Talk:A Dangerous Method
|WikiProject Film||(Rated Start-class)|
I added a citation for John Kerr's book re: Spielrein was one of the first female psychoanalysts. I am new to doing citations, not sure if I used the proper form (I copied a citation from another page and plugged in the relevant info), especially since all the other citations here are online references. Hope to expand this soon but I want to watch the film again. Beadmatrix (talk) 13:29, 1 April 2012 (UTC)Beadmatrix
I know it's too long right now, but it's a lot to digest. The original author may have been concerned with spoilers or simply may not have seen it, but there was no plot here to speak of. I've watched the film twice (who knew you could watch new releases on PPV?!?!) and I'm not finished reading the book yet. I think it would be difficult to pull the threads together from the film without reading the book or at least having an extensive knowledge of psychoanalysis, or psychology, before watching it. And I think it's better to be comprehensive, which is one salient feature of an encyclopedia, and to prune carefully, than to be too sketchy (which I actually think the fim is). I'm showing a bit of bias there, but I'm not trying to hide it. I'd like to tackle an article about the book but that is another story, I'm not ready for that yet. Next up is expanding on the critical reception, a project for another day. Beadmatrix (talk) 16:01, 1 April 2012 (UTC)Beadmatrix
1. I can't see why a plain statement of fact as to the use of leitmotifs is not acceptable. Any of the probably hundreds of thousands of Wagner lovers who have seen the film would recognise them. eg "Wagner fans would have noticed ......"
2.A direct quote from the Picard encyclopedia ref already given " Thomas Mann voyait en Wagner l'homme qui avant Freud explora les situations oedipiennes, et Groddeck considérera le Ring comme le premier manuel de psycoanalyse" or translated: "Thomas Mann saw in Wagner the man who before Freud expolored the Oedipal situations , and Groddeck would consider the Ring as the first manual of psychoanalysis' ;
another additional direct quote ""Before Freud was born, Wagner publicly analysed the Oedipus myth in terms of its psychological significance,insisting that incestuous desires are natural and normal, and perceptively exhibiting the relationship between sexuality and anxiety" Magee B. Wagner and Philosophy . Penguin,London 2001 p 85.
The whole Jung entry in Picard p1003-4 is also very informative as to Jung's building on the work of use of Wagner in his own psychoanalytic work.
Note that the Burghold ref lists the music of and occurrence of all Ring leitmotifs against the text.
Hi Amfortasj, re: undoing your edits: I think your discussion of these motifs does not properly belong in the plot section for the film. It is important to try to limit this section to what actually occurs, or is said, in the film itself, rather than what might be said about it. Also, if memory serves, Sabina names Das Rheingold specifically as her favorite of Wagner's operas. I think it is important also to find sources to cite for discussion of those themes, or Wikipedia calls it "original research". I have many thoughts and opinions on the subject myself but we have to be careful how we write about it here. I'm not an expert by any means but I hope you'll consider a different approach to these ideas. Beadmatrix (talk) 20:15, 2 April 2012 (UTC)Beadmatrix
reply from amfortasj: I think the discussion on Wagner and psychoanalysis and the deliberate use of leitmotifs is important. For references see eg Donington R ,Wagner's Ring and its Symbols London.Faber 1963; Dictionnaire Encyclopédique Wagner Paris,Actes Sud 2010 p 759. Magee B Wagner and Philosophy London,Penguin 2000. I have been lecturing and contibuting to the Wagner Society publications for over 50 years and have never seen such explicit use of Wagnerian motifs in a film before. Note: Das Rheingold is the first opera in the Ring Cycle (Das Rheingold, Die Walküre, Siegfried ,Götterdämmerung). I think it is safe to assume that Spielrein and Jung would have been familiar with all four parts of the cycle, not just the first. Maybe put it in under a new subheading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amfortasj (talk • contribs) 01:12, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
- Good to hear from you Amfortas! I've created a section here on the talk page for this topic, but see below for the reasons why it shouldn't be a section by itself in the article. I am not knowledgable about Wagner, but am looking forward to learning more. I do know that Jung and Spielrein's identification with this myth was a primary source for Spielrein's dissertation, "Destruction as the Cause of Coming Into Being", and their conversations about these themes were a major impetus behind Jung's "Symbols of Transformation". Here's the guideline for discussion of these themes, which you can use to begin structuring a section, using your "sandbox" here on wikipedia:
- Inclusion of a treatment of a film's themes – well-sourced and cited to avoid original research – is encouraged since an article's value to a reader and its real-world context will be enhanced. A separate section is not required if it is more appropriate to place the material in the Production or Reception sections.
- And here's a link to the page:
- So this topic may be better addressed in the reception section, or if you can locate any comments in interviews or press releases about the intended use of Wagnerian themes by the filmmakers, in the production section. But "Wagnerian Themes" isn't going to be a section by itself, I don't think, so I'm going to remove the heading for now. Looking forward to learning more from your area of expertise! Beadmatrix (talk) 06:20, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Beadmatrix
Hi Amfortas. Your ideas are very interesting but the format you used doesn't work; you cannot write your review of the film's use of Wagner's themes - you have to cite others. For example: Who "noticed" the use of musical leitmotifs from Wagner's four part opera cycle in the film - besides you? You are not citing that someone wrote about this music - you have to cite the reviewer or writer who noticed how it was used in the film. If you can't cite a source you can't use it. I have almost finished John Kerr's scholarly book from which the film was derived, and he makes it clear that Wagner's retelling of this legend inspired Jung and Spielrein to look for the roots of mythology, but that does not mean that Wagner anticipated the techniques of psychoanalysis or analytical psychology - but if you can find a source who said that, I'd love to see it. It would be great if you could include full or partial quotes for your assertions.
