Before I saw this movie, I respected Mozart's genius, but his music wasn't my cup of tea. Beethoven was more to my taste, I tended more toward heavier classics. But this movie moved me to tears, especially at the end when they did Mozart's REQUIEM while he was working on what was to be his last piece of music. Now, I'm a Mozart fiend. This was a great movie. True, there are some historical inaccuracies. Anyone who has studied music history knows that Sallieri did not help Mozart with his Requiem. It was a student of his named Sussmayer. But it does make this story ironic, that the man who was so dedicated to the ruination of Mozart ended up helping him in the end. (I question the historical accuracy of that as well.) I recently bought the director's cut to this movie. Until I saw the director's cut, Sallieri seemed like a more sympathetic character, someone who just couldn't buy a break. Who can't identify with that? But after seeing the director's cut and seeing what I think is an important scene between Sallieri and Mozart's wife, he seemed more like a jerk. You also understand why Frau Mozart was so rude to Sallieri at the end of the movie, whereas before, you see the next to the last scene and you think, "Whoa! Where did this come from?" This was a great movie, for entertainment value only. If you want historical accuracy, watch a documentary or read a biography from the library or something. Because of this movie, I am now a rabid Mozart fan. If the movie can make Mozart converts, then it can't be bad at all.
764 Reviews
To give everything you have to music and come up short
AlsExGal16 January 2010
At the tender age of 26, when I still thought no film was complete without a car chase and a big explosion, Amadeus had me hooked. I went to see it multiple times back in 1984 during its initial release, back when the theater was empty whenever it played and before it was nominated by the Academy.
This film is an unusual biography, and I often like to compare it with Ed Wood, since both Ed Wood and Salieri were men who gave everything they had to their respective crafts and came up short. Salieri, a contemporary of Mozart, has only one dream - to be a great composer. Predating the prosperity gospel by about two hundred years, Salieri mistakes obsessing with God over his own earthly desires with actual godliness, even being happy when his father - who objects to Salieri's musical interests - chokes to death and leaves Salieri free to pursue his musical dreams. He chalks this up to God's will for his career. Problems begin when Salieri meets a twenty-something Mozart at the court of the Emperor in Vienna, where Salieri is the court composer. Mozart is everything Salieri is not - profane, forward, and a great composer. Salieri starts down the road to insanity as he realizes the childish Mozart has all of the gifts he ever wanted and has been denied. However, Salieri is not an outright failure as was Ed Wood. In many ways he is something worse than a ridiculous failure - he is mediocre, and worse yet, he knows it.
Salieri,angry at God for honoring a profane ungrateful boy like Mozart while ignoring his own one desire to be a great composer, swears to destroy Mozart. The strange thing is, as long as Mozart is alive, Salieri is the honored composer, not Mozart, though this just seems to infuriate Salieri even more. Salieri seems to be the only person in Vienna who recognizes Mozart's talent. This just begs the question - why did it never occur to Salieri that being able to recognize something as valuable before anyone else does is a talent in and of itself? After all, in 1975 the second best thing to being Bill Gates would have been to have recognized his genius and invested heavily in his success. But I digress.
The cinematography and art direction on this film are outstanding. The visuals start out light and festive, matching Mozart's mood and prospects. As poverty, illness, and the guilt of his father's death close in on Mozart during the second half of the film, the mood and visuals become very dark to match what is happening in Mozart's own life. Highly recommended.
This film is an unusual biography, and I often like to compare it with Ed Wood, since both Ed Wood and Salieri were men who gave everything they had to their respective crafts and came up short. Salieri, a contemporary of Mozart, has only one dream - to be a great composer. Predating the prosperity gospel by about two hundred years, Salieri mistakes obsessing with God over his own earthly desires with actual godliness, even being happy when his father - who objects to Salieri's musical interests - chokes to death and leaves Salieri free to pursue his musical dreams. He chalks this up to God's will for his career. Problems begin when Salieri meets a twenty-something Mozart at the court of the Emperor in Vienna, where Salieri is the court composer. Mozart is everything Salieri is not - profane, forward, and a great composer. Salieri starts down the road to insanity as he realizes the childish Mozart has all of the gifts he ever wanted and has been denied. However, Salieri is not an outright failure as was Ed Wood. In many ways he is something worse than a ridiculous failure - he is mediocre, and worse yet, he knows it.
