A thinly plotted ensemble with dreary, disconnected flashbacks

Rating: 4/10 (10 January 2019)

"Shutter Island" provides early clues that something is amiss with the lead character, Teddy Daniels. And that leads one to think that the mystery has a twist that is different than what the film purports to be about. I didn't read Dennis Lehane's novel on which the film is based. But, if he wrote it in the way this film portrays the story, it had to be a difficult read to follow. Flashbacks are a nice (and convenient) tool in storytelling and motion pictures, but they should only be used sparingly. Otherwise, they can distract from the story. In this case, their frequency and disconnectedness soon wear the film out and tire the viewer.
I watched this film in the theater when it came out. I watched it again recently, and have a less enthusiastic response. I particularly enjoy good mysteries. The when, and how, and who, and why of a good suspense or crime story can be gripping and hold one's attention and interest. But these psychological thrillers sometimes muddle the plot and leave one wondering if a crime actually happened. So, the mystery isn't in solving a crime so much as it is in finding out if one was even committed at all.
That's the sort of feeling one gets with this film. Then, it has elements that may seem like red herrings. The idea of Communist insurrectionists, plotters against the government, and some other items might be intended as red herrings, but they seem to be more overkill in the makeup of a crazy character.
The use of so many flashbacks is probably necessary to arrive at the conclusion of the film. But they ignore the usual aspects of good movies and storytelling. So, instead of a tight plot this film seems to be a collection of different stories and random scenes and incidents tossed together with techniques to otherwise tantalize an audience. That may be very convenient for Hollywood, but it doesn't smack of superb mystery storytelling and filming.
The acting is good all around and can't be faulted. Of course, the ruse of the film can raise many questions. Did the hospital use real inmates to role-play with the delusional Teddy Daniels? If so, how could professional health people justify that? If they didn't use real inmates, then they just happened to have many other folks around who would like to role-play in an asylum for the criminally insane.
Unfortunately, psycho thrillers of this sort don't have to answer questions like that. Or make any sense at all. Real mysteries should allow people to rely on their senses and common sense otherwise. While I do enjoy such films from time to time, when they go this far off the track of good mystery telling, they go to another genre. They still involve crime but become more horror stories than human drama. And, then, the elements of the story don't have to fit or even make sense.
The use of flashbacks seems to be the modern Hollywood and fiction writers' technique for getting around the historical tenets of good writing and storytelling. So, plot, plot, plot (as in solid story development) becomes plod, plod, plod (as in toss things together and hurry them along to be done with it). Give me a good old-fashioned Agatha Christie or Dashiell Hammett mystery any day.