Addicted

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

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.

When I first saw that there was a movie coming out, I was excited and apprehensive at the same time. I've come to accept "Based on the book/novel/bestseller/etc" as a disclaimer that if you have read the book you should probably expect the movie to be LOOSELY based, with kudos given to movies who stick to the book while keeping the cinematic liberties to a minimum. But boy oh boy does this adaptation go waaaaay beyond taking liberties. Except for the characters and very few key scenes, this could have been a totally unrelated movie.

Without giving away any spoilers, basically the main character is addicted to sex, so you would think that there would be a whole lot of exposition, especially with the back drop being dialogue between the main character and a therapist. But okay, let's say you haven't read the book, or it's been a while since you have. There's so much missing as to why this woman has an addiction to sex. Why does she cheat? Why should we care that she cheats? She's painted as this spoiled and deprived woman who you don't feel sorry for,( when, in the book, there's actually a lot that went on in her past that affects her present.) There's no examination of the main character and the relationships she has.

This movie was an hour and 45 minutes. I could have maybe dealt with the other stuff that wasn't included if there was a portion devoted to her past and not the 2 and half second flashback and 1 sentence literally at the end of the movie where we're just supposed to go, "oh, it all makes sense now", and walk out satisfied.

While Addicted was erotic fiction, it still kept you on the edge of your seat because you wanted to find out what happened next. I couldn't put it down. All the movie did was show some soft core sex scenes, some violence, and then it hopped skipped and jumped to the end. If you've read the book, this isn't worth your time or money. And if you haven't, well you've been warned. Wait til it comes out on cable. It's a shame too, the cast was really let down.

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 film is bad very bad, William is an Cuban actor he is handsome but that's all, he speaks Spanish, the accent is OK. but he is not hot he is just a regular guy, go to Cuba and you will find better than him.

I don't find entertained it and I don't find educated either.

Very bad film, looks like it cost it 5$.

By submitting this review you are agreeing to the terms laid out in our Copyright Statement. Your submission must be your own original work. Your review will normally be posted on the site within 2-3 business days. Reviews that do not meet the guidelines will not be posted. Please write in English only. HTML or boards mark-up is not supported though paragraph breaks will be inserted if you leave a blank line between paragraph.