## Tyler Perry’s Latest Brain Teaser: “Duplicity” – Is This What We Call Entertainment?
Tyler Perry has built an empire on melodrama, larger-than-life characters, and a specific brand of Southern gothic storytelling. But with his latest offering, “Duplicity,” he seems to have traded coherence for chaos.
HuffPost recently declared Perry’s latest film “makes no damn sense,” and frankly, we’re inclined to agree. From plot holes bigger than a Georgia peach to characters who seem to exist solely to spout out tired tropes, “Duplicity” raises the question: is this the pinnacle of Perry’s creative genius, or a tangled web of absurdity we’d rather forget?
The Performances are Commendable, But They’re Not Enough to Elevate the Weak Script
Well, Tyler Perry has done it again. “Duplicity,” yet another soap opera-esque drama from the writer-director, made its way to Prime Video on Thursday. Of course, it’s a wild turn of events that only Perry could conjure up. Perhaps he’s the only person who can make sense of it, too, because the plot unravels into a web of lies that’ll leave your head spinning with questions.
Thankfully, the movie doesn’t start off with much confusion. It first follows high-powered attorney Marley (Kat Graham) on her most personal case yet: the fatal police shooting of her best friend Fela’s (Meagan Tandy) husband (Joshua Adeyeye) in what appears to be the death of another unarmed Black man.
That situation goes over how many would expect: civil unrest among local residents, administrative leave for the involved officer, pending a settlement, and a political case for the mayor’s office to sort through before the whole town boils over. Marley gets some assistance from her former cop-turned-private investigator boyfriend (Tyler Lepley) and his friend Kevin (RonReaco Lee).
But just as they close the book on the case, secrets start to surface and true colors are revealed, leading Marley down a maze of deception and betrayal to find out what really caused the shooting. If the plot is starting to sound complicated, that’s because it is and for no rhyme or reason.
“Duplicity” is essentially two movies in one, and neither feels fully developed. That wouldn’t be a first for one of Perry’s films, but the trend is getting rather annoying.
The Cast and Performances
Compared to many of Tyler Perry’s newer projects, I didn’t have a huge issue with the acting in “Duplicity.” Well, not until some of the dialogue got in the way (more on that later).
The most notable names in the cast are Kat Graham, Tyler Lepley and RonReaco Lee. I also recognized Meagan Tandy from her stint on Starz’s “Survivor’s Remorse.” For the most part, they all did a fairly decent job.
Trust I’ve seen worse from Perry’s other films (last summer’s “Divorce in the Black” immediately comes to mind). As for the characters the cast plays, we’ve seen them all before. Graham stars as determined attorney Marley, who’s hellbent on getting to the bottom of the mysterious police shooting that claims the life of her best friend’s husband.
Lepley plays Marley’s seemingly “perfect” boyfriend, Tony, a private investigator who’s also looking into the shooting. But, of course, there’s more to him than meets the eye. Lee plays Kevin, one of the officers involved in the tragic incident, who just so happens to be friends with Tony and Marley.
There’s nothing particularly surprising about these characters until Perry decides to unravel them by the movie’s end, which leads to my frustrations with this conundrum of a film.
I think all the actors were solid in the film, but the writing was just so overwrought that I kept being like, “what are they even talking about?” “What is even happening?” I love Tyler Lepley because he is nice to look at and he had me fooled in this role, for sure.
Kat Graham has been in a bunch of Christmas movies that I love to hate. Jimi Stanton is a really strong actor and it was interesting seeing him in this role, which seems like the polar opposite from his role in “Your Honor,” where he is pretty cutthroat.
And well, I think RonReaco Lee deserves his own section for this film.
Breaking Down the Plot Twist
The Twist Revealed
The film’s climax reveals a shocking twist that changes the direction of the story. The twist is surprising, but it’s also predictable given the film’s convoluted nature.
The reveal is marred by a series of convenient coincidences and plot holes. The twist raises more questions than it answers, leaving the viewer with a sense of confusion.
The film’s failure to provide adequate closure or resolution undermines the impact of the twist.
Analyzing the Twist
The twist is a prime example of the film’s inability to balance complexity with coherence.
The plot twist is a common trope in many movies, but it’s not done well here. The twist is introduced without much buildup, and it feels like a cheap way to add drama to the story.
The twist also raises more questions than it answers, leaving the viewer with a sense of confusion and frustration.
The film’s inability to provide closure or resolution to the twist also undermines the impact of the twist.