Salieri,angry at God for honoring a profane ungrateful boy like Mozart while ignoring his own one desire to be a great composer, swears to destroy Mozart. The strange thing is, as long as Mozart is alive, Salieri is the honored composer, not Mozart, though this just seems to infuriate Salieri even more. Salieri seems to be the only person in Vienna who recognizes Mozart's talent. This just begs the question - why did it never occur to Salieri that being able to recognize something as valuable before anyone else does is a talent in and of itself? After all, in 1975 the second best thing to being Bill Gates would have been to have recognized his genius and invested heavily in his success. But I digress.
The cinematography and art direction on this film are outstanding. The visuals start out light and festive, matching Mozart's mood and prospects. As poverty, illness, and the guilt of his father's death close in on Mozart during the second half of the film, the mood and visuals become very dark to match what is happening in Mozart's own life. Highly recommended.
Rock me Amadeus! Amadeus is a beautiful musical masterpiece
ironhorse_iv20 August 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Extraordinary! On the page it looked nothing! The beginning simple, almost comic. Just a pulse. And then, suddenly, high above it, beautiful music. A single note, hanging there, unwavering. Until a clarinet took it over, sweetened it into a phrase of such delight! This was no composition by a performing monkey! This was a music I had never heard. Filled with such longing, such unfulfillable longing. It seemed to me that I was hearing the voice of God. Director Milos Forman's Best Picture winning drama was indeed a masterpiece. Based on Peter Shaffer's extravagant 1980 Broadway play with the same name. The film tells a fictionalized biography of tortured genius and Viennese child prodigy Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (Tom Hulce). Also, the story was presented in a way that was very unique at the time. It was through the eyes of fellow jealous composer Antonio Salieri (F. Murray Abraham) who finds the deeply crude and childish behavior of Mozart, unworthy of such praise. Driven by his attempt to outshine Mozart, Salieri must find a way to gain the audience of the Austrian Aristocrats, before it's too late. Without spoiling the movie, too much, a lot of people had complain that this movie wasn't historical accuracy. In my opinion, a lot of this criticize wasn't needed. To the film credit, Amadeus never claims to be a true story. It's normal for films like this, to sometimes diverge from historical facts in order to explore more fundamental and universal human issues and to achieve a dramatic effect. Yet, the film had more fact than fiction than most people are willing to taken. It did a lot of homework to get, as accuracy as possible. So, when I hear, some of the main complains that the critics point out about the film. I had to question, their short-temper justice. I felt like they were misinform. Many of the so-call historical inaccuracies were somewhat true. It's true that Antonio Salieri later claims he killed Mozart. Even Mozart toward the end of his life, swears that he's believe that he been poison, but in terms of Salieri doing it; its indeed historical fiction; due to the fact that most historians dismissed his mad ravings with that of a person whom clearly had his sanity deteriorated & the fact that Mozart fell ill while in Prague on Sept 6. 1791 where Salieri was clearly not there. Another claim, these critics spoke of, is how the film, portray a masked man wanting to commissioned a requiem from him in order to steal his work. In truth, it was very likely at the time for people to anonymously commissioned requiems from famous composers and pass them as them, off; but there was no reason why Salieri needed to. After all, his music was a lot more popular at the time, than Mozart. It wasn't, because Mozart was lazy. It was, because he was a fading child star, who had drug problems which both historians and film critics fail to notice that kept him working. I thought that Tom Hulce's immature performance as Mozart was very accuracy as it was very well documented that the composer had those characteristic traits even if it's a little exaggerated. However, the ever-present, idiotic giggle does get a little too annoying at times. About the fact that Salieri and Mozart were fighting for certain imperial jobs, it was true, but the reason why Mozart was never given a position on the emperor's courts, wasn't, because Salieri's envy of Mozart, but the fact, that Mozart's music doesn't sound typical 'Galant' & he wasn't noble. There was no reason why Salieri really needed to steal his work, as he was rich enough, and Mozart's work was a little too controversial at the time for basing works on Austrian's