Spy(ies)

2009
5.9| 1h39m| NA| en| More Info
Released: 28 January 2009 Released
Producted By: France 2 Cinéma
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

In London, an airport baggage handler is forced by French and British intelligence agents to seduce the wife of a businessman with ties to Syrian terrorists.

Watch Online

Spy(ies) (2009) is now streaming with subscription on Prime Video

Director

Nicolas Saada

Production Companies

France 2 Cinéma

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial
Watch Now
Spy(ies) Videos and Images
  • Top Credited Cast
  • |
  • Crew

Spy(ies) Audience Reviews

GamerTab That was an excellent one.
ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.
PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.
Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.
nightwatch4773 This film started out very exciting and than slid into one of the most average films I have ever seen. There was absolutely no surprises in this film whatsoever. The acting was excellent and the UK setting was just perfect but nothing is really happening other than the obvious. One of the most forgettable french films I have seen in the last 10 years. I did like the main character and I think if he was given more to work with, this could've been a terrific acting performance but unfortunately it was just average at best. Skip this one and watch Tell No One or Anthony Zimmer instead. Make sure it is Anthony Zimmer though and not that horrible remake with Angelina Jolie and Johnny Depp called the Tourist.
dbdumonteil I do think that Guillaume Canet is one of our best French actors (and he may become one of our best directors).He is fluent in English (the movie is half French half English for most of the action takes place in London).But this is not a movie he will be remembered for. After a promising start,when Canet seemed to be "framed up" and caught in a mysterious cobweb (kudos to Hippolyte Girardot ,who makes the best of a non-existent part and is the only one to generate some thrills ),the movie sinks into "dejà vu" .As soon as Canet arrives in London town ,all that must happen happens: obviously the usual suspect has a gorgeous wife ,a wife who falls for (well have a guess?) ;the hero just pretends but he is in love too obviously as the last sequences show;there's the obligatory chase scene in the tube;there's the obligatory terrorism subject.A computerized screenplay based on too many American thrillers .Stephen Rea and his unfortunate son bring the melodramatic touch.
luhlin I was looking forward to this bilingual European movie. However it turned out to be quite preposterous. The music was very good, cinematography reasonably good, interesting locations. But it became hard to believe in the characters, especially the leading man. On the one hand he is a thief, he drinks incessantly, using drugs frequently and yet he is set up to portray a doctor involved in international humanitarian work and has to pull that off against masterful forces in espionage. Not only does he tackle characters written as heavyweights in the spy business, but he clearly defies those who are giving him a break and then unbelievably gets caught up in tearful grieving for one of the characters whom he is disobeying. The script seems to have been written as the movie proceeded from one scene to another. There is no real connectivity or logic to the protagonists actions whether in his role as the humanitarian or as the hapless degenerate druggie who got caught out. The premise of using such a loser for an important international espionage event boggles the mind. The principal women of the film while reasonable good actors and very attractive really are unable to pull off two of the films turning point events, solely because of the impracticality and unbelievability of their tasks - again, it looks like a script written on the fly. Finally, what is it about films that have the central stars locate each other in one of the world's busiest airports? Most of us have trouble finding a washroom.
writers_reign Writer-director Nicolas Saada used to be with Cahiers du Cinema and those of us who remain unpretentious and non-brainwashed know that Cahiers du Cinema like Nouvelle Vague is French for s**t so we approach this movie with low expectations and are not disappointed. I accept that the glaring geographical errors - 1) Vincent is following Claire down a London street, in voice-over an MI5 operative says 'she's heading for the Burlington Arcade'. Bulls**t, she's nowhere near the place, which runs off Piccadilly. Next shot she is in the Burlington Arcade and so is Vincent; he suggests coffee, she agrees; there are probably thirty or forty suitable establishments within two or three minutes of the Burlington Arcade yet, for reasons unexplained, they are seen, moments later, in the East End. They may have got away with it had not Saada elected to linger on a street sign that read Hoosier St, E.C.1. Example 2) Some time later Vincent is pursuing a suspect on the London Underground. The train pulls into a station and the announcer says 'Camden Town'. This tells us that Vincent is on the Northern Line, the only one to stop at Camden Town, BUT, Camden Town is where two divergent branches of the Northern Line converge so EVERY announcement says either 'Camden Town-High Barnet branch', and/or 'Camden Town-Edgeware branch' in the case of Northbound trains or else 'Camden Town - Bank branch, Camden Town - Charing Cross branch' for Southbound trains. More? Whilst the train is at rest in Camden Town another voice-over from monitoring MI5 says 'Vincent is following the suspect, they are heading for Ladbroke Grove'. Quite a trick as Ladbroke Grove is on the Metropolitan Line and no one on a Northern Line train could possibly be heading there. Okay, if you're watching the movie in France, America or even rural England you won't care about this because you won't know there is anything wrong but nevertheless it represents SLOPPY writing and/or research; if you get the small things right you have more chance of getting the Big things right. Guillaume Canet is saddled with the lead, an ordinary guy obliged to work for the French Secret Service; chances are he's never handled a gun in his life yet in a climactic shootout he manages to nail a gang of pros. Incroyable. On the other hand there is some great eye-candy. The French turn out gorgeous actresses by the yard and the joke is they can all actually ACT. Geraldine Pailhas could be described as Audrey Hepburn-lite but alas, she is spoken for by - and may even be married to - Daniele Thompson's son, Christopher. Guillaume Canet also writes and directs movies and he could shoot something ten times better than this with the lens cap on.