User reviews

I will confess that I have never read the Stephen King novel on which this movie is based. Maybe the end is a bit clearer in the novel, but the ending of the movie really kind of left me a bit empty. I was really enjoying this movie up to that last ten minutes or so. I can't say that I had been particularly familiar with Carla Gugino, who played Jessie in this, but I thought her performance was fabulous. The story begins with Jessie and her husband Gerald (Bruce Greenwood) taking a vacation in a remote place in the hopes of resparking their marriage, which had gone dry romantically and sexually. To do that, Gerald had brought handcuffs and handcuffed Jessie to the bed. To that point this really had something of a "dark comedy" feel to it; it was humourous in a warped sort of way. But it doesn't stay that way for very long. Jessie wasn't enthusiastic about Gerald's handcuff game, or the rape scenario that he wanted to play out with them, and she eventually objected, leading to a fight between them - during which Gerald dropped dead of a heart attack with Jessie still chained to the bed. Alone, with no one to help her, no food, a hungry dog that had found its way into the house and was feeding on Gerald's body and only a single glass of water, she has to find a way to survive. The movie eventually becomes a journey of self-discovery for Jessie as she finds herself exploring the demons in her own past back to her childhood and her relationship with her father and how they connect with the present.

This is really well done, and it includes a few scenes that are absolutely cringe-worthy. I actually had to turn away from the screen a couple of times. But personally I just thought this fell apart a bit with the ending. I didn't like the "Moonlight Man." I didn't think the "Moonlight Man" was really necessary to the story. The dog and just the situation seemed quite sufficient to make this a thoroughly superb horror movie and, to me at least, the "Moonlight Man" took a horror movie and turned it into something silly - although that was only in the last ten minutes or so of the movie. I will say that this definitely has a Stephen King feel to it, and up to that last ten minutes I would have said this was superb. But when an ending leaves me dry I end up having to mark it down just a little bit. (7/10)

Stephen King is at times a brilliant writer, and most of his novels give a home-bred 70's vibe. There's the presence of raw indecency and rotten attachments right beside the gore, and this movie is very good at portraying that.

I started watching this movie expecting to get bored at some point, because Gerald's Game is an odd pick of a novel to make into a film. A lot of the story revolves around the heroine spending hours alone and restricted. In a book, the writer has the freedom to play around with memories and weave them into the present, but was the director going to be able to do that?

The answer is, yes, he is, and he does that very well. Kudos to a thoroughly entertaining experience, whether it was the 80's gore effects, the commendable acting of Mr. and Mrs. Gerald, or the shifts from almost comedic to certainly nauseating scenes.

The only thing that bothered me was that the cinematography was a bit dated, and nothing creative. But it doesn't mean that this movie is not worth the watch, and it will be even more enjoyable if you haven't read the book!

The second I saw the trailer for this movie it grabbed my attention purely because I wondered how the hell a 1 hour 43 minute movie could built upon the premise of a woman being handcuffed to a bed. But Gerald's Game proved me wrong.

There are so many hidden aspects of this movie that you just don't expect. Carla Gugino's performance as the main character, Jessie, is fantastic and she manages to carry the movie practically all by herself. Jessie's character is slowly dissected throughout and it's living through her struggles - past and present - that keeps you hooked and wanting to watch more.

The relationship between Jessie and her husband Gerald is authentic and believable. Even the character of Gerald (played by Bruce Greenwood), who was in the movie for a very short period of time, brought an element of fear and tension to the movie, when his sexual preferences suggest there may be a more sinister side to him.

Admittedly, it is slow in parts and there are areas where it starts to drag, but ultimately it's an engaging movie throughout. By delving into Jessie's psyche it has you doubt her mental state and what is real and what isn't, but also allows viewers to form a connection with her and sympathise with her as a character.

The ending has a twist that I didn't see coming, which I'm still unsure about. Was it genius or was it silly? I'll let you be the judge of that. Personally, I found it interesting although it didn't necessarily fit right with the rest of the movie.

The only reason this gets 7 stars is because of the slow pacing in places, lack of build-up and slightly unsatisfying ending.

Masterpiece. The last ten minutes were brilliantly executed. This director's work is definitely on par with Frank Darabont's movies. Every sequences of the novel is present in the movie. Acting is delivered at its finest. Netflix need more Stephen King adaptations like this one. A must watch for everyone.

