For most of its running time, "Duress" seems like a low-budget, flatly-photographed, dime-a-dozen serial killer thriller, with the only novelty being the stunt casting of Greek pop idol Sakis Rouvas as the nasty killer. Rouvas is more than acceptable in the role, after you get used to him, but what really distinguishes this film from most of the others of its ilk is its thoroughly twisted, amoral, and sick twist ending. I don't want to spoil anything here, but if you prefer movies where good triumphs over evil, or at least some characters are redeemed at the end, you might want to try something else. I was shocked on at least two separate occasions, and I was reminded of a Pauline Kael quote (about the Richard Gere thriller "Internal Affairs", but it applies here as well): "you may find yourself breaking into a grin when you recommend it to friends". You have been warned. **1/2 out of 4.
12 Reviews
Bad acting, not as suspenseful as needed but really subversive in the end!
babylonxgr1 March 2010
I decided to watch that movie because I am Greek and wanted to see how would Sakis act in an American movie. I would not spend time watching something like that if it was not for him. You see, he is just a pop singer and I was really curious to see how he would do.
I can't say I was impressed. He is not an actual actor and the role required a lot! It had to be someone professional for this role. I think that Tom Cruise would be great. I am trying to imagine him like he was acting in "Collateral". Now that would be accepted acting. Playing a serial killer isn't easy. You must make your audience feel you are always in control and know what you do or you fail as a bad guy. Sakis was a failure because he was acting stupidly cool, not scary or i-mean-what-i-say cool. Many times it felt like he was an amateur felon and things went good for him just because he was lucky. But I can excuse him because, as I said, he is an amateur actor.
Sakis was bad but the worst actor in that movie was Martin Donovan. That was not a victim. Someone from the audience could show more emotions and would react better in almost all scenes compared to him. He was REALLY bad. So cold blooded and non emotional in the whole movie, like nothing really happened and was forced to act like that. That would be good acting if someone robbed him 500 bucks and he was upset, not if someone did what Abner was doing to him. Even Kieffer Sutherland would have played that role better than Donovan. That was unforgivable acting.
The flow of the movie was slow. (I don't know if that is the right expression, I mean the way things happen and the story unfolds). It was like there was nothing interesting to say so they were showing boring stuff to fill time. I think that there could be some nice action scenes. The story could justify anything going as bad as possible. Scenes that could have lasted 10 minutes made to last less that 3. For example that man is hitting someone in the donut place. Make that last. Give it some suspense. You end it so quickly just with a punch? What?? I could imagine so many things that could happen and I am not a writer or a director! Instead of good action you give as boring scenes with a victim that does not even react like one, not a fighter but a pathetic person not doing anything to get out of the bad situation, just waiting to see what's next.
Things that I liked is Cristina Dohmen (Amy) and the subversion at the end! Christina has very few shots but I think she is exceptional when she is supposed to act good! Also know that everything you see happens for a reason and the reason is REALLY not obvious. If you are a subversion lover and do not have something better to watch, you should watch that movie. Thats why its 6 stars from me anyway. If it was not for that it would have been a 2.
I can't say I was impressed. He is not an actual actor and the role required a lot! It had to be someone professional for this role. I think that Tom Cruise would be great. I am trying to imagine him like he was acting in "Collateral". Now that would be accepted acting. Playing a serial killer isn't easy. You must make your audience feel you are always in control and know what you do or you fail as a bad guy. Sakis was a failure because he was acting stupidly cool, not scary or i-mean-what-i-say cool. Many times it felt like he was an amateur felon and things went good for him just because he was lucky. But I can excuse him because, as I said, he is an amateur actor.
Sakis was bad but the worst actor in that movie was Martin Donovan. That was not a victim. Someone from the audience could show more emotions and would react better in almost all scenes compared to him. He was REALLY bad. So cold blooded and non emotional in the whole movie, like nothing really happened and was forced to act like that. That would be good acting if someone robbed him 500 bucks and he was upset, not if someone did what Abner was doing to him. Even Kieffer Sutherland would have played that role better than Donovan. That was unforgivable acting.
The flow of the movie was slow. (I don't know if that is the right expression, I mean the way things happen and the story unfolds). It was like there was nothing interesting to say so they were showing boring stuff to fill time. I think that there could be some nice action scenes. The story could justify anything going as bad as possible. Scenes that could have lasted 10 minutes made to last less that 3. For example that man is hitting someone in the donut place. Make that last. Give it some suspense. You end it so quickly just with a punch? What?? I could imagine so many things that could happen and I am not a writer or a director! Instead of good action you give as boring scenes with a victim that does not even react like one, not a fighter but a pathetic person not doing anything to get out of the bad situation, just waiting to see what's next.