past banned materials and not being tradition. About Mozart's constant embarrassment of Salieri, such as seducing Salieri's lover, Catarina Cavalieri (Christine Ebersole). There is no evidence that Mozart slept with her. In reality, it is very likely that Salieri slept with Catarina, as it was generally known, at the time, that she was his mistress, and if they were still together years after 'The Abduction from the Seraglio'. If anything, Mozart and Salieri were, if not best of friends, at least on peaceable terms with one another, when it comes to sexual and musical conquest. He wasn't a saint at all. He even educated Mozart's younger son Franz Xaver Mozart, after the composer death. While, yes it's true that Mozart's work outlive, Salieri. It wasn't because Mozart work was better than Salieri. It was, because German nationalism began to take shape in Vienna with the birth of Romantic nationalism during the Napoleonic Wars. Italians were often view, as scapegoat of the war since Napoleon was one; thus Italian culture like it's music was somewhat banned from most European cultures during the mid19th century. This short ban, cause hits like Salieri to be nearly forgotten. It wasn't until, the late 20th century that most of Salieri's work was reintroduce into western culture with this film. The film was well-received by both critics and audiences alike with its lavish set and period costume design, music, visuals, and its acting. If the film had any faults, it would be the fact that the movie has pacing problems. It's way too damn long. 2h 40min is too much. It could had been cut down. Ultimately, the 1984 awards were monopolized by Amadeus with eight wins: Best Picture, Best Actor (F. Murray Abraham), Best Director, Best Screenplay Adaptation, Best Art/Set Direction, Best Sound, Best Costume Design, and Best Makeup. It became the 7th film in Oscar history to win eight Oscars. Overall: It's visually interesting, has dramatic intrigue acting from F. Murray Abraham, hilarious comedy, and introduced people to a part of history that was phenomenally fascinating and surprising, mostly true. I highly recommended this film.
True Gem for Movie and Music Fans
miknnik30 January 2007
I'd like to point out a few facts before I review the movie. First of all, Mozart died at home surrounded by his family, pupil and a priest. Secondly, the plot of Amadeus is not exactly original. Rimsky-Korsakov wrote a short opera called "Mozart and Salieri" with the bare bones of the story and the identical characterization of the two composers, and he used Pushkin's drama for the libretto. So, the rumor that Salieri killed Mozart has been around for almost a couple of centuries though we all know there isn't an iota of veracity in it.
That being said, Peter Shaffer's movie adaptation of his own play is still an astounding achievement. Have you ever seen a movie based on your favorite book and come out of the movie theater rather disappointed though the film version faithfully followed the storyline of the book? Amadeus is definitely not one of those movies. Shaffer clearly understands the difference between stage and film; the story is more elaborate in the movie, and some of the lengthy lines are replaced with more subtle images and close-ups.
I'm often surprised to find that people don't get that Amadeus is the story of the fictionalized character, Antonio Salieri, not the real one, who adored Mozart's music but hated everything else about him. In other words, the movie viewers are seeing Mozart through Salieri's eyes. Needless to say, his view is rather slanted. If you have read Shaffer's original play, you probably remember he describes Mozart's laugh 'grating.' In the film, this annoying laugh becomes more symbolic. Though Salieri speaks in front of a Catholic priest, he is actually having a one-sided discourse with God. At one point, he declares, "One day, I will laugh at you. Before I leave this earth, I will laugh at you." But as he is wheeled out of his room by an aide at the asylum, what we hear is that screeching laugh of Mozart--or is it? It becomes obvious as we watch that this movie is called Amadeus because that's what Salieri wished to be--God's beloved.
The movie might give some viewers who don't know much about Mozart a wrong impression that he was a cad, and it gives incorrect information on some of his music (e.g.; the count in The Marriage of Figaro sings "Contessa perdono" AFTER he learns that the woman dressed in the maid's clothes is his own wife. There's no mistaken identity here. Read the title of the song--Countess, forgive me!), but these are minor offenses. Though I am a die-hard Mozart fan, I can laugh at tongue-in-cheek references to Amadeus in other movies. My favorite? In Guarding Tess, a secret service agent tells his partner, "He (Mozart)'s a jerk. One day, a guy shows up with a mask, and he drops dead."
