Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Cortechba Overrated

Kailansorac Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Mikel3 There have been many films titled 'Asylum' over the years. At least one I can think of was pretty good. The 1972 film with Peter Cushing. Last night we watched one with that name from 2005 starring Natasha Richardson and Ian McKellen. It was listed as a 'Horror' film at Amazon Prime Videos and had a high rating. I would consider it more a steamy psychological drama than horror. As might be expected by the names involved it was well acted. The settings and visuals were well done too. The first one third of the film was promising. It's the story of a psychiatrist named Max that comes to work in a new position at large asylum for the mentally disturbed including the criminally insane. He brings along his seemingly bored wife Stella (played by the late Natasha Richardson) and young son. Ian McKellen plays Dr. Cleave, a long time doctor there that felt he deserved the position that Max was given. The wife (Natasha Richardson) soon falls for one of the inmates, Edgar. Edgar is a man who was found guilty in the murder and disfigurement of his former wife. Yes, what woman could resist such a tempting bad boy like Edgar, geesh. Soon Stella and Edgar begin an unlikely steamy love affair right under the nose of her husband, the guards and everyone else at the Asylum. This place has some security. They have steamy love making encounters right on the asylum grounds in places where he is doing jobs as a trusted inmate. Sometimes they just miss being caught on the grounds by a guard coming to check on him. It all becomes rather laughable the chances the wife takes. Still the first third of the film is intriguing and makes you wonder where it will all lead. Is Ian McKellen's character some how a part of all this? What part does he play in what's to come? Unfortunately the story soon turns into one where you do not care about a single character in the film with the exception of the little boy. The inmate soon easily escapes when he realizes he will not be released anytime in the near future. The wife finds shopping excursion excuses to go weekly into the city where she joins him at his hide out. Eventually Stella leaves her husband to be with Edgar, even though he is now jealous of her talking to other men and beats her regularly. The story goes even further downhill from there dragging on with more depressing and irritating developments. Finally at the depressing end we found ourselves asking ourselves why they turned such a promising drama into such a total mess. Don't bother watching this film unless you like depressing pointless movies with characters you eventually don't care about.

robert-temple-1 This is a horror film masquerading as an emotional drama. Why bother? The story is so disturbing, so nasty, so tasteless, so pointless. It is an exercise in 'provocation' and exploitation. Do we really want to see the late and lamented Natasha Richardson brilliantly going to pieces? Do we really want to see Ian McKellen being brilliantly devious, creepy, and demented? Do we really want to see Marton Csokas being brilliantly passionate, creepy, and demented? Do we want to see any of these things? Do we want to see people reduced to emotional and psychological rubble? Children drowning? Suicide? Marriage wrecked? Despair? Hopelessness? Do we want to be provided with a ready-made reason why we should all go jump off a high building and decide that there is no point in living? If the answer is yes, then this film is for you. Anyone who thinks life is tough enough already should give it a miss.

hesketh27 This is undoubtedly a good film, well acted, good period feel / details etc.. and I certainly enjoyed it, however, by the time I had finished watching it I couldn't help feeling that the it was somewhat out of balance. The last part of the film is all about Cleave getting his revenge on the errant couple because of his jealousy over the fact that Edgar had been stolen away from him. Unfortunately, the dramatic effect is lessened because not enough is made of his relationship with the pair early on in the film. Hints are given that he has a homosexual fixation on Edgar and that he is jealous when Stella starts to get too close to Edgar. Much more should have been made of this aspect to explain his vindictive behaviour towards the pair when he has them in his control at the climax, especially as the scenes where he deals directly with Edgar are very brief. Whether what we see is as a result of severe editing or whether the whole thing could have been written better I don't know. I plan to read the novel to find out whether more is made of this. Worth seeing, but certainly flawed.

love_ngyung It would be unfair to say that this movie is merely mediocre, but there is nothing engrossing in "Asylum" whatsoever. The movie is about the wife of a psychologist who has a sexual relationship with a lunatic inmate in a psychiatric hospital.Stella, the wife of the psychologist, for some strange reason, began having a passionate affair with Edgar, the insane inmate who decapitated his own wife. Both of them kept having a so-called lascivious affair during his working outside her house. As well as telling the story about Stella's unfaithfulness, the movie portrays the same, old cliché of an unhappy married couple, which I found a tad arid and unimaginative. Despite attempting a bit of a twist near the end, the movie gives the impression that the story only was included so as to extend the duration of the film.This movie should have ended after an hour. The director or screenwriter, however, seemed to want to make sure that the viewers grasp the actual main point of the two lovers' situation: why were they easily allowed to engage in mischievous frolics and who was the person who pulled the strings behind the whole story?The protagonists and supporting roles give a real good performance. Ian McKellen, who played Dr. Peter Cleave, performed to his usual standard. The lead characters, played by Natasha Richardson and Marton Csokas were well suited in their roles and Hugh Bonneville, unsurprisingly, depicted a stuffy, loveless psychologist husband in a good way. The cast of this movie, as a whole, is a good cast.As mentioned, the movie, itself, had a sterile plot. There was nothing new in this liaison; this unfaithful tale has been told before, and several times. The movie, ipso facto, failed to impress me. Thanks to all the stars who excellently managed to keep this movie a bit interesting. Without them, I could easily have nodded off. Altogether, they ought to do it again in another movie, with a more riveting story to tell.