MovieChat Forums > A Dangerous Method (2011) Discussion > From a person in the psychological field

From a person in the psychological field

posted 12 years ago by hoochiemoochie
40 replies | jump to latest

When I finished this movie and considered that IMDB has it at a 6.7 I was taken aback. As a person in the field of psychology I thought it was wonderful. It was intriguing and compelling. I loved how the movie was driven by dialogue and acting because that is a rare thing in film nowadays. I was never bored as Jung and Freud discussed their opinions, methods, and differences throughout the film.

Maybe this is the kind of movie that can only be fully appreciated by those with interest in this field. I'm not saying a person can't enjoy it if they don't have interest in psychology but I don't believe they will be able to fully appreciate it. Also it is important to note that I am not saying that every person involved in psychology will love the film.

Finally, I realize that 6.7 is not a bad score, but it should be at least a 7.5 in my opinion. I rounded up and gave it an 8 but it is a solid 7.5 for me and it is baffling that it is not at least a 7 on this site considering the excellent acting, great story, interesting dialogue, etc.

[–] usernumber655321 12 years ago

Of course, but you'd think any serious film goer would have some sort of interest in psychology. Sadly, this doesn't necessarily seem to be the case.

[–] PoppyTransfusion 12 years ago

As another in the psychological field, I agree. The politics and personalities beneath the psychoanalysis were compelling as was Speilrein who was perhaps the most devoted of the 3 to the cause of psychology. I too gave it an 8.

A man chases a woman until she catches him

[–] Bob Pr. 12 years ago

I'm a retired clinical psychologist [& also completed a 5+ yr. analysis (of the ego psychology flavor)].

I gave it an "8" for general viewing interest (but felt it was a "10" just for me since it piqued me to buy and read John Kerr's book which is the foundation for this film).

[–] Kuato_and_George 12 years ago

It's an interesting movie, but not a lot actually happens. The acting is good, the content ins intriguing, but it's a lot of conversation that doesn't actually result in anything.

My movie review site: http://www.hesaidshesaidreviewsite.com/

[–] Bob Pr. 12 years ago

It's an interesting movie, but not a lot actually happens. The acting is good, the content ins intriguing, but it's a lot of conversation that doesn't actually result in anything.

BUT are YOU in the psychology field as the OP asked?

Or just making random comments?

[–] ccl3 12 years ago

Are you under the mistaken impression that the OP asked for responses only from people in the psychology field? Are you with the Who-Is-Allowed-To-Comment Police? How self-important can one get.

[–] GaelicLass 12 years ago

You clearly weren't listening to the dialogue or it went over your head, Kuato.

Seems from the reviews that many people went to see this because Cronenberg's, Mortonsen's and Fassbender's names were attached and this genre is entirely different than most of his movies.

Also, the sexual issues brought out a lot of voyeurs. This was a serious movie more along the lines of Cronenberg's earlier work, M Butterfly, which was excellent.

Do not see this movie expecting his usual fare of horror and sex, you won't find it here. The sexual scenes are definitely played down so as not to distract from the real message of the film, which was about these three people and what they brought to the world of psychoanalysis which was groundbreaking. Since then we don't even treat the mentally challenged. The mental hospitals are all shut down and on Reagan's orders they were put on the streets to cope and they can't. We are going backwards to line the pockets of the already wealthy at the expense of mental health treatment.

I found this movie fascinating and gave it 8/10 also.

Keira did an excellent job of portraying a hysteric based on documentaries I have seen of real hysterical people.

"Sometimes you have to know when to put a cork in it."
~Frasier

[–] AlexSefton 11 years ago

You clearly weren't listening to the dialogue or it went over your head, Kuato.

Seems from the reviews that many people went to see this because Cronenberg's, Mortonsen's and Fassbender's names were attached and this genre is entirely different than most of his movies.

I very much agree with you. Couldn't have describe it better than how you did it. Everything you said in the above post is golden.

[–] tamalskh 8 years ago

Since then we don't even treat the mentally challenged. The mental hospitals are all shut down and on Reagan's orders they were put on the streets to cope and they can't. We are going backwards to line the pockets of the already wealthy at the expense of mental health treatment.

Sorry , I do not understand this point . Mind elaborating a bit ? I do not have any association with the field of psychology but the film interested me. Thank you.

[–] AlexSefton 11 years ago

A LOT actually happened in this movie. The dialogues ARE the indicators of the things that happened in the film. Through those conversations you can feel the change in the mind of Jung and how they influenced his perspective of psychology and theories of the mind and his philosophies. Not just Jung's, but Spielrein's and others' too.

[–] PoppyTransfusion 12 years ago

has no interest whatsoever in psychology and what people want out of life (which as a human being, I find difficult to understand)

I agree. I'm staggered that some people wish to ignore the emotional aspects of living and how the past marks us in the present.

I thought the triangular relationship of Jung - Freud - Spielrein very well done and I'm confident that on later watches I will see their relationships as mirroring the psychology of each.

A man chases a woman until she catches him

[–] Esuma 12 years ago

I loved this movie! I'm not yet in the psychological field per se, but I have a degree in Psychology and work experience in mental health hospitals and that's the field I eventually want to end up in. I thought Keira was fantastic and the film as a whole has excellent. So many great performances, an interesting story and an interesting topic well worth a movie!

[–] rex_ilusivii 12 years ago

I am not in the field of psychology, but I have some interest in it and was recommended this film by a professor of sociology and psychology after we had discussed a bit about whether some things in sex should be considered deviant or normal.

I gave it an 8. Minus points for Keira Knightley's acting and for not exploring Jung's mysticism more. Otherwise, the film was engulfing for me. Informative too.

no i am db

[–] theevilgumby 12 years ago

i went to school for psychology but work in the complete opposite of the field

I LOVED THIS FILM

[–] LeCadavreExquis 12 years ago

Just out of curiousity: what's the complete opposite of psychology?

There's a confidence in you guys that's horrifying.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] izzybellapop 12 years ago

The first time I watched it was with someone who was bored out of her mind and kept rolling her eyes.

I am not in the field of psychology and never had much interest in the subject, but I found this movie so interesting and compelling that I watched it twice. I also made a list of further reading and research topics based on different things mentioned in the film. And I recommended it to several people who have an interest in, or work in the field of psychology. I too was surprised it had low ratings on imdd.

[–] embet213 12 years ago

I am studying psychology and I found the film fasinating! I find it kind of comical that all the people in this thread are in the psych field and loved this film whereas most other people hated it. I think it really is a matter of interest and knowlage. I'm not saying that the people who dislike this film are not knowlagable, but they simply don't care about what Jung and Freud are discussing or realize that the pacients treated truly do act like that. I thought Knighly's performance was supurb! Others thought that she was over acting, but I thought her hystaria was very realistic (though her Russian accent did come and go).

[–] foxy123elm 12 years ago

I wanted to watch this BECAUSE my degree is in psychology. If psychology didn't interest me I don't think the film would have been as appealing. I had a difficult time getting past Kiera Knightly's acting. I saw her acting too much. You should never be able to tell that someone is acting. It should feel real. Many scenes didn't.

Mulder: Nobody likes a math geek, Scully.