Is this a true story?

Yes, it's based very closely on the 1971 study led by Philip Zimbardo. While some scenes are dramatized for film, the core events—the hunger strikes, the psychological breakdowns, and the early termination of the study—all actually happened.

How violent does it get?

The physical violence is relatively limited compared to an action movie, but the implied and psychological violence is extreme. There is shoving, sleep deprivation, and intense verbal harassment.

Why is the age rating so high?

It's primarily due to the intensity of the themes and the sexual humiliation scene. It's not a 'fun' R-rating; it's a 'this is deeply disturbing' R-rating.

The Stanford Prison Experiment – WISE Score & Parent Review | Screenwise

The Stanford Prison Experiment

Name: Screenwise
Author: Screenwise

movie2015

70%

WISE Score

Avg. Tomatometer

A claustrophobic, high-tension dive into how quickly 'normal' people can turn into monsters when given a badge and a jumpsuit.

84%

→

The Stanford Prison Experiment

movie

R, 2015

70%

WISE Score

Avg. Tomatometer

A claustrophobic, high-tension dive into how quickly 'normal' people can turn into monsters when given a badge and a jumpsuit.

84%

Jump to

Also rated on

84%

View →

Where to Watch

Loading streaming options...

Where-to-watch data byJustWatch

Screenwise Verdict

It’s a punch to the gut. If you’re looking for a lighthearted 'movie night,' keep scrolling. This is a gritty, faithful recreation of one of the most infamous moments in academic history, and it doesn't pull any punches in showing how thin the veneer of civilization really is.

For a mature kid who loves a good 'what would you do?' scenario, it’s a must-watch. It’s well-acted, sharply directed, and effectively captures the 1970s grime and the rapid escalation of the experiment. Just be prepared for some heavy dinner conversation afterward.

Age Fit

Strictly for older teens (16+) and adults. The themes of dehumanization and the psychological intensity are too heavy for middle schoolers, but it's excellent for high schoolers interested in law, ethics, or history.

WISE Breakdown

Wholesome

This is the polar opposite of wholesome. It depicts the rapid breakdown of human empathy, systematic abuse, and the 'banality of evil' in a claustrophobic, distressing environment.

Imaginative

As a period-accurate recreation of a real event, it doesn't lean into fantasy, but it's a fascinating, well-constructed psychological thriller that forces viewers to imagine themselves in impossible ethical positions.

Safe

Intentionally unsafe. The film features intense psychological torture, physical degradation, sexual humiliation, and aggressive verbal abuse. It is designed to be uncomfortable and triggering.

Enriching

An incredible tool for teaching ethics, social psychology, and the dangers of unchecked power. It provides deep insight into human behavior for mature audiences.

Parent Info

✓

Why It Might Be Great

Psychology 101 brought to life in a way a dry textbook never could, making it a perfect companion for students of social science.
Billy Crudup is chilling as Philip Zimbardo, capturing the researcher's own descent into the madness he created.
Ethics goldmine for families with older teens who want to discuss the nature of authority and systemic pressure.
Tense pacing that makes a 1971 basement feel like a high-stakes thriller, keeping you hooked even when it's hard to watch.

⚠

What to Watch For

The psychological brutality is relentless; the movie focuses on the systematic breaking of human spirits rather than physical gore.
A scene involving sexual humiliation—where guards force prisoners to simulate sex acts—is deeply disturbing and intended to show the total loss of empathy.
The verbal abuse and profanity are constant, used as a weapon by the 'guards' to dehumanize the 'prisoners.'
The film's claustrophobic setting can be genuinely anxiety-inducing for viewers sensitive to confinement.

Conversation Starters

"Do you think you would have been a 'good' guard, or would the uniform have changed your behavior?"
"Why didn't the prisoners just leave, even though they technically had the right to quit the study?"
"Was Zimbardo just as much a prisoner of the experiment as the students were?"
"Can we trust the results of this experiment if the participants knew they were being filmed?"

Deep Dive

The Banality of Evil in a Stanford Basement

Most people know the broad strokes of the 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment: Zimbardo flipped a coin, made half his students guards and half prisoners, and everything went to hell in six days. This 2015 film doesn't try to reinvent that story; it tries to make you feel the walls closing in. It succeeds. Unlike the many documentaries on the subject, this dramatization forces you to sit with the individual students as their identities are stripped away by nothing more than a polyester uniform and a pair of mirrored sunglasses.

What makes this version worth your time is the cast. You’ve got Ezra Miller, Tye Sheridan, and Thomas Mann playing the students, and their transition from 'hey, we're making $15 a day' to 'I am losing my mind' is harrowing. Billy Crudup plays Zimbardo not as a villain, but as a man so blinded by his own hypothesis that he forgets he’s dealing with human beings. It’s a masterclass in how easy it is to justify cruelty in the name of 'science' or 'the greater good.'

It is worth noting that in recent years, the actual experiment has faced significant academic criticism, with some suggesting the participants were 'performing' for Zimbardo. The movie touches on this—the guards seem to be leaning into movie-villain tropes—but it largely plays the psychological breakdown straight. If your kid is in a high school psych or civics class, this is the ultimate 'supplemental material' that will actually make them want to talk about the curriculum.

What Parents Ask

Ask Anything

Get a personalized guide on any topic