A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Despite the fact that the actors are very good and fit greatly into the characters the movie itself isn't very engaging, the characters accept their fate very calmly, without planning any escape or uprising which is very disappointing, we do not recommend anyone to watch Never Let Me Go unless your intention is to fall asleep

This is dystopian sf without any sf trappings set, perhaps, in an alternative universe. It's dark, you may want to watch it but if you do, be warned, it's not always easy viewing, either for the emotional content or the story gaps.The 'reveal' is revealed within the first 15-20 minutes but the chances are you might pick up on it earlier.It's not totally original. Check out The Island and if you want to go further back, 1979's Parts: The Clonus Horror.It's based on the book by Kazuo Ishiguro and screenplayed by the usually-brilliant Alex Garland. If you want to delve into the antecedants, Michael Marshall Smith wrote a novel in 1996 called Spares.Given its heritage and gravitas, it seems like sacrilege to criticise this movie but my main doubts occurred early on with the characters' total acceptance of their situation (compare and contrast with The Island) and where the whole world accepts the moral and ethical compass and fortitude shown by their teachers and society. They're free to run around in the world but they have no idea what's going on.It's a big question which the plot studiously avoids.But if you accept it, as do the players, and follow the characters then you'll have an interesting, human, and perhaps even soul-searching journey. Unfortunately, I couldn't ignore this massive plot gap so much of the emotional drama of the situation was lost.Maybe the novel was more profound. The film attempts to be but, alas, it is not.

This movie is beautiful, powerful, and leaves you feeling empty and full at the same time. It is slow like other have said, but that's because of the focus it puts into its character development and atmosphere it creatures for the movie to stand on in the end. If you have the time and don't need lots of flair and explosions to enjoy your movie, watch it. But don't just watch it, pay attention, let it speak to you and then you won't feel it was a waste of time.

Okay, first of all, I'd just like to say that I completely agree with a few of the reviews that talk about the pace and development of the film. It was slow, non-descriptive and didn't make you want to sympathize or feel for the characters. BUT if you have read the book, then you would know that it gives you a much much different feeling as to how the story moves along and the way Kathy feels and describes the three parts of the story. They missed out on a lot of detail in the film that was significant in giving the readers a full feeling of the story. It is meant to represent an unethical world where these 'clones' are treated like machines, used for their organs, and although there are people like Madame and Miss Emily that try to fight for their rights, it ends up failing... touching on real world problems! And it DOESNT give you a happy ending, it DOESNT give you the Hollywood ending where they do get a deferral and end up feeling happily after and that's why the book is so powerful (and makes you think) because this concept is a reflection of problems in the real world. Not directly but it does. Think about it.