The Double

This is, at times, a very confusing movie. It can be forgiven for that - because clearly it's intended to be. The opening scenes of the movie (a group of illegal immigrants apparently attempting to cross into the US from Mexico) are a bit disorienting. They don't seem to fit with what you expect the movie to be about (I even questioned briefly to myself whether the video store had accidentally packed the wrong movie into the case!) Once it gets going, though, it's compelling.

Basically, the story revolves around the search for the person who assassinated a US Senator, with the prime suspect being a Soviet agent who everyone believed had been killed years before. So - yes - it was an interesting way of bringing back a sort of Cold War theme to a movie made more than 20 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union. There are two experts on this Russian agent known as Cassius: CIA agent Shepherdson (Richard Gere) and FBI agent Geary (Topher Grace). They get put together as a team to try to piece the puzzle together. The first twist to the story comes about a half hour through the movie, which leaves you wondering a bit what the point of the movie is, but there's a later twist that was (to me, at least) unexpected. It's pretty well done. Gere and Grace worked pretty well together. I haven't really seen much of Topher Grace since he was the star of "That 70's Show." He's matured a great deal as an actor.

There are some pretty good action scenes in this, but to its credit the movie doesn't go overboard on action. It tends to focus mostly on the relationship between Shepherdson and Geary. It's a pretty decent effort. (7/10)

The plot of this movie has room for a decent spy thriller, but it fell short. Uninspired acting and a script not worthy of inspiration leaves the characters flat and unrelatable. The two leads spend very little time actually on screen together, and there is no chemistry when they are. At one point, some information comes to light which seems like a game changer, but it is quickly swept under the rug and ignored, as it has no impact on what happens next, while it could have been actually interesting. In the end, you won't care about the characters at all, and so anything that happens won't interest you. I advise you to look elsewhere and to not come back.

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 Double," is a taut spy-thriller with echoes of the Cold War and "The Day of the Jackal." It's not easy to speak about the plot without pooping the film's surprises but let's just say that everything's different from what it appears and no one is who he seems to be (that's where the film's title comes from). I've read reviews describing the film as confusing and too complicated but in my opinion these comments are ungenerous. "The Double" shows an instantaneous reassessment of what the viewer has seen. In that sense there's a mind-twisting satisfaction in the plot. Gere is great as an entertainingly minimal actor but he's always very convincing. Here he gives weariness to a character who had seen and done too much. "The Double" is one of those dark stories where every turn seems to be a turn for the worse. To sum up it's definitely worth a look.

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.