SHUTTER ISLAND (Martin Scorsese, 2010)

Ahhh... let me take a minute to soak in the first review to hit this blog EVER....

Alright, now let's get down to business. It's been over three years since the master Martin Scorsese brought us one of his flicks (with the exception of the Rolling Stones' concert film Shine A Light), and that last film was that one movie that won a couple Oscars... remember that one? The one with all the badass Boston accents and I'm pretty sure starred Leo DiCaprio?

I'm pretty sure it was called... The Departed?

Okay, okay, I'm pullin' your chain, of course it was the Best Picture winning, totally enamoring, sweeping crime epic The Departed. It'll be hard even for Scorsese to follow that one up. And does he do it with Shutter Island?

Ehhh... not really. The movie concerns Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo), two federal marshals from Beantown who go to the remote Shutter Island, which houses an institution for the criminally insane, to investigate the disappearance of inmate Rachel Solando (Emily Mortimer). Once Daniels and Aule start investigating the case, things continue to not appear what they seem, especially from the shady guy who runs the joint, Dr. Cawley (Ben Kingsley). To top it all off, Daniels is haunted by visions of his deceased wife and images of the Dachau concentration camp liberation, which he was a part of.

Now, it's really hard to critique and criticize the film without giving away the twist ending, but I'll do my best.

While the film is certainly a step up from most of the horror/suspense/thrillers out there, due to it's pedigreed cast which also includes Patricia Clarkson, Michelle Williams, and the incomparable Max von Sydow, I still didn't have that connection with the film that I expected to have. While it did hold my interest for the entirety of its 2 hour, 18 minute running time, it didn't blow me away or stir me like Scorsese has in the past.

Which brings me to my next point: I feel like the movie would have been the same movie if someone who wasn't Scorsese directed it. Scorsese as a director could imply that the movie would stand a head higher then the rest, but, alas, it almost doesn't. And I think if Scorsese wasn't the director, he wouldn't have attracted a top tier talented cast like this. With that being said, there still are some Scorsese trademarks which I welcomed with open arms and a warm heart, kinda like when I look at a picture of too-cute-for-school Amy Adams (alright, enough about that). The virtuoso camera movements, the jarring editing, and the spirit of the cinema of old are all present here. This movie has a wealth of Hitchcockian references, and a very '50's pulpy feel, which I enjoyed very much.

As for the cast, there really isn't any standout except for Gandhi himself, Mr. Ben Kingsley, who looked like he was having a blast playing the creepy Dr. Cawley. DiCaprio is effective when he's losing his mind, and the rest of the cast seems to just be along for the ride, though there's nothing bad about that.

I could also complain about the almost overwhelming amount of backstory to this one character of Teddy Daniels, but it all ties together in the end. However I still think some of it could have been cut out, and I think Scorsese should have been aware of what to cut and what not to cut. Some of it is just completely unnecessary.

The movie does have its moments, and I thought the soundtrack was a nice touch. And now, for the...

BOTTOM LINE: If you're an avid movie lover and geek, this is not to be missed. If you're the casual moviegoer looking for a flick to catch, then check this out, love it or hate it. It does have that polarizing effect.