A Dangerous Method previews

evantvmoviegames:
A Dangerous Method - Movie Review

It definitely felt like 2011 was the year of Michael Fassbender. While mainstream movie fans might have only seen him in X-Men: First Class, independent moviegoers got to view him in some of his finest performances, including Shame and Jane Eyre. He ended the year on a high note with A Dangerous Method, another solid performance in a very engrossing film.

The latest film from David Cronenberg, A Dangerous Method shows in detail the relationship between Carl Jung (Fassbender) and Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen) and how their conversations and work gave birth to psychoanalysis. Also portrayed in the film is the story between Jung and a patient of his, Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley).

Looking at his last two films by themselves, A Dangerous Method ends up looking like a big departure for Cronenberg. There is the constant of Mortensen who starred in A History of Violence and Eastern Promises, though he ends up taking a back seat to Fassbender and Knightley here. At the heart of it, Method ends up feeling like an extremely intelligent film. This isn’t due in soul part because of the subject matter, but because of the way the actors present it, as well as themselves. Knightley gives one of her best performances since Atonement and both Fassbender and Mortensen are as great as usual.

The film has a nice pace but near the end it begins to spin it wheels as we are presented with situations that we’ve already seen played out earlier in the movie. Seeing Mortensen and Fassbender go head to head is great though, and the resolution between Spielrein and Jung wasn’t as tense as I would have hoped. In regards to the pacing, it works extremely well at the beginning of the movie. The first quarter of the film is easily the best part and the initial relationship between both Spielrein and Jung and Freud and Jung being established was the most engrossing part of it all.

There’s a section of the film that while important to the overall story, isn’t all that interesting in comparison to everything else that is happening. This includes Vincent Cassel’s portrayal of Otto Gross, an Austrian psychoanalyst. Freud sends him to Jung and the two speak about their theories and it begins to shape and change Jung’s ideas. These exchanges essentially set into motion everything that takes place throughout the rest of the film. Overall the conversations between the two were interesting but the relationship never feels as fully established as it does between the other two sets of characters, or even between Jung and his wife, Emma (Sarah Gadon).

This subject matter could easily become stale and uninteresting, but with a seasoned director at the helm and two actors at the top of their game, the theories discussed and the conversations that arise out of them never seem forced or boring. Knightley gets to work with an extremely complex character and her arc is just as interesting as everything that encompasses her. Though there are parts of the film that don’t work as well as some others, the effort here is strong and the overall presentation is great.

*** / ****

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4cHuzYqSRo

A Dangerous Method is in theaters now.

enternechoplex:
A First Impressions Anecdote of: A Dangerous Method.

Even though I’ve seen most of David Cronenberg’s films, it wasn’t until he joined forces with Viggo Mortensen for A History of Violence that I became a genuine fan of Cronenberg. With that film he stepped away from his grotesque and horrific motifs towards much more grounded material drenched in violence and a bit of sex. With Eastern Promises he completely blew me away and delivered not only one my favourite films, but aided Viggo Mortensen in becoming by far one of the most distinctive and brilliant actors. Teaming up again with Mortensen, Cronenberg has deliver A Dangerous Method which is unlike anything he has done before.

image

A Dangerous Method chronicles the friendship between two philosophers who gave birth to psychoanalysis: Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender) and Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen). The key factor that brought these two brilliant minds together was a russian woman named Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley), who also was able to improve Jung’s research and more importantly impact his life in a deeply personal manner.

If there is one factor working in favour of A Dangerous Method is Keira Knightley’s performance. In the first half of the film her character is manic, unpredictable, disturbed and displaying raging signs of deep psychosis. I read an interview in which Knightley described the process of developing this character and this performance, and she talked about studying the various physical contractions and tics people suffering from similar traumas displayed. Her research really paid off as she deliver a performance unlike anything I’ve ever seen. Knightley goes full out crazy in this film to the point where she’s both disgusting and frightening. From the accent to her gaze to her body language, she is able to erase any notion of her star persona and deliver an intricate and career high performance.

image

However, once the character goes through the treatment and becomes sane the film loses it’s spark. Up until that point it was her performance that made things interesting and exciting, but once her character reaches sanity and is subdued like the other characters it all becomes increasingly difficult to watch. This isn’t because what happens is disturbing or anything of that sort, but everything reaches a state of stasis and the dullness factor that was creeping in from the beginning overpowers the film. One of the aspects that hurts the film is the way it jumps in time fairly rapidly and you can’t help but feel that it is trying way too hard to cover a lot of ground. As a result things feel disjointed and just as something intriguing was about to happen the film jumps two years ahead.

