We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.
The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ...
Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.
Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.
Cronenberg is off on another different tangent in A Dangerous Method. It is pre-war 20th century and Michael Fassbender plays Carl Jung. A psychotherapist whose new patient (Knightley) is proving quite the challenge but also eventually a colleague in the field. Throughout the narrative though, Jung turns to the renowned Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen) for assistance and discussion.
The film was perhaps most misleading in some of its early publicity materials – almost making it seem like it would mainly focus on the meeting of the minds of both Fassbender’s and Mortensen’s characters. Fassbender is easily the lead of this film, but Mortensen is clearly an extended cameo player. His character comes and goes, and it’s a shame as the intelligent debate between the two is perhaps where this film strikes most of its high notes.
Keira Knightly is also in a leading role; but her character (and acting) wavers between commanding to just see-through. When she is called to act out her characters symptoms it isn’t always convincing, but clearly is a brave choice for the actress as she casts her eyes on yet more period set pictures to become involved in. She may seem intent on becoming the new Helena Bonham-Carter, but she is still leagues out of her depth before she gets there.
It falls then to Fassbender to drive the film from start to finish, but the narrative just isn’t compelling enough to keep a strong investment in any of the characters that come and go along the way. There are some interesting encounters for sure and there is a decent character study within the drama. But the issue is that you know all too well that it could have been told better, or with a stronger focus on more certain aspects of the study.
This is a slight dip in Cronnenberg’s current slate, but we suspect it won’t have any lasting negative effect on what he still has yet to come. It’s a shame thought that whilst this film may appeal to his core audience, they may come away with unrealised expectations.
Steven Hurst