User Reviews

In Los Angeles, the journalist Karen Addams (Tiffany L. Paige) is investigating a mysterious case happened twenty years ago, when the owner of the Mansfield Theater, Kyle Mansfield (Harold Cannon), shot twice with a shotgun, killed his dog, and he was found covered of his own blood, but without any injure. She convinces her editor to have an interview with Kyle, who is bankrupted. Kyle gives a key of a room to her and says that he is the watcher of the place. Karen decides to open the door, and sooner she finds that somebody is using her identity, efficiently working for her and living at her place. She is promoted in her job when the criminal Greg Johnson (Trey Hardy) is arrested with her apparent support, but she claims she had never seen him before. When Greg meets her, she realizes that apparently they have been duplicated, and their evil doubles have opposite personalities.

"Deuces" is a low budget movie with very promising story that keeps the attention with the duplication mystery but the development is weak and the conclusion is a great deception. When the mystery is disclosed, the explanation is very silly; when the doubles are eliminated, the resolution is simply corny and conventional. I regret that the director / author has been so commercial and careless with the conclusion of his screenplay, otherwise "Deuces" could have been a great film. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "Dublê do Medo" ("Double of the Fear")

First of all, it's hard to define in which genre (horror, sci-fi, thriller?) we could insert 'Deuces', because the movie worked all the time with some elements of all these kind of movies but with an absolute incompetence. The story of a woman who suddenly discover that she has a double, a twin 'persona', living by her side and doing odd things - including violent acts and even murder - is not a novelty. In fact, you must remember 'Doppelganger', with Drew Barrymore, another bad movie with the same theme. And that is all the story here, punctuated with some not gripping moments of shooting, cold blood murders and eerie scenes, especially the scenes taken at the Mansfield theater, the place where the doubles seems to appear after twenty years of interval. It's very difficult to be awaken during the movie, because you'll find that the problem here is not just a problem that affects the lady in distress, the journalist Karen Adams (played with a wood faced performance by Tiffany Paige. The movie tells us a story about an evil double creature with double boring style. A complete waste of time.

If you look at it as, a regular guy had a couple thousand bucks and wanted to produce his own TV-movie-type science-fiction thriller, then it's not a total waste.

In fact, I'll agree with others that it all began with a decent premise. But it quickly went downhill from there.

Don't waste your time with this one. The acting is below average, the script is below average, the plot is below average, the directing and execution are below average, even the sound quality is below average. Like others, I was fooled by the cover...

Incidentally, virtually nothing happens during the entire first half of the movie. Yes, folks, it's that bad.

I want to be sympathetic, but honestly I'm stretching to give it a 3 out of 10. It's one of the most unwatchable movies I've ever seen. Sorry.

I never heard of this movie by any of it assumed names but there was something about the cover artwork that drew me in. There were no recognizable actors or director but judging by the artwork I expected a lesser-known Minority Report, A.I., Time Cop, Total Recall or even a decent Sci-Fi Channel made for TV movie but what a rip-off.

The plot absolutely bared no resemblance to anything that the clever cover insinuated. It was just a typical low budget straight to video repackaged stinker. I couldn't tell you the entire movie because I fell asleep about halfway. Supposedly there was a parallel universe, which at the time existed in the closet of a run down old Movie Theater; the owner who had been involved in a mysterious crime 20 years earlier had broken his silence and decided to talk to a tabloid reporter. The interview only lasted a few minutes before the bank had the police evict and arrest the man but he first managed to slip a key for the mysterious room to the reporter. Before the man could be hauled off the reporter unlocked the padlock and entered the room, which seemed to just contain black walls. Later the reporter would find that she had been sited in other instances doing things she couldn't remember, like entering her apartment and finding a bed filled with S & M paraphernalia, having a boyfriend that she never knew or writing a brilliant story (about the theater owner) that promoted her to star reporter. Later she'd see her parallel evil twin always wearing the exact same clothes, along with the opposites of others. There were no special effects of any kind, no story, no acting because the budget must have all been used on the cover, if it wasn't then they must have had no budget to start with.