For a film that features such prominent minds you would expect things to be interesting throughout but unfortunately that isn’t the case. There are some interesting ideas present in the film and some of the conversations these people have are thoughtful and present things from a different perspective. But things feel too stoic and I don’t think there’s really a plot, I just felt like things weren’t going anywhere. Part of the blame must be placed on Cronenberg whose direction is effective, but doesn’t do anything to elevate the characters or stories or even the visuals. You can tell that this is a direction primarily servicing story, but when there’s no story it all feels pointless and uninteresting. I’m sure people who are more familiar with these people will like it but even I, who is somewhat familiar with Freud’s work, found the film dull so I can only imagine how bored an unfamiliar viewer might feel.

image

Another part of the blame must also be placed on Michael Fassbender who downright disappoints in this film. He is by far the weakest link which truly sucks since he is the lead and we are suppose to care about him. His performance is effective but there is nothing remarkable, special or remotely interesting in it. Fassbender is just there to drive the “story” forward and is very easily overshadowed by everything else around him. Vincent Cassel and Viggo Mortensen both give fine performances, but they have little screen time and aren’t as good as they probably should’ve been.

With A Dangerous Method, Cronenberg is touching new ground in the sense that instead of presenting sexuality through graphic acts or imagery, he is taken a much more philosophical approach. This approach, which on paper sounds very interesting proves to be dull and completely unmemorable. All the performances except for Knightley’s are effective and do not deliver anything special or engaging. The strength of the film is Knightley’s out there performance that once it is stripped from its flashy lunacy joins in the dullness and stasis of everything around her. In terms of Cronenberg’s filmography I have to say that A Dangerous Method is by far his weakest film to date, which is really disappointing considering the brilliant streak of films he was riding on.

Rating: C

http://www.sfreporter.com/santafe/article-6533-a-tame-approach.html

01.25.2012 0 Comments


A Tame Approach
A Dangerous Method is a serious misnomer
David Riedel
A-Dangerous-Method-Liam-Daniel

One of the pleasures of watching a David Cronenberg film is the guarantee that something nasty will happen. The violence in his films lurks beneath the surface, hinted at in the cold, clinical dialogue uttered by his characters.


When the violence finally bursts on-screen—via an exploding head, a scientific accident or a knife to the gut—it’s often more horrific than our own worst imaginings. It’s also unavoidable and intrinsic to the plot. Everything relates in a Cronenberg story: the sex, the violence, the words, the silence. There’s no gratuitous Saw- or Hostel-type stuff.


Imagine, then, a Cronenberg film with no on-screen violence and lots of talking. (So. Much. Talking.) That film is called A Dangerous Method, and it’s as dry as all hell.


The subject matter—the professional and personal relationships of Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender), Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen) and one of Jung’s patients, Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley), during the dawn of talk therapy and psychoanalysis—is in Cronenberg’s wheelhouse, with all the sex, violence and talk that implies. An auteur of human biology and psychology such as Cronenberg could do wonders with it.
SHARE PRINT COMMENT FONT SIZE RATE
Related content
Albuquerque film festival kicks off this weekendLong and WindingSamurai 7 Triumph Of The Reel
Related to:moviesDavid CronenbergdramaViggo MortensenMichael FassbenderKeira Knightley
United Artists DeVargas


Unfortunately, we never get beyond talk. Spielrein arrives, screaming, at Jung’s Swiss sanitarium in 1904, jaw jutting forward, body writhing, a mess of mania and compulsion. Later, she’s before Jung (literally—he sits behind her), as he suggests her therapy consist mostly of talking sessions designed to get to the root of her problem. Of course, her problem is rooted in sex and shame. Of course, she quickly recovers. Of course, she wishes to study psychoanalysis. Of course, she and Jung become lovers. Of course, he advises her on her dissertation. Of course, it’s all easy to predict, even if one doesn’t know the players’ histories.


Worse, Jung and Spielrein’s relationship comes off as completely perfunctory, a series of scenes that play out with a feeling of “…and then this happened…” as a means to get to…what, the end of the movie?