-Dude from Blossomsoft

Ten out of ten. Other viewers can complain all they want about this film being 'tedious' or 'bland', or slightly missing the mark or opportunity, but I strongly disagree. Makes me wonder if they got the true point of the novel, even. Stephen King is NOT a horror writer, so much as he is a writer of characters and extraordinary events that they go through, and most importantly, he writes about the deep emotional experiences that people endure in their lifetimes here on this earth. He tends to throw in dark elements, to be certain, and some of those are downright creepy, frightening, or straight-up horrific; this does not make him a horror writer. And anyone expecting a horror film here will subsequently be disappointed and, I guess, apparently bored. I was not bored, I was riveted the entire time. It's not easy to do what Mike Flanagan does with this adaptation. He nails the mental struggles and fractured psyche of the main character, Jessie, under the strain of what she faces. He also delivers on the heart of King's story, which isn't the present situation she finds herself in as an adult, but rather, dealing with secrets and ghosts from her past that have haunted her all her life, without her truly even knowing 'til her current situation arises. It's a beautiful novel of pain, suffering, secrets, abuse (on multiple levels, by multiple people), and the struggle to not just survive, but also heal and thrive, if possible. Flanagan's film captures the heart of King's story, and it is beautifully rendered, and many scenes are equally visually stunning. I cried at the end of the movie. Bruce Greenwood and Carla Gugino turn in excellent performances, among the best I've seen from both of them. Henry Thomas is equally and fittingly gross. Very well done. Even younger Jessie, played by Chiara Aurelia, was exacted with nuanced grace and heartbreak. This is just a terrific movie. And I find every scene featuring Carel Struycken to be extremely creepy, so I'm not certain how other reviewers find this movie lacking in creep value. I just can't disagree more. I love this movie, it's instantly and already in my top fifteen, maybe even my top ten favorite films of all time. Well done. I'll be watching this one more than once.

This film tells the story of a woman who must break free from her shackles in order to stay alive, after her husband dies unexpectedly.

The story wastes no time and gets right into the juice very soon after it starts. I did wonder how they are going to fill the rest of the film, and it turns out there are a lot of subplots that are scary, thrilling and heartbreaking. It is an intense film that unnerves and unsettles viewers.

I quite admittedly avoided this one for a bit because I thought it would have to be masterfully finessed to keep this storyline contained in a single room while keeping my attention. I was not wrong... they just did in fact do it exceptionally well.

This movie is engrossing and atmospheric, throwing you head first into her mental and physical struggles. They do a great job of making you feel like you are, in part, experiencing it first hand. This is done with its clever editing along with the high caliber of acting. Both main characters did an exceptional job, truly. Especially the wife, high emotionally intensified scenes are not easy and she did them at great length and with prowess.

I would say my biggest gripe with this was the ending. It felt very "adapted from a book". It went from a storyline within action, to a spoon fed monologue narrating the aftermath for quite sometime in fact. I didn't dislike the way it actually ended, just the way it was executed. Overall this felt like something quite original and different, would recommend.

Extremely and unnecessarily stretched movie that has a storyline of not more than 30mins.

A woman trapped by a sadistic husband has to rely on unexplored strengths that emerge in a life threatening situation. This is not really a horror movie, although it's scary enough. Based on a Stephen King novel. I won't reveal how this plays out, but I felt it went off track at the end. Carla Gugino is great, and deserves a lot of credit for making the script work. It's a very small cast of characters, but she really stands out in the way she manages the changes her character goes through. I think I'd like to read the book now.

"Hey Siri, call Brother". Then everything could be settled. That's another example that smartphone can kill a survival movie.

Gerald's Game intrigued me with its premise, but it fell somewhat short of my expectations. While it had its moments, the overall execution, mainly towards the end, left me with mixed feelings.

The film starts with a promising setup, immersing us in a tense and unsettling situation. It explores themes of survival and psychological struggle in a confined space, which initially captured my interest. The lead actress delivered a strong performance, effectively conveying the emotional turmoil of her character. I enjoyed the "hallucination" concept which felt unique.

However, I found myself wanting more depth and exploration of the psychological aspects. While there were certainly intense moments, the narrative seemed to lose some of its momentum towards the end. The pacing faltered in that time period. The "Moonlight Man" could've been utilised more effectively.

On the positive side, the film did a commendable job of translating the source material onto the screen, capturing the suspense effectively. The cinematography and sound design contributed to the unsettling atmosphere, heightening the tension in certain sequences.

While Gerald's Game held my attention and offered some thought-provoking moments, it ultimately didn't fully satisfy my expectations. I appreciate its attempt, but I felt there was room for further refinement.

