Asylum (2005) User Reviews

Desperate Housewives with a morbid twist

[Flagrant-Baronessa · 7/10 · 21 July 2006]

Romantic thriller Asylum is a fairly intriguing adaptation of a same-titled McGrath novel, rewritten into a script by the man who wrote Closer -- Patrick Marber. Keeping this in mind whilst watching, it is impossible not to notice similarities in writing between the two films. Like Closer, Asylum is very much a study of human relationships and sexuality and both heavily explore the theme of infidelity. Also, Marber seems to have a thing for having his male character pushing up women against a wall and confronting them with their cheating -- often using violence and crude language. Just an observation.

Moving away from Closer, in Asylum desperate housewife Stella (Natasha Richardson) is bored with her passionless life and dreads every day of being a good little 1950s wife to her stiff husband, who holds an important position as a doctor at a mental asylum nearby. Strolling her garden with her son one day, Stella meets mental patient Edgar who is working for them as their gardener. There is instant forbidden chemistry and the two engage in an illicit affair that soon blossoms into a passionate romance that is shadowed by more than just lust -- it is the fear of getting caught, there is sexual obsession, morbid jealousy on Edgar's part and a great deal of violence ensuing. It all sounds pretty juicy and it is at times so this isn't the kind of movie you want to watch with your parents.

Marton Csokas (whom I haven't seen in much) is perfect for the role of sexy madman Edgar who is so smokin' hot with desire and jealousy that his presence is felt in scenes he isn't even in. Mackenzie shows us the allure of Edgar and make us see why Stella is so attracted to him (in spite of his violent nature) and at the same time makes us see that WE could never be attracted to him. Why not? Because it all comes down to the mental state of Stella and what she needs in her life. I thought the mental state part was handled somewhat sloppily even though we see foreshadowing events. In the end, Asylum is a well-crafted and intense thriller as it succeeds in creating a dark atmosphere throughout and it is, for the most part, well-acted by a respected cast.

7/10

Like an insidious sense of darkness creeping up from the unconscious

[Chris_Docker · 7/10 · 25 August 2005]

One of the factors that can add to the excitement and tension of the adulterous affair is the danger of being caught. Add to that, the fierce and idiosyncratic passion often attributed to artists. Then make the artist a raving psychopath and you have a pretty heady mix.

So finds the story of Asylum, Director David Mackenzie's further foray into shadowy worlds of sexual obsession, violence and madness. Stella (Natasha Richardson) is wearily married to Max (Hugh Bonneville), a psychiatrist working in a 1950s hospital for the criminally insane. He is overbearing to the point of being monstrous (by modern standards), joking to her about her being his 'pet patient' whilst expecting her to be a no-brainer wife who says the right things when introduced socially. In the initial build up, Mackenzie let's us see the smouldering lust in the face of inmate Edgar, who's incarcerated for murdering and decapitating his wife in a jealous rage. Just as he did with his previous movie, Young Adam, Mackenzie excels at portraying barely sublimated animal sensuality, which soon bursts across the screen in a way that is at once base and beautiful. Helen knows how insane Edgar is, and her feelings for him, but she is gradually drawn into his web of madness, together with her son.

Visually splendid in dank, grey tones, Asylum is an explosion of repressed sexuality that is frightening in its force and surprising in its ending. Natasha Richardson is fantastic as an ignored woman with a desire to be desired that wreaks destruction. Morbid, unsettling, erotic and deeply disturbing.

Like Betty Blue Without the comedy

[dellascott2004 · 7/10 · 9 September 2005]

This very dark film, set in England in the lae 1950's is definitely not for children since it contains some very disturbing scenes and events. Though most of it is set in a mental hospital and deals with mental illness, it is not one of those films like "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" or even "Angel Baby" that romanticizes and sentimentalizes the subject. So don't expect that. Rather it is a more realistic examination of the fine line that sometimes separates so-called normal people from the mad. But make no mistake, there is a line.

