A Dangerous Method

Cronenberg gives a brief insight into the core ideas of Freud and his pupil Jung in an audience-friendly and simple form, which is a rare and welcome gift compared to complexly worded lectures on psychoanalysis or literary scholarly attempts to interpret their work. Yet, thanks to the breathtaking performances of all three leading characters and the masterfully written dialogues that often provide a hidden point, I find Cronenberg's film also attractive for the audience. (02/06/2012)

That Cronenberg is in there. It lies concealed in Keira Knightley's nipple crawling out of her corset, Vincet Cassel's face, the subversive dialogue, and especially the character of Jung (who has a lot of points of contact with James Woods' character from Videodrome), but it's littered with tons of costumes and understated studio work, and somehow lacks a significant personal investment. Otherwise, Viggo Mortensen is incredible! PS: Keira Knightley is cast brilliantly and Cronenberg takes advantage of all her physical imperfections (breasts, British-sharp physiognomy, arched forehead, prominent chin, a figure that generally begs for professional help) and makes the actress accentuate them (01/30/2012)

So, let’s sum it up. What we have here is a movie where the main parts are Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud. And on top of that we have this crazy girl, who had won a windfall in her life and is now making up for it with sexual deviation. The setting – both Zurich and Vienna – is more than nice. And last but not least, there is a cast of actors in which one is better than the other. Judge for yourselves: Viggo Mortensen, Michael Fassbender, Keira Knightley or Vincent Cassel. That’s quite a cast of actors, isn’t it? But David Cronenberg lays it on you in the first minute that you immediately have to stop and think about whether Keira is serious about acting or whether she should maybe call it quits after this film and disappear into another area of art. And then you also realize that even though Jung and Freud are quite interesting characters from history, you will be so bored with them that even your ninety-year-old grandma whose only hobby is to feed her chickens twice a day could not be more dull. I’d been looking forward to an interesting premise and what I got was utter disappointment in all respects. At first sight, it’s such an interesting movie, but at second sight you won’t believe it a corner of the street in Vienna, let alone Zurich. (01/30/2017)

David Cronenberg directed an excellent film, which is mainly adorned with strong performances. Personally, I have always been interested in Freud and to some extent identify with his theories, so I would rate the movie even higher. For some, it may be full of "psychobabble," but I really enjoyed the discussions between Jung and Freud, as well as Jung and Spielrein. Cronenberg perfected his last film to Hollywood perfection, but it fits the time period, concept, and story quite well. (11/22/2013)

I would gladly play with Miss Spielrein and smoke a cigar with Freud, but I’d rather sit down by Lake Zurich than take a part in his long-winded dialogues with the malleable and indecisive Jung. Viggo Mortensen is great and the visual esthetics delicious, but there are no emotions. A film where mainstream stars recite phrases only a few viewers will understand. Compared to this, Polanski’s Bitter Moon was far more poetic and passionate in its testimony about the dark corners of human sexuality. (02/26/2012)