Lack of good storyline.

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

A Dangerous Method3 Out Of 5A Dangerous Method is a plot driven dramatic tale featuring the most complex relationship possible in the most simple way possible; a swing and a miss since the concept had an enormous amount of potential. The taboo subjects that are explored in here barely scratches the surface, to a point, that it makes you feel cheated as for the rest of the feature the subject is left to rot out on the corner of the shelf. The conversations are wise and explicitly written but unfortunately isn't as layered and thought-provoking as it thinks it is. Cronenberg's world in here is all bourgeois as far as it is investing on setting the sub-plot of each character, and when the scrutiny finally hits, all it can draw out from its audience is a mere nod, no matter how genuine. It is rich on technical aspects like stunning costume design, mesmerizing visuals and perfect editing. The chemistry among the characters is one of its strength especially between Mortensen and Fassbender; a real delight to see them go head to head on screen. Cronenberg; the director, is on his A game in each frame of the feature as the soul and kind-hearted suave tone communicates fluently with the audience. Knightly's performance is laborious which may be appreciative but certainly not enchanting as it was aspired to be. Fassbender is vulnerable and struggles through itself in an apt portrayal of his but the real show-stealer is Mortensen in his poised and arrogant walks that speaks more than the words. The production design and background score could have been a lot better. Pragmatic conversations and fast paced adapted screenplay are the only high points of this feature. A Dangerous Method is actually a sheltered and secured pathos methodology that never visits its third dimension which had the correct answer.

Keira Knightley is awful in this, totally overacting it and almost caricaturing the role in the process. She ought to stick to comedy or something, anything but this. Viggo Mortensen has no air or authority about his role at all. Michael Fassbender is actually asleep throughout the entire movie. Sarah Gadon is a blinding light in the darkness, but sadly unable to light the way through as the darkness is too strong. The dialogue is absolutely painful, with some bits embarrassingly inappropriate. Knightley's character claiming she "got wet" instead of saying she was aroused? The editor wants shot for that remark alone. The breast shots are totally gratuitous as they lend nothing to the story and in fact detract from it. Finally, there are some pretentious conversations between Yung and Freud, but nothing at all that explains either their friendship nor their breaking up. All in all a dire film, no wonder no-one watched it and it made a huge loss.

What does this movie show us? Thats the question here we are to ask ourselves.In my opinion we see here two mentally unstable psychoanalysts. Which seems to be a contradiction. But as mentioned in the movie "how can we be a good Doctor without being a bit ill". Which seems absolute right. Though the work of Sigmund Freud is the utmost interesting the way he behaves in this movie he gets blocked in his work because of his inflexibility in his thinking. He seems not insane enough to go on with his work.In the beginning it's certain that Sabina has gone mad. Though the first surprise is directly why she had gone mad. Until i all becomes clear it seems like she had been sexually abused by her father and that that caused a trauma. Though a second later the whole story makes a u- turn. Not a trauma was caused but a longing to pleasure an addiction to the abuse.Then she seems to get better and the Doctor and her get closer as friends. Then when a patient makes the Doctor change his mind and Sabina and him get really close, first there seems nothing wrong. Until you can see that longing for pleasure has turned to him.She wasn't cured yet(what seemed the case) she just found another person that could satisfy her needs. Then when she gets more stable she seems finally possible of living a normal live but the relationship has still left a scar on her further live. He on the other hand seems to get worse with every decision he makes and becomes Les stable though he gets more focused on his work and Les influenced by others.

While being thrilled to Cronenberg's upcoming MAPS TO THE STARS, which will debut in Cannes this year in the main competition, it is an apposite time to visit his other work which escaped my watch list although COSMOPOLIS (2012, 4/10) is a fiasco which quite disheartens my faith, luckily, A DANGEROUS METHOD is surprisingly robust in depicting a historical love affair between one of the founding fathers of psychoanalysis, Doctor Carl Yung (Fassbender) and his Russian patient Sabina Spielrein (Knightley), at the dawn of 20th Century, at the same time, the film also probes into Yung's correspondence with Sigmund Freud (Mortensen), how their assumed mentor-and-next-in-line rapport disintegrates in the wake of their diversified convictions in the professional field. The film dedicatedly shuns away from being a hagiography, neither for Yung nor for Freud, their highly dialectical discourse is stingingly gripping, Freud avers all neurosis is of exclusively sexual origin while Yung champions parapsychology, plus Vincent Cassel, has a small role as the more unorthodox psychoanalyst Otto Gross, who is a game-changer in Jung's world-view when he attempts to analyze Gross. Words are not verbose anymore, in psychotherapy, it is the most or maybe only effective means to divulge what's hidden inside the labyrinthine mind, Fassbender and Mortensen are conspicuously excellent in their two-handers, the former often blinks rapidly as if he tries to convey his ideas through an impregnable wall erected by the latter, who never loses his composure and is indomitable to any rebuttal. This film is not at all Cronenberg-esque, it is a straightforward drama, the only remotely grotesque scenes are Keira Knightley's distorted effort to mimic a patient under hysteria, she is gutsy and to say the least, all-out for a difficult role involves with sadomasochism, anal fixation and insanity, I'm not a naysayer in her performance, on the contrary, she barely misses my top 10 list of leading actress in 2011, the sexual tension between Sabina and Dr. Yung is unforced, although as unlikely as an ace among his peers, Dr. Yung would make such a blunder at the first place to fall for his patient, he has his secrets too, a libido-driven temptation is too hard to reject, the pleasure which Sabina offers cannot be achieved from his melancholic wife Emma (an underplayed Sarah Gadon), eventually he becomes a monogamy dissenter as Otto has advised. A DANGEROUS METHOD inclines to be an actor's playground rather than Cronenberg's auteurist endeavor, stemming from my self-satisfying purpose, I hope MAPS TO THE STARS will be another vehicle for its A-list cast, in the main for my goddess Moore, who can return to the brutal Oscar battle in an age when most actress are regressing to sideline offers. Maybe Cronenberg is the right turn this time.