The Double [Blu-ray]

I've now seen two films by the talented Ayodade – the other being his coming of age 'Submarine" - and had a very similar reaction though they are miles apart in style, story and theme.First, this is a gifted film-maker, who doesn't want to play by the usual rules. Next, he knows how to get off to a great start, build a fascinating world, get you involved with his people, but third, he doesn't quite find ways to make his third acts pay off as interestingly (or powerfully or emotionally) as the first two-thirds of the film promise. In both films the focus drifts to less interesting elements or variations on the stories he's telling.And last, he needs to lighten up on the too-obvious 'homage's to his cinematic touchstones. In "Submarine" it was (among others) Wes Anderson and "Rushmore". Here the overbearing influences (there are many) are led by Terry Gilliam's "Brazil". There were a large number of design and character choices – while effective - that came close enough that I couldn't help but sit there making comparisons ('Hey, there's Wallace Shawn doing Ian Holm'). And it starts to approach that fine line between inspiration and plagiarism.That said, there's a lot to like here. The photography is often gorgeous. Jessie Eisenberg does a terrific job in a tough double role – a meek office worker who is suddenly faced with another employee who looks exactly like him. But the new guy has a brash, self-confident personality, everyone loves him, and no one else seems to notice the two are physically exactly alike, right down to their clothes.This raises interesting questions about personality, perception and reality. Is "James Simon" (the cool one) merely a psychological projection of the nerd, "Simon James"? But if that's the case, why does everyone else interact with both, together and separately? Is it that Simon is the only one who thinks they look alike? i.e. is Simon projecting himself onto someone who – if we saw objectively – wouldn't even really look like him? Well, that would be an interesting idea, and a promising road for the film to explore, and it hints heavily at that possibility, only to simply drop and contradict it.And that's part of why this is two-thirds of a great film, not a whole one. In the end things play out in a way that has been foreshadowed from early on, and suddenly the film feels less deep, less challenging, more an exercise in cinematic playfulness than an exploration of deeper themes both personal and societal. The head trip becomes too literal, the conclusions too simple for the complex surreal reality we've come to acceptOn the plus side, the effects are terrific, and many of the best scenes in the film are Eisenberg talking to himself in one shot. (A hell of an acting challenge as well). And the film has a dark sense of humor that keeps the Kafkaesque world and 'big themes' from becoming ponderous, (Again, I just wish I had less often chuckled, but then thought 'hey, that just like the scene in 'Barton Fink…', or whatever).In any case I look forward to whatever Ayoade does next, but I hope he will find a way to finish as strong as he starts, and to be brave enough to trust his own very good sense of style, and not borrow quite so much from others.

Very dark in mood, and very well done. First rate acting all around, great story (of course), directing, sound, set design, lighting, etc. Maybe not the best date night movie, but quite satisfying (like a good Hitchcock film).

Watching ‘The Double’ was a very strange and conflicting experience for me. I found myself trying desperately to like what I was watching, but the more I saw the more confused and detached I found myself, and confused and detached are never feelings I want to have while watching a film. Comparing this to the borderline masterpiece that is ‘Enemy’ was also hard not to do, considering the obvious similarity in central plot point, and yet the two are so vastly different that it almost felt a shame to be making any kind of comparison.Regardless, my feelings for this film can pretty much be summed up in the tweet I ‘tweeted’ mere minutes after starting the film:“Twenty minutes into #TheDouble and I’m getting total 90’s Cronenberg vibes, if he were directing a 30’s screwball comedy…”To some, this will probably sound like a great thing, but for me, it left me unfulfilled. Cronenberg is not a director that I always respond to. In fact, I rarely respond to him, and the 90’s film in particular that I got serious vibes for was ‘Naked Lunch’, which is a messy, messy film. This film’s tone is so deadpan that it feels stagnant, and it tries (I mean, really…so many ‘let’s laugh at the fact that he didn’t get what he ordered’ moments) to emulate comedic cleverness in a way that feels fresh, but it fails. It’s like David Cronenberg found a long lost Billy Wilder script and said, “I can do this”, but he can’t.The film tells the story of a shy, naïve and somewhat introverted clerk named Simon who pines for co-worker Hannah and watches over his bitter and opinionated mother. His life is altered tragically when he witnesses a suicide (the theme plays heavily here) and then is introduced to his new co-worker, James, a man who shares Simon’s face but possesses charisma, confidence and a malicious intent. Simon is swept up in James’ plot to further his own status, promising to help Simon with his obvious issues, but instead he completely uses and disposes of Simon when the time is right, leaving Simon feeling duped and even more alone, now that Hannah is taken by this new ‘imposter’ of a man.This all sounds so interesting and yet…nothing.‘The Double’ feels so unsure of itself, cluttered and confused by its own intentions, and the final twenty minutes just feels so overwrought and at the same time under-developed. It’s a shame that this film is so awfully uneven (and tonally confused) because the performances by the two stars are actually pretty tremendous. Jesse Eisenberg juggles the two extremes of his characters with such fluidity, and these are major ying and yangs here, but it’s Mia Wasikowska who actually tackles the uneven tone here with a studied understanding of it. Just her manner of speaking, her rapid fire dialog exchange, her facial movements, eye flutters, tonal shifts; all feel so in the moment and completely tied into what Ayoade was going for.I want to see her alongside Cary Grant so badly, but, like, that’s impossible.In the end, I’m almost indifferent here if it weren’t for the performances and the score, which is spectacular. I just feel like Ayoade’s intentions were almost too ambitious for his skill level, for he wasn’t able to make it all mesh properly. I had a similar reaction to Wes Anderson’s ‘Rushmore’ (I know, a film that everyone loves that I barely like), and in a way this kind of feels like what would have happened had Wes Anderson directed ‘Fight Club’; and who wants to see that?

