NOTE IMDb
5,0/10
13 k
MA NOTE
Une galeriste risque sa famille et sa carrière lorsqu'elle entre dans une liaison avec un peintre talentueux et perd lentement le contrôle de sa vie.Une galeriste risque sa famille et sa carrière lorsqu'elle entre dans une liaison avec un peintre talentueux et perd lentement le contrôle de sa vie.Une galeriste risque sa famille et sa carrière lorsqu'elle entre dans une liaison avec un peintre talentueux et perd lentement le contrôle de sa vie.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Kat Graham
- Diamond
- (as Katerina Graham)
Avis à la une
Since I am an Addiction Psychologist Specialist, in training, I was forced to watch this all the way through. This is actually one case scenario I have not yet battled with any client. But I do understand the therapist in this movie and how she used addiction lingo to get her message across to her client. She got it across to me as well. As a therapist, this is a case that you would use psychoanalytic theory to get at the harbored suppressed past, and I think they actually portrayed the addiction very well. I did feel very sorry for her husband (handsome husband) who is faithful and has this kind of woman for a wife...but love does conquer all. It is not so easy in real life but the message was real and there for anyone who really is looking! Thankyou, LadyAnn68
I love movies and never walk out. I walked out of this one after sitting through a painful 40 minutes or so. It is hideously awful in every way: terrible script (written by idiotic middle school kids?), god-awful, idiotic acting and directing. It was boring to boot, even though it was supposed to be about sex addiction, and it was supposed to have beautiful people in it. It wasn't even good as porn. Actual porn is far better, even as non-porn, than this. The leading actress was not beautiful, or believable in any way. None of the actors had any credibility nor did they rescue any part of the incomprehensibly stupid script so as to make any moment seem even vaguely possible or real. Was everyone associated with this "film" a complete idiot with an IQ below 80?
This movie has a lot of problems.
Briefly, it's the story of a young professional woman, Zoe, with a husband, Jason, who would be every woman's - and some men's - wet dream. He has a perfect, muscled body, a smile that could melt an iceberg, and he even washes the dishes. They have sex 2 or 3 times a day. Not a week, a day.
But it isn't enough for her. She wants more.
But more of what? That's one of the problems with this movie. There is a lot of sex in it, though none of it shocking by modern movie standards. But for all the sex, we still have to guess at what Zoe wants. Is it yet more sex? Different sex? Kinkier sex? Is this a distant cousin to *Fifty Shades of Grey* that dares not speak of its desires? Zoe hooks up with an unsubtle but muscled white painter - who, in my eyes, has no talent - and has with him what looks like pretty much the same sort of sex she had been having with her husband. Then she hooks up with a messenger on a motorcycle. Their sex, though no doubt wonderful, looks pretty much the same as what she is having with the other two men, though it usually takes place on a table.
In between all this, Zoe ignores her children and lets her work go down the drain. She is, we are to believe, a sex addict.
That's the first problem. Zoe comes across as insatiable, but not really addicted. She only has men who are so astoundingly handsome/sexy that they would tempt all but the most virtuous. Yet if this movie had been called *Insatiable*, she would have come across as a harlot rather than a sick individual to be pitied, and would have lost the sympathies of the intended audience of well-meaning 20-40 something women. If she were actually addicted to sex, she would have had sex with anyone, and that is not the case. She is only attracted to the hottest men.
The second problem is that her poor husband, Jason, evidently detects nothing once Zoe is unfaithful to him - daily. When he does finally learn he's unhappy, of course, but we know so little about him, he's so poorly developed, that we still can't sympathize with him, though he is the potentially most sympathetic character in the movie.
These actors could probably all have done a lot better if they had been given a script that had developed characters and not just cardboard cut-outs. As it is, we get to watch a lot of evidently passionate sex performed by beautiful bodies, and then at the end have to listen to a few lectures on sexual addiction, which don't come across as very convincing. Zoe's particular case is never explored, so it's hard to believe in it or feel for her.
Zoe's sexual problems with Jason needed to be made clearer. How was he failing her? Jason needs to have been given a character; it's not enough for him just to look great. The script just doesn't make any of the characters interesting and sympathetic, and that's fatal here.
Briefly, it's the story of a young professional woman, Zoe, with a husband, Jason, who would be every woman's - and some men's - wet dream. He has a perfect, muscled body, a smile that could melt an iceberg, and he even washes the dishes. They have sex 2 or 3 times a day. Not a week, a day.
But it isn't enough for her. She wants more.