Stella Raphael(Natasha Richardson) arrives with her husband (Hugh Bonneville) and young son Charley at the hospital where he has accepted a live-in position. There are rumors that another psychiatrist, Peter Cleve(Sir Ian McKellen)may have been in line for the same position. Stella does not fit in with the other wives. She is younger, more smartly dressed(one of her hats looks for all the world like a UFO) and less traditional in every way. And the hospital culture is clearly one that expects women to keep a low profile and not make waves. Since their posh living quarters have a full-time servant, there is not a lot for her to do, but she does take up gardening, and Charley makes friends with Edgar(Marton Csokas, a trusted "pet patient" of Dr. Cleve). Stella is also drawn to the handsome and magnetic Edgar,a sculptor, despite being warned that he is there for killing his wife violently. They dance together at a staff-patient party, and soon after have a hurried coupling in the garden shed. After that, it is furtive, animalistic sex whenever and wherever they can. One day Edgar, against Stella's better judgment comes to her in her own bedroom, where he is seen by her mother-in-law, a disdainful woman who has clearly never liked her. After Edgar steals some cash from the dresser and seizes the opportunity to escape, things rapidly deteriorate in the Raphael home. There is also another shift. Stella's husband, who at first, seemed cold and repressive, almost deserving of being cuckolded, becomes more likable, and in one of the final scenes of the movie, shows that he has probably loved Stella after all. Edgar, on the other hand, reveals himself to be jealous and unpredictable at best, and at worst, violent durng a time when he and Stella attempt a beatnik life in London with another Australian artist friend of his. And what of the inscrutable Dr. Cleve? Does he really want to help patients or is he a power-hungry manipulator? One of the reasons I compared this film to Betty Blue is aprtly because of some of the disturbingly violent acts of characters, but also because it shows that survival instincts sometimes don't have anything to do with madness or sanity. Whatdoes not kill me does not necessarily make me stronger--sometimes it just makes me crazier and more self-destructive.

Martin Csokas is an actor I had never heard of before but would certainly like to see more of him.

A thunderbolt

[webmunchkyn · 6 September 2005]

Anyone calling Natasha Richardson's Stella Rafael a "sexually bored housewife" is Not Paying Attention. What happens to her and to Marton Csokas' Edgar is a thunderbolt--a life changing charge that flashes through them both and changes them forever. They have much more in common with Heathcliff and Cathy (of "Wuthering Heights") than any other lovers I've seen on screen in the 21st century: consumed, obsessed to the point of (and beyond) madness in one another, not out of selfishness but out of a cosmic passion that takes them both utterly by surprise. Certainly, Edgar is a pathologically jealous man: mad, bad and dangerous to know. But madmen can fall in love, too, and he is taken entirely unawares by his passion for the icy, closed-off Stella. What seems on the surface to be a re-enactment of "Lady Chatterly's Lover" turns into the darkest of passion plays. Neither the writer nor the director succumbed to the temptation to make this a sentimental romance or a soap opera; these are dangerous people making dangerous choices, and sometimes dangerous, even tragic mistakes. Like Heathcliff and Cathy, there is no way this story is going to have a happy ending, or these people anything but a tortured denouement. But they are fascinating to watch while they do it.

Marton Csokas absolutely burns through the screen, all fire and smoky, mad eyes to counter Richardson's ice cool yet profoundly moved Stella. Together they heat up to the boiling point and spill over into an explosive combination of lust, love, and tragedy. Ian McKellan's smirking Peter the Freudian is wonderful as the manipulative puppet-master who is not really as clever as he thinks he is. Alas, Hugh Bonneville plays Stella's husband as a one-dimensional cartoon. It's only partly his fault, the character is written that way, but he brings neither subtlety nor nuance to the role. The movie might have been better if McKellan had been cast as the husband, and Bonneville as the shrink. Neither of these characters, however, can hold the screen against the incandescent Edgar and Stella, right up to a surprising and inevitable ending. Even if you condemn them for the disaster they create, you know why they create it. Excellent and disturbing. Highly recommended.

Wild and Tragic Passion

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 11 August 2008]

In the 50's, the psychiatrist Max Raphael (Hugh Bonneville) is hired to work as superintendent of an asylum in the outskirts of London, and he moves with his wife Stella Raphael (Natasha Richardson) and their son Charlie (Gus Lewis). Stella has a passionless marriage and is ignored by Max; her boredom changes when her son befriends the handsome inmate Edgar Stark (Marton Csokas), an sculptor that in a crisis of jealousy had killed and disfigured his wife, and that is treated by Dr. Peter Cleave (Ian McKellen), an ambitious psychiatrist that aspired Max's position. During the afternoons, Stella has a hot adulterous affair with Edgar until the day he escapes and their affair is discovered. Stella has to take a decision between her family and her wild passion for Edgar.