Even Mortensen, who is so good in Cronenberg’s A History of Violence and Eastern Promises, can’t rise above the flaccid material. He does his best, playing Freud as a judgmental and purposefully repressed older man, but that repression makes for some rather drab back-and-forth as he and Jung eventually fall out.


Freud thinks Jung will advance the theory of psychoanalysis. When he and Jung realize their theories diverge—Freud brings everything back to the p****, and Jung isn’t sold on that notion—their professional relationship frays and eventually so does their personal relationship.


One compelling idea posited in the screenplay is Freud’s focus on phallic imagery as a way to limit his detractors’ attacks on him. If he has one theory, he thinks, through which to distill subsequent theories, other thinkers might find it difficult to accuse him of being a charlatan or an imbecile.


Unfortunately, that idea is a good moment within a string of talky moments. Each character experiences fear, suffering, rage and happiness, but it hardly matters because the screenplay doesn’t do anything with those experiences. It’s like an unsatisfying trip to the shrink.

A Dangerous Method

Directed by David Cronenberg

With Michael Fassbender, Viggo Mortensen and Keira Knightley

UA DeVargas

99 min.

http://strag2001.tumblr.com/post/16653084622/film-28-365-a-dangerous-method

Film 28/365: A Dangerous Method

The film A Dangerous Method is about the relationship between Carl Jung, Sigmund Freud, and Sabina Spielrein, and how they all helped in the development of psychoanalysis.

Almost everything about this movie attracted it to me. Michael Fassbender as Carl Jung, Viggo Mortensen as Sigmund Freud, David Cronenberg directed it, and obviously the thought of a film about the development of psychoanalysis.

I’ll be the first to admit I don’t have extensive knowledge of the beliefs of Jung, Freud, and Spielrein, but the knowledge I do have I feel is accurately depicted in the film.

Michael Fassbender and Viggo Mortensen did extremely well in their roles, but I feel Keira Knightley’s performance as Sabina Spielrein was…awkward, to say the least. It didn’t feel natural to me at all.

The film is obviously set in the early 1900’s, so it’s really pretty to look at. Fassbender looks fantastic in period clothing, and the over all aesthetics of the film is just beautiful. The scenery is fantastic, the clothing is fantastic, hell, even the luggage is fantastic.

The movie all around was interesting when it came to the actual psychoanalysis aspect of the film, rather than the relationship between Jung and Spielrein. The counterparts of the characters were portrayed well. There were some moments of the movie that were very obviously directed by David Cronenberg.

All in all, this was definitely an interesting movie. I wouldn’t mind watching this movie again soon if anyone wanted to see it with me. On my own, however, it would probably be a few months before I wanted to see it again.
100%
Posted 7 hours ago

thecinemaniac:
Review: A Dangerous Method (2011)

Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung are two of those names in history that most people recognize, even if they know nothing about the men themselves, the significance of their work, or have the slightest interest in their field of study. Their names almost precede them; they are to psychoanalysis what Babe Ruth and Ted Williams are to baseball. Why is this a significant point? Well, to be honest, any film about people of such notoriety must be made with a degree of caution. Accuracy is important (see my previous review on Red Tails), and it is often so crucial to the success of a movie that it can make or break it. Of course, you also need a good story, one so powerful that the audience is unconcerned about being dragged a hundred years into the past. It is in that spirit that 2011’s A Dangerous Method succeeded.

Michael Fassbender is Carl Jung, a young doctor studying the intricacies (and psychoses) of the human mind. His wife Emma (Sarah Gadon) comes from a wealthy family; and though she supports her husband’s profession, she cannot possibly match his level of enthusiasm for the subject. Almost immediately, Jung is introduced to Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley), an uncontrollable, deeply wounded woman whose behavior suggests she is either completely insane or possessed by the devil himself. She writhes around wildly and screams, contorting her face before responding to any of Jung’s questions. Jung attempts to take a more relaxed approach to treating Sabrina; instead of using a direct line of questioning to uncover the roots of her many issues, Jung acts as though they are having a lighthearted, casual conversation. The majority of Sabrina’s problems are the obvious result of an overbearing father – this much is clear to Jung, but he hesitates to press her for too much information. She does, however, offer him an integral part of her mental puzzle without much prodding – as a child, her father used spanking as punishment; and instead of fearing this method of justice (as most children would), she actually derived sexual pleasure from it. This opens the proverbial door to the intense therapy that lies ahead; but just as Sabrina begins to let down her ironclad guard, Jung informs her that he must leave for military duty, which disturbs her greatly.

