Dual

I wish I'd have known it was the "Art of Self-Defense" guy going into this. I was expecting something vey different from the trailer. Something more interesting or exciting. Even knowing that now I still dont think it comes close to measuring up.

The premise is true to the synopsis. Sarah is dying and decides to get cloned, but upon learning she wont be dying, in order to live she has to kill her clone in ritual combat. Sounds really cool. Its not. It's drab and boring, not accidently, intentionally. Everyone talks like robots and you're supposed to be only amused by the general absurdity of it all. Its barely longer than a short film, so that is literally all of it.

The problem is that it's just not funny or interesting. There's no highs or lows here. There's no humor in 90% of the film. Theres exactly 2 gags and the rest is played painfully straight. It's hard to describe but imagine a wes anderson movie except theres nothing hipster, bizarre or ridiculous. Its very very subdued, cloyingly desperate for you to think it's funny because of that. It reminded me of the Monty Python sketch "I came for an argument", except played straight and there's no punchlines or audience surrogate and you're supposed to laugh at the idea of such a facility. You get what its "trying" to do, but instead of laughing you just roll your eyes and feel bored.

Whats really disappointing is that I liked the "Art of Self-defense". It was pretty wacky and out there. There was some tension, hilarity and twists. Remove all that and this is what you have.

I assume this wes anderson-esque monotone absurdist comedy is this writer/director style otherwise Id say this movie would have worked better if the characters all acted like real people. If it "needs" to have this tone then it needed to be much more interesting or ridiculous. Like have them hunting each other throughout the movie instead of it mostly being people sitting around being awkward robots.

I'd give it a lower score but theres a few scenes I briefly found "fun". Especially when Karen Gillian gets angry and actually shows some emotion. I wanted much more of that. Otherwise this doesn't rate slowburn. Its just boring.

This is NOT a mainstream movie by any stretch. It is brought to us by a young writer-director whose specialty is unusual, quirky stories. I was anxious to see it because it stars Karen Gillan, I am a big fan, I could watch and listen to her read a phone book and be entertained.

So the premise here is in a alternate universe a technology has been invented to clone people. And a fantastic thing about it is, you spit in a cup and an hour later you meet your clone, the same size and same apparent age as you. Of course you have to teach it about yourself, family, likes and dislikes, things like that. And guard your boyfriend.

Why would you want to? You get a disgnosis that you have a terminal illness, you don't want to deprive your family and friends your presence so you make a clone to replace you.

So for most of the movie Gillan is playing two characters with subtle differences, she does it well, often with just the slight expressions on her face, and with some different voicings. What happens if, against the odds, she doesn't die? There is a law, within a year the two of them will battle until only one remains.

Set on the US west coast but filmed in Finland, it is not a sci-fi movie as much as it examines human nature and the things that motivate us, either for good or for evil. Pretty good viewing.

My wife and I watched it at home on DVD from our public library. I enjoyed it more than she did. We were slightly puzzled at the end but the DVD "extra" featuring the director's commentary cleared up any doubts.

I loved this film and it deserves much better ratings.

My only criticism is that it's trying too hard to emulate Jorgos Lanthimos's style, 'The Lobster' in particular. Still, since the original Lanthimos has somewhat ditched the avant garde with 'The Favourite', then I can forgive director Riley Stearns for filling the gap.

I get bored easily, but I found this film enjoyable from start to finish, and don't really understand all the negativity in the reviews. I guess it's not for everybody, but if you liked 'The Lobster' or 'Killing Of A Sacred Deer' and are looking for something new along those lines, then I don't think you'd be disappointed.

It's not for everyone, I'd admit.

If you enjoyed "the art of self defense", I think you would like this movie.

I think the title is clever, having a dual meaning.

Dual has an intriguing (albeit not entirely original) concept with a lot of comic and dramatic potential.

But the film is stuck in tonal limbo, being neither really funny nor especially poignant.

Dual's setting is its greatest strength. Its world always feels a little off-kilter and subtly dystopian.

But the storytelling is simply not engaging.

The writing feels bland and lazy.

The actors look mostly bored.

Riley Stearns is an interesting filmmaker. His first (and best) film Faults struck the right balance between absurdity and realism.

Since then he's gone on to adopt a more Lanthimos-ish tone, which seems overly self-conscious and gimmicky.

While that may have worked in his previous film, The Art of Self Defense, it doesn't in Dual.

I hope he returns to his earlier style for the next one.