What's not to like about Amadeus? The tale Peter Shaffer tells is gripping, the actors are first- rate, and, of course, there's music. The selection of Mozart's music in the movie is excellent; you can truly enjoy the beauty of his music no matter how much or how little you know about it. In case you are wondering, a little tune Mozart plays on his back and hands crossed as a penalty at a party is Viva Bacchus from The Abduction from the Seraglio, a duet for Pedrillo and Osmin. Pedrillo, while singing this song, is trying to get Osmin, the harem guard, drunk to help his master rescue his true love. No wonder Schikaneder calls it 'our song.' And the improvised version of Salieri's welcome march is actually a famous song, Non piu andrai farfallone amoroso, from The Marriage of Figaro.
As I said, I'm a huge Mozart fan, so my rating may be somewhat biased, but what the heck, I gladly give ten stars to Amadeus. I watched it close to a hundred times over the years, and it still gives me a great pleasure every time I see (and hear) it.
That being said, Peter Shaffer's movie adaptation of his own play is still an astounding achievement. Have you ever seen a movie based on your favorite book and come out of the movie theater rather disappointed though the film version faithfully followed the storyline of the book? Amadeus is definitely not one of those movies. Shaffer clearly understands the difference between stage and film; the story is more elaborate in the movie, and some of the lengthy lines are replaced with more subtle images and close-ups.
I'm often surprised to find that people don't get that Amadeus is the story of the fictionalized character, Antonio Salieri, not the real one, who adored Mozart's music but hated everything else about him. In other words, the movie viewers are seeing Mozart through Salieri's eyes. Needless to say, his view is rather slanted. If you have read Shaffer's original play, you probably remember he describes Mozart's laugh 'grating.' In the film, this annoying laugh becomes more symbolic. Though Salieri speaks in front of a Catholic priest, he is actually having a one-sided discourse with God. At one point, he declares, "One day, I will laugh at you. Before I leave this earth, I will laugh at you." But as he is wheeled out of his room by an aide at the asylum, what we hear is that screeching laugh of Mozart--or is it? It becomes obvious as we watch that this movie is called Amadeus because that's what Salieri wished to be--God's beloved.
The movie might give some viewers who don't know much about Mozart a wrong impression that he was a cad, and it gives incorrect information on some of his music (e.g.; the count in The Marriage of Figaro sings "Contessa perdono" AFTER he learns that the woman dressed in the maid's clothes is his own wife. There's no mistaken identity here. Read the title of the song--Countess, forgive me!), but these are minor offenses. Though I am a die-hard Mozart fan, I can laugh at tongue-in-cheek references to Amadeus in other movies. My favorite? In Guarding Tess, a secret service agent tells his partner, "He (Mozart)'s a jerk. One day, a guy shows up with a mask, and he drops dead."
What's not to like about Amadeus? The tale Peter Shaffer tells is gripping, the actors are first- rate, and, of course, there's music. The selection of Mozart's music in the movie is excellent; you can truly enjoy the beauty of his music no matter how much or how little you know about it. In case you are wondering, a little tune Mozart plays on his back and hands crossed as a penalty at a party is Viva Bacchus from The Abduction from the Seraglio, a duet for Pedrillo and Osmin. Pedrillo, while singing this song, is trying to get Osmin, the harem guard, drunk to help his master rescue his true love. No wonder Schikaneder calls it 'our song.' And the improvised version of Salieri's welcome march is actually a famous song, Non piu andrai farfallone amoroso, from The Marriage of Figaro.
As I said, I'm a huge Mozart fan, so my rating may be somewhat biased, but what the heck, I gladly give ten stars to Amadeus. I watched it close to a hundred times over the years, and it still gives me a great pleasure every time I see (and hear) it.
One of those movies that you'll never forget
Smells_Like_Cheese16 November 2003
I remember as a child, my sister told me to watch this film. That it was the best film she ever saw. I didn't watch it until I turned 10; finally I sat myself down and watched it. I fell in love with it.