Jung eventually returns to resume his treatment of Sabrina. As she begins to make significant progress, she hints at wanting to become a psychoanalyst herself (an aspiration she clearly thinks is beyond her reach, but which Jung encourages). However, the more time Jung spends with Sabrina, the more he understands the stranglehold of her sexual repression, a condition she wishes to overcome, not through analysis or rehabilitation, but through initiating a sexual relationship with him. Naturally, as a married man and an ethical physician, he resolves himself to keep it strictly professional.

Another one of Jung’s patients, a man named Otto Gross (Vincent Cassel), is an admitted playboy who sees nothing wrong with bedding as many women as humanly possible. He believes that human sexuality is one of the most basic, animalistic urges, and should therefore, never be repressed. Instead, he suggests that Jung take full advantage of the opportunity to sleep with Sabrina. Otto’s influence is obviously a negative one, but somehow the message gets through to Jung, who manages to justify the matter in his head and thus carries on the affair.

Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen) is perhaps the most respected man in the field. Jung looks up to him, and when the two finally meet to discuss their individual theories over dinner, the conversation lasts nearly thirteen hours. It is clear that Freud’s philosophies on mental illness are all somehow connected to sex. He seems obsessed with the idea that all humans are nymphomaniacs in hiding; unless their desires are fulfilled; Freud believes the resulting frustration will manifest itself as lunacy. Jung disagrees with this approach, believing that people are more complex. But Freud is from a different school where image matters, particularly the opinions of society where psychoanalysis is concerned.

This might seem like a lot to process, but believe me, what I’ve described above is not even half of the film. This is merely the foundation for everything that unfolds. There is a ton of subtlety in A Dangerous Method. The dialogue is swift and highly indicative of the early 20th century. The script was very tight and well-written; the sets and scenery were detailed and effective, and the acting put this film over the top.

First and foremost, Michael Fassbender, recently off his previous (and more provocative) film Shame, completely switches gears here. I had no trouble believing him as Jung. I found his portrayal to be quite engaging; he immediately drew me in with his clean diction and articulation. His character was a conflicted man torn between the sensitivity of his profession and a desire for contentment. In that regard, he seemed a bit more human than Freud. Viggo Mortensen delivered an excellent performance as the aging neurologist. It was hard to believe that I was watching the same man from A Perfect Murder and A History of Violence. He completely transformed himself for this role. His mannerisms were subdued and he played Freud very evenly, almost as if he were apathetic and largely unimpressed with the world; in other words, he’d already seen it all, and newcomers like Jung were simply walking in the footprints he’d set years before.

Keira Knightley really stood out in this film, particularly in the beginning when her character Sabrina was still completely nuclear and unruly. It was in these scenes where her acting abilities shone brightly. I imagine it was a bit difficult to film these scenes. There were other scenes (which I will not divulge) that Knightley initially objected to filming. They are not terribly unsettling, but after seeing the film, one might understand her hesitance.

Overall, A Dangerous Method is a well-planned and well-written biopic that is sure to entertain. It is, in fact, based on a real case. The screenplay was adapted by the 2002 stage play The Talking Cure, which was based on the 1993 non-fiction book by John Kerr, A Most Dangerous Method: the story of Jung, Freud, and Sabina Spielrein. I highly recommend this movie!

http://videowordmadeflesh.com/2012/01/31/a-dangerous-method-the-consequences-of-repression/

>>
You're Reading...
Film Reviews
A Dangerous Method: The Consequences of Repression
Posted by VideoWordMadeFlesh ⋅ January 31, 2012 ⋅ Leave a Comment
Filed Under A Dangerous Method, Carl Jung, Crash, David Cronenberg, in theaters, Keira Knightley, Michael Fassbender, psychology, reviews, sexuality, Shivers, Sigmund Freud, Videodrome, Viggo Mortensen, Vincent Cassel

