Experimenter

In Yale 1961, psychologist Stanley Milgram designs an experiment that tests how far ordinary people will go when told to administer increasingly painful shocks to a learner in another room. Volunteers believe they're contributing to a legitimate study, yet their apparent willingness to obey authority raises uneasy questions. The story places Milgram against the television era's events, as Adolf Eichmann's trial streams into American homes and fuels public debate about conformity, responsibility, and evil. The film also peers into his domestic life, showing the strain on his wife Sasha Milgram and the professional skepticism surrounding his controversial methods. Through documentary-tinged visuals and intimate conversations, it maps the tension between scientific curiosity and ethical consequences without revealing every twist or ending.

Directed by Michael Almereyda, Experimenter reanimates Milgram's era with hands on period detail and a modern sensibility, pairing Peter Sarsgaard as Milgram with Winona Ryder as Sasha; the film blends archival texture with character driven drama and a calm, observant steady camera.

It earned circa 224,145 dollars worldwide, reflecting a limited release strategy and appeal to a niche audience curious about psychology and film history. Its limited release and niche appeal align with audiences interested in psychology and historical biographies globally today.

The film positions Milgram's experiments within a broader cultural conversation about obedience and moral responsibility. By juxtaposing the courtroom drama around Eichmann with the laboratory setting, it highlights how science and politics intersect in everyday life and why these questions persist in pop culture, inviting ongoing dialogue for an audience.

Critics respond to the film as a measured portrait that probes ethics, authority, and uneasy balance between scientific pursuit and human cost. Sarsgaard and Ryder deliver restrained performances that deepen material without sensationalism. The film also questions the price of scientific authority and leaves viewers reconsidering the costs of research.