogue is rather telling:

TESLA: Don't forget your hat.

Angier glances at the pile of hats.

ANGIER: Which one is mine?

TESLA: They are all your hat, Mr. Angier.

Notice he doesn't say "hats."

I've pretty much given up on movies being able to fool me, especially if I know there is a twist.

Personally, I find being "fooled" by a movie to be an overrated experience. In any case, I'm honestly not sure how hard Christopher Nolan & Co. were trying to hide the truth from us. After all, there are times when the underlying dread of a slowly dawning revelation is more dramatically effective than the passing shock of a sudden surprise.

Personally, I find being "fooled" by a movie to be an overrated experience. In any case, I'm honestly not sure how hard Christopher Nolan & Co. were trying to hide the truth from us. After all, there are times when the underlying dread of a slowly dawning revelation is more dramatically effective than the passing shock of a sudden surprise.

Rob,
I agree that Nolan and company weren't trying very hard - there are just too many clues throughout that become impossible to ignore by the beginning of the 3rd act (or "The Prestige", in the film's nomenclature) - but I don't think any of them had much control over the way the film was marketed, either in traditional media or virally.
Word of mouth before the film's release was what destroyed my appreciation of the initial viewing experience, as mostly what I heard was what a surprise all the plot twists were to people who had seen it in previews, or read the novel.

I just watched this on ShowtimeHD, and was pretty impressed. It looks fantastic in HD, and I like the plot. David Bowie was really good as Tesla.

One plot hole that bothered me I'm surprised nobody mentioned, when Angiers wife was drowning in the tank, why didn't Michael Caine or Angiers just remove the trick lock and open the top, rather than struggling to break the glass? This only bothered me because they had a scene where they specifically show how the "trick" was performed and supposed to go.

Otherwise, it was pretty good, though I figured out the "twist" at the end about five minutes after that character appeared onscreen.

For me, it fits into the "flawed, but I rather liked it" category. Unlike other movies that may hang together better, this one had a resonance that remained after the viewing.

Given that we're a jaded bunch, how could you create a movie about magic and simulate the wonder of a magic show? You'd have to introduce something we couldn't easily explain away, and therein lies the risk of venturing into science fiction or fantasy. Hm.

I wish that we were not shown the two Angiers simultaneously. Then the final shot might have been more of a surprise ... the prestige, as it were.

That was pretty much my impression as well. I think the movie did get into sci-fi/fantasy and that made it a bit uneven in my opinion.

I didn't see this in the theater nor on Hd - watched it on a desktop here in Iraq - but really liked it. It's on my list of movies to get from Amazon.com at some point in the not-too-distant future. Like Scott, the only flaw I found in the movie was with the death of Angier's wife. Otherwise, I thought it flowed rather well and had no real flaws other than it seemed a bit overly slow in a number of scenes.

I had it figured out as soon as we saw what Tesla had built for Angiers, tho. I just thought that perhaps Borden's character would have come around instead of doing what he did at the end. I found the story itself to be the most engaging part, regardless the background tools used to get us there.

The Prestige is one of those films that I warm up to after multiple viewings. It's a favorite among recent films for me now. True, neither main character is really the hero. Michael Caine is the only one who is truly honorable. But I love the design of this film and Jackman and Bale are always interesting if not likeable.

I saw The Prestige last year when came out. The movie was okay. But, the thing that excited me most about this movie was that they weaved Nikola Tesla into the film. As soon as the lightning machine showed up and the movie went to Colorado Springs I knew exactly who the wizard they talked about was. I didn't care for David Bowie playing the role of Tesla. He didn't seem to put much energy into the role. He didn't even look much like him. They probably should have gotten an actor from Serbia to play his role. They made him seem like more of a magical than intelligent man. I have heard that Albert Einstein once said that Nikola Tesla was the most intelligent man he ever met.

By the way, there is a movie with actors that was made about the real Tesla. I think it even had Orson Wells in it. I can't recall the title because I haven't seen it in a long time. It had Tesl's name in it. It wasn't a very well made movie, although it was factual. That's probably why it wasn't that great of a film. I think a much better movie can be made. Although he was a creative genius, he spent his life struggling against other engineers who were better businessmen than he was. Aftre all, Tesla invented radio first, but, Marconi got the Nobel prize for it.

I thought Bowie gave a great performance in a role that was entirely unlike any he's played before. He wisely used a lot of restraint in a role that could have easily been over-the-top.

I agree about Bowie. Thought he was great in the role. And being a huge LOTR fan, it's always fun to Andy Serkis in the flesh (rather than CG).

I am comparing Bowie to the real Tesla. I guess you guys are just saying how much you liked his role irregardless of whether he accurately portrayed Tesla or not?

