Duress (2009)

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.

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!

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".

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.