Firstly, as a Bostonian I laughed a little. Our coastline is a mix of gravel and sand. Glacial deposits. The island portrayed in this film is pure CGI and rocky cliffs like northern Maine. No such place exists in Boston Harbor. We did have a mental institution which was built on a gallows hill in Danvers Ma, about an hour to the North. A notoriously scary place with brick buildings much like those portrayed here, but not on an island. Incidentally: Lighthouses contain a set of stairs and a light. There is no room for rooms anywhere in a lighthouse. I forgive the accents, but I do not forgive giving BOTTOM billing to the great Max Von Sydow. Fine: Ben and Leo have more recent cred, but Max...is Max!
Secondly, the trailer you just saw portrays a thriller, but the sheer volume of disturbing images and gore isn't even implied. This is as nasty as any horror film you've seen. Scary as hell in fact. And if you happen to be ancient enough to recall WW2, scarier still. I take umbrage with the omission of this by the trailer compositor.
Lastly, quips like "What are you boys smokin' over there" belong in the sixties. They didn't say that in the early fifties. (Kills the already tenuous suspension of disbelief.) And in the opening scenes the sound engineer decided to synch the flipping of light switches which turned on red lights over the entry doors to the setting, with the unmistakable sound of a press type magnesium flash bulb from an old camera. Old light bulbs were exactly like todays, in that until they blew out they made no sound.
I wish some writer would offer Leo a lead in which his character is treated better.

Not Scorcese's best film. It had a lot of unnecessary cuts and continuity issues. The increased cuts takes away from the acting and dicaprio drops his accent a lot and becomes the lovable boy we know from titanic. His partner was making his face deformed and dicaprio looked like he was TRYING to act the part but other than that it was good but the premise of the story has been done before but the initial set up was better than most and there were some GORGEOUS shots.

Shutter Island worth seeing just not in theatres. This film has an extremely predictable plot within 20 minutes I knew what the deal would be,( I basically got it from the previews). It was enjoyable, but for a Scorcese film it was worse than regurgitated dog droppings. Anyone who likes Scorcese should avoid this film just for the simple fact that it will lower their opinion of one of the greatest directors ever. WAIT TILL RENTAL. You're welcome

DEFINTLY WORTH SEEING IN THEATRES, a differnt kind of scorsese as in even better, all phenomanal acting, might even see it again im telling all who read this if you want tp see a great movie for once SEE THIS

It was beautifully shot and edited for the most part, but the scenes that fall apart really fall hard. The boat scene, why tell us he is a new partner, mentioning he is from seattle then portland could have made it much more exciting. A few, who cares? surprises and then it seemed nobody making or editing the film was paying attention to details? A surprising Ben Kingsley scene which ruined it for sure with one of the worst stereotype intellectual laughs on film, what was that about? The disintegrating wife scene, (camera move and a little smoke would have saved the shot,) was a hack job at best. And last time I checked Dead people aren't supposed to move (little girl), use a bezier matte and freeze the frame if she's fidgety, thats compositing 101. I think details have gotten so bad in films along with story telling something slightly above average is considered a masterpiece now, sad. Perhaps its the new entitled, adderall riddled kids that are getting jobs on movie sets without paying there dues being runners and grunts like it used to be.P.S. I did find a great asian grocery market on the way home though, (black sesame ice bars rock!) so that was cool:)