Duplicity

Duplicity_360P

source: Duplicity

We went because we generally enjoy Julia Roberts. A tedious movie about uninteresting characters with a ho-hum plot. The plot was tedious, the supposed corporate product was boring as were the meanderings of characters. One of the worst movies we've seen in the last year! Julia, were you double dealing with your audience? I read that a review that said the plot was 'clever', hmmm clever and smart must be in short supply if this is what passes as clever. Usually in a love story you want to feel for the characters so that you can share the adventure - or maybe even hate them - these ones were just boring. However in this the only warmth was the money that passed hands as the movie theatre owners accepted our money that we too willingly passed to them. We are what would be called a 'mature' audience i.e. over 50 wit a little life experience. So if you are under 22 this may be the movie for you.

Duplicity {dir. Tony Gilroy, 2009} (***1/2/****) A dense and fascinating con game thrown together with sleek and sophisticated romantic comedy. Keeping up with this film is a large part of the enjoyment, Gilroy's tight screenplay is good company. The leads are in full star mode (as they should be) and the supporting actors are perfectly cast (as they should be.) The chemistry between Roberts and Owen is palpable and refreshing. I was surprised that a film so entertaining and intelligent would be released in what is a notoriously dismal season for good films. The closest a major studio film has come to channeling the charismatic cool of Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn. A sparkling entertainment!

This movie is like every other movie in the past few years- nothing special. Duplicity's trailer make it seem a lot more fun that what it really is. This should have been an Ocean's movie; it certainly has the talent to be. Clive Owens and Julia Roberts (not really looking very glamorous) are good actors and they are supported by other stellar performers. So why isn't this movie very much fun? Well its the writing. There are a lot of so called twist that can be guessed almost immediately. Only one actually surprises you. Also the dialog is not very witty and it should have been. In fact it repeats itself so much as to be annoying. So in the end what could have been a fun little romp turns boring in the end.

Half way through the film, I began asking myself what the hell was going on. There were just one two many flashback scenes and when you finally figure the whole thing out, and then you have the ending hit you over the head with a sledgehammer, you realize that what you just saw was a very big wastes of time. You invest two hours of your life into these characters and you root for them. Then they get duped and they end up with nothing. What a terrible way to end an already below average film to begin with. More problems ensue when you piece things together and you ask yourself how the corporation actually knew what was happening. It seems like they went to great lengths and endured many impossibilities just to throw two would be thieves off their brilliant discovery. I just didn't buy it. Duplicity is a terrible film that asks you to invest in two characters for two hours and then asks you to leave the theater disappointed. There is no payoff in this film and in today's economic climate, seeing corporate America win another one, well, just tell me where to mail the check. 2/10

Wow another movie thats doesn't stand good on its own but good because of Julia Roberts. Its really good to see her again after long time(after Mexican?). But that is the drawback too, we expected to return her in great movie but this movie doesn't seen to have any depth and just became another one of her movie. But what really makes this movie worth a watch is the good chemistry between Julia and Owen and the dazzling dialog's. And cinematography also been great especially the wine shot. Story and background score also ordinary only. But casting was great that does a magic for this movie. It is a decent thriller with some interesting twists and spies which may worth a 5 stars from what makes it a 8 starer is Julia only Julia. If you are a fan see it immediately she doesn't lost her charm after all these years. For Others it is not a must see movie but worth a watch when you get bored. OK friends thats all from me please acknowledge me whether my comment is useful or so i might improve myself. Thank you for viewing my comment.