Things that I liked is Cristina Dohmen (Amy) and the subversion at the end! Christina has very few shots but I think she is exceptional when she is supposed to act good! Also know that everything you see happens for a reason and the reason is REALLY not obvious. If you are a subversion lover and do not have something better to watch, you should watch that movie. Thats why its 6 stars from me anyway. If it was not for that it would have been a 2.
Related boring movie but to compensate with an unexpected end
mcsolar277 March 2010
The movie starts and fills you with expectations for the continue.For us Greeks it is bizarre to see sakis rouvas a pop singer playing a serial killer although he manages pretty good .Unfortunately the continue is boring with no action and when you begin yawning it comes an unexpected ending to make you see this movie with more sympathy.The result is not that bad if you take under consideration that it is a low budget movie.It is worth to see it if you do not have anything special to do. Looking forward seeing more Greek presences in the future in Hollywood.If you are curious to see Greek horror movies i suggest you "to kako(evil)" and "to kako 2 in the time of heroes"
Hasta la vista
Hasta la vista
Gullibility?
danthepoetman20 December 2018
Some movies require a lot of good will. Some almost need gullibility from the viewer to work. This one is of the latter category. And yet it's not science fiction or horror, it's not fantasy. It's a "crime thriller"! The story is not bad, it's unpredictable, and Martin Donovan is always good. But it's so improbable, so unbelievable that you just can't let yourself get hooked. I guess you can say it's a nice effort nonetheless.
A seemingly predictable movie with some twists.
rlyonsii13 January 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I admit the main reason I watched this is because I am a giant nerd and was a fan of Ariel Winter because of Final Fantasy 13-2. I have seen Martin Donovon in many different things and he usually brought a little something to the table.
I originally had this as a 4 because it seemed very straight forward as home terror movies have seemed to go as of late. I initially compared it to things like The Strangers, and You're Next.
After the initial excitement it quickly winds down for me and it becomes what appears to be a very boring movie. I think they worked a little to hard at covering up the things they were trying to conceal, because the middle part of the movie did seem very slow.
Without revealing to much there are a few twists in the end, one of which I think anyone can see miles away, and then something else happens which in the opinion of this writer, truly made the movie in a higher quality.
All in all I think it is worth a watch, just drudge through the middle, and you will be rewarded!
rlyonsii.net
I originally had this as a 4 because it seemed very straight forward as home terror movies have seemed to go as of late. I initially compared it to things like The Strangers, and You're Next.
After the initial excitement it quickly winds down for me and it becomes what appears to be a very boring movie. I think they worked a little to hard at covering up the things they were trying to conceal, because the middle part of the movie did seem very slow.
Without revealing to much there are a few twists in the end, one of which I think anyone can see miles away, and then something else happens which in the opinion of this writer, truly made the movie in a higher quality.
All in all I think it is worth a watch, just drudge through the middle, and you will be rewarded!
rlyonsii.net
The promising plot twist was wasted on this below-average film
pirateLyd30 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this film expecting to be disappointed by Sakis Rouvas' inexperienced acting skills, but it turned out there were several more major flaws.
Yes, Sakis' acting was stilted and it was only too obvious that he doesn't belong in the world of movies. I think most everyone not blinded by his looks or reputation as a singer will agree that he just can't pull off such a role. However, I was surprised by how flat Martin Donovan's portrayal of the character turned out to be. Though his confused and blank expression fitted some scenes, he hardly expressed the emotion that most of the film required and left me waiting for a peak that never came.
Furthermore, the attempts of making the killer oh-so-elusive and fitting all the pieces of the puzzle together left some major holes in the plot. I won't go into details to avoid giving out spoilers, but it's safe to say I rolled my eyes one too many times at the poor explanations behind certain events.
And yet the most important and, in my opinion, obvious problem of the film was the dialogue. I can't recall ever hearing more unnatural conversations in a movie before...especially Sakis' lines sounded like nothing anyone would say in reality. There are only so many times you can address another person by his name in a conversation, so once he started using "Richard" at least once in every sentence it didn't take long before I grew sick of hearing it.
To be fair I must admit I found the ending quite appealing, in a disturbed sort of way...but the twist in the tale can't make up for all the negatives. If anything, I felt it had a lot of potential and it's a shame it wasn't the highlight of the much better film it deserved.
Overall I found Duress to be a very mediocre production, with less-than-adequate acting and horrible dialogue. It's not that it didn't keep me interested, but the unreal feeling of it had me wince more than once. I believe the word that best describes this film is "awkward".
Yes, Sakis' acting was stilted and it was only too obvious that he doesn't belong in the world of movies. I think most everyone not blinded by his looks or reputation as a singer will agree that he just can't pull off such a role. However, I was surprised by how flat Martin Donovan's portrayal of the character turned out to be. Though his confused and blank expression fitted some scenes, he hardly expressed the emotion that most of the film required and left me waiting for a peak that never came.
