Experimenter (2015)

Gripping study. Explains my own thoughts of Nazi Germany.

Fmovies: 2015 was a very unusual year because two different movies debuted that were about famous (or perhaps infamous) studies that are discussed in practically every introductory psychology textbook published over the last three decades. After all, it's not like there is a huge demand for this sort of thing and the market for such films is pretty limited. While I was not particularly impressed by "The Stanford Prison Experiment", "Experimenter" is simply terrific and I was shocked by the wonderful writing and direction by Michael Almereyda. In fact, it's so good and the style is so amazing that I think most everyone could enjoy and appreciate the film...if they end up seeing it, which isn't very likely.

I have a greater interest in this sort of film than most people because I taught psychology and used to be a psychotherapist. When I taught, I frequently talked about the ethics or ethical lapses of the Zimbardo Prison Study as well as the Milgram Obedience Study. But, as I said above, the way Almereyda wrote and designed the film make it a film for anyone...not just geeky ex-psychology teachers!

"Experimenter" begins with a graphic depiction of Milgram's classic study. I was very surprised at the choice of actors, as Anthony Edwards (E.R.) and the stand-up comedian Jim Gaffigan played subjects in this experiment...and they both were excellent. In Milgram's experiment of the early 60s, there were two subjects--one a real subject and another who pretended to be one but who was actually working for the experimenter. The study was supposedly about learning methods and one subject was chosen to be the 'educator' and the other the 'subject'--but this was rigged and the real subject was always the educator. The educator's job was to read questions over a loud speaker to the subject in the next room. If the subject missed a question, the educator was instructed to administer an electric shock--and the intensity of the shocks increased throughout the experiment. The subject followed a script in which he eventually begins to complain about the pain of the shocks and even say that he wants to stop....yet the psychologist there in the room with the educator encourages them to continue. Amazingly, despite educators thinking they were causing significant pain, about 65% of them went all the way...even shocking the subject AFTER they stopped responding altogether!!

The experiment's true purpose was to demonstrate that the same sort of blind obedience to authority that the Nazis showed in the death camps and their willingness to follow rules still exists in societies today. Many praised his insightful and brilliant study, but many also criticized its methodology and thought the study was very unethical. This was also true in the Stanford Prison Experiment--yet, oddly, that film never really addressed concerns about ethics--which is why I found that film so disappointing. Fortunately, Experimenter did present both sides of the debate as well looked at Dr. Milgram as a person--something I never expected. To do this, they obtained the cooperation of the Milgram family t learn about the man. In fact, you can see the Professor's widow and brother interviewed on the special features on the DVD and they seemed very happy with the film. This is interesting because Stanley Milgram is very flawed in the movie. He's sometimes arrogant and smug and Almereyda did something very smart to help accentuate this. He had the actor playing Milgram, Peter Sarsgaard, occa

Science and Psychology in Academia and Art are not usually Associated. But that didn't stop Director Almereyda Painting a Canvas of the Surreal and Expressionistic in telling the Story of the Real-Life Professor Peter Milgram and His now Famous and Controversial, early Sixties 'Experiments" and Study.

What has become Infamous as the "Shock Study" has its Detractors but over Time, as the initial "Shock" of the Methods and the Results were Contemplated and Peer Reviewed, are now mostly Accepted as Valid and Repeatable.

The Film is Straight-Forward about the Study, the Man, and the Repercussions He endured. Verbally, the Script is Played out in typical, Dry, Academics. But the Director Unleashes many Bizarre Backdrops and Heightens the Reality to Absurdity to give the Film a Pleasant, Dreamy, Subconscious Feel as the Textbook Stuff is Explained.

Many well Known and A-List Actors show up throughout the Film for a Scene or two and add some Weight to the already Heavy Subject, but it is the Whimsy of the Wrapping that keeps things Digestible for the Non-Eggheads.

In Other Words, it is made to Entertain as well as Inform. Off-Beat and Self-Conscious, Playful, yet Ultra-Serious, Peter Sarsgaard and Winona Ryder lead this Lecture that Touches on many of the Controversial, Historical outcomes of the Professor's Work that is still being Studied to this Day.

Experimenter fmovies. The movie titled "Experimenter (2015)" I feel was a great film. I loved the styling of the film most of all especially the green screen backdrops and how they offset the vibe of the view. The acting and the cast I believe were perfect for such a film and the story was very intriguing. I've saw various films based on human experiments and I believe this one was perfectly created. The educational standpoint or setting of where, when, and why was a great introduction and following through out the film. I enjoyed how it showed the mindset of humanity in its time frame being that I'm certain the results would in today's time be even worse as humanity has devalued its beliefs, ethics, and life meanings.

Very well put together film, and once again I cannot express how well the cast performed within such a film style. It was artistic, poetic, yet realistic; great stuff.

This film is NOT about the Milgram experiment ALONE (the one with shocks and the way we behave when prodded by a person in authority) - and that is what makes this film so interesting! The film is about Stanley Milgram the person. It only starts with his 1961 experiment (which occurred nearly around the same time as the Eichmann trials and Hannah Arendt's writings and hence garnered even more interest). It then continues to show the travails that he passed, his life and how the experiment changed people's perceptions towards him (some interesting reactions here - do watch it and be prepared for the surprises)! For such a popular experiment, there is a surprising lot that many of us (e for certain) may not have known - the film fills in that (large) gap.

There is one big difference between this film and the similar 2015 film "Stanford Prison Experiment" (which I also highly recommend) - This film has a far happier ending and hence makes it even more interesting from a cinematic perspective.

Do watch this film - you will not regret it.

This movie is about Stanley Milgram, arguably one of the most important social psychologists in our field, and specifically about one of his most important experiment - his obedience to authority experiment.

The movie depicts to my knowledge accurately the setup, conduction, and results of the experiment and goes further, crafting an interesting and weighted portrayal of the man that Stanley Milgram was. The acting is low key, Peter Sarsgaard especially delivers a down to earth performance which shows that he rigorously prepared for the role. All supporting characters (e.g. Winona Ryder, Anton Yelchin) do a good job and no one distracts from the key issues raised by the experiment.

Cinematography is good, although nothing special. Occasionally there are creative moments in direction. When the 4rth wall is broken by Sarsgaard and he speaks directly to the audience, weird things happen in the background, making these moments very endearing and interesting.

There are no thrills or action in this movie, as well as no conventional drama. It is kind of a biopic with a twist, although I would say the biographic aspect is downplayed by the focus on this specific experiment. Many scientific issues are addressed on a side note (e.g. the ethical code of doing experiments, which triggered the proliferation of ethical committees for scientific research).

I would recommend this movie to people who are interested in science, more specifically in psychology (but not exclusively), that do not need action, drama, or thrills and enjoy a well researched and crafted movie with good acting.