Intricately layered and hypnotically complex, David Cronenberg’s brilliant adaptation of Christopher Hampton’s stage play “The Talking Cure” (in turn based on John Kerr’s book “A Most Dangerous Method”) takes on the deep-rooted neuroses associated with want, lust, and desire as exemplified by the destructive and symbiotic relationship between Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortenson), Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender), and Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley). Eschewing almost every trace of the “body horror” that defined his formative work, and even the radical violence that punctuated his last two films, here Cronenberg burrows into the hidden recesses of psyches and intellects in torment and crafts a piece that explores his interests in indulgence and transformation in greater detail than almost anything he’s done. It feels like Cronenberg’s been working towards this film his entire career: it isn’t hard to trace the trajectory from the repression-gnawing parasites of “Shivers” to Jung’s embrace of his most primal sexual instincts in A Dangerous Method. Both involve violence and arousal as by-products of the grotesque (or the unexpressed); that Cronenberg is here dealing with something close to an accounted actuality rather than horrific fantasy makes the thematics presented all the more shattering when ultimately realized. There are consequences to pleasure, emotional and potentially deadening.

Opening on a hysterical, near-epileptic Spielrein being carted up to a sanatorium, Cronenberg immediately establishes the fractured, frightening tone of the film. Spielrein’s condition is violent and halting, causing her to stutter and contort herself. Given over to the psychiatric care of Jung, he decides to implement Freud’s radical “talking cure,” a theory that laid out the groundwork for all of modern psychoanalysis. By removing himself both visually and emotionally, Jung gets to the heart of Spielrein’s psychosis– her early and continued sexual excitement arising from her father’s disciplinary beatings years before. Two years later, cured, Spielrein begins medical studies herself, hoping to become a psychiatrist as well. Jung’s successful treatment of Spielrein grants him an audience with the much admired Sigmund Freud, and the two form an antagonistic bond that ultimately tests the beliefs of both men as well as the strength of their individual theories of psychoanalysis. Freud’s approach is clinical and rooted in sexuality; Jung opens himself up to the possibility of mysticism and parapsychology, to Freud’s growing distaste. When Spielrein confesses a sexual attraction to Jung the idea of it gnaws away at him and he reluctantly acts on it; from there Cronenberg’s film becomes a cavernous parade of defeat, humiliation (both sexual and professional) and self-doubt as Jung, Spielrein, and Freud commence an odyssey of interaction that spans years.

The principal actors all turn in exemplary performances here. Fassbender caps off a stellar year with a portrayal of Jung as a man haunted by the realization of his own desires and his crippling fear of acting on them. Watching his restraint erode away as he desperately tries to keep it in check, and its resultant effect on him, is mesmerizing. Mortenson is all cool, clinical detachment as Freud, playing up the Master’s need to exert authority as well his subtly condescending ridicule of any psychological theory not beholden to his own. And Knightley is simply stunning in her depiction of Spielrein, bringing her from the brink of madness to the composed manipulator she becomes at the end of the film (I would be surprised if she didn’t receive an Academy nod.) The three entwine themselves beautifully, like an intellectual threeway where the only rule is climax denial.

The deterioration of Freud and Jung’s intensely competitive and adversarial relationship allows for an illustration of differing psychological approaches that highlight several of Cronenberg’s authorial themes. The film’s lush evocation of myriad sexualities, and Jung’s growing awareness of his own ravenous sexual appetite, references previous Cronenberg works like Crash (where the outre’ fetish begins to have a strange and hypnotic allure to the film’s protagonist); the exploration of sadistic and masochistic tendencies in relationships recalls Videodrome‘s strange Samurai Dreams programs found inbetwixt the white noise of late night television reception. Cronenberg’s subtle treatment of the idea of transformation comes into play in A Dangerous Method as well, with Jung’s shifting ideological alliances and growing personal awareness acting as a less visceral mirror to Seth Brundle’s grotesque reawakening in The Fly. Cronenberg’s world is packed with the bizarre; here it’s just dressed more politely. Spielrein’s initial fits are nothing if not agonized representations of the consequences of repression. So too Jung’s state at the end of the film, hollowed and carved out, dreaming of the apocalypse and wondering how it all spiraled out of control, another major concern in this work.

