User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 102 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 72 out of 102
  2. Negative: 12 out of 102

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 27, 2011
    Summary: On the eve of World War I, Zurich and Vienna are the setting for a boring snooze-fest of epic proportions. Drawn from true-life events, "A Dangerous Method" manages to take the turbulent relationships between fledgling psychiatrist Carl Jung, his mentor Sigmund Freud, and Sabina Spielrein, the troubled but beautiful (phew! at least she's beautiful!) young woman who comes between them, and reduce them to a stilted, dry-as-sawdust, repetitive, uninteresting, and unenlightening entry from a 1950s World Book encyclopaedia. Into the mix comes Otto Gross, a debauched patient who is determined to push the boundaries. One might hope that this would offer the filmmakers an opportunity to explore any of the myriad fascinating aspects of all of these characters, their relationships, their theories, and the times in which they lived. Sadly, however, the movie descends even further into turgid, pseudo-intellectual, phony claptrap, the only physiological stimulation for audience members being a catastrophically hammy and unrealistic performance by the usually excellent anorexic, Keira Knightley. In this supposed exploration of sensuality, pretentiousness and cluelessness set the scene for the cinematic equivalent of an elementary school production of "The Miracle Worker." Expand
  2. Mar 6, 2012
    With such good prospects : Freud at the beginning of his clash with a conservative society and David Cronenberg who has been on ice for some time one would think that we would get some good food for thought and some good jolts of eeriness. But apart from some old school S&M and some odd sexual remarks of sorts nothing really happens that could interest or shock anybody (well maybe a diehard Jane Austen fan) Expand
  3. Dec 3, 2011
    just terrible, terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,just terrible, terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible,terrible.
  4. Dec 17, 2011
    A real Cronenberg dud. Lifeles and talky, the film makes Jung and Freud dull and flat and adds nothing to our knowledge of both. At first we are detached and soon we don't really care. Follow your impulse and leave -- it only gets worse and you certainly have better things to do than sit through this. Knightley's perfomance as Jung's patient and assistant is an exhibitionist act without a shred of authenticity. It will make you cringe and wish somebody take her out of the film. Nothing in that film rings true - we would be better off if it had never been mad Expand
  5. Jan 16, 2012
    Vapid. Inert. Lifeless. And other synonyms for this beautiful period piece. It is nicely filmed and doubtless faithful to its sources. But it is so austere that there is little to which to relate. The male leads are strong, particularly Freud, but the female lead's opening scenes are over-acted. Gorgeous buildings.
  6. Dec 22, 2013
    A lifeless dull film, aside from Knightley's overacted and frankly bad performance, that doesn't thrill, doesn't touch, and it's not even a real love story. The movie is just a total bore.
  7. Aug 30, 2012
    I had so high expecations in this film from the trailer, which all got destroyed with seeing the movie. Fassbender, Mortensen and Knigthley play ineffectual and the Golden Globe nomination for Mortensen shows again how bad these awards are. Knightley plays her role over the top and ends out being noncredible. The story is only halfway there and mixes these two psychoanalysts and these unfitting sado-maso-story, which is probably only there to make the film more interesting. This is the case in the trailer but not in the movie, which actually is one of the most boring movies in the 21st century by now. Silly dialogues, leap in times from 1 year after only one minute of speaking and so on. It's not that worse but definitely not worth to watch. It doesn't thrill, it doesn't touch, it's not even a real love story. Expand

Generally favorable reviews - based on 41 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 33 out of 41
  2. Negative: 1 out of 41
  1. Reviewed by: William Thomas
    Feb 6, 2012
    Despite a top-notch cast performing well, and bravely in the case of Knightley, this is an austere, somewhat repressed movie. It never really gets under the skin in the way Cronenberg does at his best.
  2. Reviewed by: Mike Scott
    Jan 27, 2012
    A Dangerous Method still feels as if it's based on a rather pedestrian narrative --and so, in the final analysis, Cronenberg's film bores.
  3. Reviewed by: Steve Persall
    Jan 25, 2012
    A Dangerous Method is a movie believing the most formidable sex organ really is the brain.