"Asylum" is a sort of combination of "Madame Bovary" with "La Ragazza di Trieste", telling the wild and tragic passion of an ignored and bored woman and her descent into a hell life with a madman. The narrative is sexually tense, and the still sexy Natasha Richardson has a fantastic performance in the role of a woman that becomes obsessed by her destructive desire. Her chemistry with Marton Csokas is amazing, combining tension, madness and eroticism in a stylish cinematography. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Paixão Sem Limites" ("Passion Without Limits")

A good film but......

[hesketh27 · 6/10 · 13 June 2007]

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.

Much to admire, much to dislike

[El Gato-4 · 6/10 · 2 September 2005]

There is so much to admire about Asylum that I wish the movie came together better. The smoldering 50s sensuality is dead on, as are the colors used for clothing, building, etc. (although all the vehicles are a little too new). The acting is generally good all around, although a couple of moments may seem a bit forced.

But structurally, the film is a difficult sell. It seems to be a thriller, but isn't. The characters should be sympathetic. None are, and most become less so as the movie goes along. There is a formal symmetry to the proceedings, but I was left wondering if it served the material as well as some other approach might have.

Like his previous movie Young Adam, Mackenzie takes a literal approach to his adaptations - not be the best way, perhaps, to bring these types of difficult materials to the screen.

Great acting, but who wants to watch a movie like this?

[Diana_Prince · 4/10 · 9 March 2006]

The performances in this film are excellent, notably Sir Ian McKellan's, who is almost always stellar. But the entirety of this movie I thought to myself, "Why am I not turning this off?" The answer: I was morbidly fascinated. The sex scenes, though mostly clothed, were gratuitous in that it was an addiction - almost animal like because the characters were basically "shooting up." Sex to them both was a drug and they had to get their fix. As disturbing as that is, it does prove that there is such a thing as 'sex addicts.' The plot of the movie (based on the novel by Patrick McGrath) had several large holes. Too many questions that are answered too vaguely. My opinion is, if they bring something small to light in a film this complex, they need to see through. To say "phsycological thriller" is in-accurate. "Drama" is included but not the main theme. "Horror" wouldn't come close to the feelings experienced during the two hour duration. "Boredom" is well suited, but also in-accurate. The genre is basically indescribable in its...complexity? I sat through the whole film caring nothing for any of the main characters, even Peter Cleeve, played by McKellan. His character is shady but never fully explained. Is he playing Mrs. Raphael by telling her he loves her? Is he merely using her to get to the "tragic genius" of Edgar Stark? Or is he merely looking for comfort from a woman who has, by this point in the film, watched her son drown and done nothing, then been committed to the same hospital she and her husband had one day hoped to oversee? Which seems to go against the very character of "Dr. Peter Cleeve."

Even at the end of the movie when she jumps to her (very bloody and somewhat unexpected) death the 'relationship' is never fully divulged. Personally I don't want to be left with the image of a bloody woman muttering "Leave Me Alone" to a man she never loved (but agreed to marry anyway?) and the "bloody sculptor" (Edgar Stark) played - very well - by Marton Csokas)) sobbing in his solitary confinement because he never got the chance to see the woman he was obsessed with just one more time. In short, if you like the feeling of massive depression and undefinable anger at all the characters at the end of a movie, I highly recommend it.

Excellent Adaptation - A Gripping and Haunting tale of Obsessive Love

[richard-810 · 8/10 · 13 February 2006]

