Montgomery Cliff (in his last role) plays James Bower, an American physicist visiting West Germany who's recruited by a shady CIA agent, named Adam, to help them with the defection of a ... See full summary »
This pseudobiographical movie depicts five years from 1885 on in the life of the Viennese psychologist Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). At this time, most of his colleagues refuse to cure hysteric patients, because they believe they're just simulating to gain attention. But Freud learns to use hypnosis to find out the reasons for the psychosis. His main patient is a young woman who refuses to drink water and is plagued repeatedly by the same nightmare.Written by
Tom Zoerner <Tom.Zoerner@informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
John Huston wanted Marilyn Monroe to play the role of Cecily but Freud's daughter, Anna Freud, expressed her unhappiness about having members of her family being portrayed on film. This gave Monroe the opt-out she was looking for as she had no desire with Huston again. See more »
[when Dr. Breuer is the only one to shake hands with him after he has presented a controversial theory]
You're not afraid to touch the leper?
See more »
Originally prepared at 140 minutes; cut to 120 minutes for theatrical release. Some older TV prints still use the cut version; full-length version is now available on DVD in the UK (as of 2015 there has been no domestic Region 1 DVD release.) See more »
I found this film by accident. A happy one? Montgomery Cliff, John Huston, Jean-Paul Sartre and an image of Marilyn Monroe are purposely put together though it comes across as accidental.
On the plus, it is educational to see how something mainstream presents material which should be avant guard. The dream sequences are interesting for that reason as the film would have been much better if they pushed the envelope. Instead, the film maintains a balance in the imaginings of what an Oedipal Complex were, of what dreams are like, and, I suppose, the images are as developed as they could be for 1960's America. For that reason I recommend it: The film is a bit of time capsule in how films were made.
Against the film, the pacing is unnecessarily slow and the acting is wooden or melodramatic for todays audience. The dialogue presents the Freud's ideas with ease but there 's no art in the language.
7 of 10 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this