sdyer@bbncca.ARPA (Steve Dyer) (09/24/84)
I went to Amadeus expecting a lot, having read the early critical reviews.
What a disappointment!
This is a movie infused with the petit bourgeois concept of "high art", but
truly anti-art in its execution. It is a movie for people who would rather
talk about music than listen to it. It gives us Mozart's life in a
disjointed series of sitcom-style vignettes, separated by the aged
Salieri's narration, and wonderful musical excerpts. The trouble is, the
movie gathers no momentum. The writing is often banal, and the "schtick",
namely Salieri's "mediocrity" in the face of Mozart's "divine genius" is
rehashed over and over, without much amplification of our understanding of
either character. Only when Mozart's music is performed (in luscious Dolby
stereo) does the movie pick up, but it's over all too soon, and it's back
to the sitcom again. The movie plods forward up to Mozart's death, and
after 2 1/2 hours, I was glad he didn't live to a ripe old age.
The acting is generally OK, within the limits of the cardboard
characterizations provided by the script. Neither Mozart nor Salieri are
given much depth: they are caricatures. Two characterizations are worth
noting: Mozart's wife is played as if she were an American housewife from
the Valley. This seemed bizarre at first, but it ultimately works: it's an
interesting attempt to find a modern metaphor for her well-known frugality
and domesticity. Finally, the Emperor is a gem. The actor looks like he
walked out of a painting of the Hapsburgs, and his mannerisms are wonderful
and sublimely subtle: a not-too-smart, semi-talented statesman who must
suffer the company of his fawning court. Neither of these are worth the
price of admission, however.
I guess what really bothers me with "Amadeus" is the terrible imbalance
I see: this is an EXPENSIVE movie. So very much money was spent on
location shots, sets, costumes, music, and photography. In every sense,
all of these are first rate. So much so that they expose the true
artistic mediocrity of screenwriter Peter Shaffer and director Milos
Forman: there's very little here which can carry its own in such
rarefied company.
--
/Steve Dyer
{decvax,linus,ima}!bbncca!sdyer
sdyer@bbncca.ARPAbytebug@pertec.UUCP (roger long) (09/28/84)
Your description of the movie sounds exaactly like the play, which I though
was fantastic! Perhaps it lost something in translation to the silver
screen, but more likely, you went expecting a Mozart concert, which it
definately is not.
I've not yet had a chance to go out and see the movie, but perhaps someone
else could give a comparison between the stage production and the movie?
--
roger long
pertec computer corp
{ucbvax!unisoft | scgvaxd | trwrb | felix}!pertec!bytebugsdyer@bbncca.ARPA (Steve Dyer) (10/01/84)
The problem with the movie is NOT that it isn't a "Mozart concert." Rather,
it is unwittingly ironic that whenever the film presents exerpts from
Mozart's music, their genius just about blows Shaffer and Forman out of the
water, revealing just how second rate this effort is; modern-day Salieris,
if you will. A good movie doesn't allow you to prefer the musical excerpts
to the work as a whole.
I hadn't seen the play, though I was aware of its very good reviews.
I can only judge the movie on what I saw. Lyons and Gabler last night
on "Sneak Previews" both despised the movie, too, though they had enjoyed
the play. Interestingly, Siskel and Ebert both loved it, though their
reasons smacked to me of grovelling before the altar of high culchah,
leaving their critical faculties behind them in the vestibule.
--
/Steve Dyer
{decvax,linus,ima}!bbncca!sdyer
sdyer@bbncca.ARPAhania@rabbit.UUCP (Hania Gajewska) (10/02/84)
I haven't seen Amadeus the movie yet, and I don't know how good a screen writer Shaffer makes. I did see Amadeus the play; the production was marvelous, as was Mozart's music (despite an attrocious sound system), but through it all, what really shone was Shaffer's talent as a playwright. The play was a drama full of conflict and suspense, and I was kept on the edge of my seat throughout. I had seen it three times; two of the three was with friends who don't care for Mozart or classical music in general -- they, too, loved the play. I also have the book; I read it through a few times, and return to it often, marveling at its use of the language. If the movie, indeed, doesn't measure up -- it's a shame. I wish that the play's genius could reach the movie's wide audience. Hania Gajewska
grass@uiucdcsb.UUCP (10/03/84)
<Kushaj, na zdorov'e> Amadeus is not the first play based on the theme of Salieri murdering Mozart. Alexander Pushkin wrote a short play about the same theme around 1810. I don't know if it is easily available in English, but it is a classic of Russian literature. Salieri's motivation is exactly the same as in Amadeus: e.g. he works so hard as a composer, but only gets mediocre results. Mozart, on the other hand, creates masterpieces without effort. This seems a great injustice, so... . Pushkin manages to dispose of this theme in about 25 pages worth of play. I saw Amadeus on Broadway and was really impressed with it. I am looking forward to seeing the movie (regardless of the reviews) just to see how the story could get stretched any more. - Judy Grass University of Illinois- Urbana