Euro intellectual recession-time story? I recommend Copie Conforme because of and in spite of the difficulty in watching it. The difficulty resides in the multiple layers involved in the relationship of the two protagonists, not to speak of the three languages that they both speak in various circumstances. The more the the action evolves, the less we seem to understand the real nature of their relationship. What we do know is that those two have a problem of communication. It is this struggle of seduction/rejection, with setbacks and all that make it worth watching. Atmosphere and the man-woman tension is what keeps it going. The filming is impeccable, with lovely scenes of Tuscany, excellent camera, and the great work on surrounding noises, which I believe replaces any music at all. The acting is also very fine, with Binoche deservedly getting a major Cannes Film Festival award.

If certifying an art piece as a copy means defining the authenticity of its original, watching Certified Copy means reviewing how much ideals, expectations, and fantasies about love you have projected to your life. What does your true self intrinsically need from love? And, how do time and life changes affect your perspective?

James the protagonist would rather challenge himself with one of the most difficult writing tasks, i.e. endorsing the originality of art work, than get engaged in the search for an authentic love. For marriage, he holds a pessimistically detached attitude, which is seen at different points in the film, and cannot be clearer when he refused to take a picture with the young couple at the popular wedding spot. For him, marriage is just a copy of an image of what people think love should ultimately lead to, but marriage is not exactly what love is meant to be. For him, love should be liberating (like the way that Cypress trees extend their branches); it cannot be maintained without adaptation to changes, including changes caused by the lapse of time, new responsibilities, career ambition, etc. His detachment towards Juliet Binoche (who played the nameless character, the woman who sometimes seems to be his wife and sometimes simply seems to be a book fan) may be an expression of his insistence on the originality of love.

Binoche is the opposite of James. She gives values to copies, even though she recognizes the superiority of originals. This is reflected in her antique shop, where both originals and copies are displayed and sold. While James shows contempt to Original Copy, she highly regards it. (Original Copy is the painting copy which was mistaken as the original for such a long time that it eventually got acknowledged as a valuable art work and displayed in the Tuscany museum). For her, love is an ideal but not without responsibilities. Marriage may be just an illusion of love, but it can be just as real and rewarding if you believe in it hard enough and work on it hard enough. Unfortunately, she is in love with someone who does not share the same value as her, someone who does not want his own liberal spirit to be inhibited by responsibilities, and someone who does not conform to the inferiority of copies.

The most intriguing part of the story is that you never know the relationship between James and Binoche. Obviously this is not a mystery to solve, but an idea to play with. You can see them as two people who newly met, but just play along after being mistaken as a couple. Both of them have demonstrated certain transference as the story goes, but Binoche was almost overtaken by it. Unintentionally, they projected their feelings towards their spouse onto each other. You can also see James as the constantly unavailable husband of Binoche, a man who needs to be free from obligations to enjoy life. It is interesting to note that, what seems to be confusing to viewers is plain and clear to the people around these two persons – they all see them as a couple, including the waitress, the new young couple at the church, the old couple by the fountain, and the inn keeper. For us viewers, the confusion did not start until after the conversation between the waitress and Binoche. From then on, James and Bionche started role playing or revealing their past. Either way, the process is punctuated by intense and emotional moments. It raised the questions of how we react to others' interpretation of us, what constitutes their interpretation, and how our reaction to the interpretation affects us in return. If one's identity is shaped by - or worse- caters to other's interpretation, how authentic can his life remain? How well are we aware of our true self? How much does awareness matter?

I love the way that the director uses the camera. At some points, the viewer feels like standing behind a two-way mirror watching the characters. At some points, the viewer feels like sitting in the position of James or Binoche, being looked right into the eyes and talked to. At some other points, the viewer feels like being in the position of the new couple, whom Binoche was waving at. The open ending is excellent. The question that is left to be answered is whether James took the train and left, or he stayed with Binoche.How to draw the line between the value of originality and the value of copies? Are you going to compromise? What is the standard for a "certified copy"? What are acceptable and not acceptable for an authentic love/life?

'Certified Copy' is one of the latest films by Iranian master Abbas Kiarostami and one of the few made by him outside Iran. The landscape is very different from his previous films. The film looks completely 'European' and the assimilation of the European cultural background is perfect. At the same time, we find here familiar themes that have preoccupied Kiarostami throughout his career - family and couple relationships, the place of children in the family, the different personal memories and perceptions of the characters. As in his best films of earlier periods, the director manages to tell a meaningful story with simple and expressive means. But what we also find in 'Certified Copy' is a game of meanings with which the director envelops the behavior and the words of the heroes of the story that is being told on screen in an atmosphere of mystery and ambiguity. The story in the film haunts its viewers after the screening. What did we actually see?

The main heroine, played by Juliette Binoche, whose name we never know, is a mature French woman, who raises alone a boy in his early teens and keeps a gallery of antiques and art objects in the Tuscan town of Arezzo. James Miller (William Shimell) is a British author of art books, the most recent one having as topic the relation between originals and copies of works of art. She witnesses the launch of the author's book in Arezzo and then becomes his guide for a few hours in the villages of Tuscany. At one point, in a cafe, the owner of the place confuses them with a married couple. The two seem amused by the confusion, and from now on they gradually enter the roles and behave more and more naturally as a couple for 15 years, maybe separated or on the verge of separation, in any case a couple in crisis. A game or reality, because their behavior becomes more and more deeply suited to the attitudes of a loving woman and of an indifferent man, concerned only with his career? Which of the two hypotheses is the 'true'? Discussions about originals and copies suddenly can be viewed in a different dimension, get a different meaning. What is truth? what is authenticity? can the copy generate more emotion than the original? can the feelings in the game be deeper than those in reality? or maybe everything around us is a multitude of copies or the result of simulation games? or just imagination?

Juliette Binoche is perfect and in my opinion makes this film one of the best roles in her mature career. I wasn't extremely convinced by William Shimell, a semi-professional actor (and famous tenor). His intellectualism and emotional disconnection may have been in line with Kiarostami's vision, but I couldn't help but think as I watched the film to alternative casting choices (Daniel Day-Lewis? Jeremy Irons?). James Miller's character remains one of the many mysteries of this beautiful film, which is worth seeing and reviewing, and then discussing in mind or with friends. I recommend you do it.