Based on the life of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, played a terrific and hilarious performance by Tom Hulce. This also has the life of Antonio Salieri, a great and well deserved Oscar winning performance by F. Murray Abraham. Despite the story not being accurate, come on! This is a great movie that was a gigantic Oscar waiting to happen. Congrats to Amaudeus for bringing the beauty of classical music into out living rooms.
The story is that we start off with an older and more suicidal Salieri who blames himself for Mozart's death. When a priest comes to ask Salieri to plead forgiveness to the lord and wants to council him, Salieri describes who he was and how music inspired his life, he plays a few notes from his opera's that were masterpieces, the priest just looks at him not knowing the music. Salieri just looks at him with a smile and says "Ah, how about...?", he plays Mozart's most famous work and the priest gets excited saying "Oh, how charming! I'm sorry, I didn't know you wrote that!" smiling and knowing how it will please Salieri, Salieri just looks at him with a emotionless face "I didn't. That was Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart" and you see the priest's embarrassment. Just great and a perfectly played out performance by Abraham and Frank.
Tom Hulce gives Mozart this crazy and annoying yet nevertheless funny laugh that you can't help but laugh at it every time he does it. He brings such life to Mozart and an immaturity that I think some of us can relate too in being spoiled and always knowing you're the best at your talent. He marries Constanze played by Elizabeth Berridge and she does it remarkably well. Constanze is obviously the more mature one and is the only woman who can try to tame Mozart's crazy ways. When Salieri gets a little jealous that the emperor played by an under rated Jeffrey Jones, since he is the emperor's tutor, then the emperor demands more of Mozart and his music. Salieri vs. Mozart: on the next celebrity death match!
"Amadeus" is a fantastic movie that anyone could easily love and enjoy. It's definitely a must see for movie fans and anyone in general who is just looking for a good movie. This was the best picture of 1984 and it's well deserved, just trust me and the awesome reviews it's getting!
10/10
Based on the life of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, played a terrific and hilarious performance by Tom Hulce. This also has the life of Antonio Salieri, a great and well deserved Oscar winning performance by F. Murray Abraham. Despite the story not being accurate, come on! This is a great movie that was a gigantic Oscar waiting to happen. Congrats to Amaudeus for bringing the beauty of classical music into out living rooms.
The story is that we start off with an older and more suicidal Salieri who blames himself for Mozart's death. When a priest comes to ask Salieri to plead forgiveness to the lord and wants to council him, Salieri describes who he was and how music inspired his life, he plays a few notes from his opera's that were masterpieces, the priest just looks at him not knowing the music. Salieri just looks at him with a smile and says "Ah, how about...?", he plays Mozart's most famous work and the priest gets excited saying "Oh, how charming! I'm sorry, I didn't know you wrote that!" smiling and knowing how it will please Salieri, Salieri just looks at him with a emotionless face "I didn't. That was Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart" and you see the priest's embarrassment. Just great and a perfectly played out performance by Abraham and Frank.
Tom Hulce gives Mozart this crazy and annoying yet nevertheless funny laugh that you can't help but laugh at it every time he does it. He brings such life to Mozart and an immaturity that I think some of us can relate too in being spoiled and always knowing you're the best at your talent. He marries Constanze played by Elizabeth Berridge and she does it remarkably well. Constanze is obviously the more mature one and is the only woman who can try to tame Mozart's crazy ways. When Salieri gets a little jealous that the emperor played by an under rated Jeffrey Jones, since he is the emperor's tutor, then the emperor demands more of Mozart and his music. Salieri vs. Mozart: on the next celebrity death match!
"Amadeus" is a fantastic movie that anyone could easily love and enjoy. It's definitely a must see for movie fans and anyone in general who is just looking for a good movie. This was the best picture of 1984 and it's well deserved, just trust me and the awesome reviews it's getting!
