Good movie but grossly overrated

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

I read the book years ago. I recently heard that it was made into a movie and felt that I HAD to see it. I re-read the book (in 2 days) and watched the movie the following day so that all the details were fresh in my head.The movie is similar to the book but not enough like it. In the book she had 3 kids, and put her family above all, whereas in the Movie she only had 2 children which she neglected regularly. And her business did NOT struggle in the book, when she did go through hard time, she always appointed someone to handle things. She mentioned several times in the book how she needed to go home and cook dinner for her family, but in the movie she couldn't even make it to sports games?? They also skipped all the drama with her lovers ex girlfriend and what happened to her romantic fling with the female. They also completely eliminated their entire childhood story which was like 10 chapters in the book. Their childhood was part of what makes you fall in love with the characters.In addition, her Best Friend Brina was a Train Wreck in the book but was holding her down in the Movie and you couldn't really tell that she was her Best friend. We only know that because Brina stated it in conversation. They never did anything together in the movie. With that being said, there was No Brina Drama either. And for ANYONE who read the book, you know that is a big deal.The last thing I will say is that, in the movie they turned her into a scared women. In the book she was so edgy and ready to (smack a hoe), at the drop of a dime. She had one heck of a temper in the book. Yelp, not in the movie.All in All, I hated the movie because I know what it SHOULD have been like. If I had not read the book than I guess it would have been OK (6/10), but still not great.

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.

Addicted is essentially an uneven facade that in one instance, poses as softcore porn and in another instance, becomes a documented, public service announcement for sex addiction. It's a slick, trashy, yet mildly entertaining soap opera of a movie that unbeknownst to me, goes completely off the rails in its final half hour.Directed by the guy who made Honey (2003) and Beauty Shop (2005) and based on a best selling novel of the same name, Addicted is like a carbon copy of 2002's Unfaithful. But where Unfaithful had a murder and a sored cover-up to that murder, this limited October release has a silly, kill-free twist at the end (I'm not gonna count a failed suicide as murder in case you're keeping score). It also has many more love scenes in it than Unfaithful not to mention a main character that ends up having more than just one affair.The story begins with stunning, happily married businesswoman Zoe Reynard (played by Sharon Leal). She has the perfect life. She has two great kids, a husband who thinks the world of her, a loving, caring mother who lives with her (and is quite tolerable), and a beautiful home via the outskirts of Atlanta, GA. But wait a minute, her perfect husband isn't fulfilling her everyday needs (sexually that is). He's never around and is always working. Her solution: have a series of romantic trysts with a well revered painter (Quinton Canosa played by William Levy) and a womanizing club hopper (Corey played with minimal dialogue by Tyson Beckford). This leads to her addiction by which she literally ruins her career, fractures her family values, is forced to see a shrink, and decides in anguish, to (spoiler alert) commit freeway suicide. As mentioned earlier, Addicted walks a fine line between glamorizing sexuality and reiterating a certain sickness. As a result, the proceedings are choppy and disjointed despite a surprisingly good level of unpredictability.Really in truth, this vehicle is almost saved by Sharon Leal. She gives a solid, realistically grim performance in the lead role as Addicted's disturbed test subject. As for the rest of the cast, they are comprised of mostly good looking people who's acting is not as seething or as sharp. In conclusion, this is a poster child for the effects of sex addiction and to be honest, it's not really about infidelity. Addicted in its 106 minute running time, makes two mistakes: it turns a character (Levy's Canosa) who doesn't really seem menacing enough, and makes him psychotic. The second mistake is that this thing climbs too close to becoming a therapeutic healing session for a specific audience (people that go to support groups for sex addiction or don't bother to get help at all for said addiction). And as the plot thickens, it feels less like an actual film going experience and more like a hidden cry for help. Bottom line: Addicted as a drama/thriller, may offer a certain kind of appeal. But for me, it just wasn't that "addicting".

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.