In conclusion, would I watch it a second time? Yes. Would I recommend you to watch it for the first time? Yes.

Do NOT watch the trailer. It basically gives away some of the best parts of the film and would spoil their impact.

It was darker than I expected, but in a good way. Great cast all round, especially Carla Gugino, and a really well-paced, well thought out story. I haven't read any negative reviews on here but I am surprised it's not higher rated on IMDB. Might have contributed to why I waited so long to watch it, and I wish I hadn't.

*Mild spoilers ahead if you like to know a bit about what you're in for....*

Remarkably similar to 127 hours. Even the escape is just as gruesome, so if you're squeamish be prepared to look away.

It's a happy / satisfying ending thank goodness, which I wasn't really expecting but was very grateful for.

I only wish there hadn't been so many flashbacks. I would have preferred more real time storytelling from Jess to keep the audience focussed in the room. And the eclipse thing was a bit overdone.

I watched this movie because I was looking for recent, highly-rated horror movies on IMDb. I felt pretty misled by the rating which was 6.9 at the time of watching.

The premise of the movie stoked my curiosity. I wondered how a woman being handcuffed to a bed could play out in a movie-length production since there didn't seem to be much to go on. Well, it's even more boring than you would expect.

Don't get me wrong, the acting is not bad and the cinematography was a bit above-average as well. However, the story and dialogue dragged on horribly.

At first, watching the interaction between the older couple feels incredibly awkward--and this is good because I think the film is intended to provoke this feeling. It's as if you are invited over to an older couple's house and they break out into an hour-long passive-aggressive fight in your presence. But it just doesn't stop. The characters make obviously stupid mistakes both in their relationship and in their kink-play. Since they make such stupid mistakes it is incredibly hard to relate to them or care about them.

I kept waiting and waiting for something interesting to happen only to find that there was no pay-off. Avoid this movie if you are a horror fan looking for something scary or exciting. This movie is entirely a drama with some dark elements so maybe watch it if you are more geared towards that genre.

Carla Gugino puts in an absolutely stunning turn here. And Flanagan as director creates quiet magic fully utilising the power of metaphor to communicate his themes.

I don't read Stephen King, and to evaluate the movie that's not really necessary. Novels are one medium and movies are another.

And this is a movie's movie. Because it practises the Kurosawa principle that a film as a multimodal medium is best when it balances all the media at its disposal.

And Flanagan has managed to do just that. But just to illustrate: The central imagery of the solar eclipse occurring on the screen at crucial points in the central character's development, until her final liberation from the abuse by the males in her life coincides with the end of the eclipse and return to normal light, is brilliantly used to provide narrative, dramatic and psychological cohesion. I hate flashbacks, but the eclipse metaphor makes the ones used here flow so seamlessly, they don't feel like flashbacks.

The visuals with the darkness of the house, the eerie red glow of eclipse totality and the final daylight that prevails create hugely appropriate atmospherics and mood, which perfectly match the central character's journey.

Many other elements work just as well, but suffice it to say that the device of characters coming out of themselves and addressing themselves is another brilliant technique as the central character explores and questions her existence and essence as a woman.

For this is not a movie about marriage and its woes, it's about the fate of women in their relationships to all the men in their lives: fathers, husbands and scary gargoyles of the imagination, all of whom turn out to be real and to have done real damage to the heroine.

But only as long as she lets them. Her strength and persistence triumph in the end, and the said males recede into the background impotent and unable to scare her any more. She truly cuts them down to size.

There's more authentic "feminism" in this movie than all of the "me too" and women's liberation movements combined. The power of art when it's not pretentious.

Carla Gugino could teach the Streeps of this world what acting can be. She is just a powerhouse, given she's in every frame and carries the entire movie.

Don't we just love to be so beautifully surprised by some Netflix productions? The end of big Hollywood studio productions? Good riddance and RIP. There's a new paradigm in town with streaming companies and some of the goodies they deliver are so fabulous, they make old Hollywood with its male tyrant directors sound like amateur hour.

An absolutely mesmerising flick, Bravo Miss Gugino, Bravo Mr Flanagan, and twice Bravo Netflix.

