Kirpianuscus adaptation of a book who gives more ideas than scenes. opportunity for Armand Assante to give a role who is far to be easy for the melodramatic way imposed by script. short, a nice try to give a story who has special beauty. the only sin - for this hard work , the director has not the right tools. and this did the film decent if you ignore the not reasonable tone from few scenes. "When Nietzsche wept" is the genre of book perfect for read it and not imagine versions of adaptation. this is the explanation for the sins of the film - the desire to say what only the silence gives.

Gabriel Alejandro Quinche Velandia Its not a tremendous film, a must see, of a picture at his own, When Nitszche Wept is very good driven style of fan fiction, that manage to get us near to a lot of Niche, and Freud, concepts -but in reality is only near, because as lots of book-film adaptations, it takes a to much of the director's point of view-, it gets it right in some moments and is not a waste of time at all, but it suffers from his flaws, the nature of art, is specific to each category it belongs, this is most like and homage, and want us to remember very important things, and don't care about being very technical with the acting, the passing, or the writing itself, it's made great with the cameos that it have, and the good vibe the producers have toward those beautiful mind that they were, but maybe fails, to stand alone as film,

thomaspkanell I watched this movie immediately after taking a course on the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. I was interested in seeing how Nietzsche's philosophy was depicted, and how the man was portrayed. I was not disappointed, as I thought the movie was very fair and accurately showed Nietzsche's philosophical mindset.Nietzsche actually has been called one of history's greatest psychologists because of his insight into "the will to power." This is contrasted with psychoanalysis' and Freud's "pleasure principle." The movie shows a very interesting depiction of the early years of the development of psychoanalysis, when Breuer and Freud first start dealing with the hysteria of Anna O., using catharsis as a healing mechanism for mental illness. Nietzsche's own loneliness and emotional-physical pain demonstrate his human side. Nevertheless, Nietzsche, in spite of his precarious mental health, helps the good Dr. Breuer to realize his own values of living life on this good earth through sharing his own brilliant philosophy. Although usually antagonistic to one another, the protagonists representing philosophy and psychology meet to produce a very profound and poignant friendship in the end.The movie weaves together different musical themes from that era, such as the scene with Nietzsche's conducting Wagner's "Ride of the Valkyries," [1870] and the movie's beginning with Strauss's "Blue Danube." [1866] Since the movie is set sometime in the year 1882, the music is very appropriate.This movie brings "ideas" to life. Some people might prefer an action or adventure movie, or prefer actors to speak with an English accent, but I think they are missing the point! This movie is not intended to entertain as much as it is intended to teach! The philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche gets high marks for showing us that we should be passionate about this life! The one reviewer who remarked that he thought his life had changed in watching this movie is exactly why this movie was made in the first place!I was impressed with Armand Assante's acting a very difficult role. Ben Cross does a fine job in acting as the 19th century man. The women's characters are not at all that well developed, it is true, and even Lou Salome's character seems rather one-dimensional. Perhaps this could be seen as a metaphor for the state of women at that time. All in all, however, I was edified for having watched a very satisfying portrayal of the ideas and the humanity of one of mankind's greatest geniuses.

highlama Knowing nothing of the book, and based solely on the DVD cover and description I expected a disappointingly shallow, titillating pseudo-intellectual romp through the fields of pretense. But the portrayal of the rare humanity of these characters as they confronted their obsessions and limitations drew me into rapt attention at the next plot development. Perhaps I'm just shallow and easily amused, but this story gave a fairly good look at a decent man, Joseph Breuer, and his struggle to really feel his humanity. This is an important story, one rarely told because how many story tellers have been through the fire of transformation to live for real? Where do you find an audience willing to sit through something they're desperately trying to avoid themselves? Maybe package it as a shallow and titillating pseudo-intellectual romp. Sure there were times when I saw through the weave of the story, for a moment I even saw Assante speaking lines rather than Nietzsche talking but for the most part this story was to me a real story of people really evolving right before our very eyes. That's not something you're going to see every day.