Very briefly, the story concerns Stella, the wife of a newly arrived deputy superintendent of a prison hospital for the criminally insane and the developing relationship that she forms with one of the trusted inmates. Nothing particularly original about a tale of doomed love - you inevitably suspect that the outcome will be disastrous, but the tale unfolds in a way that is unexpected and gripping. What makes Asylum stand out is the environment in which the tale is set and the quality of the production. I read the book on which the film is based some years ago. I often find that having read a book, a subsequent film can be a disappointment, possibly because the pictures you have formed in your mind vary from those that appear on screen. Asylum differed in this respect and I came away from the viewing haunted by what I had seen and greatly impressed with the absorbing nature of the production. For the benefit of any readers unfamiliar with the work of the author Patrick McGrath, his books often feature characters that are mentally ill. He knows the subject well as he grew up living in the grounds of Broadmoor, the English prison hospital for the criminally insane that features in this story. His father worked on the medical staff there. The film captures the claustrophobic and artificial environment of such a community and I refer to that which is experienced by the staff and their families rather than the patients. The rigid conformity and social constraints to which Stella is subject to are convincingly portrayed. The casting and acting I found pretty much faultless, not only from the big players such as Richardson and McKellen but the lesser known members of the cast excel also. Marton Csokas as Edgar, the subject of Stella's attention is particularly good. I was expecting a worthy but slightly dull 'quality' drama but I found the film unexpectedly absorbing, even though I was familiar with the story. The direction and photography should be praised also – unobtrusive but allowing the story to unfold at a swift pace so as to hold the viewers attention. Highly recommended.

Don't bother if you've read the book

[borgolarici · 6/10 · 7 April 2021]

While this movie isn't exactly bad (the acting is good and the gloomy atmosphere is intriguing), i absolutely advise people who loved the book to not watch it. It would be an underwhelming experience.

They Shouldn't Make These

[robert-temple-1 · 1/10 · 31 March 2009]

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.

Insanity

[jotix100 · 8/10 · 3 September 2005]

Patrick McGrath's novel has been faithfully translated to the screen by Patrick Marber, and directed with great care by David Mackenzie. The film's basic idea is to what extent a woman can go when falling passionately in love with a mad man. Mr. Mackenzie seems to be in complete control, as he takes us for this somewhat erotic ride to show us what makes Stella lose her mind. If you haven't seen the film, maybe you should stop reading here.

The action takes place in the England of the fifties. The look of the film fits perfectly with the story thanks to that faded photography Jules Nuttgens created for the movie. The Raphael family arrives at an insane asylum where he has been hired for an important position. As such, Max must attend to everything because he looks as though he will inherit the director's job. Stella, his wife, is another story. She is bored with the surroundings and with her marriage. There is nothing between Max and Stella in a way of passion.

When Edgar, one of the inmates that is somewhat freer around the institution, is assigned to help restore the green house that belongs to the house the Raphaels occupy, he immediately develops an attraction toward Stella. This young woman is awakened into a sexual frenzy because the way that Edgar makes her feel, something that appears is lacking in her own marriage.

The problem is compounded when Peter Cleave, the ambitious doctor who appears to have been bypassed in favor of Max, realizes what's going on between the two lovers, but it's too late for Stella to react, or change ways, she has already been smitten by something that is more powerful than her own resolve to stay away from the mad Edgar. In a way, there's a hint of homosexuality, in that Cleave might also have feelings for the insane man, but being in control, he can rein his own impulses.

Mr. Mackenzie gets excellent acting from all the principals in the film, especially Natasha Richarson, who as Stella, is perfect for this role. Ian McEwen, the distinguished English actor, makes a great Petere Cleave. The surprise of "Asylum" proves to be Marton Csokas, who plays Edgar. Hugh Bonneville, as the cuckolded husband Max, is also quite effective. Judy Parfitt, Joss Ackland and Gus Lewis are seen in supporting roles.

Mr. Mackenzie has directed with great style as he seems to understand these characters well.

Pretty Good

[missygoldstein · 6/10 · 15 August 2005]

I enjoyed this movie. I thought it was good, though not great. The plot was good, and the characters were interesting.

This was the story of a wealthy bored housewife in the fifties who meets a patient of the nearby mental hospital. He was on a sort of work/release program and his assignment was to do work on a nursery (I think that's what it was) outside of her families home. She is ahead of her time and is completely put off by being forced by her husband to play her wifely role and conform with the other stepford wives. She has her own mind and opinions. When she encounters this man he represents everything she desires; passion, desire, freedom, and a free spirit. She sees herself as sort of a prisoner, even though HE is the one who is imprisoned. Her affair with him is an expression of desire, freedom, and a chance to break out of her unhappy existence, overbearing husband, and evil mother in law. She does however have a son who she really loves.

She decides to run off to be with her lover who managed to escape from the asylum. When she learns of why her lover was institutionalized she is a little unnerved and when he starts exhibiting these reasons she is fearful, but not enough to end her obsession.