David Bowie as Tesla.
http://media.movieweb.com/galleries/3728/2534/lo/cocc.jpg (http://www.movieweb.com/movies/film/28/3728/gal2534/22.php)

Nikola himself.
http://www.teslascience.org/archive/photographs/NT1919.jpg

Well, count me in w/that group, too. I loved Bowies performance and have no problems w/any accuracy issues. After all, how many times have we seen actors who only barely resemble the historical subject they're portraying?

At least they got Tesla's hair right in the movie. :)

Okay, ignoring the physical appearance issue, I still think they could have made Bowie a little more dynamic. The photo is of Tesla posing. But, I've seen plenty of his photos with his suit coat off working. Bowie never gets out of his suit in the film. He never invents anything. He just calmly talks.

He never invents anything.
Other than the Transporter/Duplicating Machine.

Honestly, and with out any malice, it sort of sounds like you're being overly nit-picky. Tesla was only a background character in the movie. He was an important background character, to be sure, but this isn't a historical movie dealing w/Tesla. It's a purely fictional account that happens to have Tesla as a background character.

As to him being seen w/his coat on, he's already done the hard work. Now he's in "showman" mode. At least, that's what I got out of it.

:shrug: I understand your frustration, but it really doesn't bug me any. I enjoyed the movie in spite of knowing he didn't resemble Tesla all that strongly.

Bored to tears. That was my reaction. My wife and I had friends over for dinner and watched this as the after dinner entertainment. Not so much for me, but they loved it.

I thought the whole idea of a cloning, transporter machine was....silly?
In any event, it wasn't the worst movie I've ever seen (a title held to this day be Battlefield Earth) but it certainly isn't in my top, say 100.

Maybe as mentioned above, this is a movie that required multiple viewings to really get into? Office Space was like that for me. I hated that the first time, but after several viewings, (apparently I am a glutin for punishment :freak: ) I really enjoyed it.

j

I am being picky. But, the Tesla part is the only part that I really liked, mainly because I am a Tesla enthusiast.

I am being picky. But, the Tesla part is the only part that I really liked, mainly because I am a Tesla enthusiast.

Yeah, I thought a story about Tesla (over the top dramatized perhaps) with Bowie might not be a bad flick. I ran into Tesla recently while I was reading Mark Twain's works. Seems that Twain (Sam Clemens) was an old friend of Tesla. (for a free read of Twain see UofV's E library. link (http://etext.virginia.edu/ebooks/Tlist.html))

Apparently I'm not the only one who thinks it's fuel for entertainment.

short paper on Twain and Tesla(link) (http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/dept/Courses/E-24/E-24Projects/Krumme1.pdf) . Tesla/Twain "Five Fists of Science" comic (-er graphic novel?) preview(7mb link) (http://images.comicbookresources.com/previews/imagecomics/fivefistsofscience/5FoS_BW_Preview.pdf) .

edit: and unless I'm mistaken, Mark McG's Magnagouger is a Tesla invention.

The whole thing was just too depressing throughout for me, and especially at
the end.

Disregarding how many copies of both characters there were, from wherever
they came from, it seemed to me the story was substantially the following.
Please correct any timeline errors I may make, as the flashbacks combined with tiredness caused me to lose track a bit. I also forgot all the guy's names, so I am using the actor's names to keep track of 'who's on first'.

Bale kills Jackman's wife unintentionally because he wanted to show what a great magician he was, then Jackman spends his life trying to outdo Bale in magic tricks and success as a magician, as his revenge.

Bale then demonstrates a remarkable magic trick, but Jackman eventually duplicates it. Bale physically attacks, humiliates and permanently cripples Jackman during Jackman's more interesting version of the magic act.
Jackman is now more willing to do more to directly hurt Bale.

Jackman instigates a romance for Bale, who is by then already married. Bale's wife finds out and she commits suicide. Jackman is convinced there is a real, scientific explanation for Bale's greatest magic trick and is obsessed with discovering that secret. He manages to buy a method from Tesla to outdo Bale's greatest magic trick. Bale is framed for the murder of Jackman during one of Jackman's magic shows. By now Jackman wants to take away Bale's child and raise her as his own, once Bale has been excuted for the apparent murder of Jackman.

I think Michael Caine set Jackman up to really be murdered by Bale at the end, I'm not sure why. By that time they had both caused the deaths of each other's wives, but since Bale started the whole thing I certainly would not have let him be the survivor and 'winner' of the feud at the end of the story. Bale is now twice a murderer directly, while Jackman only indirectly caused the death of Bale's wife.

All the death and lack of redemption of anyone in the story was just too depressing for me at the end. Life sucks enough already, which is why, in the end, I like my personal entertainment to be more upbeat.

No question the whole film falls into the tragedy genre. But so does some of the best Shakespeare. I still find it a fascinating film.

Rented it a couple of months ago. Liked it. A noble failure, maybe. So much better than so many movies that had 5 times the hype and made 10 times the box-office. And I'm fine with downbeat.

I did like the movie but it just left me somehow.......disappointed.