- Hi Amfortas, can you please research and find citations from either the filmmakers (quotes or interviews, why the use of Wagner's music in the film) or from movie reviews? If you find info from the filmmakers, that would go in the production section; from reviewers, in the reception section. Perhaps if you read some other film articles it might help, I will try to get some links for you to use as a reference for how to write about the use of musical themes in a film...
- For the film Alien, there is a complete section on the music, but it emphasizes how the fimmakers chose and used the music. There are quotes from the composer and the director, and references to the film's editor, as well as the musicians:
- Here's a very different example, from The Third Man, just for comparision:
- I hope this helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beadmatrix (talk • contribs) 05:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Permission Request to Add a Link to this Aticle
I want to ask for permission if it's possible to please add the following link to the External Link part of this article:
A Dangerous Method Movie Quotes MovieQuotesandMore.com
I hope I've asked this at the right place!
I do hate anonymous edits.*Sigh*. But I added a bunch of citations to the plot section, pending another viweing of the film.I believe almost all of this is in the film itself, and so does not require citations - but I don't have a video to replay right now, so it'll have to wait. And it will take a little time to find the few other locations that elucidate ideas that may have ben unclear in the film. Beadmatrix (talk) 14:19, 7 April 2012 (UTC)Beadmatrix
Could someone knowledgeable about the true lives of these people write about theaccuracy of this film? This movie is going to form the opinon of a lot of people about this method. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 19:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
- All the citations in the plot section are referenced from the scholarly non-fiction book (500+ pages) written by John Kerr, which was the foundation of the stage play adapted for this film. Many of the original sources were letters written by all three people to each other, and most of Spielrein's were found quite recently and have not been published in English. If you are interested in learning more the book is quite good, and maybe I'll tackle an article about the book next. But the links in the text also provide much corroboration from other sources. I see a conflict with John Kerr's assessment of Spielrein's theory and the filmmakers' (and playwright's) contention that Jung and Spielrein engaged in BDSM, but I have yet to read a review or authoritative criticism which I can cite. And the article is not finished; some things become clearer with time, hopefully the discussion around these topics will too. Beadmatrix (talk) 11:51, 19 April 2012 (UTC)Beadmatrix
- PS I need to carefully read the guidelines about sections on historical accuracy, but my impression is that they are generally discouraged, if the issues can be addressed in other sections (like production re: intentions and reception re: impressions). Beadmatrix (talk) 11:54, 19 April 2012 (UTC)Beadmatrix
My understanding is that we do not even know whether Jung and Spielrein had an adulterous relationship (though they were certainly emotionally involved in some personal way). Feketekave (talk) 10:44, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
The "Reception" section could use some work. The lead opinion is from a critic of little notoriety, and the rest of the section has little to do with what critics actually thought of the film. Jedgeco (talk) 19:31, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Yep that's my next project - not tonight tho. Beadmatrix (talk) 04:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)Beadmatrix
Kundry: A lot of dust; no coffee...
I missed a critcal point of view in filming freud#s an jung#s rivalery. The so called "historical" film is fiction on a triangel; forbidden relationship focussing. A pschychy, who is able to define his own urging neuroses and suggesting a centery this one as their ones, is a phanonomen worth to be told. The real historic circumstances, the growing nazism; who freud mirrows are missing. So it#s somehow a belly-botton story in historic costumes....and when the wellkwon dog, a ciao-ciao, had played "with", something about unconcious urges could be revealed. I think--- by oposing end them!--Ai-mu-mu (talk) 19:32, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
- Your post is almost incomprehensible, so I'm unsure if you are commenting on how to improve the article, or commenting on the film itself. If you comment pertains only to the film, it is inappropriate here. Talk pages are only for comments about improving the article. Cresix (talk) 20:00, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Does article's Plot section go beyond what is in the Film?
I have only seen the movie once and may be mistaken, but my sense is that the article's Plot section may incorporate material and details not actually covered explicitly in the film -- possibly drawing on the original book? As one example, I do not recall the film showing SF dismissing SS's ideas at a Vienna meeting. I am also not sure if CJ's "refusal to give her a love child" is made this explicit, nor if all the details about SF and CJ's use of SS's work are as clear in the film as they are made here. Are we looking at a description more of the book than of the film? Nandt1 (talk) 13:27, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- At one time it had a substantial amount of material about the history of psychoanalysis and biographical details that were not in the film. I removed as much as I could find, but if you know of more and are sure it's not in the film, go ahead and remove it. Or if you're not sure, bring it up here as you did above and perhaps others will remember details. Cresix (talk) 15:44, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
I decided to reference the original book on which the play and the film were based because the there are some points which the film doesn't make very clear, and the guidelines say: "Complicated plots may occasionally require clarifications from secondary sources, so cite these sources in the section." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Films/Style_guidelines I had almost finished reading the book when I watched the film, twice in 2 days, and checked the dialogue and events carefully. The filmmaker's POV seemed somewhat different than the historical record presented in the book, which was not fiction but historical analysis of the central characters personal correspondence and publications, but I tried to maintain the filmmaker's presentation and POV. The plot isn't terribly complicated but the conflicts that drive it are subtler than they might appear at first. Beadmatrix (talk) 03:37, 4 November 2012 (UTC)Beadmatrix
- Still, the "refusal to give her a love child" section is not in the film (watched it twice), so it should be removed from the plot section. Cronenberg did talk about the child Spielrein and Jung never had as a sort of "Wagnerian hero" in interviews, so it could be mentioned in the background infos on the film. – Robert Kerber (talk) 11:57, 10 January 2013 (UTC)