Experimenter is based on the true story of famed social psychologist Stanley Milgram, who in 1961 conducted a series of radical behavior experiments that tested ordinary humans' willingness to obey by using electric shock. We follow Milgram, from meeting his wife Sasha through his controversial experiments that sparked public outcry. Just like with "The Stanford Prison Experiment" this is a film that suffers from a very dull script and will make viewers almost fell asleep and that is the bad because you have so many great actors in here but none of them got the material that they deserved. If you wanna watch a good film with the exact same plot go watch "The Experiment" and not "Experimenter"

By itself, this is not one of the world's greatest movies. It certainly attempted new venues in making semi-documentaries, and most of it is easily watchable, even humorous at times. But occasionally, things about the life of Stanley Milgram get thrown in at odd angles that don't really support the story, which begs the question of whether or not it would have been better to focus on the experiments, instead of the experimenter.That being said, the punch of the experiments is the thrill here. This is fare for the ones that seek brain-food. If you don't want your little gray cells to feast on a banquet of ideas, look elsewhere. There's not really a lot of anything else at this table.This is a movie that follows (generally) the life of the sociologist Stanly Milgram (played very well by Peter Sarsgaard). The man's main experiment, the Obedience Experiment, is of course his most famous and his most shocking one of the film (and of his life) and it is delivered to us early with the help of Winona Ryder (playing his wife), Jim Gaffigan (playing his partner in crime, so to speak) and even Anthony Edwards (playing one of the experimentees). It is all delivered well enough to ease you into the mind of this man, where his focuses were as a sociologist, and at the same time leaves you uneasy with what it is that he discovered with his work.Winona doesn't bring down the house here, but she does a solid job. Nobody really delivers anything in the realm of amazing here, but that's apparently not the point of the film. Whether or not they intended it, the experiments themselves do all the work of plot, character development, and intrigue that really carries you on throughout the film. The plot of this man's life is ordinary, the path taken throughout the movie is not spectacular. Everything goes back to the experiments themselves, and they are the star of this film. And amazingly, they do their job well.Although you will certainly be amused and enlightened by the lighter, less disturbing experiments done by this man, it will most certainly be the Obedience Experiment that will leave you with chills. The results of the experiment speak to the future generations of humanity, and are frightening to face in the calm, soft-colored palette of the movie. Perhaps it is the weight of that one experiment that carries you through the movie, waiting to see what Stanley comes up with next. Nothing he ever did beyond that first experiment ever compared to it, but the weight of it is/was so heavy that its impact is worth the price of admission.There's not really anything else to say. For the sake of the Obedience Experiment itself and what it means to the people of this planet, at the very least, you should watch it.Even if you decide to shut it off, once Mr. Milgram tries to move on to other things.

Michael Almereyda's Experimenter isn't what you would think it is. It is a documentary disguised as a movie that examines and experiments on the viewer through abstract story telling, bizarre imagery and personal quandaries. The film aims to tell us a very interesting story, but Experimenter always feels the need to remind us that we aren't as smart as the intellectuals showcased, making the audience feel considerably distanced. To start, the acting is pretty excellent overall. While I was never familiar with Stanley Milgram before, Peter Sarsgaard gave an incredibly intriguing performance as the sly social psychologist. He brought a surprising amount of depth to a character who would seemingly appear shallow. Winona Ryder also gave an excellent performance as Milgram's spouse. Her character serves as the audience's character as she is mostly unfamiliar with Milgram's work. She helps to reveal layers of humanity and emotion that we never expected from the icy and straight- faced Milgram. Even the sub-characters with minimal screen-time put in a great effort. Their small movements and facial expressions during the film's first experiment sequences are incredibly realistic and make these scenes totally engrossing.All the experiments shown and explained throughout the film are easily the film's best moments. These experiments and social predicaments are absolutely fascinating. They act as a vessel in which we can view raw human emotions and nature in unfamiliar and uncomfortable situations. Sadly, the film insists on making us feel like we are the ones being experimented on, which puts a considerable distance between the film and audience. Experimenter is a film about intellectuals and their need to put themselves above the public. The story shared with us is explained through abstract storytelling and some strange imagery, and many times throughout I couldn't shake the feeling that I was being pandered to. Experimenter becomes quite pretentious when it decides to abandon it's regular path of narrative and adopt a quirky and abstract style of storytelling. It isn't always like this though, but it does become quite obvious when the film thinks that it is so much smarter than it's audience. Experimenter manages to be entertaining most of the time, despite it's complicated and deep social psychology. But when Experimenter is bad, it's really bad. There are some stretches within the film that are completely dull and boring. These stretches are somewhat infrequent, but the entire film does take a hit when a narrative slump this massive shows up. Luckily, these parts aren't quite long enough to completely ruin the film, but they still are quite noticeable and unpleasant. The excellent acting and fascinating social experiments are more than enough to say that this film is enjoyable, but Experimenter doesn't bode too well when it so obviously sees the audience as below it.

Trump. Note the timing of this movie, which questions how far people will go, if pushed by perceived authority and by the herd instinct, in persecuting or harming others. The references to Milgram's personal interest in the Holocaust bring us right up to date with our concerns about Trump (or, more exactly, the Trump-support groundswell). The questions become ever more crucial--why do people do things against their own morals and their own interests, and what can we do to prevent it? Eighty years after Nazi Germany was converting a population of normal people like you and me into murderous, hateful, hypocritical savages, we are watching another demagogue kick up the same trouble. The fact that the reminder of the film's political relevance (an elephant following Milgram around) is the very symbol of the party being perverted by Trump, is an amusing touch.