Amazing movie with fantastic humor and a fantastic story. This movie is a nice change of pace from regular comedies and is a great ride.

Weird movie. Did not like it..

good

To weird to me

Loved the trailer so decided to check this out. I fully understand why people may not like this film, it takes it's own path. Whether it's humor, dialogue, the score, cinematography, etc.Not as big of a brain burner like 'Enemy', but I was completely invested in the story.Fans of film looking for something different will love what Richard has done here.

This film is made by a bunch of people who know exactly what they are doing. Every detail is taken care of. It feels like it was made for a reason and with a love of the craft. Anyone who appreciates a great film with attention to detail should watch this. It's somehow a combination of the best Terry Gilliam, Woody Allen, Michel Gondry, European/ New York, unknown city life trapped in a depressed office/ factory/apartment building with the feeling of a well written claustrophic play that somehow manages to be comedically uplifting when needed. In my opinion that's a hard thing to pull off. It's quite unique and particular. It has a sense of urgency about it which along with the random music makes it a bizarre mismatched pace of welcome surprises. It is impressively stylised, visually blunt with its editing in parts and overall feels like a new generation of film. Anyone who is self analytical or even questions some of the annoying "whys" in this world would appreciate this film. Anyone who questions the system or questions their own sanity. Anyone who has worked hard to achieve things and also the dreamers who dream of a better "what if " world would enjoy it. It can be watched completely as a whole or even in segments for those with a short attention span . The characterisation is entertaining and the actors are perfectly balanced between predictable and obscure. You don't necessarily have to understand this film in totality. You can just appreciate it for what it is. It's intelligent without being too obviously intellectual and you don't quite know what to expect, right to the end. More than anything it just makes me happy to know that films like this get made. They don't really get the acclaim they deserve but they make a difference to the world because they are undeniably great cinema.

Richard Ayoade’s The Double (2013) has a nightmarish tang, but doesn’t set out to frighten, it substitutes creaky jump-scares, for utter, stupendous style.Simon (Jesse Eisenberg) lives in a bureaucratic state, working in the bowels of a government office. Lonely, he daydreams about Hannah (Mia Wasikowska) and makes any excuse to contact her. One day, a new employee arrive, and Simon notices something remarkable about him, he’s identical to Simon in appearance. Yet, different in personality. Will Simon be consumed by his double James (Jesse Eisenberg)?Some opinions may say that story has been sacrificed for style, and I agree. Yet this is a bold move by Ayoade and editors Chris Dickens and Nick Fenton. The tale of the double, the doppelgänger, the lookalike, the evil self, has been used many times in literature and film, so we don’t need spoon feeding with every plot point. Instead, the director and editors made a conscious decision to focus on style.And style dazzles in every scene. It’s the atmospheric lighting, showing shadows and brightness in equal expressionistic quantities; it’s the metallic and dismal set design by Barbara Herman Skelding resembling theatre sets, reminding me of Michael Radford’s 1984 (1984) or even in a strange sense Lars von Trier’s Dogville (2003); its violent string instruments and deep piano pinging, created by Andrew Hewitt, creating a nervous audience, it’s all these things that give The Double its style.The film is so stylish that we forget the exceptional special effects showing Eisenberg playing two different characters consuming the same screen. Like Brian Helgeland’s Legend (2015), which does the same, the effects are so amazing that we believe we’re watching two different actors.The Double is made by experts in their respective fields. It is well worth a watch to experience exceptional stylistic choices.

What can I say? It is completely unwatchable. I fast forwarded to see if the pace and the story picked up, but 40 minutes in was exactly the same as the beginning. Among the most boring, depressing films I've ever attempted to watch. I wish Amazon had a "minus" category and i would give it three minuses. Dreadful.

This is a non mainstream off beat kind of production but I enjoyed it very much. It put me in mind of films like Eraserhead and Naked Lunch etc. I particularly liked the sets, props and images used. This is a keeper for me and I'll watch it again, but it's definetly not everyones cup of tea.

Awful film. Purchased as scored high on rotten tomatoes. Very dull, didn’t care what happened to the characters.