10/10
The Patron Saint of Mediocrities
JamesHitchcock3 September 2010
Most films about composers- Ken Russell's "The Music Lovers" about Tchaikovsky and "Immortal Beloved" about Beethoven are examples- rely upon the cliché of the creative artist as tortured, neurotic genius. Perhaps we like to console ourselves for the fact that we are not ourselves geniuses with the thought that genius must be paid for in mental suffering. Of course, not all composers fit this stereotype- Haydn was stoical in the face of misfortune (including a miserably unhappy marriage), Rossini was a noted bon viveur and it was often said of Felix Mendelssohn that his forename (Latin for "happy") well suited his character. But when did you last see a biopic of Haydn, Rossini or Mendelssohn? "Song of Norway" told the story of Grieg, another composer who doesn't really fit the "tormented genius" label, but it bombed at the box-office.
"Amadeus", however, attempts to overturn this cliché with a vengeance. The Mozart portrayed in the early scenes is about the least tormented genius who ever lived, obnoxiously hearty and cheerful, without the slightest doubt about his own talents. The tormented character is his rival, Antonio Salieri, but Salieri is no genius; in his own mind he is a hopeless mediocrity whose talents pale into insignificance besides Mozart's.
The story is told as a confession made by the now elderly, half- mad Salieri to a priest in 1823, long after Mozart's death, the earlier scenes being seen in flashback. As a young man, the deeply pious Salieri vows that if God will make him a great composer he will live a chaste, virtuous life and use his talents to God's glory. At first Salieri believes that his vow has been accepted. He quickly achieves fame and is appointed Court Composer to Emperor Joseph II. When Mozart arrives in Vienna, however, Salieri realises that the young man's music has a transcendent beauty which his own can never match.
Salieri's attitude towards his rival is not one of simple jealousy. Were Mozart a man of his own austere, puritanical stamp Salieri would not resent him nearly so much. Mozart, however, is very far from being puritanical. He is not a bad man, but he is very young, and his are a young man's faults- brashness, overweening self-confidence, a bawdy sense of humour, a keen eye for a pretty girl and a lack of respect for authority. (Actually, those last two are not really faults at all). His most irritating characteristic is his high-pitched laugh like a braying jackass. In Salieri's eyes, however, Mozart is a vulgar upstart, a smutty, sex-obsessed boy. Salieri believes that God has cheated him, by denying him the musical talent he deserves and giving it to an unworthy recipient. (The title is an appropriate one; Amadeus was not only Mozart's middle name but is also Latin for "beloved of God"). Salieri therefore plots a diabolical revenge against both Mozart and God.
The director Milo Forman took the brave decision to cast little-known actors in the three main roles, F. Murray Abraham as Salieri, Tom Hulce as Mozart and Elizabeth Berridge as Mozart's beautiful young wife Constanze. In each case, however, that decision paid off admirably. Constanze has sometimes had a bad press from biographers, but here Berridge portrays her as strong-willed but loving and kind-hearted.
Both Abraham and Hulce were nominated for "Best Actor" Oscars, and it was Abraham who won. Good as Abraham is as the gloomy, saturnine Salieri, a man eaten up with obsessive hatred, I still think that Hulce should have beaten him. There is a remarkable contrast between the brash young jackass of the early scenes and the Mozart of the later ones- a more mature, serious family man who has learnt the meaning of responsibility and who is for the first time starting to experience worries- about his finances, about his health, about his career. Hulce's achievement is that he not only makes these two Mozarts equally believable but also indicates that they are not two distinct individuals but rather two aspects of the same complex personality. There are also good performances from Jeffrey Jones as the conscientious but bumbling and musically tone deaf Emperor Joseph and Roy Dotrice as Mozart's autocratic father Leopold.
"Amadeus" is not, and is not intended as, a factually accurate biopic of Mozart. As Peter Shaffer, who wrote both the screenplay and the play on which it was based, was well aware, there is no real evidence that Salieri was obsessively jealous of Mozart, and absolutely none to support the old legend that he murdered him. He was not in reality a celibate puritan- he had a wife, eight children and a mistress. Shaffer uses this legend as the basis of a fictional story which explores complex questions about the nature of artistic creativity and the relationship between man and God.
