Duplicity

In the entire two-hour running time, this film fails to match the brilliance of its opening credits, and it generally requires more concentration and attention than what it offers is worth. (04/24/2009)

I still can't decide if Gilroy took a step back or missed the mark. The script is decent, the weaving of conspiracy threads is fun and so is the layered ending, but why did it have to be so drawn out? The line between a slow and drawn-out tempo is too thin, which you realize when you think of the amazing Michael Clayton, compared to which this film noticeably lacks symbolism and greater vigor. I do get that it wants to be a bit lighter (the awesome opening credits), but there’s a total vacuum between Julia and Clive, which is made up for (albeit desperately slowly) by the famously slightly choleric Wilkinson and Giamatti duo. And Howard's rip-off of Powell's "Bourne" music isn't much fun either. Despite all the aforementioned, the "Gilroy" brand is still a strong enough trademark in my eyes. (05/13/2009)

A cunning spectacle full of cunning and even more cunning people, whom I admit I fell for more than once. And although I was most amused by the opening slow motion credits with Paul Giamatti and Tom Wilkinson, I certainly can't say that I was bored by the remaining two hours. Clive Owen (who in Duplicity reminded me a lot of Harrison Ford, which was not a bad thing) and Julia Roberts looked good together, Tony Gilroy proved once again that he is as good a director as he is a writer, I also liked Newton Howard's soundtrack and the constant flashbacks, which gave a completely different meaning to what I had seen before... I'm satisfied. (03/17/2012)

A very scattered film that failed to capture my attention. I don't know, maybe it was actually interesting, but I just couldn't recognize it. The performances were good, especially Clive Owen and Julia Roberts, who should have certain standards, not to mention actors like Tom Wilkinson and Paul Giamatti, who rarely disappoint. Clive Owen and Julia Roberts are intelligence officers. He works for MI6, she works for the CIA. Or at least they used to. Currently, they are involved in industrial espionage. You know what that means. Some company has something revolutionary, and you want to get it because it could bring you a lot of money. It doesn't matter if you use dishonest and illegal means to obtain it - in this case, a chemical formula. The most important thing is that you are the first one to appear at the patent office. It's really sad that it's just easier for there to be several, maybe even dozens, of mediocre minds that want to take credit for the ideas of a truly great mind. Where did morality go, huh? I know it's a stupid question, but do we just accept it, wave it off as normal, and move on? If so, then I don't see a bright future. I think the crisis was a warning for us. It was a crisis caused by moral decline. Not because someone rated a company poorly or because banks lent too much, but simply because we didn't pay our debts. Because the Greeks forged documents to have something they didn't deserve. There are many examples. The film doesn't even accidentally point out any of this. It's too superficial entertainment that only wants to show us how everyone lies, how everyone has their own plan. Alright, if that's the case, where will we be in ten, twenty years? Everyone will have their own plan that doesn't align with someone else's? Well, I really don't want to see where we end up. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/12/wtc-yes-man-mary-max-zambezia-cerna.html (03/02/2013)