NOTE IMDb
6,8/10
48 k
MA NOTE
En 1971, vingt-quatre étudiants, tous masculins, sont choisis pour endosser au hasard les rôles de prisonniers et de gardiens dans une prison fictive située au sous-sol du bâtiment de psycho... Tout lireEn 1971, vingt-quatre étudiants, tous masculins, sont choisis pour endosser au hasard les rôles de prisonniers et de gardiens dans une prison fictive située au sous-sol du bâtiment de psychologie de Stanford.En 1971, vingt-quatre étudiants, tous masculins, sont choisis pour endosser au hasard les rôles de prisonniers et de gardiens dans une prison fictive située au sous-sol du bâtiment de psychologie de Stanford.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 4 victoires et 3 nominations au total
Avis à la une
This is perhaps one of the best movies I have seen in 2015 and yet I would think twice before watching it again. The Stanford Prison experiment is a taut and intriguing drama hat manages to thrill you for most of its run time as well as making you terribly uneasy as you ponder as to why people behave as they do in the movie. Inspire by the real life prison experiment conducted at Stanford University in 1971 using college students where some would be assigned as guards and some prisoners and were stationed in a mock prison for 14 days within the Stanford University premises itself. It proved to be one of the most disastrous and widely criticized psychology experiments ever conducted by mankind and was shut down in just 6 days.
The movie doesn't spend too much time on buildup as you start feeling the claustrophobia and sense of loss of freedom quite early on. The script has been top notch as well as the direction. The best part about the script that I loved was that it remained truthful to the actual events and the documentary style cinematography added so much realism to the experience.
The other impressive aspect of this movie is the acting. The casting doesn't involve any big superstar names, rather most of them are well known in the indie and television scenes. Phillip Zambardo's character development was pulled off by Billy Crudup with absolute finesse while Ezra Miller and Thomas Mann left a lasting impression with the devolution of their respective characters. The rest of the cast, especially the ones who played the prisoners were great as well, as they were constantly able to maintain the sense of helplessness and psychological deterioration throughout. The main star of the film, however, is Michael Angarano. His character is what everybody would love to hate. I used to remember Angarano as this charming kid in Almost Famous and Lords of Dogtown and I was quite shocked to witness the whole sadistic and borderline sociopath side of him.
The only shortcoming I felt was the overall pacing. The movie slowed down at some points; especially during the first half (I am not going to spoil anything) and it could've done a better editing job. Some of the cast, especially on the guard side could've used a bit more screen time since the camera was almost entirely focused on Michael Angarano. However, this doesn't diminish the quality of movie in any way. It's a great albeit cringe worthy study of human psyche and the movie will leave a long trail of questions for you to think about.
Overall, The Stanford Prison Experiment is undoubtedly a great cinematic achievement both in terms of visual style, storyline, acting and direction. This is not exactly a family movie or something you want to watch with your girlfriend and definitely not a feel-good experience, but if you are a fan of psychological thrillers, then this film will give you a run for your money. My IMDb rating is 8.1/10.
The movie doesn't spend too much time on buildup as you start feeling the claustrophobia and sense of loss of freedom quite early on. The script has been top notch as well as the direction. The best part about the script that I loved was that it remained truthful to the actual events and the documentary style cinematography added so much realism to the experience.
The other impressive aspect of this movie is the acting. The casting doesn't involve any big superstar names, rather most of them are well known in the indie and television scenes. Phillip Zambardo's character development was pulled off by Billy Crudup with absolute finesse while Ezra Miller and Thomas Mann left a lasting impression with the devolution of their respective characters. The rest of the cast, especially the ones who played the prisoners were great as well, as they were constantly able to maintain the sense of helplessness and psychological deterioration throughout. The main star of the film, however, is Michael Angarano. His character is what everybody would love to hate. I used to remember Angarano as this charming kid in Almost Famous and Lords of Dogtown and I was quite shocked to witness the whole sadistic and borderline sociopath side of him.
The only shortcoming I felt was the overall pacing. The movie slowed down at some points; especially during the first half (I am not going to spoil anything) and it could've done a better editing job. Some of the cast, especially on the guard side could've used a bit more screen time since the camera was almost entirely focused on Michael Angarano. However, this doesn't diminish the quality of movie in any way. It's a great albeit cringe worthy study of human psyche and the movie will leave a long trail of questions for you to think about.
Overall, The Stanford Prison Experiment is undoubtedly a great cinematic achievement both in terms of visual style, storyline, acting and direction. This is not exactly a family movie or something you want to watch with your girlfriend and definitely not a feel-good experience, but if you are a fan of psychological thrillers, then this film will give you a run for your money. My IMDb rating is 8.1/10.
I have to admit that my rating is conflicted between the quality of the film (the caliber of the acting and directing), and the enjoyment/watchability of the film itself. It was superbly acted and directed - exhibited by the fact that recognizable actors blended seamlessly with their characters and eliciting sincere feelings of contempt and sympathy. However, it was not an easy film to watch. Again, I think that's a testament to the talent of the artists involved.
I do think it should be required viewing for psychology students - unfortunately this film was released after my college years.
As another reviewer stated, I really would have liked to have seen more about the final repercussions: how it affected the participants once the study was over (one would imagine some could have been left with PTSD, if only short term). In fact the film was so immersive and believable that I wondered if any of the actors fell victim to the same tendencies as the original participants and got a little lost in their roles.
I had to go online to see if there were any legal or professional repercussions for Dr. Philip Zimbardo or any of the other parties involved. The post-notes at the end of the film could have been a bit more comprehensive, as I believe there were certain practices/rules put in place for psychological studies as a direct result of this experiment (among them being the establishment of the National Research Act as well as the creation of the Institutional Review Board).