The film, deservedly, won the "Best Picture" Oscar for 1984; indeed, it is in my view one of the finest films of the eighties. It works on a number of levels- as a lavish piece of "heritage cinema" recreating the Europe of the late 18th century (the sets and costumes are particularly fine), as an intellectual exploration of philosophical issues, as a well-acted human drama, as a fictionalised study of a great man. The soundtrack is heavenly, but that is only to be expected, containing as it does some of Mozart's greatest music.
The film has had a curious side effect. It could have condemned Salieri to perpetual infamy as a jealous minor composer who was supposedly responsible for the death of a great one. Instead, it seems to have led to a revival of interest in his work; he is certainly better known today than he was in 1984. Many musicians would now regard him as something far more than the "patron saint of mediocrities". God may have answered Salieri's prayers long after his death. 10/10
"Amadeus", however, attempts to overturn this cliché with a vengeance. The Mozart portrayed in the early scenes is about the least tormented genius who ever lived, obnoxiously hearty and cheerful, without the slightest doubt about his own talents. The tormented character is his rival, Antonio Salieri, but Salieri is no genius; in his own mind he is a hopeless mediocrity whose talents pale into insignificance besides Mozart's.
The story is told as a confession made by the now elderly, half- mad Salieri to a priest in 1823, long after Mozart's death, the earlier scenes being seen in flashback. As a young man, the deeply pious Salieri vows that if God will make him a great composer he will live a chaste, virtuous life and use his talents to God's glory. At first Salieri believes that his vow has been accepted. He quickly achieves fame and is appointed Court Composer to Emperor Joseph II. When Mozart arrives in Vienna, however, Salieri realises that the young man's music has a transcendent beauty which his own can never match.
Salieri's attitude towards his rival is not one of simple jealousy. Were Mozart a man of his own austere, puritanical stamp Salieri would not resent him nearly so much. Mozart, however, is very far from being puritanical. He is not a bad man, but he is very young, and his are a young man's faults- brashness, overweening self-confidence, a bawdy sense of humour, a keen eye for a pretty girl and a lack of respect for authority. (Actually, those last two are not really faults at all). His most irritating characteristic is his high-pitched laugh like a braying jackass. In Salieri's eyes, however, Mozart is a vulgar upstart, a smutty, sex-obsessed boy. Salieri believes that God has cheated him, by denying him the musical talent he deserves and giving it to an unworthy recipient. (The title is an appropriate one; Amadeus was not only Mozart's middle name but is also Latin for "beloved of God"). Salieri therefore plots a diabolical revenge against both Mozart and God.
The director Milo Forman took the brave decision to cast little-known actors in the three main roles, F. Murray Abraham as Salieri, Tom Hulce as Mozart and Elizabeth Berridge as Mozart's beautiful young wife Constanze. In each case, however, that decision paid off admirably. Constanze has sometimes had a bad press from biographers, but here Berridge portrays her as strong-willed but loving and kind-hearted.
Both Abraham and Hulce were nominated for "Best Actor" Oscars, and it was Abraham who won. Good as Abraham is as the gloomy, saturnine Salieri, a man eaten up with obsessive hatred, I still think that Hulce should have beaten him. There is a remarkable contrast between the brash young jackass of the early scenes and the Mozart of the later ones- a more mature, serious family man who has learnt the meaning of responsibility and who is for the first time starting to experience worries- about his finances, about his health, about his career. Hulce's achievement is that he not only makes these two Mozarts equally believable but also indicates that they are not two distinct individuals but rather two aspects of the same complex personality. There are also good performances from Jeffrey Jones as the conscientious but bumbling and musically tone deaf Emperor Joseph and Roy Dotrice as Mozart's autocratic father Leopold.
"Amadeus" is not, and is not intended as, a factually accurate biopic of Mozart. As Peter Shaffer, who wrote both the screenplay and the play on which it was based, was well aware, there is no real evidence that Salieri was obsessively jealous of Mozart, and absolutely none to support the old legend that he murdered him. He was not in reality a celibate puritan- he had a wife, eight children and a mistress. Shaffer uses this legend as the basis of a fictional story which explores complex questions about the nature of artistic creativity and the relationship between man and God.
