Duplicity (Tony Gilroy, 2009)

Message

#1 Post by **Jeff** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:08 pm

When the original announcement about Duplicity was made in Variety last October, I was mainly interested because of the Clive Owen-Julia Roberts pairing that I thought was very successful in Closer (yeah, I know I'm alone here). After Michael Clayton though (which is even better on second viewing), I'm very interested to see what Tony Gilroy has cooked up next. Billy Bob Thornton and Tom Wilkinson have joined the cast. Robert Elswit is the D.P. again, and Gilroy's brother John is back in the editor's chair. They just started shooting, but if it turns out well, I could see it being released at the end of this year. Here are some pics from the set.

SoyCuba · #2 Post by **SoyCuba** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 12:11 pm

Well, according to Yunda Eddie Feng this will be a winner at the Oscars.

Antoine Doinel · #3 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Thu Mar 20, 2008 11:57 pm

Paul Giamatti has joined the cast.

Antoine Doinel · #4 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Thu Nov 27, 2008 3:27 am

Tony Gilroy follows up the excellent Michael Clayton with uh, this.

#5 Post by **domino harvey** » Thu Nov 27, 2008 3:32 am

The cinematography looks quite stylish, maybe it'll be okay

#6 Post by **Jeff** » Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:44 am

Michael Clayton is wonderful -- an impossible act to follow, but this looks like good Charade-style fun to me. As the Bourne films show, Gilroy is just as adept at the smart thriller as he is the character study. His Hawksian romcom patter was the best thing about his screenwriting debut The Cutting Edge too. I'm not expecting one a' them "enduring works of art" that Ray Carney speaks of, but I am looking forward to this.

Apple has a higher quality trailer in a variety of formats.

Highway 61 · #7 Post by **Highway 61** » Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:56 pm

The New Yorker on Gilroy and the making of Duplicity.

#8 Post by **Jeff** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:01 am

Mike D'Angelo's mini-review on his blog has me all atwitter.

[EDIT]

...And now it's two for two!

Todd McCarthy, [i][url=http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117939878.html?categoryid=31&cs=1]Variety[/url][/i] wrote:An ultra-sophisticated love story between two corporate spies with pronounced mutual trust issues, "Duplicity" is a brainy, non-violent "Mr. and Mrs. Smith," the film "Intolerable Cruelty" wanted to be, a "Trouble in Paradise" for modern times. Smart, droll and dazzling to look at and listen to, writer-director Tony Gilroy's effervescent, intricately plotted puzzler proves in every way superior to his 2007 success "Michael Clayton." The twisty, time jumping narrative forces viewers to keep on their toes, and it could well be that "Duplicity" is too smart for its own good as far as the popcorn masses are concerned. Still, this is about as good as it gets these days for sharp-minded Hollywood entertainment made for an intelligent audience, and Universal can only hope that Julia Roberts, in an excellent return to leading lady form, still has the B.O. pull to put this one over.

WOW!

Antoine Doinel · #9 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:40 am

Huh. Nothing in the trailer makes me think this could be remotely better than Michael Clayton (which I loved) but the reviews have me curious. I guess the only thing that will make it or break for it for me is the suggestion of 3 Stooges type humor from the trailer -- mainly Paul Giamatti and Tom Wilkinson getting physical on the airport tarmac; Clive Owen spilling the martini etc. I truly hope it is a sophisticated spy comedy that earns a comparison to Trouble In Paradise and something quite different than the brassy but dull trailer.

tavernier · #10 Post by **tavernier** » Thu Mar 19, 2009 8:00 pm

More good news: AW hates it!

#11 Post by **Jeff** » Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:07 pm

tavernier wrote:More good news: AW hates it!

Oh, Armond, you had me at "crusading liberal movie stars." I haven't been this pumped to see a movie in a good while.

MoonlitKnight · #12 Post by **MoonlitKnight** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:18 am

The trailer had the STRANGEST tone to it. Is it a thriller? Is it a caper? Is it a lightweight comedy? If it's trying to be all these things, I'm not sure it was working in those 2.5 minutes.

