Stream or Skip
This week’s Layers of Adaptation Theater Freud’s last session ” (currently available on Netflix), a film adaptation of the stage play (of the same name) based on the book (god’s question The father of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud, and the writer C.S. Lewis (who almost certainly never met, but if the film’s afterword is to be believed, may have – no one knows for sure) It is based on a fictitious meeting, sword fight, and debate between the Japanese and Chinese (who are also unknown). Anthony Hopkins plays the atheist Freud and Matthew Goode plays the devoted Christian Lewis, and they engage in ideological debates about everything as World War II breaks out across Europe. This premise is appealing in theory, but what happens in practice? I’m a little unsure.
Abstract: London in 1939. Two days ago, Hitler invaded Poland. British citizens are nervous and are considering fleeing the country. Sigmund Freud (Hopkins) suffers from the constant pain of oral cancer, the after-effects of surgery to treat it, dental prosthetics, and is likely to die from the disease, so his daughter Anna (Liv Lisa)・Send Fleece to cover an academic lecture. She was placed on his chin. He pours himself some whiskey and mixes it with a dropperful of morphine. That’s how he gets through the next 1-3 hours, then drinks another horrifyingly powerful self-medicating cocktail.
It is difficult to know whether Freud felt threatened by the impending war. He listens to BBC news radio broadcasts in an almost dismissive manner, as if accepting that he may not even live to see Britain’s involvement. Then Lewis (Goode) arrives at Freud’s house.Freud called him for a meeting – Lewis is a writer of note, but he has not yet written a famous book at this time The Chronicles of Narnia In the novel, he professed to have renounced atheism for Christian doctrine. It is unclear why Freud provoked this debate, but he sees in Lewis a fascinating psychological study, a patient who fundamentally changed his ideology, and is worth pursuing further. It may be thought that this is the case. Alas, Lewis apparently wrote a piece that fooled Freud, but Freud never bothered to admit that he had read it.
And they veer from prickly and bellicose to kind and loving as they explore worldviews that, although seemingly separated by a wide, yawning chasm, sometimes overlap. . Freud calls belief in God an “obsessive-compulsive neurosis,” while Lewis dismisses psychoanalytic theory as exploring the “latent perversions” in everyone–then an air raid siren sounds and they scramble. So we headed to a nearby church and huddled in the basement. along with many others. Lewis suffers from panic attacks due to the trauma of fighting in the trenches during World War I, but Freud calms him down. The air raid then turns out to be a false alarm, and they laugh when they hear the announcement that follows, “Sorry, no bombs.”
As the two men spar, the story returns to the moment Lewis meets JRR Tolkien, or ends up becoming a literal atheist (deep sigh) in the trenches. It also depicts a scene in which Freud is urged to flee Vienna due to fascist rule, and a hallucination sequence set immediately after his jaw surgery. As they discuss sex and war, hatred and pain, Freud receives many phone calls and sometimes ends up turning on the radio to hear updates on the war. Freud appears to be addicted to morphine and desperately wants Anna to find him a pharmacy to refill his prescription. Will Freud and Lewis become friends? It’s certainly not easy, but if they can share their strengths and weaknesses on an equal basis, there’s a pretty good chance they’ll be on each other’s Christmas cards. That’s a good sign.
What movies do you remember?: One of the “what if” and “could have” critiques: If we rationalize this story, we might end up with something like this. dinner with andre between two cultural luminaries.
Featured performance: At times, I became irritated by Hopkins’ purposeful displays of affection—his rushed lines, his frequent obsessive, almost compulsive manner; Hehehehe Giggling – But no matter what role he plays, he never fails to deliver a consistently engaging and provocative performance.
Memorable dialogue: Students question Anna’s credentials as an academic.
Jerk: She’s not even a doctor. Why should you waste your time listening to her lecture?
Anna: You shouldn’t, Mr. Hansel. That’s exactly right. You won’t learn anything. I think you know everything there is to know about adolescent narcissism.
Gender and skin: none.
Our view: I argue that dinner with andre Tackle would have worked better than coach Matt Brown’s conservative, middle-of-the-road approach. It seems as if the cutaways and flashbacks were devised to make the film more visually dynamic than two guys talking in a room, and they execute in a somewhat confusing and confusing way. will be done. Sometimes all it takes is two of his stalwarts like Hopkins and Goode and some inspired dialogue to make a great movie. But it’s almost as if Brown (with whom he co-wrote the screenplay). Freud’s last session Playwright Marc St. Germain (playwright Marc St. Germaine) plays the role in a stripped-down, unconventional, and unpleasant way, even as his characters discuss sex, death, and suffering under the existential umbrella of war. I don’t trust the subject matter enough to make it too dark.
You also won’t be surprised to learn that Goode is in a bind when it comes to characters. He’s a reasonably talented actor, but he’s no Sir Anthony Hopkins. Because there is only one Sir Anthony Hopkins. And when Siberia’s largest bear walks around, it will be the first to eat it. There is more of a dynamic in Freud, as a man in the final stages of his life comes into dialogue with his daughter and with the “unhealthy paternal attachment” she has to her father. Hopkins almost seems aware of how solid the script is, and digs in to make it interesting, with Freud playing Lewis off-duty and out of bounds, knowing it probably wouldn’t be appropriate to question him. As the analyst chastises Lewis, he indulges in a few histrionic flourishes. His parents and his sex life, but do it anyway.But the actors’ attempts to enliven a structurally challenged and plodding script aren’t enough to boost reviews. Freud’s last session A thoroughly fascinating and provocative drama. When an atheist and a Christian sit down to argue, it shouldn’t be this boring.
Our call: Strong premise, great cast, and bland execution. Please skip.
John Selva is a freelance writer and film critic based in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Load more…
Source link