It seems that the entire affair is orchestrated by one of the doctors who is competing against her husband for the same big promotion and this lover of hers wasn't really an accident so much as he was a plant.

The story goes on and gets more complicated, and comes to a climactic ending.

All in all a story of life, love, passion, lack of passion, obsession, and how it intoxicates and can destroy you, and those around you. You saw her descent into madness illustrating how her lover became mad in the same way.

My problem with this movie is that there were several scenes within the movie that were meant to be serious, and me, and the rest of the audience in the theater where I was were laughing...hard. I don't think it was intended to be funny, but it was. Aside from this I thought it was a good film.

It coulda been a contender

[lastliberal · 5/10 · 22 August 2007]

There was so much promise in this story, but it just wasn't there. Maybe, if they had beefed up Sir Ian's role or had a husband that drew more sympathy, it could have been a great film.

As it was, it was just passable, and not worthy of a watch recommendation, even with Sir Ian in the cast. He just seemed to phone in his role. That was a shame because he could have been written as more mischievous and allowed to stretch to the capability we know he has.

Except for the utterly forgettable Maid in Manhattan, this is the first time I have seen Natasha Richardson. She did a good job in the role of a neglected housewife and pawn of Sir Ian.

This was also the first film of director David Mackenzie's that I have seen. he appears to have some promise, but he just didn't show it here.

Emotionally intense

[Gordon-11 · 5 October 2006]

This film is about the wife of a psychiatrist who falls in love with one of the patients in the psychiatric institution.

At the start, I thought that the scenes seem disjointed. The scenes were so short that it seems truncated and underdeveloped. However, as the film develops, the film no longer feels this way. Instead, this turns into an advantage because the scenes are only as long as they need to be, and hence the film is tight and intense, and things happen all the time. There is hardly room for the viewers to breathe!

This is an intense film with a lot of emotions. We get to see love, hate, jealousy and regret. Both the director and the actors capture the emotions in the most vivid manner that makes me feel for the characters.

The ending is rather unexpected, and the reaction of all the parties concerned in the film are also portrayed.

strong example of self destruction

[antoniotierno · 7/10 · 18 October 2007]

Natasha Richardson has really been superb, her performance is in my opinion the surprise of the film; not that she wasn't credited as a valid actress, but her role is played perfectly - she's also surrounded by an excellent cast - and is probably the key point to this gloomy and fascinating story. She dominates the screen by acting as a repressed English wife living in the Fifties and throwing her life out for a crazy love affair. Her personality is depicted by many mood changes and of course by a dose of madness and fits the provocative and intentionally shocking atmosphere. Sex scenes are deliberately strong, somewhat primitive, and saying th finale is disturbing is an understatement.

... missed so much more in passing

[bjarias · 7/10 · 19 May 2016]

Damaged-lonely souls crossing paths.. with neither capable of solving their individual problems, and so they must ultimately meet the same fate and ultimately crash and burn. She really did capture the screen with her incredible presence, with a timelessness that shall forever persist. Certain actors just exude that calm persona and inner and outer beauty so critical to numerous delicate roles. She was a very special individual and talent, and even if the whole world did not have the extended opportunity to share that revelation.. just watching certain of her works.. and those glimpses of wonder shine through. Forty-five when she passed away, we shall all be rediscovering her marvelous and indelible achievements for years to come.

The Thin Line That Separates The Sane With The Mad

[jcanettis · 6/10 · 19 March 2007]

The line separating the sane with the mad is very thin, and this is what "Asylum" is about: We watch the story of Stella (Richardson), the wife of psychiatrist max Raphael (Bonneville), who falls in passionate love with Edgar (Csokas), one of his patients. Her passion leads her to reckless actions in the beginning, and gradually starts to gravely impair her own clarity of mind with catastrophic consequences.

The subject of the film is quite intriguing, and the overall impression that the movie produces to the viewer is satisfactory. And yet, the film fails to get a "very good" or "excellent" grade: This has nothing to do with Mckenzies direction or the actors' performances, which are both good; the problem lies with the fact that from some point onwards the story starts to become quite implausible, thus putting the viewer off.

