Duplicity

I'm not quite sure why this film got so-so reviews in the UK but it wasn't offering me a great deal to check it out and it was only the lack of alternatives that saw us going to see it. Perhaps it was my low expectations but what I found was a perfectly fine slick little caper film that, while not perfect, had enough slickness and pace to make for an entertaining couple of hours. Essentially we have seen it before, the smooth music, the cool cinematography, the stars in lead roles, the many twists and turns on the way to a reveal that makes for the conclusion of the film. It is nothing new and, in light of the Oceans films doing the same thing, it could almost be called a bit tired.

It does work though and writer/director Gilroy keeps it moving along well even if he is too close to his own material to be able to identify the problems within it. The basic plot is all well and good but the structure weakens it a bit. The multiple jumps back in time are supposed to inform us and/or add to the mystery but unfortunately they actually mostly serve to break-up the flow. It is not complex but the time shifting makes it feel more complicated than it actually is and makes it harder to follow because it breaks up the slick flow that the majority of it has. This is a shame because otherwise the film works well and it is only really the failure to pull off the structure that takes the shine off it.

And it is a "shine" because this is a film that has been polished in most regards. In itself it is what it appears to be – a glossy thriller with many little twists attempting to keep you from guessing the final reveal. It doesn't quite manage this as the ending is perhaps a little foreseeable after a certain point but mostly the sheen on it makes it flow. The direction is mostly very good with clever shots and fine delivery and editing to pull it together – in this type of thing that is much more than half the battle because sometimes that can be enough to fool viewers into buying the style when the substance stinks. That is not the case here as the substance is pretty good and the cast add the journey. Roberts didn't really convince me as she hasn't for a while (maybe she never did) but she is a Hollywood star through and through and she brings class to the film. Owen brings the rising star but, more importantly, the rugged charm that he does so effortlessly. Having Wilkinson and Giamatti only adds to the feeling of a quality product along with several good turns in smaller roles.

Duplicity is not a brilliant film but it is a good one within the context of the genre. The structure limits the slick appeal that it could have had and makes it a little less fun that it could have been but mostly all the packaging is in place and it does what you expect it to do as a genre film. Nothing to shout about from the rooftop by any means but for a Friday or Saturday night it delivers the sort of gloss that one goes to see these movies for and you gotta give it some credit for that in a period where so many star-led blockbusters fail to even do that.

Two spies hatch a plan to get rich. This movie is a game pulling the blindfold on everyone, to create a serious tone of grown ups fighting in a sandpit. Hilarious seriousness with great writing and acting to empathise the multi-layered plot. Laughed out loud for most of it, my kind of comedy.

After all the fun, the ending left a sour taste, once taking the blindfold off it was just a sandpit. If you like creative complex comedies this ones for you. Hopefully now you know about the sour ending it won't taste so bad.

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

Having just finished the enormously disappointing 'The International,' a 2009 espionage thriller starring Clive Owen, I can't believe I saw 'Duplicity'…another 2009 espionage thriller starring Clive Owen. Sue me, I'm a Julia Roberts fan, I actually like Owen – we all make mistakes so no judgments on some projects, and I love a good 'Ocean's Eleven'-type spy/dark comedy. Fortunately, after having to take several breaks in 'Duplicity' and wanting to turn this off for good, I stuck through to the end. I'm glad I did. Few horrible movies, as I thought this was slowly becoming, reach out and grab me in the closing. Perfect movie? By no means; it's barely average, but if you allow yourself, like I did, to reach the climax, you'll probably be equally surprised. After roughly three-dozen "two weeks ago," "ten years ago," etc, flashbacks, you'll learn Roberts and Owen are capers in love attempting to make a heist (and life) together using their trained skills. After awhile, they settle down between two rivaling companies bent on cosmetology, products, etc. You, the viewer, pick up clues along the way on whose side who's on and who you can trust. Big problems with the film started with an maddening slow-mo Wilkinson/Giamatti intro, then the endless boxed in scenes (dang, I know style, but this was as ridiculous and annoying as Lee's 'Hulk' comic book, uh, approach to minimizing the screen) and with the extreme lack of chemistry between the two leads. Sure, Owens is swift and good, but Roberts looks fresh off the 'Ocean's' set, with almost zero charisma she was built on in the early 90s. In fact, she just looks tired. Motherhood might do that. Nevertheless, it had its moments, and the end ties all the confusion you'll have. I certainly did until the last act.

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.