Cde. · #13 Post by **Cde.** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 2:03 pm

Trailers are quite misleading. In fact, it's often the job of those who edit them to deceive the public.

If the studio doesn't know how to sell it, it probably means one of two things:
1) It's a dud and they don't know how best to fool people into watching it; or
2) It's interesting, unusual or uncompromised, so the studio doesn't know how best to fool people into watching it.

Hopefully this is a case of the latter. I don't have high hopes though.

#14 Post by **domino harvey** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 3:45 pm

The Rotten Tomatoes summary uses "cerebral" as a pejorative to describe this film. I guess that means I won't have to deal with ten year old kids on their Spring Break in the audience today

karmajuice · #15 Post by **karmajuice** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:55 am

This is an entertaining flick. Maybe a bit too talky, and the structure is confusing (with the film constantly alluding back to previous events, one loses one's place), but fun and sometimes funny and I'd say worth seeing.

MoonlitKnight · #16 Post by **MoonlitKnight** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 9:03 am

Cde. wrote:Trailers are quite misleading. In fact, it's often the job of those who edit them to deceive the public.

Indeed, I remember the trailer for "A.I." trying to make it seem as if it were another E.T."

#17 Post by **Jeff** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 1:44 am

The trailer doesn't really capture the tone of the film at all. It's very smart and fun. The comparisons to Trouble in Paradise and even Out of Sight are pretty silly, but it's still much better than 99% of what generally passes for entertainment. The film it most closely resembles is Charade, and if Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn had been in the leads I think Duplicity would have been the superior film. I don't know if I could call it better than Michael Clayton, because the tone of the two films is so different. It's definitely a fantastic sophomore effort though, and Gilroy really demonstrates the range of his writing. I didn't find the flashback structure confusing at all, and it was integral to the construction -- not at all gimmicky. The world of corporate espionage isn't something that I had really seen explored before, and Gilroy has convinced me that it's pretty thrilling. He's the real deal. If he can crank out gems like Michael Clayton and Duplicity every couple of years, we're in for a real treat.

Svevan · #18 Post by **Svevan** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 2:26 am

I agree with Jeff, including the Charade comparison, although I have to say that

Spoiler

the final twist was over-explained. Gilroy's filmmaking style is characterized by its slow-reveal process, where characters will be talking about a situation well before the audience understands exactly what it is; his method for revealing necessary plot details is organic, through small things like Tilda Swinton having a plastic bag on her hand in Michael Clayton. Duplicity layers the "slow reveals" throughout the film, via flashbacks where the two leads' hot/cold relationship always seem like an act, and both characters realize this. The final twist of the film was clever, sure, but the sequence where it is revealed bombarded us with details: "Then we'll plant THIS document in THIS mainframe, and they'll think A, B, and C, while all the while Z was true!" Unnecessary. We needed to get into Wilkinson's office and immediately get out. Tell us who won, don't beat us over the head with how. Not to mention it was only a setup for the excellent final shot, a great mix of Gilroy's slow pull-out and Owen and Roberts' performances.

So I'm very positive on the whole thing, especially the flashback structure, which is an evolution of Gilroy's storytelling method. Hopefully Gilroy's fascination with Corporate America won't become a schtick; if he sticks with it I hope he tries out other genres, and if he doesn't, I hope his filmmaking stays assured and respectful of his audience.

hot_locket · #19 Post by **hot_locket** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:21 pm

Jeff wrote:He's the real deal. If he can crank out gems like Michael Clayton and Duplicity every couple of years, we're in for a real treat.

Definitely. I almost feel guilty how entertained I was by this.

I agree with an above poster that the ending was a little too over-explained, though.

HerrSchreck · #20 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Sat Apr 04, 2009 4:42 pm

I enjoyed this film quite a bit. I thought it was a smart and clever box of popcorn for the night.

I hafta say though: Julia Roberts (I haven't seen her in a while) is getting a little weird looking.

kaujot · #21 Post by **kaujot** » Sat Apr 04, 2009 4:47 pm

She's been weird looking for a very long time.

Site Menu