Furthermore, the attempts of making the killer oh-so-elusive and fitting all the pieces of the puzzle together left some major holes in the plot. I won't go into details to avoid giving out spoilers, but it's safe to say I rolled my eyes one too many times at the poor explanations behind certain events.
And yet the most important and, in my opinion, obvious problem of the film was the dialogue. I can't recall ever hearing more unnatural conversations in a movie before...especially Sakis' lines sounded like nothing anyone would say in reality. There are only so many times you can address another person by his name in a conversation, so once he started using "Richard" at least once in every sentence it didn't take long before I grew sick of hearing it.
To be fair I must admit I found the ending quite appealing, in a disturbed sort of way...but the twist in the tale can't make up for all the negatives. If anything, I felt it had a lot of potential and it's a shame it wasn't the highlight of the much better film it deserved.
Overall I found Duress to be a very mediocre production, with less-than-adequate acting and horrible dialogue. It's not that it didn't keep me interested, but the unreal feeling of it had me wince more than once. I believe the word that best describes this film is "awkward".
Another loser is "Duress"
dhaufrect-113 April 2015
Another loser is the 2009 film, "Duress" directed by Jordan Barker. It was written by Jim Kehoe and Dipo Oseni and is considered a thriller. However, it is not too thrilling of a picture. The actors include Martin Donovan, Sakis Rouvas, Joey Adams, Megan Ashley, Jacob Bertrand, Tommy Burwell, Desiree Cooper, Catherine Dent, Deon Derrico, Cristina Dohmen, Gina Gallego, Lisa Gady, Deege Harding, Chris Holz, George Ketsios, Cole S. McKay, Kathleen McNearmey, Alexis Raich, Chelsea Smith, Ariel Winter, Billy Wirth and Susan Spano. The story is that of a middle aged businessman who has a young daughter and who is blackmailed into a life of crime by a murderer who threatens the little girl's life if the father does not follow commands. It is a slow moving film and I found it hard pressed to give it only 2 stars. Dale Haufrect
very good movie!
teaguhm649123 January 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Where do I start...
The way that the story makes it seem as though Richard is chosen at random in the beginning, then at the end you see that he was picked.
The story in a whole was very good, its very psychological you have to really pay attention until the end. there is a lot of things that you don't notice, until the end. Like yes {spoiler alert} when Richard, put tommy Wilkins shirt on that hook, I didn't notice that at all when I first watched it.
Also when shes playing with the remote control car and he asks where she gets it from and she says "tommy left it in the park" notice at the end, that they're in a park and tommy's in back when shes killing that bird and Armand was watching her. Didn't notice that either.
Also, when he kills the detective and his wife mistaking the detectives wife as Armond's wife OH MY GOD.
This movie was awesome. great acting great story you wont waste your time while watching this.
The way that the story makes it seem as though Richard is chosen at random in the beginning, then at the end you see that he was picked.
The story in a whole was very good, its very psychological you have to really pay attention until the end. there is a lot of things that you don't notice, until the end. Like yes {spoiler alert} when Richard, put tommy Wilkins shirt on that hook, I didn't notice that at all when I first watched it.
Also when shes playing with the remote control car and he asks where she gets it from and she says "tommy left it in the park" notice at the end, that they're in a park and tommy's in back when shes killing that bird and Armand was watching her. Didn't notice that either.
Also, when he kills the detective and his wife mistaking the detectives wife as Armond's wife OH MY GOD.
This movie was awesome. great acting great story you wont waste your time while watching this.
Duress is a very thrilling and spooky film
GeorgePandis19831 November 2019
Explains how Americans combat crime
tadpole-596-91825616 December 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Today's paper had a picture of President Barack and Michelle Obama lighting 26 votive candles in the White House for the Newtown, CT, shooting victims. Did the paper say 26? Yes, 26. Weren't 27 people murdered? Yes, 27 people got whacked. But the President knows that Americans do not consider parents of criminals to be people any more. As DURESS shows, their defective genes make them just as much ticking time bombs as their kids. How many dinner party invites do you think went out to the senior Dahmers, Bundys, Mansons, Gacys, Klebolds, Harrises, Loughners, McVeighs, Oswalds, or Booths after their offspring made headlines? The answer is NONE, and if their child IS considerate enough to off them on the way to their own possible last stand--as was the case in Newtown--they won't even rate a 25-cent votive candle at the White House. DURESS proves WHY the parents of American criminals are heaped with as high a degree of social damnation as their kids. We all remember the Bible says the sins of the children will come back to haunt their folks: like son, like father!
Its always been there...
aSumuru12 May 2021
Slow burn thriller!
terelli12 May 2021
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
