Suffering from hysteria, Sabina Spielrein is hospitalized under the care of Dr. Carl Jung who has begun using Dr. Sigmund Freud's talking cure with some of his patients. Spielrain's psychological problems are deeply rooted in her childhood and violent father. She is highly intelligent however and hopes to be a doctor, eventually becoming a psychiatrist in her own right. The married Jung and Spielrein eventually become lovers. Jung and Freud develop an almost father-son relationship with Freud seeing the young Jung as his likely successor as the standard-bearer of his beliefs. A deep rift develops between them when Jung diverges from Freud's belief that while psychoanalysis can reveal the cause of psychological problems it cannot cure the patient.Written by
At Viggo Mortensen's suggestion, Freud is smoking a cigar in every scene except the family dinner with Jung, where there was one waiting for him on set, just off-screen. See more »
When Jung enters Gross's bedroom there is a desiccated frog pinned to the bulletin board. In the closeup, there are papers behind the frog; in the long shots, the frog is pinned directly to the bulletin board, not on top of any papers. See more »
[to his new patient]
Good morning... I'm Dr. Jung. I admitted you yesterday.
I'm not... I'm not mad, you know.
Let me explain what I have in mind. I propose that we meet here, most days, to talk for an hour or two.
Yes. Just talk. See if we can identify what's troubling you. So as to distract you as little as possible, I'm going to sit there, behind you. I'm going to ask you to try not to turn around and look at me under any circumstances. Now...
[walks behind her as she flinches]
[...] See more »
This film is based on true events, but certain scenes, especially those in the private sphere, are of a speculative nature. See more »
Excerpts from Siegfried
by Richard Wagner, original publication by Schott Music GmbH & Co KG, Mainz, Germany, 1876.
Adapted by Howard Shore, published by South Fifth Avenue Publishing, 2010. See more »
The movie does a good job....at telling you absolutely nothing!
A movie about Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud directed by David Cronenberg? That sounds surprising and interesting, to say the very least but the movie as it turned out, was far from anything interesting to watch.
There are really multiple causes. The first and foremost problem is obviously with its story. And not just only the story in itself but also the things its emphasizes and puts its focus on. It makes some bad choices with this, which makes this movie feel like a very dry and distant one.
The movie is mostly focusing on the 'romance' between Jung and his mental patient, played greatly by Keira Knightley. Nothing wrong with that, if only the romance was anything really romantic or something to feel involved with. It instead just feels wrong and dirty and besides isn't made all that believable. Why, out of all of his patients and opportunities he must have had in his life, does Carl Jung suddenly decide to have an affair with this particular woman? What was so different or intriguing about her? This movie really doesn't give you the answers to any of this.
And if you think that this movie is being one that is sort of showing the rivalry between Freud and Jung and their opposing psychology methods, you are completely wrong. There is never any interesting dynamic between the two of them, which is granted also due to the fact that Viggo Mortensen as Sigmund Freud, is hardly in the movie at all.
And don't know what their methods were and why there are still being used in today's psychoanalysis and why the both of them are being regarded as the two founding fathers of psychoanalysis? Don't expect this movie to show or tell you anything! It really remains on the surface all, as if it was afraid for its own subject and that it might loose some of its viewers with it.
In other words, the movie really isn't telling you anything interesting and it's mostly being an unusual romantic movie, you'll get very little out off.
All a same really, since the movie itself remains well made and acted out. It's a pretty good looking movie, with all of its historical sets and costumes and the actor's play their roles convincingly. It at least still makes the movie watchable but it's barely enough to keep you interested in it.
44 of 69 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this