I do like Indie movies too and I'm very open minded but understanding and being just plain awful are two things totally different. Friend of the film maker or not, at least be honest. Don't make my mistake, avoid this one at all costs!

I just want to set everyone straight here. This movie was written and directed by a good friend of mine and i was on set several times during the course of the shoot. By no means was any part of the budget devoted to the "cover" of the movie box. My friend Michael wrote the screenplay, produced and directed it himself. So any insinuation that the production couldn't "afford" a decent script is ludicrous. The whole movie started with the script already finished. Let me also mention that the cover art does in fact have nothing to do with the film and Michael Winnick had no part in this movie's retail. He was not even aware that it was released in any format whatsoever. The production company has the rights to use and repackage the film as they see fit and it was they who apparently played some kind of consumer game on you. No one creatively involved in the production was involved with its retailing.

Anyway, I like the movie. The hotel clerk is especially crappy, but the phone company guy was hilarious. It's kind of like an X-Files episode but without Scully and Mulder (i.e. the last 5 seasons of the show). Anyway don't miss the Special Edition with all new special effects that Michael is re-releasing in theaters next year. Because now an entire generation has grow up not knowing what the hell this movie is.

The problem with this film, it seems to me, is the story. An earlier poster mentioned genre problems, and I think he or she hit the nail right on the head. If you're going to do science fiction (or horror, or mystery, or western, or what have you), you need to know something about the genre. Lip service needs to be paid to the hows and whys. Fantasy doesn't have to be realistic, exactly, but if things work differently in the film world from how they work in our world, we need some kind of explanation. Omitting details like this--at least lip service to them--is dangerous and sloppy.

That said, there's a lot to like in this film. The public location work is good, and the camera work is generally unobtrusive but occasionally impressive. The dialogue is quite good, suggesting that the director/writer has some skill in this area (I'd recommend help with the story itself in future projects though). Some of the acting was very good.

Budgetwise, the producers did a lot with a little, and the next effort might be a breakthrough. This one isn't it, and unfortunately it's the story that gets in the way ... and that's the one thing that's got to be there.

I was actually in pain while watching this movie. It made little sense, and the acting was not by any means good. How it got a 4.2 rating is beyond me. I thought that it would be good judging by the cover. I soon found out that they spent all their money on the cover and therefore couldn't have a decent script. Thats makes about as much sense as the rest of the movie ie. none. Avoid at all costs!! 0 out of 4 stars. I would rather sit though a Power Rangers/Gigli/Glitter movie fest for the rest of my life than see this movie again.

(2002) The Duplicate/ Deuces SCIENCE-FICTION/ HORROR

Straight to rental and low budget co-produced, written and directed by Michael Winnick that has female reporter, Karen Addams (Tiffany Paige) discovering a room that has the ability create another evil alter ego, after interviewing a man whose supposed to be dead, who of course is going to create a duplicate of herself, and is planing on a take over- there's supposed to be another surprise revelation regarding 'the duplicate room', but to low effect. Great looking poster but as soon as you watch it, then it becomes extremely forgettable because of very poor performances and it's low budget constraints.

I found this movie Deuces also known as Duplicate, very poorly acted and no flow. The lighting was minimal and character development very weak. I searched your database and found the main actress, Tiffany Paige, in two movies. Deuces once the only one that matched the theme for Duplicate.

Over all I thought the concept of the movie was good but I felt it to be contrived and non realistic. The best part of the movie was the casting. Tiffany Paige I think did a great job portraying 2 different characters and sides of herself. I would imagine this to be a tough job no matter what kind of movie your in. I think she did a great job and she is easy on the eyes as well. I would like to see more of her on the big screen.

Though Trey Alexander did not get as much screen time his portrayal of playing 2 of the same people was similar to Tiffany Paige's but different enough to compliment.

Overall I thought the movie needed better flow and dialogue but worth the rent to see some up and coming actors. Call me crazy but I love low budget films to see creativity replace dollars and the actors especially Tiffany Paige supplied that to this film.