GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Marketic It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

leaningt The 2006 Edinburgh International Film Festival has premiered an array of high quality feature films, imported from around the globe. However, there will always be a few bad eggs that manage to slip through the festival's cinematic net. 'The Prodigy' is not so much a bad egg, as a scavenging rat that has the ability to close down the most reputable of London restaurants. Previously well received in the United States, William Kaufman's gangster flic resembles a B-movie, as it follows tough-guy 'Truman' around the blood-stained streets of Dallas, Texas, attempting to track down a psychopathic assassin who has kidnapped a local mob-boss' nephew. Too often than not, the dialogue is mind-numbingly boring and the pitiful performances are enough to tip a suicidal man over the edge. A truly terrible film.

CineCritic2517 I don't know what the people that rated this film a 5 or more usually watch but I have a fairly good idea. And perhaps if you see little else than MTV all day and catch a Horror flick every once in a while, this movie could indeed be appealing.I can safely say that I have seen my share of stinkers but those movies didn't all fall short due to the lack of almost everything that makes a quality movie. Yet, Prodigy certainly seemed to spare no effort to try to fail on all counts although I admit there were some nice action-scenes and the premise certainly was interesting.But the main question is: why make a movie and blatantly ignore directing it? I mean, the story was all over the place and none of the scenes seemed to blend at all. It was like watching a collection of scenes in a non discernible order. Any first grade film student would have surely done a better job in creating some cohesion.Directing aside, what was up with the grainy footage, the constantly changing camera style (make up your mind guys) and the first-draft dialog? And don't even get me started on the 'acting' by some of the cast. I know this movie was obviously low-budget but for the love of God, you don't have to remind the audience of it in just about every scene.This movie gets a lot of positive reviews and those reviewers give this flick a neat 4/4 stars. 'Bit suspicious considering that the weighted average vote isn't even a six, which is due to the fact that 36%! of the voters gave it a ten obviously without giving it much thought. If you don't mind incoherent film-making, overlong scenes and an in-the-face feel of lowbudgetism, then, by all means, go see this and give it a 10 as well. Otherwise just avoid...

adriansmithy I am amazed at the multi-star reviews this film is getting. With 3 friends (2 guys, 1 girl) i watched this at the Edinburgh Film Festival and all of us said it was terrible. Not 'the' worst film ever but in the top 20 stinkers i have seen. Where to start? On paper it looked good, dark gritty action - according to the blurbs anyway. What we got was a film i would expect an adolescent boy and his school pals to make. The dialogue was useless, camera work & lighting were terrible, acting wooden in extreme & the characters totally unbelievable. I didn't recognise many of the people in it, but a bunch of actors from a cheap porno could have done as well. I would advise the makers of this to maybe keep the same camera angle for more than 3 seconds, instead of constant rapid fire changes. Maybe use some lights? i know its meant to be 'dark' but this is ridiculous. Also massive amounts of gunfire & death don't make up for lack of coherent storyline & bad acting. Two other problems - the bad guy is supposed to be tough? why when he is unmasked does he look like a weedy corporate lawyer? Does the suite he wears make him an ultra ninja-terminator only while he wears it? Was this deliberate? He was seriously unscarey. Secondly, Scottish accents. Americans just cant do them, please don't even try. When the main character's sidekick first spoke there were audible gasps & laughs from the audience. We turned to each other in total disbelief & amazement how this could happen in 2006? It was like Brigadoon all over again. So the summary from this 'Scotch-lander' is : don't see this unless you are a teenage gun nut who doesn't mind bad acting, poor lighting, incoherent comic book story lines, unconvincing characters & the worst Scottish accent in 50 years in your movies. Instantly forgettable a D-minus. (PS. My 3 friends would have given this an even worse review!)

dfwscout Although I'm a little fatigued with the 'bullets and blood' shorts and features that are produced wholesale, I was genuinely stunned with the quality of this production. I have produced 10 shorts and 2 micro-budget features, so I feel the pain of being held back by monetary restrictions. Yet with this film I never once thought 'if only they had the funds and/or time to do that the right way'. If they would have announced the budget at 5 million, I would have said that it was money well spent. The cinematography was the best I have seen from a local production, the characters and acting were completely convincing, and the editing, pacing, and score were spot-on (if you notice any of these, then it becomes irritating) and did nothing to detract from the story…which I found refreshingly unique and richly layered. If I had a distribution company I would have signed them in the lobby after the screening.