The Stanford Prison Experiment

The plot is based on a true story, blah blah blah. It's a good one as well! Not the amazing ingenious movie and certainly not the thriller that "Das Experiment" was... If you can find it at your local video store, go and get it and watch this instead!

Don't get me wrong, the movie is a nice attempt, really interesting and raising all kinds of moral questions and dilemmas. The actors were true and professional all the way and overall, this is more than a movie for a pleasant afternoon...

The science behind the experiment was kind of crappy, but I guess back then, psychologists were a bit on the rough side and not too cautious with experimental parameters, etc.

Anyways, if you want the thrill and the tense, "Das Experiment" is what you should be looking for. This movie was unparalleled. Better yet, watch this one first and then "Das Experiment"...

Okay - lets be honest here. Its not extremely difficult to make a film portraying a psychological experiment that was well documented and captured on film.

This film as more of a reenactment - just so you are aware.

Ezra Miller continues to shine as a prison subject in this movie. With the upcoming Justice League Films, and Miller portraying The Flash, its nice to see his work outside that to get more comfortable with his upcoming performance.

So - as the film title states, this a recalling of a social experiment gone a little too far, and had to be stopped early for reason I will not spoil.

The true nature of human empowerment is truly devastating to witness.

If you have time, see this tense thriller. It will however, raise as many questions as it answers.

A great thinking movie. Please don't forget to check out the source material on this study during, or after the movie.

Very interesting, very disturbing, and very enlightening.

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?

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.

I've always been fascinated by the original Stanford prison experiment. It always had the ingredients for a fascinating study of human behaviour. Its conductor Dr. Philip Zimbardo knew that, it just had to be played out. Of course, The Stanford Prison Experiment is a story that's been notably portrayed before, such as the 2001 German film Das Experiment. I remember being a fan of it when I first saw it, but I admit I can't quite recall it enough to make a comparison here. Nevertheless, this American version which doesn't make substitutions is a preferable version, one that makes resourceful use of today's technology and young talent. There's a dual study going on here. One, the part that writes itself, a document of the actual experiment. And the other, an examination of the ethics of the experimenters. Here is the ugly side of the human condition and our desires to push one another to feel the sweet taste of superiority.

While it may lend the obvious yet compelling results of what imaginary power and authority does to people, it still needs to be well executed to work. Fortunately director Kyle Patrick Alvarez and writer Tim Talbott have the right handling of the material, working with great economy in balancing its dichotomy's. At first it's disarmingly casual in the way the volunteers are selected and summoned, making a point of its randomizations and often offering an endearing and natural sense of humour. While superficially bleak, it's having fun with the 70s clothes and oversized moustaches, without peeling back their integrity. But then real tension, real anguish, and a real sensation of danger and dread creeps in and The Stanford Prison Experiment becomes deeply unsettling in its dehumanization techniques. With a careful sense from Alvarez of how far to escalate each sequence, it rings true to human sensibilities of what would happen in this unique situation. There's always a reminder that it isn't real, but it doesn't stop you from feeling unbearably trapped. This is nature at work, combined with a touch of modern cruelty.

There is a tendency in the film's inherent and forgivably episodic narrative that it gets you attached to a character they're focusing on only due to their upcoming exit. Thereby the film loses steam bit by bit. It gradually wins you back afterwards, but each time it takes a little longer. Ezra Miller in particular is a highlight of the first half of the film, formulating some of the most memorable instances of the prisoner's rebellions and reluctances. He's missed, but his absence only breeds more tension and vulnerability as we're left with weaker willed volunteers. If anything, this film is an impressive display of the best talent from the next generation of actors. Hopefully all to soon be familiar faces; Johnny Simmons, Tye Sheridan, Brett Davern, and a guard with the most inventive choice of wording, Michael Angarano, all stick out among other strong performances. While a crowded ensemble does mean no character gets to be fleshed out to their full potential, Alvarez and Talbott at least give room for everyone a time to shine without any dim spots.

On the experimenters end, Billy Crudup is perfect casting as Dr. Zimbardo. Donning a beard that gives him an uncanny resemblance to Satan, it doesn't remove that trustworthy glint of compassion in his eyes. His usual warmth is countered by his malicious intent to shove the volunteers to their limits and it creates an enthralling inner conflict where he's finding his own limits. The film admittedly does lack a female presence giving the nature of 24 volunteers and all the scientists being men. Its only example is Olivia Thirlby as Zimbardo's girlfriend who later involves herself in the experiment and becomes a voice of reason, but a very welcome one. It may have blind spots and a few stumbles, but it doesn't hinder what the film does right. As I was completely wrapped in its deft and dense confrontations, I kept waiting for the film to explode. Perhaps recalling the more gritty approach Das Experiment took to its second half, instead this implodes, which is a much more restrained and satisfying conclusion to watch these invisible social constructs dissolve rather than erupt.

The Stanford Prison Experiment's wealth of strong material and performances are matched by its technical ambitions. The slick photography makes it cinematic with liberal collages of close-ups and swift camera moves but still keeping it intimate. When the scene calls for rigid obedience, any time the camera moves out of line we hold our breath. It's graded with a washed-out atmosphere, relishing in the moody darkness. I've been irritated with indie films that abuse a shallow depth of field in their photography for no good reason, but this film uses it to isolate you in its grasp and as a result the film shook me up for the rest of the day. While it gets under the skin of the prisoners and the scientists, I did find myself wanting to get behind the motivations of the guards, the most vocal contributors of the experiment. Instead, thats saved for an epilogue that feels like a wise afterthought, but it's a powerful note on the personal experiments we run just because the opportunity is there. The Stanford Prison Experiment is an ideal taut psychological thriller that bristles with youthful energy and will mostly likely remain standing as one of the best of the year.

8/10