Not a great movie. Not a terrible one either. It did its job, considering it's a movie where mostly 2 characters have philosophical conversations about religion and/or some about their childhoods. As usual, Anthony Hopkins's class and brilliant acting shines through. I confess i didn't knew much of Freud's personal life outside the well known quotes and some of his work. It gave me a bit of insight on some stuff i didn't knew before. But because this was an imaginary conversation that could or could not have happened, i don't know how true these were/would be. It did help pass the time.

Great that he showed Freud as having a sense of humor. I am a Hopkins fan

I understand how some critics see this as light & thin with the subject it explores. This is so much more, seeing the complexities of the main characters frailty, emotional and thought processes, peaked an interest to want to explore more of Lewis’s work on God & Faith , and Freuds unhealthy relationship with his daughter Anna. I was at peace with the film not being able explore life the universe and the answer 42 within its 2 ish hour time limitation. I’m still figuring out how to use my digital watch.

Freud’s Last Session. Featuring the wonderful work of Anthony Hopkins as usual the man’s talents are unstoppable. He is living in England escaping the Germans at the beginning of WW2. Slowly dying of oral cancer he is sharing memories of his life as he talks to the writer CS Lewis played by the wonderful Matthew Goode who has come from Oxford to debate topics close to their hearts and minds. Life, politics, love, the war and religion. The mind. Interesting that Lewis witnessed children being evacuated by train to the countryside and he took in children himself who would eventually become the inspiration for the children in the Narnia series. Freud also confessed a love and admiration for Tolkien’s work. He knew about The Inklings their writing group in Oxford. He talked about his office in Vienna he still kept and was one of the places I visited when in Vienna- impressed by his collection of ancient Egyptian artifacts. Lewis also admires his Greek and Roman artifacts in his office in England. An excellent script featuring 2 wonderful actors and Freud’s daughter Anna herself a psychoanalyst specialising in children and also a University professor. Hopkins and Goode really made this worth watching and it was fascinating and doesn’t matter at all if you are not a Freud fan. The coming together of these men’s minds and intellects was intriguing especially at this time in history and their own personal histories.

A fascinating imagined dialogue between two of the greatest minds of the 20th century. Delving deep into topics of religion, war, family relations and much more while using early world war II as a backdrop to both question the future and analyze the past from both perspectives who seem to agree as much as they disagree. Matthew Goode and Anthony Hopkins do a phenomenal job of staying true to the source material with representing the character and psyches of these two historical heavyweights.

Lack of a script and poor editing ruined what could have been a great film.

SEHNSUCHT, DAS STÄRKSTE DEUTSCHE WORT Es ist das Jahr 1939, Sigmund Freud weiss das er nicht mehr lange leben wird. Für den heutigen Tag meldet sich Professor C.S.Lewis, einem großen Verteidiger des Glaubens an. Als die beiden mit ihrer Diskussion beginnen, entfacht ein Feuer der Leidenschaft über die jeweilige Sicht der Dinge und der Welt, währenddessen fliegen Bomber über dem Haus. Freud - Jenseits des Glaubens geht ca. 110 Minuten und ist ab 12 Jahren freigegeben. Wir haben hier Anthony Hopkins als legendären Psychoanalytiker und du meine Güte, ihm beim Schauspielern und Reden zusehen zu dürfen ist einfach Gold für Auge und Ohr. Ich liebe jede einzelne Dialogzeile die hier zwischen den beiden Darstellern gesprochen wird und davon gab es jede Menge. Die Handlung dreht sich hauptsächlich darum das Freud und Lewis ihre jeweiligen Sichtweisen darstellen und erklären, dabei ist Freud stets Streitlustig und fordert Lewis mit provokanten Aussagen heraus. Dazwischen gibt es noch Freuds Tochter Anna, die ebenso brillant wie ihr Vater ist, denn ihre Vorlesung über Kinder in Kriegsgebieten ist faszinierend. Ihr "gestörtes" Verhältnis zu ihrem Vater ist dabei nochmal ein ganz anderes Thema. In kurzen Rückblenden erfahren wir mehr über die beiden Hauptdarsteller, dabei werden teils grandiose Bilder kreiert die hervorragend auf einen wirken. Hier werden so gute Sätze ausgetauscht das es mir kaum möglich war alle zu behalten, die Argumente der beiden konnte man nachvollziehen, was zeigt wie gut es sie es rübergebracht haben. Das Finale zeigt uns was aus Freud, seiner Tochter sowie Professor C.S.Lewis wurde. Am Ende bleibt ein Werk das spitzen Dialoge liefert, ein Thema behandelt das definitiv diskutabel ist und einen Anthony Hopkins zeigt der einfach nur brillant schauspielert und mit vollem Eifer sowie Feuer dabei ist. Der Humor ist fein gesäht und Namen wie Tolkien und Poe lassen einen aufhorchen. Von mir bekommt der Film 9/10 Punkten. Vielleicht gefällt er auch nur mir so gut, aber ich hätte den beiden so gern noch länger zu gesehen.

