Gripping story with well-crafted characters

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

James Miller (William Shimell) is in Tuscany to do a reading of his latest book where he praises copies in art over the need for originality in most people's minds. A French antiques dealer (Juliette Binoche) comes to the reading with her son but he forces her to leave early. He later tracks her down and she drives him around the countryside without a destination. A café owner mistakes them for a married couple. Then the question arises whether it's actually true.Juliette Binoche is dressed down but is as alluring as ever. The first half is aimless wandering and can get meandering but Binoche is always fascinating. Shimell is great at being the cool academic. Binoche takes a big turn and he's able to follow her. There are logic questions about why the son doesn't seem to know James if they're actually married. Of course, it could simply point to them play acting although they are so emotional and specific in their conversation. It's a really fascinating turn. I wish it comes sooner and reveals more about their relationship.

This is actually a totally different approach to cinema. Is it original? We wouldn't know, but it is definitely great. There are various ways of approaching this film. There is a lot of philosophical questions being raised and answered partially or fully through out the film. One way I like to look at this film is as two journeys with no definite separating point. Somewhere at the middle of the film, the relationship between the two characters change so we get to look at the things in life (art) in a different way. In the first half, you see a happy male who is satisfied with his being while in the second half, he is someone who has been married for 15 years, and unsatisfied with his state of being. The lady is more satisfied in the second half despite being emotional and vulnerable. There is a serious philosophical discussion about what is the right way to approach things. In the first half, the independent man doesn't care about the consequences of actions in general. He thinks things are just the way they are and we should not try too hard to change it. In the second half, he starts acting exactly opposite to his own earlier philosophy as the lady takes control in a socially acceptable relationship. It was interesting to see that the director used the term Mise' en Scene to credit himself at the end as this film does not fall under the Hollywood definition of drama.

this movie is engaging and beautiful and mysterious I don't want to spoil the plot. Two people meet and decide to tour some historical sites and have lunch and chat. Their talk involves books art history. They are both somewhat art historians. They seem to know each other. Have they actually met before? they play some jokes and games and have some wine and discourse. They seem to know each better than the film purports. Is that a fact? (that they had met before?) The film is very sly in the way their dialogue skips around months years decades sometimes. Really the basis of their relationship is never revealed. however the encounters filmed here are little small slices of life and talk and dialogue that seems so very very real.. beautiful scenery sets restaurants historical sites and some great dialogue. however is all this real?? I watched this movie a couple of times in my TV and Sound room. I am still confused with the meaning of the movie however it is truly an original film that I will never forget. However the reality of the film is unsure and mysterious; I will soon see his film the Olive Tree. I was somewhat reminded of the Louis Malle film My Dinner with Andre. However My Dinner with Andre is a straightforward film. Certified Copy is an enigma. I think of it as a hall of mirrors is that a reflection you are seeing (hearing) or something real. Time and relations are distorted every so minutely in this film. This is one of the first really high quality intellectual art filmed I have seen in several years. Hats off to Iranian writer and director Abbas Kiarostami and stars Juliette Binoche and the British opera singer William Shimell (in this his first film role)

While the movie poses a few interesting questions along the way (the one alluded to by the title being one of them), it overpowered me with its sheer contempt for the rational. I believe that if the movie made sense, all of a sudden it wouldn't be considered "good" by its admirers. Open-endedness can be a powerful artistic tool in skilled hands, but this movie is open wide from one end to the other. Married? Lovers? Kinky sadists? Divorced? Make up your own story because the director is not. Nor does he give you consistent material to work with, you'll need to do some heavy editing if you want your story to hold water. Exhausting.