CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
6.1/10
53 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Dos ex agentes gubernamentales convertidos en espías industriales rivales tienen que dar lo mejor de sí mismos cuando una de sus empresas se prepara para lanzar un producto importante.Dos ex agentes gubernamentales convertidos en espías industriales rivales tienen que dar lo mejor de sí mismos cuando una de sus empresas se prepara para lanzar un producto importante.Dos ex agentes gubernamentales convertidos en espías industriales rivales tienen que dar lo mejor de sí mismos cuando una de sus empresas se prepara para lanzar un producto importante.
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Elenco
- Premios
- 1 premio ganado y 4 nominaciones en total
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
We need more filmmakers like Tony Gilroy in Hollywood right now. Coming off of his debut feature Michael Clayton, after years of working on stuff like the Bourne movies, to his second film Duplicity, he's marked some strong territory as a guy who can work with top-shelf A-list talent and put them in material that is mature just enough to make it safe for the 30+ year olds to see it and not think their intelligence is being wasted. His films provide such a wealth of juicy scenes of dialog and plots that make us think about what the characters will do next as opposed to just spoon-feeding along the conventions. And even if Duplicity is not quite as excellent as his first film (and suffice to say it's got a couple of things that make it tick) it's still a marker of fine entertainment. At the least, it makes for a strong matinée viewing, if one were to rate it such.
Like one of those features from the 40s or 50s from Hitchcock where he would place Cary Grant and (insert blonde bombshell here), Duplicity relies on its stars, and sometimes its dependable character actor supporting players, to make it more about watching them and how they go about the material as opposed to the real specifics of what to worry in the plot itself. Hitchcock wasn't worried about what was really in the "secret" formula since he knew, maybe rightfully so, that the audience doesn't really care either. When will Grant and Kelly have that kiss? It's certainly a lot more fun trying to explain how well Clive Owen and Julia Roberts fit into this classic Hollywood couple mold (not to mention since it's their second time on-screen following the more theater-based Closer) and play off one another than describing how "one is a MI6 and the other CIA and their operatives in these corporate firms and one might be making a toaster oven or yada yada and they both do A and B and..."
So yeah, basically Duplicity is about conning and about not believing what the other person is saying, but at the same time Gilroy toys around with the idea of people who are stuck in a world where by proxy they can't trust one another but get each other so well who the other is at the same time. The characters Tom Wilkinson and Paul Giamatti play- who, by the way, share one of the funniest and most awesome opening credits sequences I've seen in years- are playing checkers in their corporate one-oneupmanship games, but it's Roberts and Owen that are playing chess which is a little brainier but trickier at the same time.
One might criticize that there's almost too much of this back-and-forth guessing and curiously trying to figure out what the other is saying about something. But if done right in a film it can be fun to watch just to see what move or motive or revelation will come next. And Gilroy has casted these two stars so perfectly that you can lose yourself in these scenes where they keep playing the same guessing games (some dialog deliberately repeated). This helps especially when the actual plot becomes a little silly, and particularly when it's revealed in the last ten minutes what the big TWIST has occurred. It won't do any good to explain what it is, but suffice to say it's a little too convenient to put into exposition, and it's been done before. In a script that is otherwise sharp and clever and dramatically pleasing in construction and character Gilroy falls back on a couple of tired devices towards the end.
It comes dangerously close, as Ebert pointed out, to saying simply "who cares?" But, thankfully, Duplicity does, for at least roughly in total 2/3 of the running time, give us characters to care about and go along for the ride with and so have this sheer joy of an A-list movie that tries to be about the guessing game and cons and covert operations and the nature of this whole thing Gilroy's dealing with. And the last shot, thankfully, tries to put a good coda on everything that's happened. It's a glossy, breezy time in usually the best way. 7.5/10
Like one of those features from the 40s or 50s from Hitchcock where he would place Cary Grant and (insert blonde bombshell here), Duplicity relies on its stars, and sometimes its dependable character actor supporting players, to make it more about watching them and how they go about the material as opposed to the real specifics of what to worry in the plot itself. Hitchcock wasn't worried about what was really in the "secret" formula since he knew, maybe rightfully so, that the audience doesn't really care either. When will Grant and Kelly have that kiss? It's certainly a lot more fun trying to explain how well Clive Owen and Julia Roberts fit into this classic Hollywood couple mold (not to mention since it's their second time on-screen following the more theater-based Closer) and play off one another than describing how "one is a MI6 and the other CIA and their operatives in these corporate firms and one might be making a toaster oven or yada yada and they both do A and B and..."
So yeah, basically Duplicity is about conning and about not believing what the other person is saying, but at the same time Gilroy toys around with the idea of people who are stuck in a world where by proxy they can't trust one another but get each other so well who the other is at the same time. The characters Tom Wilkinson and Paul Giamatti play- who, by the way, share one of the funniest and most awesome opening credits sequences I've seen in years- are playing checkers in their corporate one-oneupmanship games, but it's Roberts and Owen that are playing chess which is a little brainier but trickier at the same time.
One might criticize that there's almost too much of this back-and-forth guessing and curiously trying to figure out what the other is saying about something. But if done right in a film it can be fun to watch just to see what move or motive or revelation will come next. And Gilroy has casted these two stars so perfectly that you can lose yourself in these scenes where they keep playing the same guessing games (some dialog deliberately repeated). This helps especially when the actual plot becomes a little silly, and particularly when it's revealed in the last ten minutes what the big TWIST has occurred. It won't do any good to explain what it is, but suffice to say it's a little too convenient to put into exposition, and it's been done before. In a script that is otherwise sharp and clever and dramatically pleasing in construction and character Gilroy falls back on a couple of tired devices towards the end.
It comes dangerously close, as Ebert pointed out, to saying simply "who cares?" But, thankfully, Duplicity does, for at least roughly in total 2/3 of the running time, give us characters to care about and go along for the ride with and so have this sheer joy of an A-list movie that tries to be about the guessing game and cons and covert operations and the nature of this whole thing Gilroy's dealing with. And the last shot, thankfully, tries to put a good coda on everything that's happened. It's a glossy, breezy time in usually the best way. 7.5/10
Where is the dupe in duplicity?
Ex-intelligence operatives Julia Roberts and Clive Owen decide to go into business for themselves. Moreover, they would not mind being romantically evolved. The only problem is can they trust each other. They take an economic opportunity by infiltrating two rival pharmaceutical companies. Each company uses all sorts of tactics to get one upon each other. Will the ex-agents succeed with any of their goals?
The film relies excessively much on flashbacks within flashbacks to the point that the whole film is just one big flashback. It is very annoying. It goes out of the way to mask needed information from us instill it is over-explained in the flashback.
I found the movie fun to watch. I was occasionally misled. Now if they could have just gotten rid of all the flashbacks.
Ex-intelligence operatives Julia Roberts and Clive Owen decide to go into business for themselves. Moreover, they would not mind being romantically evolved. The only problem is can they trust each other. They take an economic opportunity by infiltrating two rival pharmaceutical companies. Each company uses all sorts of tactics to get one upon each other. Will the ex-agents succeed with any of their goals?
The film relies excessively much on flashbacks within flashbacks to the point that the whole film is just one big flashback. It is very annoying. It goes out of the way to mask needed information from us instill it is over-explained in the flashback.
I found the movie fun to watch. I was occasionally misled. Now if they could have just gotten rid of all the flashbacks.
