They made the prince kill himself, but the prince did NOT kill Sophie. Neither did they have any proof that he killed anyone else.
They should have just leave it at that after Sophie escaped. He could join her and live together, without killing the prince, indirectly. The prince would think he killed Sophie, so he wouldn't search for Sophie or Eisenheim.
Agree. This is pretty bizarre. In the trivia it says, that he doesn't frame him in the original story.
But you could also view it as something done on purpose, ie the protagonist is not a moral person - he doesn't mind a (somewhat) innocent person dying if it helps his own cause/eases his life.
The prince was a TRAITOR. He was about to start a civil war. He was also a killer, and not stupid. If Sophie's corpse had disappeared, he would have put 2+2 together. As he did when he realized he was being framed for her murder. And their lives would have been forfeit, since the arm of his empire reached far.
You missed the part where he never tried to do anything, because he was out cold after the bitch drugged him. Sophie claims he would have hunted them down and killed them, but he is just using her for political reasons and thinks she is too old to be of romantic interest, so would he really bother? Killing a man for her is just a test to make up for running off on her when he was a boy
How is she a bitch? Please explain. "You missed the part where he never tried to do anything." He had just hit her and was running after her calling her a whore, surely he was going to do something. If he hadn't been drugged then Sophie very well could have been killed for real.
He's a violent horrible man, who most likely had beaten his lovers and killed one of them. He hit her just prior to the scene and we know he only wants to marry her to gain support from Hungary so he can overthrow his father, and who knows how violent that would have been and how many people would have died. And god, marriage with him? Have you ever heard of marital rape?
Her situation was in every way awful and if drugging him and convincing just one person that he murdered her, a crime for which he could not have been convicted, makes her a bitch, then the Prince was surely a devil in comparison. She did only one morally dubious thing in the movie, just one. She does not deserve to be called a bitch.
That part was very strange. It seemed really unfair, even though he was painted as a "bad guy". Even though he didn't do it, he seemed like he felt guilty. THough i think he killed himself more to escape the scandal.
They basically framed him for murder and killed him (and drove him to commit suicide). Kind of weird that Paul Giammati was laughing and applauding that "trick)
I had a big problem with this too. It left an unpleasant aftertaste in what was otherwise an engaging and clever film. Sure, the prince was no nice guy, with a bad reputation, but like you say, they could have just faked her death.
they didn't kill the prince. the prince was going to overthrow the emperor... the emperor was simply alerted to the prince's plans, & whatever happened after that was out of their control.
If you know the tale of the Count of Monte Cristo, Dante's plot of revenge against one of his betrayors made his enemies wife poison her son and herself. it was collateral damage.
A while since I watched the movie now, but if I'm not mistaken, he kills himself because of the plot against his father has failed, doesnt he? The events in the movie might have led to the failed usupring, but that would be like blaming a waterdrop for a flood.
Some might find me morally challenged or morally ambigious. I prefer morally creative.
Sophie clearly states that if she and Eduard were to run away, they would be chased for the rest of their lives by the prince. This makes Eduard realise that they need to fake her death, and in a way that the prince can't fail to believe. Thus they have him "kill" her, in a drunken state. Had he not already had a reputation for killing/maiming his lovers, he wouldn't have done so on that night when he tried to kill Sophie. In that sense, he's already guilty of probably killing others. As far as morals are concerned, he DID "kill" Sophie, and he even tried to cover it, as I'm sure Eduard predicted. Moreover, thanks to the shrewdness of the prince, it's quite possible that Eduard felt the need to put the nail in the coffin, both figuratively and literally.
The prince *was* guilty of treason, plotting to overthrow his father. It's obvious that his moral compass is very twisted. I guess Norton's biggest crime is selfishness, more than immorality. That's just my opinion. Also, off-topic, but this movie was *cough* overrated. Also my opinion :D
They didn't "make" the prince kill himself. How would they have known he would react like that? OK, they framed him for murder but he would have got away with that as he explains to the police chief - the palace was outside the police's jurisdiction and he knew he was innocent.
It's the failed coup plot that leads him to kill himself, and that's his own decision (and not a particularly rational one either, he might well have talked his way out of it ).
I used to want to change the world. Now I just want to leave the room with a little dignity.
I feel kinda sorry for the Prince. Who says he wouldnt have made a great ruler?? Indeed, you must admit he was quite intelligent, guessing the twist way before the Inspector for instance and other things.
Even the Chief Inspector thinks highly of him initially.
And if he did murder a previous lover, surely the Chief Inspector would know about it or at least suspeect it (since he seems to be an honourable man judging by his ultimate actions, and suspected nothing).
Did you miss the part where the Prince brought police to the theater with orders to arrest any audience member who asked a question of Sophie? Arrested for asking a question.