Sexyloutak
Absolutely the worst movie.
Kien Navarro
Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.
Quiet Muffin
This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.
Gordon-11
This film is about an accomplished cartoonist who is convinced that someone breaks into her house repeatedly. Her sanity is quickly being put into question.I expected "Irresistible" to be substandard as it was straight to video. After watching it, I was left to question why this gem was not released in the cinemas. Susan Sarandon puts on a great performance as a woman under great pressure, experiencing unusual events in her home. The plot is well written, and the story is very well told. Sometimes evidence points one way and sometimes the other way. It quickly makes you wonder whether strange things really happened. Soon, it makes you question whether Sophie is sane or not. It's intense, engaging and suspenseful. It makes you doubt what seems to be the truth, so that you just don't know what or who to believe. Such great story telling makes "Irresistible" a great psychological drama.
MBunge
There are two things that will be clear to you after watching this film.1. Writer/Director Ann Turner can't recognize a good story when it's staring her in the face.2. Susan Sarandon has a tremendous rack.Sophie (Susan Sarandon) is an American expatriate who was brought to Australia by her father when she was just a teenager. Now fully into her middle ages, Sophie is an artist and book illustrator. She's married to Craig (Sam Neill), a successful architect, and has two lovely young daughters named Elly (Joanna Hunt-Prokhovnik) and Ruby (Lauren Mikkor). Sophie's mother recently passed away and she's also struggling with a new project, drawing a memory of sorrow and pain from her past for a new book featuring the work of many artists. Already emotionally unsettled, Sophie notices things going missing and other strange things happening in her home. Eventually, she begins to suspect that Mara (Emily Blunt), the new IT person at Craig's office, is breaking into her home and playing some sort of sinister game with Sophie's family. Now, you may think an IT person who looks like Emily Blunt is more unrealistic than a flying car named Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, but that's not the silliest thing you'll see in this film.As Sophie becomes more and more paranoid, she starts following Mara around. She even sneaks into Mara's home and gets caught. That leads to a restraining order against Sophie as even her husband thinks she's losing her marbles. Sophie's behavior becomes more erratic and more extreme, until she's only allowed to have supervised visits with Ruby and Elly. T hen there's a scene where Sophie's dark and painful memory is revealed and that's when the movie gets a lobotomy. After that scene, there's no more mystery or suspense of tension in the story. You know exactly what's going to happen and how the movie is going to end (Hint, Mara is playing a sinister game). There's a fight in a basement that's straight out of Melrose Place. There's a climax that makes no sense, a heartfelt reunion after that which actually makes negative sense and then a twist ending that is laughably stupid.It's too bad this film finishes so poorly, because the first half of it or so verges on being genuinely engrossing. When the story really seems to be about a woman who is emotionally breaking down, haunted by something from her past and losing her grip under the stress of remembering it, Irresistible is fairly good. As Sophie starts to unravel, Sarandon gives us a feminine version of what Michael Douglas did in Falling Down. She shows us a normal woman slowly crumbling under pressure. And if all of her fears and suspicions had turned out to just be in Sophie's head, this might have turned out to be a very good movie. Instead it degenerates into a below average, "woman in peril" Lifetime flick. If Mara's sinister game had just been a figment of Sophie's imagination, then none of Sophie's paranoid observations need to make any sense. But when those suspicions are confirmed, you can't help but recognize that a bunch of stuff that happens in the story is impossible and/or ridiculous.Even as the film heads south, though, Sarandon's bosom remains spectacular. I t may remain covered for the entire movie, but there are still some scenes where her breasts almost qualify as supporting characters. This may be the best performance by clothed boobs in cinematic history. They are that damn impressive.Irresistible is more frustrating than your run of the mill bad movie. It teases you for quite a while with the suggestion you're going to watch something worthwhile, and then smashes those hopes like a hot girl crushing a nerd's dreams on prom night. If Sarandon had actually unleashed her blouse puppies, that might have been forgivable. She didn't, though, so it's not.
MrGKB
...but can't be faulted for trying hard. Too hard, unfortunately. Writer/director Ann Turner strives to build tension, but loses focus as the script distracts the audience with too much belaboring of incidents to maintain any real dramatic momentum. It's also difficult to accept sexagenarian Susan Sarandon as a woman in her early forties. Yes, she's always held her age well, but c'mon. Still, fans of her work will enjoy what she gives them here, even as they groan at times. Sam Neill does his dutiful best as the husband bewildered by his wife's odd behavior, but his character comes totally unraveled in a third act seduction. Speaking of which, although decently filmed in the beautiful environs of Melbourne, Australia, "Irresistible" descends into formulaic schlock in its final act, and loses whatever good will the audience had for it at that point. The twist ending only makes you wonder how clever little Mara (played with all the appropriate do-ability necessary by tyro starlet, Emily "The Devil Wears Prada" Blunt) got the job with the hubby's firm in the first place, and the too-long-by-half second twist ending is out of place. Regrettably mistitled, "Irresistible" simply isn't.
caa821
I noticed this listed in the TV section of the Sunday newspaper, and with its stars, and 2006 release date, assumed I'd missed it last year when it must have played theaters here, and I was out of the country for an extended period.I also glanced at a few of this site's first few comments, and just encountered some highly-enthusiastic ones. Didn't have time to look at others, and then tonight tuned it in.What a piece of nonsense - and I wish I had read some of the later comments. Can see why it went "straight to video." And as I read some of the later comments here during the earlier part of the flick, I must admit, though, I got somewhat fascinated by its awfulness.Some movies are so "bad," they're almost fascinatingly "good." This wasn't one. The word DULL describes every aspect of the movie: the writing; the acting; the dimension (i.e. lack thereof) of the characters.The little girls were cute and totally "cardboard" additions to the cast. Sam Neill looked like he needed a gallon of coffee, strong enough to provide a caffeine high, with a half-bottle of uppers dissolved in the brew. Susan Sarandon has proved herself a real pro at schlepping around in some of her past performances, but positively outdid herself here. The new, young ingénue, whom others here have praised, was only a bit less wooden than Sam, and did her share of schlepping as well.I really had trouble even relating (much less caring) as to just what in the hell Susan was doing in her work. As an architect, it would seem that Sam, with his level of energy, would probably take a year to design a chicken coop.And the ending's "big twist" (after a previous twist), was slightly confusing, too brief and undramatic, and by then, who in the hell would care anyway?