Cameron Diaz’s Response to Microaggressions
Cameron Diaz Speaks Out
Cameron Diaz responds to a resurfaced clip of her shutting down a journalist’s “microaggression” against rapper Nicki Minaj.
Diaz’s response is praised for its class and poise, and serves as an example of how to handle toxic questions with kindness and politeness.
The clip highlights Diaz’s professionalism and commitment to setting boundaries with journalists.
Implications of Diaz’s Response
Diaz’s response has implications for the way women are treated in the media, particularly when it comes to microaggressions and sexism.
The clip serves as a reminder of the importance of holding journalists accountable for their behavior.
Diaz’s response is a powerful statement on the importance of respect and professionalism in the media.
The clip has gone viral on social media, with many praising Diaz for her response to the microaggression.
One user wrote, “Cameron Diaz answering toxic questions with kindness and politeness while still setting boundaries. Amazing.”
Another user added, “Cameron is a girls girl and classy with it too. Love that.”
The clip has sparked a larger conversation about microaggressions and sexism in the media.
It highlights the importance of setting boundaries and being respectful in a professional setting.
The clip serves as an example of how to handle difficult situations with class and poise.
Valerie Campbell Sets the Record Straight on Rory’s Baby
Breaking Down the Plot
It seems like someone had a real-life “oy with the poodles already” moment. Valerie Campbell — who worked as a key costumer on the “Gilmore Girls” series and as a costume supervisor on its 2016 Netflix revival “Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life” — is clearly fed up with speculation surrounding the father of Rory Gilmore’s (Alexis Bledel) baby.
So much so that she published a TikTok over the weekend that sets the record straight about the mystery that she and others at the series felt was “very, very, very, very, very obvious.”
How Rory’s Costume Hints at the Father’s Identity
“A Year in the Life” was broken down into four parts, each represented by a season in the year. The revival starts in winter, so Campbell explained to her followers how Rory’s costume in each season acts as a hint, saying fans just had to “do the math.”
In the winter, she’s sleeping with Paul — maybe, maybe not — I don’t know … she definitely forgot to break up with that guy. But she’s definitely not sleeping with him,” Campbell starts, referring to a boyfriend, played by Jack Carpenter, that Rory is so uninterested in she often forgets that she’s dating him.
The Only Obvious Choice
“The only obvious choice is — you guessed it — Logan,” Campbell said.
Campbell then notes that even the show’s creator Amy Sherman-Palladino wondered why people were questioning Rory’s baby’s paternity due to all these factors.
“It’s because it was supposed to be very, very, very, very, very obvious,” Campbell says.
Campbell’s TikTok has sparked a larger conversation about the show and its characters.
It highlights the importance of paying attention to details in a story.
The clip serves as an example of how to handle speculation and rumors surrounding a TV show.
Conclusion
The Incoherent Chaos of ‘Duplicity’: A Cautionary Tale for Audiences and Filmmakers Alike
In a scathing critique, “Tyler Perry’s ‘Duplicity’ Makes No Damn Sense” on HuffPost laid bare the numerous flaws that plague Tyler Perry’s latest film. The article highlighted the convoluted plot, underdeveloped characters, and cringeworthy dialogue that left viewers scratching their heads. Key points included the film’s inability to balance tone, the misuse of social commentary, and the failure to deliver on its promise of a thought-provoking mystery. The article’s main argument was that ‘Duplicity’ is a misfire, one that underscores the perils of prioritizing style over substance and commercial appeal over artistic merit.
The significance of this topic extends beyond the film itself, serving as a warning to filmmakers and audiences alike. In an era where streaming platforms have democratized access to storytelling, the pressure to produce content that resonates with a broad audience has never been greater. However, as ‘Duplicity’ demonstrates, the pursuit of mainstream appeal can often lead to creative compromise and a watering down of the very elements that make a story compelling. The implications of this trend are far-reaching, threatening to homogenize the film industry and stifle innovation.
As we look to the future, it’s clear that audiences will continue to demand more from their storytelling. With the rise of platform-specific content and the growing influence of creators’ voices, the bar for quality and originality will only continue to rise. As we emerge from the wreckage of ‘Duplicity,’ let this serve as a call to action: let’s prioritize substance over spectacle, and let’s reward storytellers who dare to take risks and push boundaries. As the saying goes, “the truth is rarely pure and never simple,” but with ‘Duplicity’ serving as a cautionary tale, we must ask ourselves: what’s the true cost of surrendering to commercial pressures, and what’s the price of creative integrity?