Of course, implausibility should generally not be a problem in itself when we are talking about a movie containing a fictional story. However, since "Asylum" aims to be a study of characters and minds, keeping the story plausible is an essential factor in having the viewer engaged. As soon as actions and events start to become outlandish, the viewer starts to disconnect. This is why the film gets a 6/10 when it had the potential for 1-2 more points.

Why could you not control yourself?

[love_ngyung · 5/10 · 8 March 2007]

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.

Compelling adaptation of Mcgrath novel

[lzvzz7 · 9/10 · 14 August 2005]

This flawed but compelling adaptation of Patrick Mcgrath's novel spins out a sterile world of which Stella Raphael(Natasha Richardson) is never a part. Enter Edgar Stark(Marton Csokas), sculptor, carpenter and inmate at an asylum for the criminally insane. Thus begins a sexual obsession that spins out of control and leaves no one untouched by its uncontrollable ferocity.

The brilliance of this film is Marton Csokas' Edger, who never lets Stella nor the audience forget his profound influence even when he is out of the scene. He paints the portrait of a darkly obsessed genius, ranging from intensely passionate to violently out of control on the turn of a moment. Pulling the viewer into his dance with the haunted Stella and the driven Dr. Peter Cleave, meticulously portrayed by the ever diverse Sir Ian McKellan, he robs us of our will to be horrified by his actions - no mean feat, and beckons the viewer to follow him too.

The one flaw in this otherwise darkly intense film is Ms. Richardson's Stella. Though she tries valiantly to create the portrait of a woman lost in the morass of doubt and fragility - a woman who would choose to stay with her abusive lover - Ms. Richardson's innate strength shines through. The viewer is led to wonder why she stays when she is clearly stronger emotionally than her dynamic partner. But stay she does until chance takes her back to her husband and son.

Scenes of violence and sexuality make Asylum a film not for everyone. The R rating is not to be taken lightly, but it is a do not miss for anyone interested in a powerfully intense film that plumbs the depths of the human psyche and establishes Mr. Csokas as a major film talent well on his way.

Interesting, but strains your credibility

[fmoramar · 6/10 · 4 September 2005]

Here's a lively intense film, beautifully acted, gorgeously shot, energetically directed, and yet the whole doesn't quite come together. It's in some senses a period piece that pretty well gets stuck in its period--England in the early 60s, when a lot of smoking and Freudian psychoanalysis were both in their heyday. There are a lot of twists and turns in this drama, each one grimmer and more outrageous than the last, but in the end what you admire are the sensitive and engaging performances of Natasha Richardson and Ian McKellen, both of whom take us into this soap opera of a drama and make us care about their characters. That's more that can be said for the screenplay which would fit comfortably on daytime TV. It's worth watching for the performances, but its not a film you'd recommend to friends.

neeewbs!

[YesYesNo · 3/10 · 20 July 2005]

Asylum is a dreadful, insulting, misogynistic affair unworthy of cable TV. Do not hesitate to avoid it at all costs, and you will be saved the nausea it induces. After a promising start with auspices of campy intrigue, it becomes apparent that the filmmakers are woefully inept and incapable of crafting characters with real, human characteristics, much less any genuine comic value. What we get are one-dimensional figures with no sense of personal dignity or free-will, making the whole thing dreadfully predictable if not always boring. The story is contrived and makes little sense. I have nothing against contrived and senseless stories when accompanied by redeeming qualities in direction or character building, but herein lies not a single grain of inventiveness. The dialog is sometimes witty, and more often sub-par, formulaic banter that advances our plot but allows no greater insights into the motivations of the characters.

By far the most annoying element is the manner in which our wife, played sufficiently by Natasha Richardson, consistently makes the stupidest decisions possible, ruining any semblance of sympathy (absolutely essential for this type of film) she might evoke from the audience, and making a mockery of the central themes and ideas of sexual obsession emerging from female sexual boredom. Imagine Bunuel's Belle de Jour being directed by some fresh-out-of-film-school, Tarantino-fan-boy hack intent on making the next juicy psychological thriller, and you have an idea of what our finished product looks like, with neither legitimate psychological elements, nor any thrills to be found.

