Irresistible (2006)

***Contains Spoiler****My husband got this movie from our local library, and I had no idea what it was about before watching it. I didn't even read the descriptions on the DVD case. I enjoyed the movie a lot so I was surprised to find the number of negative reviews on IMDb afterward.This movie kept you guessing what is really happening and guessing the motives of each key player, all the way to the end. There are several interpretations I saw in the discussion forum, posted over the years. After reading them I came to feel that most viewers don't understand the complexity of childhood scars, of abandonment issues, and mental health in general, in order to truly appreciate this film and such stories.I find Mara cold-blooded, chilling, and calculating, but then I see that it is only proportional to the cruelty she had to endure from her childhood, revealed in the scene in the hospital. Her genuine love for her friend Kate made me not believe she had killed her, but wanting a revenge on Kate's mother Sophie for rejecting Kate, which led to her death. Imagine how you'd feel as an orphan to see that the mother is featured in magazines as 'supermom'? What hypocrisy! All the appearance of success and perfect mom contrasts sharply with what she knows, that she had not acknowledged an abandoned baby and just went on happily with her life as if it never happened. While some people think the movie should conclude when the two made up, when Sophie said she's Mara's mother and comforted her and that reconciliation saves the day, well, I'm glad it didn't end there. If it did, it'd not have the depth and complexity that made this film above cliché and predictably forgettable. While open to debate what is the right thing to do with unwanted pregnancies, I have met children who are suicidal and never felt worthy of love due to abandonment from their parents, especially their mothers. It is not always a blessing to be born just to be born. The twist at the end showing that Kate is Sophie's daughter, not Mara. I wonder why Sophie didn't ask the hospital for a DNA test to be sure. Perhaps out of guilt, she had to give in and apologize and try to make amends. Mara never claimed Sophie is her mother, Sophie did. I think Mara find it irresistible to the idea to have a mother, as her mother had already rejected her, so she went along with it. So instead of killing Sophie to avenge her best friend Kate, she will have Sophie as her mother.As for Sophie's husband Craig, who appeared to be a supportive husband turns out to be a rather typical male that has a weakness for beautiful young women and can't resist temptations. I thought he was crazy to have Mara over his house while he had Sophie away, but then no, he was not crazy, he was just making things convenient for himself, and of course, he always has excuses. What kind of husband sides with the woman that had his wife on a restraining order and invite her to his house? And asked her to pick up his children? It's as if Sophie was replaced and he's pretty dame happy helping along! This made me wonder if Sophie's father has something to do with why she married a man like Craig. Her father was the one that made her give up her first baby and moved to Australia, the shame made her keeping it a secret that she never told anyone. The open-ended ending makes me look forward to seeing a sequel. Will Sophie find out Mara is not her daughter? Will Craig confess again what he did with Mara? Will Mara succeed in cutting out Sophie's two young daughters? Will forgiveness be complete? Can trust be re-build? Can childhood scars be healed? Can innocence survive?

A minor variant on the female stalker genre of movies sees Susan Sarandon relocated to Australia (her American accent explained away with a troubled New York upbringing, which later assumes greater importance in the plot) and her happily-married with two children, successful-career existence shaken by someone out to bring it all down. Said someone turns out to a pretty young work-colleague of her husband with a young, good-looking husband and daughter of her own, so why would she go after Sarandon, if indeed she is the interloper?As is I suppose typical with this type of movie, the plotting has some convenient coincidences (Sarandon's main independent witness is a conveniently forgetful OAP) and some unlikely occurrences (Sarandon breaking into her suspected rival's house, twice, what would make a supposedly content young woman turn vengeful) does recycle some obvious genre clichés (her husband's ambivalence, a recent bereavement and pressure of work causing her to imagine things), but while the film fails to deliver any really big moments, (you never really sense that Sarandon's life is ever in real danger, a given I'd have thought in a film of this type) either revelatory or of sheer excitement, it's never less than engaging.The acting helps it along, old hands Sarandon and Sam Neill have made films like this before and know what they're doing, while Emily Blunt is okay as the avenging other woman. I was slightly thrown by the film's "in at the deep end" beginning but appreciated the change of approach and also actually enjoyed that the film was set in Australia rather than big-city USA but felt more could have been done to play up this aspect of the movie. Oh and of course there's the usual tacked-on twist at the very end although it has the effect if anything of reducing the Blunt character's motive for her actions.All in all then, this was a routine but well made psychological thriller, fine for late Saturday- night viewing.