So, yes, I would definitely recommend watching this movie with the caveat that you're not going to be left feeling upbeat or warm and fuzzy.
I do think it should be required viewing for psychology students - unfortunately this film was released after my college years.
As another reviewer stated, I really would have liked to have seen more about the final repercussions: how it affected the participants once the study was over (one would imagine some could have been left with PTSD, if only short term). In fact the film was so immersive and believable that I wondered if any of the actors fell victim to the same tendencies as the original participants and got a little lost in their roles.
I had to go online to see if there were any legal or professional repercussions for Dr. Philip Zimbardo or any of the other parties involved. The post-notes at the end of the film could have been a bit more comprehensive, as I believe there were certain practices/rules put in place for psychological studies as a direct result of this experiment (among them being the establishment of the National Research Act as well as the creation of the Institutional Review Board).
So, yes, I would definitely recommend watching this movie with the caveat that you're not going to be left feeling upbeat or warm and fuzzy.
7ivko
This film is a dramatization of a real psychological experiment that took place at the Stanford University in 1971. The motivation was to study the dynamics of individuals who were arbitrarily placed into roles as prisoners and guards at a simulated prison. Since none of the study participants were actual criminals or correction officers, the idea was to glean insight into the psychology of the power imbalance that arises from the situation, as opposed to the people involved.
Things famously degraded quickly and the experiment was terminated after only six days. Multiple guards displayed sadistic traits and performed acts of psychological and even (to a smaller degree) physical torture, all overseen, permitted, and arguably encouraged by "superintendent" Philip Zimbardo, the study's creator.
The conditions the participants were exposed to were reprehensible, but even worse is that ultimately this was simply bad science, making the whole endeavor a cruel waste of time. The experiment lacked much of the basic rigor required, as highlighted in the film by a verbatim repetition of an actual conversation Mr. Zimbardo had with a colleague who questioned some of the basic scientific methodologies being utilized in the study.
Zimbardo himself committed what I would consider borderline criminal acts such as initially denying "prisoner" participants the option to leave when requested (to instill in them the belief that their situation was, in fact, real), which came frighteningly close to converting the "study" into a criminal act of kidnapping in my opinion.
Zimbardo explains this as him getting "to close" to the experiment, but personally I'm not particularly sympathetic to that argument. When you watch the actual clips from the study and read the notes, I'm more inclined to think that Mr. Zambardo himself had a sadistic streak that he failed to control for a time. Honestly, I think the man should have faced criminal charges for his role in this fiasco.
In the end, some good did come out of this experiment in that it created a push for establishing standards and controls for psychological experiments in the future.
Despite knowing the actual outcome, I still felt anxious about the fates of the young men involved, a testament to the power of the acting and directing here. To me, this movie is a chilling and visceral reminder of how easy it is to create conditions that foster cruelty and dehumanization. A rewarding, if somewhat depressing, film to watch.
Things famously degraded quickly and the experiment was terminated after only six days. Multiple guards displayed sadistic traits and performed acts of psychological and even (to a smaller degree) physical torture, all overseen, permitted, and arguably encouraged by "superintendent" Philip Zimbardo, the study's creator.
The conditions the participants were exposed to were reprehensible, but even worse is that ultimately this was simply bad science, making the whole endeavor a cruel waste of time. The experiment lacked much of the basic rigor required, as highlighted in the film by a verbatim repetition of an actual conversation Mr. Zimbardo had with a colleague who questioned some of the basic scientific methodologies being utilized in the study.
Zimbardo himself committed what I would consider borderline criminal acts such as initially denying "prisoner" participants the option to leave when requested (to instill in them the belief that their situation was, in fact, real), which came frighteningly close to converting the "study" into a criminal act of kidnapping in my opinion.
Zimbardo explains this as him getting "to close" to the experiment, but personally I'm not particularly sympathetic to that argument. When you watch the actual clips from the study and read the notes, I'm more inclined to think that Mr. Zambardo himself had a sadistic streak that he failed to control for a time. Honestly, I think the man should have faced criminal charges for his role in this fiasco.
In the end, some good did come out of this experiment in that it created a push for establishing standards and controls for psychological experiments in the future.
Despite knowing the actual outcome, I still felt anxious about the fates of the young men involved, a testament to the power of the acting and directing here. To me, this movie is a chilling and visceral reminder of how easy it is to create conditions that foster cruelty and dehumanization. A rewarding, if somewhat depressing, film to watch.
This movie is one of the most shocking things I've seen and it's all because it's a true story of a so called scientist that has lost his humane side and enjoyed conducting a psychologically damaging experiment.
The lack of control on the guards shows that Dr.Philip was fascinated by the horror and cruelty human kind can create even in a simulation. The fact that he chose an ex-prisoner as a consultant shows that this experiment lacks all credibility because the ex-prisoner wanted to subject his negative experience on innocent students. A chilling movie until the last seconds!!!!
It's the sad truth but I hate how they have ended with a huge lie "no long time side effects have been observed" so Zimbardo continued his studies. Why did they "omit" that one tried to kill himself as a side effect of that experiment?
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesAlthough never mentioned in the movie, the real life experiment was funded by the U.S. Office of Naval Research and was of interest to both the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps as an investigation into the causes of conflict between military guards and prisoners.
- GaffesWhen Dr. Zimbardo speaks with his colleague, the colleague says that he will see him at the beginning of the semester. Stanford does not have semesters; rather, it has a quarter academic calendar.
- Citations
Daniel Culp: I know you're a nice guy.
Christopher Archer: So why do you hate me?
Daniel Culp: Because I know what you can become.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Stanford Prison Experiment?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Untitled Stanford Prison Experiment Project
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 660 561 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 37 514 $US
- 19 juil. 2015
- Montant brut mondial
- 663 114 $US
- Durée
- 2h 2min(122 min)
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant