Todd McCarthy in Venice for The Hollywood Reporter:
“We have to go into uncharted territory,” the psychiatrist Carl Jung observes in regard to his own pioneering work, and the complex, fascinating topic of Jung’s and Sigmund Freud’s touchy relationship and eventual falling out over a beautiful, sexually hysterical patient has been grippingly explored by director David Cronenberg and writer Christopher Hampton in A Dangerous Method. Precise, lucid and thrillingly disciplined, this story of boundary-testing in the early days of psychoanalysis is brought to vivid life by the outstanding lead performances of Keira Knightley, Viggo Mortensen and Michael Fassbender. Sure to be well received by festival audiences in Venice, Telluride, Toronto and New York…
UPDATE: More McCarthy, and excerpts from another favorable review, after the cut.
Shaking off any dusty remnants of a period biographical piece, the film tackles thorny psycho-sexual issues and matters of professional ethics with a frankness that feels entirely contemporary…
Of all of Cronenberg’s films, A Dangerous Method reminds most of the brilliant Dead Ringers, if only because they both so breathtakingly embrace the dramatic dualities within humans, especially when they brush up against the primal subjects of sex and death.
Despite having to cover stages in the trio’s relationships spread over many years, Hampton’s screenplay utterly coheres and never feels episodic. The dialogue is constantly confronting, articulate and stimulating, the intellectual exchanges piercing at times. Cronenberg’s direction is at one with the writer’s diamond-hard rigor; cinematographer Peter Suschitzky provides visuals of a pristine purity augmented by the immaculate fin de l’epoch settings, while the editing has a bracing sharpness than can only be compared to Kubrick’s.
Oliver Lyttelton writing for The Playlist/IndieWIRE says, “Cronenberg’s ‘A Dangerous Method’ An Insightful Look At Sexuality & The Mind”
All in all, it’s a pacy, absorbing picture, and one of real substance (certainly more so than the enjoyable, but somewhat hollow “Eastern Promises”). But if anything keeps it from quite hitting the heights that it could, it’s Hampton’s scripting. It’s not so much the uncompromising manner of the material—an audience member could probably get by on the briefest knowledge of psychoanalysis, which in this day and age most have, and, while the dialogue is sometimes tortuously wordy, the cast are able to make it fly, with only one or two lines sounding clunky. It’s more that Hampton can’t quite stick the landing; Freud and Jung’s feud over the latter moving into more radical, mystical territory isn’t really adequately covered, while a break and then a resumption of the affair between Jung and Sabina kills the momentum of the thing.
Still, if the take off and landing are a bit bumpy, most of “A Dangerous Method” is fearsomely smart, a grown-up film that doesn’t forget to move you even as it fires up the synapses. Mortensen caps off a trilogy of perfect performances for Cronenberg (and is the film’s best bet for award nods, we imagine), the other leads hold their own, at least after that awkward first reel, and it examines the creative and destructive elements of sexuality in a way that very few filmmakers would dare. While we hope that Cronenberg will kick off and play a little more loose the next time out, we’re glad he decided Hampton’s play was worth the effort.
Not to mention, that Todd McCarthy IS the most influential critic whose review is already out there, so it is completely logical that you would single out his take on the film. When Pete Travers, Manohla Dargis, Roger Ebert etc. all hated the film and you failed to mention it, THEN Joan will have a valid argument/complaint. Until then, much ado about nothing…
Not to mention, that Todd McCarthy IS the most influential critic whose review is already out there, so it is completely logical that you would single out his take on the film. When Pete Travers, Manohla Dargis, Roger Ebert etc. all hated the film and you failed to mention it, THEN Joan will have a valid argument/complaint. Until then, much ado about nothing…
Joan
What “OVERALL critical consensus” ? There are only a few reviews out at the moment, there will be an “OVERALL critical consensus” when the film actually comes out and there will be over 100 reviews available.
^
ahh, thank you, phantom.
Not sure how to explain it better. We’re not going to take part in any effort to smear a movie on the basis of a couple of UK reviews and festival bloggers.
Joan
What “OVERALL critical consensus” ? There are only a few reviews out at the moment, there will be an “OVERALL critical consensus” when the film actually comes out and there will be over 100 reviews available.
^
ahh, thank you, phantom.
Not sure how to explain it better. We’re not going to take part in any effort to smear a movie on the basis of a couple of UK reviews and festival bloggers.
I still can’t help but find it entirely silly that you’re ONLY posting positive reviews of the film when the OVERALL critical consensus, American or not, has been more middling to mixed, while dismissing each critic who seems to diverge from your expectations for the film.