NO SPOILERS YETSophie (Sarandon) is a children's illustrator who is married to a,architect (Neil) and together they have 2 children - Elly 7/Ruby 10. The movie takes place in Australia where everyone speaks with an Aussie accent except Sarandon who's character moved to Aus. when she was 17 with her parents from NYC (Father is Aussie, Mother was a New Yorker. Basically, they have a happy life together (although Sarandon's character is still sad about her Mother's passing) until Emily Blunt's character of Mara comes into the picture. She does Tech stuff at Sophie's husband's work and hosted a party that Sophie & her husband attended. To Sophie's surprise when she arrives, she is wearing the same dress as Mara. Mara and Sophie hit it off as Mara dances with her, drinks with her & pays her much attention. There is a flirty vibe going on initiated by Mara. Mara knows about Sophie's Mother dying & confided in her that she lost a dear friend, Kate, in a tragic fire in Kosovo when they were there doing work with the orphans. As the party winds down & Sophie gets ready to leave, another party goer confronts her with her supposed drinking problem. Apparently, there is a rumor that she drinks too much and her flirty, over the top behaviour at the party only drove that idea home. Sophie denies it and as she and her husband (Neil) leave, she notices Mara up on the balcony watching them. She finds her creepy.As the movie goes on, things turn up missing in Sophie's home. There is also a mysterious blue car parked across the street that an elderly neighbor claims she saw Sophie getting out of. Sophie becomes paranoid that someone is stealing things from her home and sets her sights on Mara who shows up at her home one day for tea wearing a dress that Sophie had noticed was missing. Sophie goes as far as to break into Mara's home, gets caught and Mara and her husband (they have a daughter too) get a restraining order against her. This doesn't stop Sophie, who has now become obsessed with the idea that Mara is out to get her, from stalking her around the town. In all the craziness, Sophie drives her husband away as she accuses him of cheating on her with Mara.There is a twist that many will see coming a mile away given a conversation out of no where between 2 main characters to set up the twist BUT there is a double twist at the end that leaves the movie flawed IMO b/c, although entertaining, the movie just doesn't live up to what it could have been. Without the final twist, everything makes sense but the last curve ball makes one question previous motives and leaves open answered questions that never get answered. I think that the movie was more into the big twist at the end than actually realizing that the twist leaves many things up in the air.. and I don't like that.7/10 only b/c the movie was entertaining, kept me guessing at the beginning and the actor was really good especially from Blunt who did a great job of coming across as normal, then broken, then crazy. It IS very flawed though.. a lot of plot holes.MAJOR SPOILERS NOW . . .Kate is, in actuality, Sophie's daughter and Mara assumed her identity (they were both orphans as kids) - I get that. However..many questions about motive and actions come into play.IF Mara wanted to get a mother and a family, why did she spend a good portion of the film trying to destroy and then kill Sophie? If the movie had left it at Mara felt rejected b/c she was the daughter it would have all made sense but they did not.Also.. one has to wonder.. she tried to kill Sophie with fire, did she kill Kate?Here is my conclusion since the movie is a mess in that sense - Mara did NOT kill Kate. If she had killed Kate to assume her identity, then again, she wouldn't have been so enraged at Sophie and tried to kill her if she wanted to come to town and pretend to be her daughter and get the love she wanted.I think that Kate died in a tragic fire and Mara lost her best friend. She took that anger out on Sophie who had abandoned Kate and wanted to ruin her life. She tried to kill her with fire to try and make her feel the pain that Kate had felt. In the end, Sophie mistakenly assumed that Mara was her daughter and Mara couldn't resist the chance to have a real family - she found it Irresistible.The Dear Mara letter from the adoption agency I think was real and it was her real Mother rejecting her which possible was the catalyst that set Mara off.. that combined with Kate's death.The family photos she stole and labeled as her family was Mara holding Kate to her 'we share everything' comment. She wanted her family, she wanted her sisters to be her sisters.. she just wanted Sophie, the woman who had rejected Kate, to not be part of the equation.Is this accurate? Who knows.. the movie ends with the big twist that Kate is the daughter and Mara is an imposter and then nothing.. and it makes one question the motives and actions of Mara and Kate's horrible fate. There are no answers in the actual movie unfortunately..

...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.