In summary of plot: Our respectable bourgeois wife and mother of darling boy Charley falls madly in love with an ax-murdering mental hospital inmate, and devolves into something not unlike that stereotypical impulsive and insecure teenage runaway who keeps going back to her sexy and abusive boyfriend for more sex and abuse. Even if our filmmakers knew how to show the confluence of female love and self-harming obsession in an appropriate light, the premise would still be ruinously goofy. I end up wondering if the filmmakers are even trying to mold a sympathetic protagonist, or rather are out to see how dumb and stereotypical they can make the film's only notable female character. So we get a helpless slave to passions, devoid of reason and self interest, and more easily manipulated than a plastic abacus, and bravo, you make James Bond look like Douglas Sirk in its empathy for sexually 'bored' women.

Ian McKellan is in this movie too, by the way, playing a psych doctor who amusingly devolves into a completely unbelievable Hannibal Lector type engineer of social disaster, routinely treating his patients like white mice by steering them into the most unhelpful situations, like ballroom dances between fiendish wife-killers and vulnerable wives. Only in bad horror films are the circumstances and settings in which characters meet each others for moments of dramatic intensity so embarrassingly contrived and unlikely.

Any time a film brings you to the point where you hope that all the fake and disgusting characters terminate their lives in suicide, you have an indication that the film has achieved nothing of particular value for those who think movies should be about humans. Fortunately, a key character DOES commit suicide, making for a healthy round of laughs from the audience. I won't tell you who, because that would be a spoiler, but if spoiling the ending would save you the price of admission, I'd consider myself a hero.

A Gothic Romance Tale

[gradyharp · 8/10 · 19 January 2006]

Patrick McGrath's novel 'Asylum' was more a poetic elegy about thwarted love and lust than the screenplay by Patrick Marber ('Closer') addresses. The improbability of the story, when McGrath's poetic prose is extracted, surfaces and the nuances of a dark love story are lessened. Despite this the film is a worthy, strange story with a fine cast lending lustre to it.

The time is the 1950s, and the place is a mental institution in the outskirts of London where Max Raphael (Hugh Bonneville) brings his wife Stella (Natasha Richardson) and young son Charlie (Gus Lewis) to begin his tenure as a psychologist. The asylum is dark, dank, and foreboding, a place where the wives of the doctors are expected to behave and be bored at silly conclaves and teas, all lead by the director Jack (Joss Ackland) and his stuffy wife Bridie (Wanda Ventham). The sinister Dr. Peter Cleave (Ian McKellen) observes the new couple with suspicion, as they are his 'competition' in the ascendancy of director. Peter is coldly genial and concerns himself only with his 'pet patient' Edgar (Marton Csokas), a handsome but dark sculptor who is institutionalized for brutally murdering and dismembering his wife and for whom Peter appears to have a sexual attraction.

In no time Stella is bored, not even able to assist her maid Mrs. Rose (Sara Thurston) in household chores. Stella sees Edgar and an attraction is mutually palpable, and soon enough they begin acting out their frustrated prolonged lust in the greenhouse Edgar is renovating. Peter and the other staff expect the affair, but when circumstances surface Max's ready embarrassment at his wife's behavior explodes. Edgar escapes the asylum to live with his old friend Nick (Sean Harris) and before long Stella discovers his whereabouts in London and begins assignations there under the guise of shopping trips. Ultimately she responds to Edgar's demands to leave her family and live with him, all the while watching Edgar plunge into the same mental state that preceded the murder of his wife. Peter relentlessly seeks out the couple, finds them and returns Stella to her husband who has been fired from his job because of her dalliances. They move to North Wales to a meager life, Edgar follows, and before long the couple reunites with disastrous results. Stella's mind is broken and she tacitly sits and watches her son drown, and as a result she is returned to the asylum as a patient. The ending is bleak and somewhat unexpected and ties the story of love abnormally focused to a circular closure.