I don’t feel my job is to be surrogate metacritic for you, Joan. I know what reviews matter to me — more importantly, which reviews I think factor into the awards mix — and those are the ones I choose to highlight.
Do you need help finding Stephanie Zacharek? Google “zacharek cronenberg venice.” She quite liked A Dangerous Method. I’d be surprised if her review isn’t scored 80 or higher on metacritic.
I still can’t help but find it entirely silly that you’re ONLY posting positive reviews of the film when the OVERALL critical consensus, American or not, has been more middling to mixed, while dismissing each critic who seems to diverge from your expectations for the film.
I don’t feel my job is to be surrogate metacritic for you, Joan. I know what reviews matter to me — more importantly, which reviews I think factor into the awards mix — and those are the ones I choose to highlight.
Do you need help finding Stephanie Zacharek? Google “zacharek cronenberg venice.” She quite liked A Dangerous Method. I’d be surprised if her review isn’t scored 80 or higher on metacritic.
This made me want to see this film pronto! Looking forward for more positive reviews..
This made me want to see this film pronto! Looking forward for more positive reviews..
Jeremie
Yeah, we’ve been over this. Your source that the film was dismissed by Cannes was based on someone’s ASSUMPTION, yet you once again try to make it look like it is a fact…and it still is NOT. And even if it were – it isn’t – didn’t Cannes dismissed Brokeback Mountain and had The Da Vinci Code as their opening film a few years ago ? Excellent festival for sure, but let’s not pretend that they are flawless.
And I’m not even surprised that you think every good to great review about this film / Cronenberg / Knightley should be ignored, because you THINK it’s shit so ONLY the bad reviews should be considered seriously…even though you still haven’t seen the film, have you ? Negative opinion based on nothing but pure dislike ? Yeah, that’s gonna be convincing…
Jeremie
Yeah, we’ve been over this. Your source that the film was dismissed by Cannes was based on someone’s ASSUMPTION, yet you once again try to make it look like it is a fact…and it still is NOT. And even if it were – it isn’t – didn’t Cannes dismissed Brokeback Mountain and had The Da Vinci Code as their opening film a few years ago ? Excellent festival for sure, but let’s not pretend that they are flawless.
And I’m not even surprised that you think every good to great review about this film / Cronenberg / Knightley should be ignored, because you THINK it’s shit so ONLY the bad reviews should be considered seriously…even though you still haven’t seen the film, have you ? Negative opinion based on nothing but pure dislike ? Yeah, that’s gonna be convincing…
Actually, Zacharek’s review of A Dangerous Method was quite positive, for her, LOL. I was pleasantly surprised. And since ADM is featured at 4 important festivals (Venice, Telluride, TIFF and NYFF), I doubt if its absence from Cannes will prove to be any big deal.
Beth reads Zacherek’s reviews so that I don’t have to.
I don’t agree with any critic all the time. No critic is the boss of me. Zacharek is not always wrong. (and McCarthy is obviously not always right). Just that SZ is worng often enough that I find I can’t rely on her to point me in the right direction toward movies I like. And TM is right often enough that I trust him as a better guide.
We hang out with people whose taste matches our own. We vote for politicians who share our views. I chose the critics I like to read and quote the same way.
Actually, Zacharek’s review of A Dangerous Method was quite positive, for her, LOL. I was pleasantly surprised. And since ADM is featured at 4 important festivals (Venice, Telluride, TIFF and NYFF), I doubt if its absence from Cannes will prove to be any big deal.
Beth reads Zacherek’s reviews so that I don’t have to.
I don’t agree with any critic all the time. No critic is the boss of me. Zacharek is not always wrong. (and McCarthy is obviously not always right). Just that SZ is worng often enough that I find I can’t rely on her to point me in the right direction toward movies I like. And TM is right often enough that I trust him as a better guide.
We hang out with people whose taste matches our own. We vote for politicians who share our views. I chose the critics I like to read and quote the same way.