Cronenberg filming A Dangerous Method

Control is constantly switching hands, especially between Spielrein and Jung: when she comes to him asking to begin a sexual relationship, Jung has the power to grant or deny her wish. When he in turn becomes infatuated, the power reverts. Jung weeping into her skirts, begging her to stay, is perhaps the film’s most openly vulnerable moment; Jung never allows himself this concession to emotion again. Spielrein later seeks to inflame and dominate Jung by working with Freud. Freud in turn exercises authority over Jung by never conceding to having his own dreams analyzed by his protege. This constant circle of domination is a brilliant illustration of Freud’s threepart divided self, with each character variously inhabiting the roles of id, ego, and superego.

Of course sex is at the root of the film, as it is in so many other Cronenberg films. Jung has difficulty accepting Freud’s idea that every human psychological frailty stems from sex, but even more difficulty recognizing the proof of the theory in his own actions. After their initial meeting, Freud sends a troubled colleague, Otto Gross (Vincent Cassel, in full on sleazy magnetism mode), to Jung for treatment. Jung cannot process Gross’ lustful approach to life, taking the most issue with Gross’ nonchalant attitude towards doctors sleeping with their patients. Gross believes in pure freedom, shorn of repression and open to all experience; Jung believes in certain ethical standards that he cannot reconcile with his own desires. This conflict inevitably becomes the constant antagonist in Jung’s spirit; when he tells Spielrein of his apocalyptic dreams (which would later form the basis of his gorgeously metaphysical “Red Book”), he’s not just filling her head with evocative nightmares-he’s telling her that his experiences with her have utterly ruined him and hollowed him, and that he can’t heal the wounds their union has inflicted. It’s a harrowing scene, given life by Fassbender’s crumbling restraint and growing self-doubt. Cronenberg isn’t endorsing a full-on de Sadean approach to pleasure at any and all costs, but he is suggesting the harm inherent in self-denial. As there are consequences to pleasure so too are there consequences to repression, whether it’s supernatural dwarves born of rage or a lifetime of sadness and regret.

The haunting final shot of Jung sitting alone in his lakeside chair gazing out at the water suggests both the unknowable expanse of human emotion and the fallibility lurking within the idea of self-restraint. The atmosphere is distinctly forlorn, yearning, and wretched, allowing Cronenberg to map out the terminus of desire and the subtle onset of obsessive self-reflection. Jung’s twilight years were spent in an increasingly dreamlike state; his work became more artistic and vague and his theories more involved with parapsychology and the notion of the spiritual in the everyday. The pressures and professional antagonisms he was facing from both his colleagues (Freud openly denounced him) and himself (he never seems to have recovered from his experiences with Spielrein) forced him into a life of speculation and a transference of the supernatural as a substitute for fulfillment. For all its intelligence, wit, and sophistication, this is very much a film shot through with an aching, hopeless sadness. The question of possibilities is defeated by reality and the brooding weight of existence. Love is of the moment, to be seized. It cannot be cultivated or hoped for or achieved; Jung’s mistake is his failure to act on this truth, made even more punishing because he knows it as a truth.

A Dangerous Method serves as Cronenberg’s multifaceted warning against fallacy, against preconception, against propriety. No one ever gets what they really want. Sometimes other people get hurt.

Cory Strand 1/31/12

pbuzz:
A Dangerous Method, not so much

I was thrilled when The Edge theater, here in Birmingham, got A Dangerous Method. Thrilled because i had read such great things about it. Thrilled because i am truly, madly, and deeply in love with Viggo Mortensen. Thrilled because it was Viggo’s third movie with director David Cronenberg (the first two movies being Eastern Promises and one of my favorite flicks of all time, A History Of Violence, and i would HIGHLY recommend both of those films). Thrilled because i am really digging Michael Fassbender of late. And i thought, how interesting for a film to explore the relationship between Dr Carl Jung and Dr Sigmund Freud and the early history of psychoanalysis. Well, the thrill was soon gone. To put it mildly, this film sucks. It was like watching paint dry. And i hate to say this, for all the reasons i have just mentioned and more. It just falls so flat. I didn’t care about a single person. I had no way to invest in any of the characters, like i normally would, and the plot just goes…nowhere. 99 minutes of running time, 99 long minutes of repressed emotions, repressed feelings, and some sex. And the sex, no chemistry between Keira Knightley and Fassbender. You KNOW it’s bad when the sex scenes are boring. Keira Knightley has always left me cold, i have never been a big fan. If you can get through her screaming, groaning, throwing her jaw outward and bugging her eyes out, more power to you. Daddy beat me when i was a child and i secretly got off on it? Really? It does not take a genius to figure out that the biggest, most powerful sex organ is the brain. I will say that the scenes with Viggo are quite good. But that is all i can say. I found myself wanting an entire movie about Viggo as Freud. Sort of the same way i felt when i was watching Meryl Streep play Julia Child in Julie & Julia. I just wanted to know more about this funny, interesting woman, and the other characters paled in contrast to her. Same here. More Viggo, less…everything else. This is the first negative blog i have written. And i will add that Rotten Tomatoes gave this film i really good score, in the 70% range i believe. I just don’t see how. I am hoping Cronenberg will be able to redeem himself, and use Viggo as his muse again sometime soon. But in the meantime, if you are looking for a movie to use as white noise while you take a nap on the couch, this would be it.

