Released in 2015, Experimenter is a thought-provoking biographical drama that delves into the life and controversial experiments of Stanley Milgram, the renowned social psychologist best known for his obedience studies. Directed by Michael Almereyda and starring Peter Sarsgaard as Milgram, the film offers a stylized and cerebral take on the ethical and psychological implications of Milgram’s research, providing both an informative and artistic perspective on one of the most famous psychological experiments of the 20th century.

Plot Summary

Experimenter chronicles the life and work of Stanley Milgram, focusing primarily on his obedience experiments conducted at Yale University in the early 1960s. The film begins with Milgram recruiting participants for his groundbreaking study on obedience to authority, in which volunteers were instructed to administer what they believed to be increasingly severe electric shocks to another person whenever they answered a question incorrectly. Despite the apparent distress of the “learner” (who was actually an actor and not receiving real shocks), many participants continued to administer shocks under the encouragement of an authority figure. The study revealed disturbing insights about human behavior and the extent to which individuals would follow authoritative commands, even when it meant causing harm to others.

As the film unfolds, it explores the widespread criticism Milgram faced, with many condemning his experiments as unethical and psychologically harmful to the participants. The narrative also delves into Milgram’s personal life, particularly his relationship with his wife, Alexandra (played by Winona Ryder), offering a glimpse into the human side of the scientist often portrayed in a clinical light. The story extends beyond his obedience studies, touching on his subsequent research, academic challenges, and his impact on social psychology.

Themes and Symbolism

One of the defining characteristics of Experimenter is its unconventional storytelling approach. Almereyda employs a mixture of traditional narrative techniques and fourth-wall-breaking monologues in which Milgram directly addresses the audience, explaining his theories, motivations, and reflections. This method makes the film feel more like an intellectual conversation rather than a conventional biopic, engaging viewers in the psychological and ethical debates surrounding Milgram’s work.

The film also makes use of surreal imagery and theatrical staging to emphasize its themes. For example, there are scenes where Milgram walks down hallways with deliberately artificial backdrops, highlighting the constructed nature of perception and reality, much like the deceptive environment of his experiments. The recurring motif of an elephant in the room serves as a visual metaphor for uncomfortable truths that society often ignores—specifically, our potential for blind obedience and complicity in unethical actions.

Characterization and Performances

Peter Sarsgaard delivers a nuanced performance as Milgram, portraying him as both an inquisitive scientist and a man burdened by the moral implications of his research. His portrayal is restrained yet effective, capturing Milgram’s intellectual curiosity and unwavering belief in the significance of his studies. Winona Ryder, as Alexandra Milgram, provides an emotional counterbalance, offering a glimpse into the personal life of a man whose work was often emotionally isolating.

The supporting cast, including Jim Gaffigan, Kellan Lutz, and John Leguizamo, help to bring to life the various participants in Milgram’s experiments and the academic figures who either supported or criticized his work. Each performance contributes to the film’s broader discussion on human nature and authority.

Historical Accuracy and Ethical Debates

While Experimenter largely remains faithful to historical events, it also takes artistic liberties in its portrayal of Milgram’s life and research. The film does an excellent job of presenting the facts surrounding his obedience studies, but it also simplifies some of the complexities and subsequent debates about the ethics of his experiments.

Milgram’s work was groundbreaking, but it was also controversial. Critics argued that the deception involved in his studies caused unnecessary psychological stress to participants, even though Milgram defended his methods by pointing out the significant insights they provided into human behavior. The film does not shy away from these discussions, instead presenting them in a way that encourages viewers to reflect on the nature of ethical research and the responsibilities of scientists.

Additionally, Experimenter touches on Milgram’s other contributions to psychology, including his small-world experiment (which led to the popularization of the “six degrees of separation” concept) and his work on the lost-letter technique. However, these aspects are explored only briefly, as the film primarily focuses on the obedience experiments.

Cinematic Techniques and Direction

Michael Almereyda’s direction gives Experimenter a distinctive and experimental feel that sets it apart from conventional biopics. The use of minimalistic sets, artificial backgrounds, and fourth-wall-breaking dialogue all contribute to a film that is both an educational piece and an artistic exploration of Milgram’s ideas.

The film’s pacing is measured, ensuring that each scene serves a purpose in either expanding on Milgram’s work or exploring his personal reflections. The cinematography and lighting choices create an almost documentary-like atmosphere, reinforcing the film’s focus on psychological exploration.

Impact and Reception

Upon its release, Experimenter received generally positive reviews from critics, who praised its thought-provoking content, unique storytelling approach, and Sarsgaard’s performance. The film was lauded for making complex psychological concepts accessible to a broader audience while maintaining intellectual depth.

However, some viewers found the film’s unconventional style to be distancing, making it feel more like a lecture than a traditional movie. While this artistic approach aligns with the film’s themes, it may not appeal to those expecting a more conventional narrative structure.

Despite these critiques, Experimenter remains an important cinematic work that sheds light on one of psychology’s most significant experiments. It not only educates audiences about Milgram’s research but also invites introspection about authority, ethics, and the human capacity for obedience.

Conclusion

Experimenter is a fascinating film that blends biography, psychology, and artistic storytelling to examine the life and work of Stanley Milgram. Through its unique narrative techniques, compelling performances, and thoughtful exploration of ethical dilemmas, the film offers a profound look at one of the most infamous psychological experiments of all time.

Milgram’s work continues to resonate in discussions about authority, ethics, and social influence, making Experimenter a relevant and thought-provoking film for modern audiences. Whether one agrees with Milgram’s methods or not, the film successfully highlights the enduring impact of his research and the difficult questions it raises about human behavior and moral responsibility.