User Reviews

Every review posted here is right, but they're also missing out on some of the best parts of this movie.

Yes, the acting is BAD. The green screen is BAD. The movie is BAD. The sex scenes - gay and straight - are BAD.

But there's some hilarious content. Like, every time the leading lady gets a secret text message from her illicit lover, his name is displayed in a font that takes up at least a third of her screen. Like, why is it so big?! And how does no one see who she's texting?

The music sounds like the soundtrack to The Room. Indeed, the acting and script seem inspired by The Room as well. But if this movie tried to be The Room, it failed.

I'm also sad no one mentioned the church sex scene, the baby murder, or the skateboarding scenes. What 30-something woman isn't insanely turned on by a grown man on a skateboard?

Give it a watch and have a lot of booze on hand. Even if you only drink everytime they mention blowjobs, you'll have a solid buzz.

As I was waiting for another film to come on TV suddenly this title popped in and I was like why not give it a try. I've got on board without knowing the story, let it all happen before me but a few names there made me more interested in seeing this: director Roland Joffé ("The Mission"), writer Nicholas Kazan ("Reversal of Fortune"), and Emilie de Ravin ("LOST"). Since it was a surprise movie it wasn't like back in my younger days when I could create expectations (good or bad). Word of advice I can provide you to avoid embarassment or pure disappointment is don't bother watching. It's a mountain of cliches after cliches, typical from softcore movies - and trust me, there are better are out there and I'm not talking about the sex scenes, the plot of those movies are truly constructed without loose ends.

A clunker of a movie where infidelity and money are the name of the game; Emilie plays a lovely wife married to a rich man who just makes a new insurance policy (you know where this is going) and a third part arrives to stir things up, which is the insurance guy, a hot young guy (Leo Howard) and it's love at first sight. That first meeting is unbelievable, with this guy being really intrusive about the couple's marriage and we're just following to see how the sparks of excitment fly high between the hot couple. By now you can figure out he's a con-artist, someone will get killed and money will be the main treasure hunt. Here's a movie too obvious for its own sake, it's cheap suspense for beginners who haven't seen enough movies in life. My sixth sense for movies was right all along that a cheap thrill would be the final result but this wreck was predictable for 90% of the time; the little plot twists concerning the husband and the insurance hunk were made this worth watching.

What can be learned from "Scorned"? Everything is really about money and looks. Well, as for the latter it seems odd that successful people at their jobs and have amazing sculptural bodies, society's definition of success, are so miserable - heart matters are always secondary. But outside of the story, it's really all about money and it applies to everyone involved - TV movies don't pay that much but they pay and people gotta survive (though not on other's suffering eg we, in the audience). In the words of director Michael Cimino, it comes a down time in your career when you don't do what you want but you do the best that is available. Mr. Joffe was a great film director but ever since the 1990's he went from satisfying good films to messy things (something happened on that "Super Mario Bros" set that not only got him fired but practically banished from Hollywood). I don't blame him entirely because he had a good cast in spite of everything.

On the other hand, the once-talented Nicholas Kazan as a writer here was a huge disappointment. Scripts can't survive solely on plot twists and thrilling scenes; gotta show us the drama, gotta make us care. All of the characters are fake, deplorable and easily seduced; and the actors though doing a nice job (some of them) they were given laughable dialogues, awkward moments and not much to work around. I was like "What happened, man? You were a good storyteller."

The guilty pleasure was the leading man, an excellent choice to play a sexy seductive machine that works his way on both men and women, and it's easy to understand why people fall for him besides the fact of him saying he knows people deep down inside the facade. And the other surprise, possibly the best acting around, was Cary Hiroyuki-Tagawa playing the total opposite of his action villainesque roles: the insurance company boss. It was so unusual to see him playing a common man, reliable and not dangerous at all; he's quite comfortable acting outside of his league and I admired him on this.

If it's not just the story...I was bothered with the tame sexual sequences and the ridiculously fake mountains that appear on a pivotal moment - so obvious to see it's all done during editing. The few qualities I gave you are not enough to make it a suggestion to watch unless you're into unintenional laughter or enjoys to waste some time watching a bad movie. 5/10

As others have mentioned, the use of a green screen in the mountain scene was so obvious and fake that you're jolted out of the movie wondering why they couldn't just bring a camera up a mountain to film the scene.

Then there's the insurance salesman that the husband warns his wife is "good looking" before he visits her....but when she opens the front door and you see this guy, you'll laugh because he's so not the good looking hunk you expected when the husband said it.

He looks like he's fresh out of high school and has the sex appeal of 2 week old fruit. Usually Lifetime hires hunky types for these roles, but this actor was anything but and you'll scratch your head wondering why the wife so quickly fell for him because there's really nothing appealing or special about him.

I mean he wasn't a dog, but he was totally miscast for this role. The actress who played the wife was ok and played her part well and there are twists here to keep you entertained, but you'll laugh at those too...like why did the guy keep going back and forth from men to women? Does he just sleep with anyone?! And why do so many people find this guy irresistible?!

The whole movie was ridiculous and one of the lesser quality Lifetime films.

Terrible movie all around. Mediocre acting. The usual with Lifetime movies. The mountain scene though... The green screens used to shoot the scene overall are the most obvious I've ever seen. It is literally so bad it made me laugh out loud. When the husband was pushed off the cliff that made me laugh as well. It looked so blatantly fake.

So all I all a terrible film, but worth watching if you want to laugh at how bad it is.

For watching this piece of crap. A sad attempt at an artsy film. Neither lead actor is that attractive to be honest. I don't understand what the lead actress saw in that boy. And she looked a bit like Kermit and desperately needs a tan on those pasty white thighs. The husband was even worse. What the hell kind of name is Ste? I don't care if it's short for Stevens that's a dumb a$$ nickname. I hate their attempt at trying to be a high class art film when it was nothing but a load of crap. I can't believe they actually had sex in the church. How disrespectful. And she does this knowing that her husband was banging the dude she was banging. And then she gets upset with him after the fact. How about not sleep with him you dirty dirty tramp? I'm just so mad at myself for watching this till the end because it was nothing but a piece of crap. Do not watch it's a waste of time. I think the only character that I liked was Wong.

"A Lover Scorned" aspired to be an entry into the genre of neo-noir. But the filmmakers did not do their homework in striving achieve dramatic tension, suspense, and the style of film noir.

The characters were especially wooden in the love triangle of the husband, the wife, and the life insurance salesman. The husband treated his wife abominably, and it was not clear why she remained in the marriage for as long as she did. And there was no chemistry established between the wife and the insurance agent, making their love affair implausible.

The film style was especially disappointing with a grainy quality that looked like amateurish photography, as opposed to the noir style. Overall, the film was extremely disappointing in the main areas that should count in film noir: interesting characters, well-crafted intrigue, and moody atmosphere.