Certainly an entertaining, well lit, well designed movie, but a script that is more like the creator's thoughts about the two subjects, and even he would probably admit it shouldn't replace one's own close reading of the source materials, which are far more interesting.

This movie was slightly boring

From the homonymous drama by Mark St. Germain, based on the essay "The Question of God" by Armand Nicholi, an interesting chamber cinema about a meeting that never took place between S. Freud and C.S. Lewis. The actors' performances are fascinating, not so much the screenplay which, although focused on a conceptual level; all dialogued and folded on the highest systems; often lacks a notable mastery of the subject matter. The dialectical duel on God, on life, History, interpersonal relationships and human nature, offers many ideas to reflect on but in general it is rather superficial or never truly in-depth. The work is supported above all by the interpretation of their actors (above all, Hopkins); and it becomes remarkable at least in the story of the biography of its protagonists, when the film passes from the intimate to the global, and vice versa; underlining how all the physical and metaphysical complexity is interconnected and not always explainable/understandable/justifiable. The director is aware of the ambition of his project, and perhaps too unsure of the paths to take to infuse the film with a more precise, solid, and effective structure that would make the story more powerful, more engaging, and more exciting. In conclusion, a film that partially works, whose final result could have been more brilliant; but which is still appreciated for its attempt to ambitiously mix cinema, theater, and writing; offering us a pleasant and interesting comparison (and mutual acceptance) of different but enlightened points of view on suffering, on Faith, on human existence, and on the drift of the contemporary world. A curiosity: the great Hopkins here played the character of Freud but, in the film “Journey to England” (1994) by Richard Attenborough, he played C. S. Lewis. Rating (in tenths): 6 / 7

I guess I have just one question: What was the point of this movie? Did anyone know?

Had high hopes for this as I am a huge Hopkins fan. Luckily it did serve a purpose - putting me to sleep on a long haul flight!

The premise had so much potential - two intelligent men on opposite sides of faith and belief in God. The actors were good but the script was a huge disappointment. It focused mostly on Freud and his daughter and their creepy and abusive relationship. But even there, not enough details. C.S Lewis was an after thought. Anyone vaguely familiar with his story knows that he turned from a cynic to a devout believer in Jesus because he did deep research and only found evidence that proved God existed and was good. He was a brilliant man yet the script never shows Lewis sharing any of this evidence with Freud, he is just a simpering victim of the more aggressive Freud. What a waste of time.

Have never reviewed before but feel the need to defend this film from the bad reviews; especially those criticising the acting. Freud's two word message to humanity, "Grow up!", is very apt. Though it required a lot of mental concentration (yes, the viewer has to do some of the work) it went by surprisingly quickly for me. Other positive reviews have covered many of the interesting aspects of it, so I won't repeat these. What grabbed me was the capturing of the context of the period; the mindsets of that particular time. This is not easy to do; too often now, historical dramas are enacted through embarrassingly contemporary mores instead of staying true to the era depicted (not one f word, as I remember). Yet, interwoven through the WWII context, there were topical themes, e.g., attitudes towards homosexuality and, of course, in the main theme of the film; i.e. the perennial subject of the 'meaning of life'. There is a banquet of food for thought here. Most impressive, though, and something that seems to have been missed by many, is that here we have a debate between two people with diametrically opposing views, sometimes expressed with cutting directness relating to painful personal issues yet, at all times, they remain courteous and respectful to each other; even loving and affectionate at times. In short, there's no 'cancel culture' here. This film deserves a lot of respect, merely for attempting to bring such complex content to the big screen. I thoroughly enjoyed it and I wish there were more like it.

This adaption from the play of the same name which in turn is adapted from Dr. Armand Nicoli’s book The Question of God: C. S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life imagines an encounter of the two intellects the day England enters World War II in the abode of the founder of psychoanalysis and their intellectually stimulating debate on sex, sexuality, fear, attachment disorder and, religion and science.

I believe this was the worst film I have ever seen. To its credit- great costumes and camera work. Against it? Nonexistent plot, nonsense dialogue, characters that we should care about (based on historical significance) but simply can't, and once again legitimately no plot. Please watch anything else lol

weak and with strong performances, Anthony always stands out when it comes to acting but sinks into a boring film with tiring and dirty dialogues at times. Bad, the perfect definition for this film.

Interesting movie. Two gladiators of thought fight it out in words. Hopkins is very convincing as Freud.

I really enjoy biopics, but this was an annoying movie and an unpleasant one to watch. It depicts a fictional meeting between Freud and CS Lewis. They debate the existence of God. I was hoping for an interesting debate. But the filmmakers seem to have little understanding of the spiritual aspect of belief in God. Instead, they focus on the morality preached by religion. And CS Lewis is depicted as not debating the issue at all but instead making an ad hominem on Freud. Throughout, Freud is depicted as despicable and somewhat disgusting in his final stages of oral cancer.

This psychiatric drama was great. Anthony Hopkins, Matthew Goode, and the rest of the cast did a great job in this movie. This true story about the meeting with Sigmund Freud and C.S. Lewis on the brink of WW2 was dramatic and depressing. It's about sharing their beliefs on the existence of God. If you haven't seen this movie yet, check it out sometime. It's worth watching.