kidsondrugs-:
Watched: A Dangerous Method

I thought it started off with a really interesting storyline, but as soon as freud, his ideas and the conflict between him and jung was introduced the film descended to a point where i found it tedious. if the film was souly about the relationship between jung and sabina, or at least if it focused more on sabina’s mind and condition, it would have held my attention for longer. although im critical of the story, keira knightley should have been nominated for some form of award this year for this, a screen actors at the least because she was surprisingly really good, and i only laughed once at her russian accent, and micharl fassbender is gorgeous with a moustache, especially when he gets food stuck in it. i probably didnt enjoy it as much because i dont know much about freud or jung or psychology, but my friends who have studied it would probably like it.

voidoid:

Saw A Dangerous Method today and christ in heaven, was it good. I really didn’t think Keira could pull off playing a Russian/Jewish mental patient — Keira the tame, beautiful English rose — but her performance was so real, so grounded, there was nothing left to doubt. And Viggo, jesus, Viggo! I didn’t even see Viggo because all I could see was Freud. You know it’s a good performance when you see nothing but the character.

I really loved the Carl Jung/Otto Gross scenes. In my opinion they made the movie. Fassbender and Cassel had a palpable chemistry. The subject matter of the film - psychoanalysis, sex, dreams, the subconscious, and all the rest, - made for such a compelling story it made me want to go and pursue a PhD in psychoanalysis. But jokes aside, what disappoints me the most is how little exposure a brilliant film like this gets compared to, say, a Hollywood ‘blockbuster’ like The Descendants, when this film is far, far more worthy of your time. Shame it didn’t get a single oscar mention.

I can’t say just how good enough it was, how completely in a trance it threw me and sucked me into this beautiful world of Cronenberg’s making. I just can’t f#%@#&! articulate. So yeah, go see the film.

(Also can I just say, Keira you lucky lucky girl, getting spanked by Fassy! Eternally weeping in jealousy and frustration.)

ruthkartel:
A Dangerous Method

image

There were two reasons that I wanted to see A Dangerous Method. First: Viggo Mortensen and David Cronenberg were teaming up again (remember A History of Violence & Eastern Promises). Second: Michael Fassbender is really hot right now.

The IMDb storyline describes this film as “A look at how the intense relationship between Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud gives birth to psychoanalysis”. Vague right? But in all honestly, after seeing the film – I’m not sure there was anything else to say. A Dangerous Method is basically an artistic observation (recollection?) of what went down between Freud, Jung and some sexually repressed patient that Jung experimented on. And by “experimented” I mean talked to and then had strange sex with.

Directed by David Cronenberg, the film was adapted from Christopher Hampton’s play The Talking Cure. Cronenberg’s presentation is unassuming and cool, which I think worked given the dialogue (and there was a lot of it) was a bit dramatic. And by dramatic I mean it’s a little obvious that this was originally meant for the stage.

Overall I found the performances to be refreshing. Although this is yet another period drama under Keira Knightley’s belt, her portrayal of mentally disturbed Sabina Spielrein was anything but her average “English Rose”. Her weird facial contortions and bizarre sex scenes displayed a level of effort that I hadn’t really seen from Knightley before. Fassbender, who played Jung, was everything that I needed him to be in this role – that is to say, a bit uptight and handsomely conceited. When it comes to Viggo (can I call him Viggo?) I think he was underutilized in the story. Freud and Jung have this whole surrogate father/son rivalry (which I’m sure the old school film critics must love – you know, Oedipus and all that) but the film basically focuses on Jung’s struggle to evolve Freud’s theory. Viggo’s character comes off as just a bitter, old Jew – a pleasantly played bitter, old Jew, but a bitter, old Jew nonetheless.

