The Double

we cannot call a thriller as thriller if all the ingredients of the recipe is exposed right in front of your eyes within 5 minutes running. we cannot call a mystery a mystery if the 'whodoneit' is already so obviously shown from the early stage of a story. using often with the flash-backs to explain what happened years ago also won't help a transition of the plot but only shows the limit of a screenplay and its director. one of the worse thing is a so-called movie thriller is implementing the constant non-stop sound track to support the tension of a suppose-to-be-suspenseful movie, by the annoying endless non-stop drumming dong, dong, dong to set the tempo but in the meantime blocking the clearance of all the dialog is another stupid arrangement of this movie. no matter how you tried your best to make sudden twists later in the plot or the scenario, it's just rubbish and crap, only horror movies or brain-dead farces that claimed themselves as 'COMEDY' do not need logic. i've also found out that recently more and more lousy screenplays been proved into production (not just Hollywood) and this one in particular, is a living proof of what i'm saying here. i just don't understand why nobody in the production of this movie, including the director never pointed out the absolutely unacceptable flaws and holes of this shitty screenplay. richard gere should have used his influence to point out to the production people what would not work, what should be more logic of this screenplay, otherwise, the movie would also damage his own image. if i were him, i would not and could not perform well if the screenplay so obviously stupidly ridiculous. but maybe it explains why he could be an actor and i not.

this is a horrible movie. avoid as best as you can.

The fascination for depicting the criminal minds is an endless source of inspiration for studios trying to rise above the cliché that is usually present in most thrillers. And if you choose to unmask the villain at the beginning of the story, something else must hold the viewer's curiosity until the end.

"The Double" goes for the second choice and although I may have spent the rest of the movie trying to figure out what else could make up for the fact that the villain was already exposed, I must say the final surprise didn't quite do the trick. Richard Gere may still have his charm, but I'm not sure he was the best choice for the character he played. There are some action involved, but in the end this movie feels like a meal that doesn't taste as good as it looks.

Richard Gere plays "Paul Shepherdson," a decorated CIA veteran who is just pulled out of retirement & teamed up with new & upcoming agent, Ben Geary (Topher Grace) to find the truth about the Russian assassin "Cassius," who Shepherdson claimed to have killed years before. The intel says he lives & is now in the US. The movie follows the duo as the real truth of the matter comes closer, and things are not always as they seem, not like we haven't heard that line before in countless intelligence genre films. It just failed to deliver surprise as very early we are bombarded with hints as to who's who. All the elements where there, great actors & production but the script wasn't as brilliant as it could have been. They could have played out an extraordinary cat & mouse game if things in the script were changed. I did enjoy watching this and I give a 7/10 generously as I'm a fan of both Grace & Gere.

Also I would recommend a watch at least on the web, cause the ad campaign failed so horribly in marketing the film, maybe they could at least go VOD or STV cause it really deserves more.

Typical action movie lovers will find this film very satisfying. It's got attractive lead characters, guns, car chases, lots of cold-blooded murder and a supposedly world-class villain with a twist.

The truth is, it's not really my cup of tea -- I look for more emotional drama or educational/meaningful content ideally -- but my three action-loving companions all gave this one thumbs-up, and that's all the average action-lover will need to know.

Having said that, the screenplay gives the impression of a plot that could have been executed with more depth but for the time considerations of a movie, which force producers to gloss over too many interesting issues. Thus the whole production became superficial, with Richard Gere delivering a disappointing performance. I didn't feel the depth of the character that would have raised Gere's performance to a level I think we always hope for from him but never really get. In addition, Topher Grace and Odette Annable are the too-perfect, too-pretty, 2-dimensional couple that are a bit hard to swallow.

Although there were a couple of interesting twists in the plot, they weren't developed enough to raise the level of this film to a must-see, and pretty much every other part of the screenplay was as superficial as your run-of-the-mill action movie.

A retired CIA operative (Richard Gere) is paired with a young FBI agent (Topher Grace) to unravel the mystery of a senator's murder, with all signs pointing to a Soviet assassin.

On top of the great casting of the leads, you also have Martin Sheen being as dignified as ever and Odette Yustman having a smaller, but important role. All around, the casting was just spot on.

What is great about this film is that the words "action star" rarely come up when talking about Grace or Gere, but both have a high level of anger, energy and violence in this flick. I think it marks a great expansion in both of their ranges.

I saw a review that said the film should allow us to "think" more. And yes, one of the key twists is given away far too early in the film. But I think this exposition is warranted, given the bigger twist that comes up later on... and ultimately leads to a chilling ending if you think about what will happen after the credits roll (I am being vague here to not give anything away). I hear (but do not know) that the first twist was even revealed in the trailer. Okay, that was a little too early.

Ebert is surprisingly nice to this movie compared to the average viewer. He says, "Here is a movie constructed from basic parts at the Used Screenplay Store, with a character plugged in whenever one is required." But then he goes and gives the film two stars out of four -- not a terrible rating. He also says the writers had a better film when they wrote "3:10 to Yuma", and that is certainly true.

I want to give this film a second viewing... I did not understand at first about the Russians in Mexico. And now that I do, I want to see the scene again... hmmm. Looks like the film hooked me.