The Double (2014)

Waste of time

Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Pretty Good

Just so...so bad

Well. This was something. The world building was great. I felt they were in a different world/era ala "Brazil" (the movie) But I got bored quickly, only a few of the "jokes" landed, and as a bland person myself, I just can't believe I would take even 20% of the crap Jessie Eisseinberg's (which was good) character took on this one. In the end, dark/black comedies should make you laugh or chuckle way more than this one did. There is "romance" here, and for me is the only thing that really works.

Before you get all pissy and shout at your computer screen that this movie is based on a Dostoevsky novella from the 1800s, let me be clear: I am not inferring that the story somehow ripped off other contemporary sources. I'm just saying that I felt distracted while viewing The Double by its many similarities to films I've seen and that have seeped into popular culture. Specifically, I kept thinking of Fight Club, The Tenant, Youth In Revolt, Enemy, Rear Window, Brazil, Eraserhead, Dead Ringers, and The Trial. Which leads me to the question: Do we need this movie? Even if it is a mostly faithful adaptation to a hitherto unadapted story by a world famous 19th century novelist, which recalls excellent films from the history of cinema, and which was beautifully, skilfully crafted and acted...do we really need another surreal-noir about the anonymity of corporate jobs? Or another movie with the doppelganger/alter ego paradigm, especially one which does nothing to reinvent or subvert the genre? It should be noted that I enjoyed watching this film for its set design and b/c of Wasikowska's enchanting ways. But not for its story. Which isn't to say I think the source material is weak, but that the elements which had been so intriguing when the novella was first published have now become tropes of this type of film. In short, The Double left me thinking of the films it resembled, already forgetting the doppelganger (could this have been the point?).

This is that kind of movie in which you need to read impressions more than pay attention on talks and scenes to understand its meaning for real. Richard Ayoade was really smart on the using of colors, dark scenarios contrasting to colored lights accordingly to humors, also, in complicated dialogues among characters. I enjoyed so much. The main characters, which are a double played by Jesse Eisenberg, show us the conflict within a person, the different ways a person can act or react to different situations, and the response other people may answer accordingly personality who acts . Sometimes you realize they are the same person, sometimes you think they are not. The main cast is formed mainly by young people, however, you see many many elderly people in this movie, maybe a reference of judgment and wisdom that old people may do towards the younger, once you remember the place of work, on the movie, is a government agency. Suicide, loneliness, and depression are also subjects in this entire environment. If you like those "easy" films in which signification is clear, you won't enjoy it, however, if you like psychological conflict, and dialogues meaning more than what characters say, you will find it a good movie.

The Double A film review by: Jamie PolsonSimon James is the main character in the movie "The Double. It takes place at an unknown point in time. Simon James works for a company that deals with data living an average sort of life when a new employee joins the team, and his life goes on an emotional roller coaster. The new employee is named James Simon and has an uncanny resemblance to Simon James. This movie uses a lot of thematic elements in it to convey the story. Different character's facial expressions indicate what that character is thinking. For instance the actor who played Simon James was the same actor that played James Simon, so, to show that he was one or the other, he would have different expressions for that character. Simon always looked sad in the eyes, and James always looked proud of himself or not caring at all. One of the other important thematic items was the soundtrack or music. For example, whenever Simon would be walking somewhere, string instruments would play intense music. Whenever Simon realized something for the first time there would be an oboe in the background. The dialogue is unique and funny in this movie. All of the characters say things that you typically would not hear in real life. If you did, it certainly would make you do a double take. For example, Simon is talking on the phone with his mom and we hear him say, "Yes, I know I'm a disappointment." One of the last thematic elements is that the actors told the story partially through their body language and mannerisms; the characters' personalities are shown through how they hold themselves or act. Simon has a mannerism where wherever he is walking (no matter what he is feeling) he always walks with his arms by his side. He doesn't swing them like most people. Hannah, whenever we see her walking, is clutching her purse close to her chest. Harris (who does not appear much) always seems to be relaxing or not doing his fair share. When we do see him on screen, he is either putting his feet on his desk or asking Simon to do his work for him. I thought the lighting was very interesting. In a lot of the scenes, the lighting was dark so there was quite a lot that you could not see. Also, they made the choice to have all the scenes be shot at night. There were literally no scenes during the day. Another technique was that most of the scenes have this orangey feel, so although the scenes happened at night, they felt kind of warm. It also made it kind of creepy. It made me feel uneasy like something was going to jump out of the shadows at any time. The camera angles were a major part of the movie. I am specifically referring to shots that were moving, like running scenes. The scene where Simon is running from his mother's funeral was a long distance angle. The camera was not on a tripod and was very shaky. It felt like I was running with him. The story structure is a very linear structure. It starts out at the beginning, or what they show us is the beginning, and then it just keeps going with the story as it happens. There were no flashbacks, which I thought was an interesting choice. I liked this movie. I thought it was planned out well and it made me think quite a bit about what was happening. I thought the character development was also very good because it really got you to connect with the protagonist at every part. Bad stuff kept happening to him and I felt really sorry for him. I thought it was an interesting choice to show the type of world that they were in. It seems to me that this movie may have been a prediction of what people from the 1950's or so thought the future was going to be. The topic is very interesting. I can see how this movie could easily be based on a true story. To me it was about how the protagonist knows what kind of person he wants to be, but knows that he will never be able to achieve that goal. It also shows the struggles that he faces to try and achieve that goal This movie really made me think, which is the sign of a great movie.