PLease Jeremie you will create bad press for Knightley even if there wasn’t any, just because you don’t like her, so how reliable are you? Oh I forgot you big Cannes insider!!! Please go back to you cave…
PLease Jeremie you will create bad press for Knightley even if there wasn’t any, just because you don’t like her, so how reliable are you? Oh I forgot you big Cannes insider!!! Please go back to you cave…
Well McCarthy also said Cars 2 was another “Pixar winner” and Melancholia “a bit of a bore”. So not sure I want to rely on the guy. On the other hand, reviews saying that Cronenberg has lost his edge, and that Knightley couldn’t act even if her life depended on it, sound a lot more plausible. After all, it’s not like it’s what I have been saying for months since the film has been politely refused a competition slot at Cannes… 😉
Well McCarthy also said Cars 2 was another “Pixar winner” and Melancholia “a bit of a bore”. So not sure I want to rely on the guy. On the other hand, reviews saying that Cronenberg has lost his edge, and that Knightley couldn’t act even if her life depended on it, sound a lot more plausible. After all, it’s not like it’s what I have been saying for months since the film has been politely refused a competition slot at Cannes… 😉
OT : Great early word on ‘The Descendants’ from Telluride.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/telluride-2011-clooney-shines-descendants-230890
OT : Great early word on ‘The Descendants’ from Telluride.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/telluride-2011-clooney-shines-descendants-230890
Fair enough. I wasnt aware of choose to structure your blog, but I can respect that decision. I personally like to read a mix because it helps develop a balanced perspective, but I can definately see where you guys are coming from when it comes down to spreading bad press for a film.
I understand, zzzzzzzzz, a balanced perspective is good, and we try to provide that for movies in wide release.
We just don’t feel it’s possible to know what the balance is when there are only 4 or 5 mainstream reviews, coming from such an insulted venue. It’s not a large enough sample size for us to get a sense which way the wind is blowing. So I focus on the breaths of fresh air.
Fair enough. I wasnt aware of choose to structure your blog, but I can respect that decision. I personally like to read a mix because it helps develop a balanced perspective, but I can definately see where you guys are coming from when it comes down to spreading bad press for a film.
I understand, zzzzzzzzz, a balanced perspective is good, and we try to provide that for movies in wide release.
We just don’t feel it’s possible to know what the balance is when there are only 4 or 5 mainstream reviews, coming from such an insulted venue. It’s not a large enough sample size for us to get a sense which way the wind is blowing. So I focus on the breaths of fresh air.
Lol, whats wrong with Stephanie Zacharek?
I can understand wanting to stick to American critics but why just positive ones? Doesnt the mixed, variety report count as worth mentioning? Not criticising your coverage, just curious.
zzzzzzzzz,
If you read Sasha’s piece a couple of days ago, “Oscar Season Starts, Beware the Insta-Pundit” you’ll better understand why we’re not interested in smothering kittens in a sack this time of year.
Festival mentality bears little relation to a movie’s reception in wide release. (you’ll even find critics who revise their own opinions in the months that transpire between a film’s festival premiere and it’s opening in multiplexes.)
We don’t mind reporting on good early buzz — and we hope those first favorable impressions hold on throughout the season. We’re happy to help a movie out if it shows promise.
But I’m not comfortable kicking a movie in the teeth when it’s just emerging from its cocoon. There will be plenty of time for us to discover which movies have got the goods when we have 35 or 40 mainstream reviews to compare. I’m not going to let one cranky critic who has jet-lag in Venice blacken a movie that might fare better in the real world.
You obviously have no trouble finding all the negative and mediocre reviews you want. Anybody familiar with Google can do what you’ve done. But you won’t see review excerpts that prematurely bash movies on this site posted by me.
[the exception, of course, would be if I’ve seen the movie and already have an opinion of my own. But I’m sure you see the difference between expressing my own opinion or reporting hearsay about some other blogger who doesn’t like something. If you want to know what other bloggers think, you know where to find them.]
Right now I’m looking for good movies. I’m not interested in exposing the bad ones.
Lol, whats wrong with Stephanie Zacharek?
Her taste.
She hates most movies I like and she likes most movies I hate. Why would I want to help spread an opinion I think is nonsense?
Put another way, I don’t think she’s reliable. It’s silly to think I’d cite an “authority” I don’t trust, right?
Lol, whats wrong with Stephanie Zacharek?
I can understand wanting to stick to American critics but why just positive ones? Doesnt the mixed, variety report count as worth mentioning? Not criticising your coverage, just curious.
zzzzzzzzz,
If you read Sasha’s piece a couple of days ago, “Oscar Season Starts, Beware the Insta-Pundit” you’ll better understand why we’re not interested in smothering kittens in a sack this time of year.
Festival mentality bears little relation to a movie’s reception in wide release. (you’ll even find critics who revise their own opinions in the months that transpire between a film’s festival premiere and it’s opening in multiplexes.)
We don’t mind reporting on good early buzz — and we hope those first favorable impressions hold on throughout the season. We’re happy to help a movie out if it shows promise.
But I’m not comfortable kicking a movie in the teeth when it’s just emerging from its cocoon. There will be plenty of time for us to discover which movies have got the goods when we have 35 or 40 mainstream reviews to compare. I’m not going to let one cranky critic who has jet-lag in Venice blacken a movie that might fare better in the real world.
