C.S. Lewis (Matthew Goode) visits an ailing Dr. Freud (Anthony Hopkins) as war is declared in September 1939. They discuss ideas, the existence of God, and the meaning of evil, even as Freud’s devoted daughter Anna (Liv Lisa Fries) struggles to find evil. Get accepted.
An appendix to this philosophical effort explains that an unknown person from Oxford visited Sigmund Freud’s home in London shortly before his death in 1939. What if he had been C.S. Lewis, the film asks? Well, we might have had a conversation a little like this dessert – although perhaps a considerably more intense one.
Freud (Anthony Hopkins) was a prominent atheist: but this did not protect him from persecution by the Nazis because of his Jewish roots, which prompted him to flee Vienna to London with his family. Meanwhile, Lewis, played by Matthew Goode, has lost and rediscovered his faith after the early death of his mother and the trauma of World War I. As World War II approaches, both men count its costs and regrets. Like One Night In Miami or Mary Queen Of Scots, this uses a fictional encounter to explore the lives and work of the two men, but somehow its effect is less than satisfactory.
The problem is that the conversation drags on, with long periods of silence interspersed with short, sometimes somewhat obtuse attacks on the other’s views.
It’s not an inherently bad idea, nor is it an uninteresting pair of characters — especially given the complicating factor of Freud’s struggle to control his daughter Anna (Liv Lisa Fries) and ignore her relationship with Dorothy (Jodi Balfour), in defiance of everything he has. Theories and ideals. The problem is that the conversation drags on, with long periods of silence interspersed with short, sometimes somewhat obtuse attacks on the other’s views. It stands to reason that Louis would be too polite to attack a sick old man, but likewise he cannot be passive and continue to present his case.
The frequent flashbacks to Lewis’s war years and Freud’s triumphs and tragedies attempt to heighten visual interest, but ultimately distract from what should be an exciting clash of ideas. Ultimately, you’re frustrated that the writing and direction can’t do justice to the brilliance of either man at the heart of the film, nor to their ideas.
This is not the fault of either star, but the patchy script makes this an unsatisfyingly weak exploration of the important themes it seeks to cover. More cutting and intellectual direction and less flashbacks would have helped.