But more of what? That's one of the problems with this movie. There is a lot of sex in it, though none of it shocking by modern movie standards. But for all the sex, we still have to guess at what Zoe wants. Is it yet more sex? Different sex? Kinkier sex? Is this a distant cousin to *Fifty Shades of Grey* that dares not speak of its desires? Zoe hooks up with an unsubtle but muscled white painter - who, in my eyes, has no talent - and has with him what looks like pretty much the same sort of sex she had been having with her husband. Then she hooks up with a messenger on a motorcycle. Their sex, though no doubt wonderful, looks pretty much the same as what she is having with the other two men, though it usually takes place on a table.
In between all this, Zoe ignores her children and lets her work go down the drain. She is, we are to believe, a sex addict.
That's the first problem. Zoe comes across as insatiable, but not really addicted. She only has men who are so astoundingly handsome/sexy that they would tempt all but the most virtuous. Yet if this movie had been called *Insatiable*, she would have come across as a harlot rather than a sick individual to be pitied, and would have lost the sympathies of the intended audience of well-meaning 20-40 something women. If she were actually addicted to sex, she would have had sex with anyone, and that is not the case. She is only attracted to the hottest men.
The second problem is that her poor husband, Jason, evidently detects nothing once Zoe is unfaithful to him - daily. When he does finally learn he's unhappy, of course, but we know so little about him, he's so poorly developed, that we still can't sympathize with him, though he is the potentially most sympathetic character in the movie.
These actors could probably all have done a lot better if they had been given a script that had developed characters and not just cardboard cut-outs. As it is, we get to watch a lot of evidently passionate sex performed by beautiful bodies, and then at the end have to listen to a few lectures on sexual addiction, which don't come across as very convincing. Zoe's particular case is never explored, so it's hard to believe in it or feel for her.
Zoe's sexual problems with Jason needed to be made clearer. How was he failing her? Jason needs to have been given a character; it's not enough for him just to look great. The script just doesn't make any of the characters interesting and sympathetic, and that's fatal here.
A little more romantic than most recent films about sex addiction like Nymphomaniac part 1 and 2, but thankfully the movie does not dumb down the condition. Instead, simplifies it greatly.
The movie focus is on a happily married woman who fills a void in her life when an affair with another man triggers her sex addiction using a more romantic approach.
The entire cast did a good acting job. I've never seen William Levy in anything before, but I thought he played a good "Mistress" in this film. Lead actress Sharon Leal and Boris Kodjoe were also good in the movie.
Not as melodramatic as you would expect from movies like this, and it had some pretty awesome love scenes. A winning combo for me.
The movie focus is on a happily married woman who fills a void in her life when an affair with another man triggers her sex addiction using a more romantic approach.
The entire cast did a good acting job. I've never seen William Levy in anything before, but I thought he played a good "Mistress" in this film. Lead actress Sharon Leal and Boris Kodjoe were also good in the movie.
Not as melodramatic as you would expect from movies like this, and it had some pretty awesome love scenes. A winning combo for me.
I would not recommend this movie to anyone unless you are interested in adult films or Porn, The story line was predictable, cliché and BORING. The movie has no excitement, the plot was simple, and not a thriller by far, the only good thing about this movie was how "Good- looking" the actors were. Many of the sex scenes were not needed...the main character is obviously sick.. the movie magnify how the main character is struggling with her addiction.. by showing her abuse the addiction over and over and over... The plot do not move beyond the point. Its like watching an obese person suffer from over eating... we have established that point..can we move on now... but the movie continue to revolve around the obsession of the addiction... which in returns bore the viewers because they are watching the same actions happen repeatedly... over and over and over again.. its like watching a 3 minute video clip over and over and over again... The plot do not expand to any dimension.. it is as flat and dry as bread... with NO BUTTER
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesIn the book Quinton is black.
- GaffesWhen the Brina places the artist's material on Zoe's desk; the History Brochure is on top and the book of references is next from the top. However in the next cut after Zoe puts down the brochure the orientation of the material has changed and now the Catalog of Art is next from the top.
- Citations
[last lines]
Jason Reynard: Our love is forever.
Zoe Reynard: Always has been.
Jason Reynard: Always will be.
- Bandes originalesWrong or Right
Written by Kwabena Adjepong and Christopher Taylor
Performed by Kwabs
Courtesy of Warner Music U.K. Ltd.
By arrangement with Warner Music Group Film & TV Licensing
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Addicted?Alimenté par Alexa
- What are the differences between the Theatrical Version and the Unrated Version?
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Perversa adicción
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 5 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 17 390 770 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 7 485 346 $US
- 12 oct. 2014
- Montant brut mondial
- 17 534 314 $US
- Durée1 heure 46 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant