O Duplo

I am currently studying Russian Literature at the University of Bucharest and one of this semester's assignments involves reading three of Dostoyevsky's novels: Crime & Punishment, The Double and The Brothers Karamazov. Having finished the second book today, my memories in regard to the source material are still clear & well-defined, so I will try to pinpoint some things I've liked and some things I didn't about Richard Ayoade's 2013 film.

What I didn't like.

• I understand that the movie doesn't aim to be the most accurate adaptation, hence it's modern setting, but the truth is, the movie is just loosely based on the novel. I say that because it only makes use of some plot devices that are to be found in the book, but mostly fails in capturing the inner emotional turmoil, dilemmas, paranoia and mental dizziness of Simon, elements that make Dostoevsky's Golyadkin an interesting case for me. Here the character of Simon is simplified a bit. For example when Simon meets his double, instead of the sheer dread that makes me feel the horror of this unspeakable resemblance, one can see a sudden cut to a Simon that has just faint - an easy gateway for the screenwriters and the director. Or the very first encounter with the double, when James takes the photos of the Colonel and other employees, that seemed a bit too abrupt and in a certain sense - rushed.

• an unnecessary comedic tone, with tasteless jokes for a rather profound story.

• The mild Chinese racism - did the screenwriter try to copy Dostoyevsky's sense of mocking towards the ethnic Germans?

Things I did like

• the color grading, the tones, the hues, the sick greenish of the office; Better that I'd have imagined.

• Jesse Eisenberg's (The Social Network) and Mia Wasikowska's performances.

• ''a person can get really sick by just floating by''

• also the speech about Pinocchio and feeling like you're not real. And the subway scenes especially.

Everybody thinks they are special. Everybody thinks they are unique. Everybody also thinks there is someone deep down that can and must come out so they are better people. As our protagonist thought. But in this case, that person was not that great but was what our protagonist thought he was missing.

I am not familiar with Dostoevskys book but this adaptation from Ayoade was really more like Kafka. A bizarre story set in a bureaucratic, soul-less environment where humanity tries to come out like a flower through concrete. Or as an obnoxious douchebag.

But the memorable Brazil-like imagery aside it's a few degrees too weird and loses you a bit.

This is a seriously weird and disturbing movie that initially looks like it's going to come across as a bit of a 21st Century downmarket version of Brazil. Our hero experiences a sequence of unsettling events, seemingly unconnected and apparently trivial to a degree, although clearly aiming to tee up some of the later action.

The lighting, the sounds, the camera shots are all wonderfully done, setting a disturbing and unsettling atmosphere that gently but with increasing urgency begins to throw a blanket of latent claustrophobia across characters and happenings. We witness curious incidents and are left to guess their significance, our hero reaches out to the girl but is beaten to the jump by....who exactly?

How much of what we see actually takes place is questionable. How much some of the latter scenes make sense even more so. Yet, as it twists and turns towards the denouement, I found myself gripped and engaged to an uncommon degree. It is a difficult movie as it winds up, no question, but I find the notion that anyone feeling suicidal needs warning before viewing as slightly hysterical.

On the one hand, this is an easy film to describe, whether you reference the source material, or your talk about the doppleganger and what it might be like to find one has a double. Yet on the other hand, it's almost impossible to sum this up after one viewing, as there felt like there are so many little bits and pieces that suddenly reveal themselves to your eyes and ears. that you're forced to think about going back to sit back through it again. The question is, which one of you will go...?

I was surprised to see the bad reviews on IMDb. This is actually the most creative, enigmatic, philosophical and visually stunning film I've seen in a long time (and MUCH better than the disappointing Villeneuve's "Enemy"). Every scene is made in an unusual and unexpected way...enhancing the awkwardness of the characters and the story as a whole. From the very first 10 minutes I knew I was watching something really special.

"Submarine" was cute, but this is the film that definitely makes Ayoade one of the most promising directors nowadays. Can't wait to see what he's gonna do next.

Here's the basic gist- this film is pretty ambitious on a visual level. It's reminiscent of the type of film Lynch would have made in his early days (yes, I got memories of Eraserhead for whatever reason). On a storyline-level, it's more straightforward. You can pretty much guess where the narrative is going and the strings it's going to pull. The film still works however, largely because of its cast. Jesse Eisenberg's performance here stands alongside his Oscar-nominated turn in The Social Network as the best acting he's ever given. It's truly superb work. Wasikowska is also quite effective. The score is effective and sort of haunting. Overall, I wish I'd liked it more, but it's definitely recommended.