You obviously have no trouble finding all the negative and mediocre reviews you want. Anybody familiar with Google can do what you’ve done. But you won’t see review excerpts that prematurely bash movies on this site posted by me.
[the exception, of course, would be if I’ve seen the movie and already have an opinion of my own. But I’m sure you see the difference between expressing my own opinion or reporting hearsay about some other blogger who doesn’t like something. If you want to know what other bloggers think, you know where to find them.]
Right now I’m looking for good movies. I’m not interested in exposing the bad ones.
Lol, whats wrong with Stephanie Zacharek?
Her taste.
She hates most movies I like and she likes most movies I hate. Why would I want to help spread an opinion I think is nonsense?
Put another way, I don’t think she’s reliable. It’s silly to think I’d cite an “authority” I don’t trust, right?
I agree with you Ryan about Guy, he is a great writer but very particular about his taste. And the commenting on KK’s jaw being the most prominent feature in the film really annoyed me!
Guy is a good friend and his writing is impeccably stylish. I probably like Guy more than he likes me.
But if the crux of this issue is to question why we featured a review for A Dangerous Method instead of Carnage, then Guy is not the best example to throw at me. He gave both movies **1/2 stars. C+ for both of them.
I agree with you Ryan about Guy, he is a great writer but very particular about his taste. And the commenting on KK’s jaw being the most prominent feature in the film really annoyed me!
Guy is a good friend and his writing is impeccably stylish. I probably like Guy more than he likes me.
But if the crux of this issue is to question why we featured a review for A Dangerous Method instead of Carnage, then Guy is not the best example to throw at me. He gave both movies **1/2 stars. C+ for both of them.
Variety, In contention, Movieline all have their reviews up. Very mixed set of opinions.
We call it as we see it.
We decided to run with positive reaction to A Dangerous Method because it seems more viable at this moment. If the tide changes, our coverage will change too.
due respect to Guy Lodge, he’s a fine writer, but he’s not an American critic. His point of view is decidedly out of sync with the sensibilities that determine Oscar potential — and I’m sure he’s quite proud of that. I know I would be.
Movieline? ha, sorry. I don’t quote Stephanie Zacharek. I don’t even read her anymore.
Variety, In contention, Movieline all have their reviews up. Very mixed set of opinions.
We call it as we see it.
We decided to run with positive reaction to A Dangerous Method because it seems more viable at this moment. If the tide changes, our coverage will change too.
due respect to Guy Lodge, he’s a fine writer, but he’s not an American critic. His point of view is decidedly out of sync with the sensibilities that determine Oscar potential — and I’m sure he’s quite proud of that. I know I would be.
Movieline? ha, sorry. I don’t quote Stephanie Zacharek. I don’t even read her anymore.
2 out of 5 Stars by the guardian.co.uk
I also made a comment concerning the strange way of reporting here at Awardsdaily.
Take a look at “The State of the Race: Oscar Season Starts, Beware the Insta-Pundit”
UK reviews have Zero impact on US critics awards, Zero effect on US audiences, and scant influence on the Academy.
I rarely post excerpts from any UK paper except the Guardian and even then only as a curiosity.
Seems to us that American reviews for Carnage have been much more mixed than the more enthusiastic US reaction I’ve seen today for A Dangerous Method.
You’re welcome to contribute references to any UK review that tickle your fancy as part of your own strange way of making the same comment in multiple posts.
2 out of 5 Stars by the guardian.co.uk
I also made a comment concerning the strange way of reporting here at Awardsdaily.
Take a look at “The State of the Race: Oscar Season Starts, Beware the Insta-Pundit”
UK reviews have Zero impact on US critics awards, Zero effect on US audiences, and scant influence on the Academy.
I rarely post excerpts from any UK paper except the Guardian and even then only as a curiosity.
Seems to us that American reviews for Carnage have been much more mixed than the more enthusiastic US reaction I’ve seen today for A Dangerous Method.
You’re welcome to contribute references to any UK review that tickle your fancy as part of your own strange way of making the same comment in multiple posts.
The critics response to the movie ranges from mixed to very, very divisive particularly when it comes to Knightley’s performance.
The critics response to the movie ranges from mixed to very, very divisive particularly when it comes to Knightley’s performance.
Kubrick Comparisons? I know I’m in the minoirty on Dead Ringers, but damn, can’t wait to read the thoughts of other reviewers.
I wonder when or if we’ll see another film from McCarthy.
Kubrick Comparisons? I know I’m in the minoirty on Dead Ringers, but damn, can’t wait to read the thoughts of other reviewers.
I wonder when or if we’ll see another film from McCarthy.