Ultimately, while the film displays great diversity by both the filmmaker and his players, I was rather disappointed with the story, which seemed to loose steam and focus by the third act. I guess the main characters all found resolution, but not in any satisfying way. I somehow felt I was owed more at the end especially since this was technically a biopic and we all knew what eventually became of the characters (well at least what Wikipedia told us).

So – bottom line? Watch it if you find the time. A Dangerous Method is interesting and amusing enough to pass a quiet afternoon. If you don’t get too carried away with names like Freud and Jung and Viggo and Cronenberg then you’ll find it enjoyable enough.

jeffersonpenpen:
Um Método Perigoso (2011)

image

A Dangerous Method

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1571222/

Director: David Cronenberg

Writers: Christopher Hampton (screenplay), John Kerr (book)

Stars: Michael Fassbender, Keira Knightley and Viggo Mortensen

Para quem não é profissional da área, a psicanálise é um campo de estudo misterioso. Para os que acreditam tratar-se de pura adivinhação a aqueles que acreditam ser a salvação da humanidade, Um Método Perigoso é um filme extremamente interessante. Trata-se da biografia de um convalescente Sigmund Freud e do jovem Carl Jung e seu eventual relacionamento extraconjugal com Sabina Spielrein, uma das primeiras mulheres a se tornar psicanalistas.

O longa costura a relação tempestuosa e intensa dos maiores estudiosos da psicologia, além de superficialmente mostrar ao espectador do que se trata a famigerada ciência de Freud. Além disso, dado o tempo em que se passa a história, assuntos como anti-semitismo e o nazismo são tratados de forma ambígua e justamente por isso complementam bem o enredo.

O novo queridinho de Hollywood, Michael Fassbender interpreta Jung. Seu personagem é frágil e inquieto e muitas vezes mostra-se fraco demais. Viggo Mortensen é Freud. Aliás, um ótimo Freud. Bem dosado e contido, Sigmund é austero e prepotente. E melhor ainda, invejoso. Muito bem feito. Justamente por isso foi indicado ao Globo de Ouro de Melhor Ator Coadjuvante. Merecido. Keira Knightley não corresponde a dupla e sua Sabina Spielrein é caricata demais. Sua fala forçada e a loucura que tenta encarnar é caricata e pobre. A curta participação de Vincent Cassel como Otto Gross é densa. Um personagem perturbado para um ator que o sustenta.

Produção e figurino de época dão conta do recado, embora algumas falhas são gritantes como as cenas com efeitos especiais que não passam a credibilidade que deveriam.

Um Método Perigoso é um bom filme. Um modo interessante de conhecer ao menos um pouco sobre essas duas personalidades e, de quebra, ainda entender um pouco dessa ciência que tanto se fala ultimamente. Mas cuidado, você corre o risco de querer se tornar um deles.

Diversão 9/10

Originalidade 10/10

Qualidade 8/10

Nota Final 9/10

#UmFilmePorDia 042 - 11/Fev/2012

theskyisopening:
s$#! movie review with Gabi: A Dangerous Method

My ideal date movie.

Excellent… if you’re interested and know quite a fair amout about the main theories involving the study of psychology then this one is for you, if not this one is still understandable and interesting if you like wordy films.

Keira Knightley was kinda hard to watch, I actually really like her presence generally but I didn’t think she was right for the role. She made me feel uncomfortable, and I don’t think that was genuinely intended.

Viggo Mortensen was great as Freud. He really gave appropriate life to the character.

Vincent Cassel’s cameo was top notch. He is just incredible.

And of course the bell of the ball… Michael Fassbender. I always waffle on about how much I love him and his face and general acting capabilities and in this case, I will again - I think he is just amazing. Wow… I have big love for that man.

And the directing by David Cronenberg was spot on again. After watching this and Eastern Promises, I’m a big fan. I’m excited to see what he does next and what he’s done in the past.

3.7/5 Stars

Stand out performance: Well, I think I’ve made that clear… Mr Fassbender.