Greetings again from the darkness. The very imaginative and quite funny opening credit sequence sets the stage for a fun frolic through the world of corporate espionage. The only two problems ... it's not that much fun and there is very little frolicking. Writer/Director Tony Gilroy (Michael Clayton) just tries to be too clever and cute for his own good. After landing two perfect leads and two of the best character actors of this generation, Gilroy offers up a tedious, bungled mess that is really never that clever and certainly gives the feeling of holding back these four fine actors. The multi-frame look, non-linear time line, repeated dialogue and smirky exchanges between Clive and Julia are just some of the clichéd tricks used to make this seem more interesting and complicated than it really is. Clive Owen shows again that he would have made a sterling James Bond (nothing against Daniel Craig, who is excellent). Instead of his usual dark, brooding roles, he seems to thrive when he can show a bit of emotion. Luckily for the audience, we are only subjected to one of Julia Roberts' patented cackles that causes every man to cringe. For her, she is quite reserved, but just can't pull off the smartest person in the room role. Sadly, the great Tom Wilkinson is pretty much wasted in his role as one of the dueling corporate giants. Paul Giamatti, on the other hand, has the best scene in the film as he delivers over-the-top arrogance in his stockholders speech. Must also mention Tom McCarthy, not so much for his role (he is the guy handcuffed in the meeting room), but just because I have become such a fan of his directorial skills ... The Station Agent and The Visitor. If you are after a dime store version of Michael Clayton or a mostly non-funny Cary Grant type film, then this is the film for you. To me, it just doesn't deliver the quips, twist or turns that it pretends to.

Wow this film is bad. I loved "Michael Clayton," but this is clearly a director with one successful film allowed to go off the deep end on his sophomore effort. (See "Atonement.") I knew we were in trouble from the opening credits -- an interminable slow motion sequence of what's supposed to be a comedic pantomime of two people who hate each other...with the music turned up extra loud to make it seem faster, funnier, quirkier...or something... Problem is, we get the idea after five seconds. The rest of the open gives us no new information, and it's not actually funny, so it seems to last an hour. These opening credits telegraph what you are in for: two hours of film-making DEVOID of actual content, delivered with mediocre style. Scene after scene is too long. I don't need a whole sequence of Clive Owen following Julia Roberts, I just need enough shots to know that a following happens. The passing scenery does not interest me. I also don't need the scene in the car where two guys mock Clive's accent to go on this long...or even happen. Clive Owen has an English accent. Is that supposed to be funny? And how many tilt-up-to-skyscraper shots does a movie really need? I guess about 50. But apparently you also need the actors performing the SAME exact scene (the film's big gimmick) even more than that. Note to filmmakers: this only worked in "The Conversation." Unless it reveals something new, it's a waste of time. (And if it *does* reveal something new, then stop it after 10 seconds, and one occurrence, because once we realize what actually *is* new information (if we haven't guessed already) we're done. The different intonations of the act are of no interest.) Also, FYI, legitimate suspense is not created by just having people yell "Hurry! Hurry!" while someone looks up a room number from their messy desk. That's just arbitrary. And -- wow -- BOXES as a transition device. Again, this has been done to death, but usually when it has been done to death, the boxes are telling you something in terms of simultaneous action -- they're not just using boxes for the sake of having boxes. WOW. The worst part is that the film believes it is being clever, when really what's going on is TOTALLY OBVIOUS. You're way ahead of it for at least an hour, yet the filmmakers feel they have to SPOON FEED YOU A MONTAGE OF "WHAT JUST HAPPENED" (and even *that* is too long) in case you were asleep during the show (a legitimate worry with this film.) That's just insulting. Oh yes, and ultimately the screenplay is about NOTHING. (Is that technically a spoiler?) Basically the protagonists try to do something frivilous, involving no stakes, then in the end find out they were doomed to fail from day one because they're self-involved idiots. Yawn. There is one good performance from the southern woman seduced by Clive Ownen. Her behavior is funny in her interrogation scene, the only inspired part of the film. Almost forgot...you have Roberts use a copy machine to copy the "secret document," yet no one even thinks to check whether or not SHE MIGHT HAVE MADE A COPY OF IT WHILE USING THE COPY MACHINE. (See what I mean by "insulting"?) Avoid this film.

I really wanted to like this film, Julia Roberts and Clive Owen two very good actors but no, I couldn't get to grips with the plot and characterisations or lack of either. I wasn't convinced Owen and Roberts were close despite the various romantic interludes in flashback. It seemed it was trying to be Ocean's 11 or 12. It failed. About twenty minutes into the movie the game plan was obvious, after that is was sitting it out to the end because I'd paid for it. The one saving grace was Giamatti and Wilkinson's performances they were brilliantly over the top. I hope they all turn up in a decent movie very soon.