Two corporate spies (Owen & Roberts) hook up (after knowing each other a while back) to pull off a scheme to get 40 Million dollars. The mission is to infiltrate a company that each other work in, and expose a secret product the company is releasing. Soon things get out of plan, and the two spies realize they have more feelings for each other than they recently thought. I've been a fan of Clive Owen ever since Children of Men, and I was so gratified to see Julia Roberts back on the screen. A few years ago both Clive and Julia did a movie together called "Closer", and it was satisfying to see them back together again. Their performances together are the only uplifting value of this film. Although we could have used more of Paul Giamatti and definitely more Tom Wilkinson, the entire cast was perfect for this film. This movie had too much potential in the first half, but after that it becomes a confusing and mind boggling mess of a movie. There were so many twists, and confused story telling even I heard some of the audience members yell out "Huh? What was that about?" The script was good, but the story was horribly told that it came to a very disappointing outcome. That's a shame because I was expecting to enjoy a good suspense movie that wasn't confusing. Duplicity is a often funny and well acted movie, but you'll have to find either the film's director or the screenwriter to translate the story for you, or else you won't get it. It surprisingly turns romantic in the end which makes it a fairly good date movie, but you'll be more confused than dazzled. I have to say skip this movie, and if you want to see Julia Roberts at her best rent Erin Brockovich. If you want to see Clive Owen at his best rent Inside Man. Need I say more?
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.
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.
Set in the high-stakes world of corporate espionage, this is a film built on the interplay between writer/director and viewer. It jumps from the present to flashbacks repeatedly, every time revising the viewer's understanding of present-day action.
There is ambiguity in the intentions of Ray (Clive Owen) and Claire (Julia Roberts), rival agents who join forces, it seems, to pull off a big payday. This is a romance between two people who never trust anyone. Is such a thing possible? The film keeps us guessing as each flashback adds another layer of understanding, in effect rewriting the story.
One must pay attention to follow the narrative as it twists, turns, and doubles back on itself, but the payoff is worth it.
One of my favorite things about this film is the music. The film credits James Newton Howard, who has a nearly-endless list of compositional accomplishments. The accompaniment to the opening credits of this film is a good indication of what is to come musically.
Much like "The Thomas Crown Affair", comedy is interwoven with the drama in an enjoyable way. A strong cast, well directed, keeps things just light enough that the drama is not undercut.
There is ambiguity in the intentions of Ray (Clive Owen) and Claire (Julia Roberts), rival agents who join forces, it seems, to pull off a big payday. This is a romance between two people who never trust anyone. Is such a thing possible? The film keeps us guessing as each flashback adds another layer of understanding, in effect rewriting the story.
One must pay attention to follow the narrative as it twists, turns, and doubles back on itself, but the payoff is worth it.
One of my favorite things about this film is the music. The film credits James Newton Howard, who has a nearly-endless list of compositional accomplishments. The accompaniment to the opening credits of this film is a good indication of what is to come musically.
Much like "The Thomas Crown Affair", comedy is interwoven with the drama in an enjoyable way. A strong cast, well directed, keeps things just light enough that the drama is not undercut.
Julia Roberts Through the Years
Julia Roberts Through the Years
Take a look back at Julia Roberts' movie career in photos.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThe character of Claire Stenwick is named for classic-era movie actress Barbara Stanwyck.
- ErroresDuring the opening-scene fight between the two CEOs in the airport it is supposedly raining (everybody carries umbrellas). However, Tully and Garsik do not get wet.
- Créditos curiososAt the end of the movie, we see images of the supporting characters while each actor is credited. However, when Claire and Ray are shown, Julia Roberts and Clive Owen's names aren't shown.
- Versiones alternativasThere are two versions available: the worldwide theatrical release, with a runtime of "2h 5m (125 min)", and an edited cut released in Turkey, with a runtime of "1h 58m (118 min)".
- Bandas sonorasBeing Bad
Written and Performed by Bitter Sweet (as Bitter:Sweet)
Courtesy of Quango Music Group, Inc.
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Duplicity?Con tecnología de Alexa
- Is "Duplicity" based on a book?
- Who and why are the two men fighting during the opening scene?
- Why does Garsik use a double?
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 60,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 40,572,825
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 13,965,110
- 22 mar 2009
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 78,176,181
- Tiempo de ejecución2 horas 5 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta