"Freud's Last Session" comes as a huge disappointment for me. This fictionalized encounter between groundbreaking pyschoanalyst Sigmund Freud
(Anthony Hopkins) and writer C. S. Lewis (Matthew Goode), on the early days of World War II with the first German bombers coming to England, doesn't
challenge viewers in asking themselves about what they're trying to figure out while challenging themselves about the nature of man and if God exists
or not (Freud is an atheist; Lewis is a Christian believer).
Adapted from Matt Brown's play, the material is poorly translated to the screen which
doesn't allow a solid 15 minutes with both of those characters alone in their session without keep coming back and forth between some background
moments from each character, or either some present situations with the threats of bombing or Freud's poor health that needs constant care from his
daughter, of which we have some tense revelations about her relationship with her dominating father. And they tried so hard to make it a plot twist
when it comes about that character and her secretary that it was annoying - specially if you know that while Freud didn't condemn homosexuality as a
moral issue, but he didn't want them near him (read Paul Roazen's works on him).
One sort of expects this being a psychoanalysis session rather than a weird chatting between famous authors with opposite views. For the life of
me, as it wasn't a session in fact, I still don't have a clue on what Lewis was doing there. The verbal duels are the moments we wait for, there are
so many interesting bits and exchanges between them but as a whole it all falls flat because either the dialogue is not that brilliant; the editing makes
it all look like a tennis match - there's not a single moment for some monologue or some plan sequence; and the constant sidetrack of past moments that
tries to build some character, or show some background but it's all disengaging and tedious.
A film that works with such ideals and challenges about mankind, God, faith and human relations while opposed or favorable to all that must have
some coherence between action and dialogues, to create something that we in the audience might have question ourselves or haven't thought about. It must
create some excitment even if those issues aren't all that thrilling (to some) and stay in the "boring" play format without distractions. If there's
a play and film adaptation that translated such sentiment in a brilliant way was "The Sunset Limited", with Samuel L. Jackson and Tommy Lee Jones. Simple
through actions as it stays in a small apartment room and the brilliance from the complex dialogues becomes a fascinating and mindblowing experience. Hopkins
and Goode don't share the same dynamic despite being good performers. The excessive use of humor and the many interruptions in their digressions didn't
help, and we perceive them as bitter figures that don't reach any enlightning conclusion.
Here's a film that crushed any previous and possible good expectations that I could have about presenting a challenging duel of opposed views from
great minds of the 20th century, starring two favorite actors of mine. Its flawed and distractive presentation left me emptied out and waiting for
more. Sadly, it delivered so little that either Freud and Lewis still became mysteries to me, and only their works or books about them will solve a little
such mystery. I'd rather see Freud's first session, instead. 5/10.
