Experimenter brings to life the influential psychological experiments synonymous with its protagonist and narrator, Stanley Milgram (Peter Sarsgaard). Less than a half-century ago, Milgram, a prominent social psychologist at Yale University, carried out his infamous social obedience experiments to equal parts criticism, pure shock and intrigue.
The motivation behind Milgram’s experiments directly stems from the Nazis’ brutal genocide of the Jews during the Holocaust less than two decades earlier. This is a fate which Milgram’s parents narrowly escaped as Jewish immigrants to the United States shortly before WWII. Filled with sadness and anger, but driven by a characteristic pragmatism, Milgram set out to systematically uncover how people were capable of and driven to commit seemingly unthinkable moral crimes.
Interestingly, the experiments' deceptive nature is revealed from the outset. In the opening sequence, Milgram is shown solemnly watching the proceedings behind one-way glass. The film plays out like an autobiographical timeline with Sarsgaard delivering a cool, almost clinical narration of Milgram’s work and the consequences that unfold. It is almost as if he is perpetually stationed on the other side of the glass — an observer looking in.
To further convey this sense of detachment, Sarsgaard breaks the fourth wall throughout the film and stares directly into the audience. This is not to say that he appears aloof. His voice and demeanour are weighed down by a certain melancholy — perhaps at coming to terms with the dark implications of his findings. While Milgram is portrayed as a focused, intellectual mind with great passion for his work, he is refreshingly not painted as a dark troubled soul or otherwise dramatized to fit the "mad scientist" archetype.
The filmmakers choose not to focus solely on the social obedience experiments as they also outline Milgram’s work in the years following the experiments. Many of these studies also wield a significant influence on academic and popular psychology. Notably among them are the "six degrees of separation" theory, but it would never come close to reaching the obedience experiments’ iconic status. The experiments’ controversial ethics and their findings’ shocking commentary on human nature make it unsurprising that they overshadow his other work. Echoing this, Milgram struggles to move on completely from the experiments — an almost inescapable force in his own life.
While Experimenter succeeds in providing historically accurate and entertaining glimpses into Milgram’s life and work, it avoids falling into the trap of over dramatization. In fact, it manages to maintain a surprisingly light and humorous tone without making light of the subject matter. The filmmakers may have done well to focus less on the entire trajectory of Milgram’s professional and personal life and to give more screen time to the most fascinating part of the studies — the participants.
Much of the criticism concerning Milgram’s work targets the questionable ethics in subjecting participants to such an emotionally jarring experience. It has been condemned by critics as an ill-intentioned set-up to turn fundamentally good human beings into monsters. While we see a close-up of the participants during the course of the experiments, their experiences are viewed from the perspective of an outsider. We receive only a glimpse into the long-term psychological effects, though these are perhaps intentionally left unclear for viewers to contemplate long after viewing the film.