Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, January 10, 2012
Film Do Not Go to See A Dangerous Method This Weekend, Or at Any Other Time
Posted by Jen Graves on Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 1:01 PM
- No. No, no, no.
A Dangerous Method is a David Cronenberg film. David Cronenberg is interesting. It is about Jung and Freud and a young female patient. All of these humans are also interesting (regardless of whether or not you find them to be too involved with the anus).
But there is nothing, NOTHING, interesting about A Dangerous Method. It is the dullest possible version of itself. Did nobody notice during filming: "Hey! OMG! We're making a dreadfully boring film!" Apparently, they did not.
It is also an example—regardless of what A.O. Scott says about period hysterics and sexual intrigue (I love A.O. Scott, by the way, but we do not agree about what constitutes intriguing sexual intrigue)—of a performance so terrible that it should warrant the expulsion of Keira Knightley from the profession of acting. I never want to see her twitching face again.
Do not do to yourself what I have done by seeing this film.
1
"It's a story about one man ... who believed that talking would help a person deal with their problems .. his colleague, who believed analyzing the symbols in their dreams would help a person deal with their problems .. and the woman who loved them both!"
2
not every actress is a Charlize or a Meryl.
some are in films simply because they are phenomenally pleasurable to look at. Kiera Knightly is a rather handsome woman, much like a Kate Beckinsale or a Milla Jovovich or a Heather Graham.
as are actors: Hayden Christensen, i'm looking at you. you suck.
some are in films simply because they are phenomenally pleasurable to look at. Kiera Knightly is a rather handsome woman, much like a Kate Beckinsale or a Milla Jovovich or a Heather Graham.
as are actors: Hayden Christensen, i'm looking at you. you suck.
3
fwiw, the film has gotten generally favorable reviews:
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/a-danger…
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/a_danger…
Can you reveal why you thought it was dull/boring?
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/a-danger…
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/a_danger…
Can you reveal why you thought it was dull/boring?
4
Thank you for confirming that this is not a very good movie. I saw the preview a few times and it just looked overblown and insipid.
Sad too, cause I feel that era of history can produce the best sexual tension stories.
And yeah, Kiera Knightly only works for me when she's playing an understated role. She doesn't seem to understand that good drama isn't all about chewing scenery. I blame Lucas for her downward spiral.
Sad too, cause I feel that era of history can produce the best sexual tension stories.
And yeah, Kiera Knightly only works for me when she's playing an understated role. She doesn't seem to understand that good drama isn't all about chewing scenery. I blame Lucas for her downward spiral.
5
I totally agree. I was shocked at how much I disliked this movie, a huge disappointment. Cronenburg, Fassbender, Mortenson...sexual hysteria, psychoanalysis... Something had to be interesting, right?
No. Dull. As. Dirt.
No. Dull. As. Dirt.
6
I thought it was gorgeous to look at, but, yes, boring. I felt the same way about Spider. Knightley's performance was... jarring. I don't care how "accurate" it may have been; it was too much. Otherwise, though, it was strange that every single element was excellent, really top-notch, but it all added up to a dull experience.
7
Last Tango in Paris is really the only movie to see if you want to watch a movie obsessing over the anus.
8
I thought it was fantastic and not boring in the slightest. Knightley overacts, yes, but only in the first 15-20 minutes. She smooths out after that. And that doesn't matter anyway, since the movie is far more about the relationship between Jung and Freud; Knightley's character is just a trigger for the clash of personalities and ideas between the two men.
Every second Viggo is onscreen, I chuckled, in a good way, at his spot-on Freud (or at least spot-on in my mental vision of Freud)...confident, beloved, but pompous and relentlessly petty. Also, there are several scenes of Knightley being spanked and screwed by Fassbender. Those scenes were definitely not boring.
Every second Viggo is onscreen, I chuckled, in a good way, at his spot-on Freud (or at least spot-on in my mental vision of Freud)...confident, beloved, but pompous and relentlessly petty. Also, there are several scenes of Knightley being spanked and screwed by Fassbender. Those scenes were definitely not boring.
9
I'm not sorry I saw it, although I was confused that for a movie that dealt so much with sex, it wasn't very sexy. It was also a very talky movie, everything hit me on a cerebral rather than a visceral level.
11
I don't care how bad it is, it features Prince Fassy, and that's enough for me to throw it in the Netflix queue.
12
That is a GREAT last sentence. It made me laugh, and it is making me smile just thinking about it.
13
I generally quite like Knightley, but what's with her shouting all of her lines in this movie?
Freud: Blah bla sophisticated analysis of the ego's capacity to control the Id. Pipe smoking.
Jung: Blah blah polite questioning of stated theory while quietly pondering extramarital affair.
Spielrein: SHOUT SHOUT MY FATHER!!!! TEETH GRINDING!!! RUSSIAN ACCENT!!! OSCAR NOMINATION?!!!
Freud: Blah bla sophisticated analysis of the ego's capacity to control the Id. Pipe smoking.
Jung: Blah blah polite questioning of stated theory while quietly pondering extramarital affair.
Spielrein: SHOUT SHOUT MY FATHER!!!! TEETH GRINDING!!! RUSSIAN ACCENT!!! OSCAR NOMINATION?!!!
15
It amazes me when a director could take an opportunity to educate the masses on some very liberating concepts that could really make a difference on the way humanity looks at itself and thrust it forward in leaps and bounds to fall so short of teaching anything enlightening about these great Ideas. It has to play the sex card to get funding and viewership and the whole point is lost. And great ideas and concepts are lost on it's viewers. The film does not have to be didactic but it could be inspiring to help the un learned and suffering and ignorant get a glimpse and interest in some of the liberating ideas these men and women devoted their professional lives to exploring. What is an opportunity for human growth and Learning becomes yet another display of idiotic distortion and reduction of great advances in psychology. Pathetic all around. Crone berg shame on you. What was your intention in making this movie? How did it get so bogged down that it had nothing to say? It's like a movie about Einstein and focusing on his trip to costco. Who cares??? It shows you have no ability to understand what these men and their theories were about and the sad thing is the average viewer will get no curiosity to read the material for themselves or try psycho therapy. THe movie becomes TheTruth and the truth is lost in a half hearted attempt to discredit the whole field. Thank you for pushing humanity back to the dark ages with a " beautiful film". Disgusting.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (15) RSS