Filmed in atmospheric dark tones by cinematographer Giles Nuttgens the story's mood remains grim. The cast is excellent with most of the honors going to Ian McKellen in one of his usual highly nuanced performances. Natasha Richardson is believable as the tortured Stella and Hugh Bonneville is aptly cold and distant. Marton Csokas finds the dark interior of Edgar and is understandably the source of attraction for both Stella and Peter. The director David Mackenzie ('Young Adam') needed to pay more attention to the editing, a problem that makes this tale of downfall choppy and disjointed. Otherwise 'Asylum' is a suspenseful, tragic story of the asylums people create for themselves. But oh, for the poetry of Patrick McGrath... Recommended. Grady Harp

Children don't forget to collect items of interest in your jum jars

[sol-kay · 6/10 · 12 May 2007]

(There are Spoilers) Beautifully photographed in and around the English and Wales countryside "Asylum" starts off innocently enough with psychiatrist Max Rapheal, Hugh Bonneville, getting the job as deputy administrator of this Victorian era mental institution outside of London. Having his ravishingly beautiful wife Stella and 12 year-old son Charile, Natasha Richardson & Gus Lewis, come along with him Dr. Rapheal quickly rises to the top taking over the day to day operations of the institution with the chief administrator old man Jack Straffen, Joss Ackland, announcing his sudden retirement.

Everything at first goes smoothly with Max in charge even though his top medical man at the asylum Dr. Peter Cleave, Ian Mckellen, is a bit resentful of him by feeling that he's the man to run the place not Max being that he's been there your years and Max just for a few days. the bitter Dr Cleave may very well have unconsciously let things get out of hand later in the movie with Max's wife Stella and this dangerous inmate convicted wife murderer and artist Edgar Stark, Marton Csokas.

Stella feeling that her stuffed shirted and very proper, when it comes to having wild and crazy sex with her, husband Max isn't up to the job of satisfying her most deepest and sinful desires slowly gravities to the very hot for her and earthy, in the sex department, Edger. Stella's uncontrollable desires for the sexy convicted murderer leads to a number of almost unbearable, for the audience to watch without without feeling that they tuned into an X-rated skin-flick, and wild sexual encounters. This leads Stella to leave her husband and young child and shack up with the later fugitive ,from justice and the mental institution, Edger Stark in this deserted downtown London loft.

Edger now free and feeling that Stella is addicted to his both talents as an artist and animal-like magnetism begins to treats her with both contempt and insensitivity in being foolish enough to put up with him. Stella for her part takes all the punches and blows that Edger has to offer, or throw at, her but later falls for Edgers, as well as her, roommate at the loft the caring and sensitive Nick, Sean Harris, who want's to be part of a sexual acrobatic manaja twa, with him as the anchorman, with both Stella and Edger. This betrayal on Nick part leads Edgers to savagely beat him up, and then throwing Nick out of the loft altogether, together with Stella for daring to play around behind him back when he isn't looking.

It's later when Stella is rescued from Edger by the London Police that an enraged Edger becomes more and more aggressive and tracks her down all the way to this little town in Wales, where Stella was living with both Max & Charlie, only to be captured again by the Wales Police and put back in the mental institution, from where Edger escaped from, now run by Dr. Cleave. Stella meanwhile is slowly suffering from a mental breakdown that will in he end lead her to let her son Charlie drown in a nearby lake, during a school field trip, with her who's supposed to look after him just sitting there on the rocks and ignoring his cries for help, until it was to late, as he went under for the third time.

With her now being a totally destroyed woman Stella herself is institutionalized in the asylum and Stella's only hope now is to continue living is to rekindle her relationship with not her kind and caring husband Max, who had since divorced her. Meanwhile that vicious and manipulating psycho Edger Stark, who himself has been committed to the same place as Stella, has gone completely insane, or mute, in his refusing to talk or communicate with anyone there.

With Dr. Cleave pulling the stings he not only tells Stella that her lover Edger is also a patient at his institution, which was totally unprofessional for him to do, he also tells, the now very eager to meet Edger, Stella that he'll be at the annual dance sponsored by the asylum and she can be his dance partner. This was a sick and cruel lie or joke on Dr. Cleaves part that, if that's what his reason was in the first place, instead of helping Stella get over her depression it drove her over the top and lead to the tragedy that happened to her at the end of the movie.

Way different than the book.

[javiertrost · 5/10 · 29 March 2021]

My friend wanted to watch this film after reading the book. I absolutely HATED this film because I feel that they took the easy way out. The cinematography is beautiful. The acting is top notch. But when I read the book I couldn't stand Stella. She makes a lot of choices that were not shown on screen and they completely changed how she commits suicide. Stella in the novel is not a sympathetic character. Casting Natasha Richardson automatically made her a more likeable character. The tone of the story seemed to completely shift. I wouldn't watch this film again but the craftmanship of filming was good. READ THE BOOK FIRST!