Wasn't sure what to rate this movie, I had so many mixed emotions. I wanted to like it much more than I actually did. The premise, the reviews and the beginning of the movie all gave me high hopes that unfortunately deflated the longer the movie went on. By the end, it felt like a complete dumpster fire. The ending was the worst ending I've seen in a movie in a long time, and it destroyed a lot of what was enjoyable in the film. I know everyone is praising the actors performances, especially the main actress, but it did nothing for me. That being said, I do still enjoy what this movie was trying to be and I felt like like it had so much potential, which is what makes it even all the more disappointing. It did manage to get under my skin on a couple of occasions so at least it was successful in that department I guess. Maybe I'll have Moreno appreciation for the movie if I read the book and rewatch it.

After an attempt to reignite the passion in their marriage goes awry, Jessie is left handcuffed to a bed in a secluded house with her husband, Gerald, dead. Not only must she break free from her shackles but she must avoid being killed by a wild dog that figures that Jessie is on the menu. Then she starts to hallucinate and reminisce.

Based on a Stephen King, the movie contains many horror elements as well as human drama and survival drama elements. The survival drama is reasonably interesting, and is the best part of the film. However, it is not substantial enough to be able to make up the entire movie, hence the need for the human drama side, and the horror side, to a lesser degree.

The human drama feels overwrought and often like padding, which, from my previous comment, it is. The horror elements are a bit confusing as they are often products of Jessie's mind, but one part then isn't. This also makes the conclusion quite odd, as it seems to come out of nowhere.

Overall: watchable, but only just, and only for the survival-based intrigue.

Stephen King's work has been subject to both ups and downs in the celluloid, some such as 'Green Mile', 'The Shawshank Redemption', and 'The Mist' have been powerfully triumphant, some have been swarmed with the "meh" factor, then others such as 'Dreamcatcher', 'Cell', and 'The Longliers' have been severely loathed. Now we have Mike Flanagan, director of 'Oculus', 'Hush', and 'Ouija: Origins of Evil', coming into to bring another adaptation of Stephen King's novel of the same name Gerald's Game. Premiering on Netflix, this film straps audiences in another ride of King's twisted horror methodology with hair-raising twists and thrills to ignite of shivering atmosphere that challenges viewers' expectations nearly every step of the way. When it comes to providing solid scares and nightmare-inducing aesthetics, the results are moderately satisfying with a few attempts that fall flat and an questionable ending. But with Flanagan working behind the wheel, it is safe to say his effort do justice to King's work. So the film is about Jessie (played by Carla Gugino) who takes some time off an spend a weekend with her husband Gerald (played by Bruce Greenwood) at a lake house in attempt to mend their fractured relationship. Upon arriving, Gerald treats Jessie to a kinky sex game involving him handcuffing her to the bed. When he suddenly suffers a fatal heart attack, Jessie is left handcuffed in the bed with no food, water, or anyone in contact to help free her. As the sun goes down, Jessie experiences some supernatural events that lead her into some dark secrets from her past about her father (played by Henry Thomas).

The film does not pine as your average survival tale, it is a supernatural one that takes a hostage situation and spins it with a Twilight Zone-esque twist. Mike Flanagan holds a solid patent for splashing viewers with cutting-edge thrills and wringing out surprises from supernatural concepts. His efforts pay off to the events that sketch out how a woman fights for survival when her husband's kinky antics are disrupted by an unforeseen tragedy. The execution in which Flanagan operates not only give both Carla Gugino and Bruce Greenwood the task of taking on challenging roles, but pay satisfying results to a hair-raising experience that dares to leave questioning every step. When Greenwood bites the bullet, Gugino is pulled into a deeply unsettling world where reality and imagination begin to merge, and the haunting horrors of her past are brought to light. That is when the story explores her past relationship with her father who had a morally despicable conduct, and the scares and thrills tautly dominate the atmosphere before taking horrifically gruesome turn that demands the squeamish to turn their heads. Not all the scares land well and some of the thrills fall short of effectiveness. But one major aspect that never fall short of such is the performance by Carla Gugino who packs pure grit for a role that requires her to carry nearly the entire portion of screen time while left stationary to a confined setting. Henry Thomas does a fair job at gripping us with discomfort as does Bruce Greenwood in his oddly dubious role. Every scene with these two present is bound to tie viewers up for one hell of a chilling position. If you are leaning at the edge of your seat with your hands squeezing the sides, you know each of them are getting the job done.

Gerald's Game is an engrossing experience lodged with sheer cutting- edge twists and chilling scares to keep things in rolling in spectacular fashion. It is a film worth indulging in when craving for chilling Stephen King-style scares, but don't expect anything groundbreaking. Going in with a heavy wish list will likely lead to some disappointment if not more.