The film, deservedly, won the "Best Picture" Oscar for 1984; indeed, it is in my view one of the finest films of the eighties. It works on a number of levels- as a lavish piece of "heritage cinema" recreating the Europe of the late 18th century (the sets and costumes are particularly fine), as an intellectual exploration of philosophical issues, as a well-acted human drama, as a fictionalised study of a great man. The soundtrack is heavenly, but that is only to be expected, containing as it does some of Mozart's greatest music.
The film has had a curious side effect. It could have condemned Salieri to perpetual infamy as a jealous minor composer who was supposedly responsible for the death of a great one. Instead, it seems to have led to a revival of interest in his work; he is certainly better known today than he was in 1984. Many musicians would now regard him as something far more than the "patron saint of mediocrities". God may have answered Salieri's prayers long after his death. 10/10
Genius
SevenOfNine6315 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
It is because of this movie that I began listening to Classical music. Up to the age of 20 I wouldn't listen to anything but rock, rap, hip hop, punk. Then I fell in love with Mozart. And because of this epiphany I went on to listen to other styles of music such as country (Patsy Cline, Loretta Lynn, Hank Williams), Edith Piaf, Al Jolson, and so on. This movie is breathtaking. A knockout and I wish I could see it on the big screen! Tom Hulce was wonderful as Mozart! Elizabeth Berridge who plays his wife Constanza looks eerily like the real Constanza judging from portraits of the great composer's wife.
F. Murray Abraham deservedly won the Oscar for his outstanding turn as Mozart's arch enemy-fellow composer Antonio Salieri who was NOT a 'mediocrity'! He was a brilliant composer in his own right. It is just that there are the fair, the good, the great-and then there are the gifted.
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was one of the gifted. When it comes to music even the un-trained ear can tell that God kissed the man right on the lips.
And there was nothing Salieri could do about it. He could train in music for a million years and he still could not come close to the genius that was Mozart-who's "Eine Kleine Nachtmuzik" is recognizable today even to non-classical music fans.
F. Murray Abraham deservedly won the Oscar for his outstanding turn as Mozart's arch enemy-fellow composer Antonio Salieri who was NOT a 'mediocrity'! He was a brilliant composer in his own right. It is just that there are the fair, the good, the great-and then there are the gifted.
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was one of the gifted. When it comes to music even the un-trained ear can tell that God kissed the man right on the lips.
And there was nothing Salieri could do about it. He could train in music for a million years and he still could not come close to the genius that was Mozart-who's "Eine Kleine Nachtmuzik" is recognizable today even to non-classical music fans.
A movie of a genius, directed by another one !
mario_filipe23 May 2004
I thought that it would be impossible to make a movie like this one! Peter Schaffer's original play inspired Milos Forman, the great czech film maker, that surprised the world with "One flew over the cuckoo's nest" (1975). The sublime, almost over-human performance by Frank Murray Abraham (the Mozart enemy and secret admirer, Salieri) is one of the keys for the movie success, mostly to it's depth. The perfect sense of timing by Milos Forman is admirable, he knows when to play wich music. All the scenarios: opera houses, palaces, streets, etc., are details absolutely harmonious! One of this classic secret was that Forman gathered "the" team, perfect team work.
We can just admire it, laugh, cry, reflect, most of all, listen to it. See it, it's 10/10.
Thank you Mr. Forman...
We can just admire it, laugh, cry, reflect, most of all, listen to it. See it, it's 10/10.
Thank you Mr. Forman...
A rare masterpiece
Alec-1126 June 1999
Warning: Spoilers
SPOILER: Amadeus is an extremely well written story, covering the last ten years of Mozart's massively prolific yet unusual life. I have read much that it paints a rather inaccurate picture of the genius's life, and yet I am not dissuaded from ranking this film as one of the greatest made. The historical problem should be addressed first, because it draws the most criticism. I would advise anyone to shut out the self-righteous whining of those people who fancy themselves as Mozart experts, when they really have little solid evidence for their assertions. History is only seen by us in fragments, be they documents or eye witness accounts. These fragments certainly do not amount to a full picture of events, and so Milos Forman and Peter Schaeffer are perfectly entitled to form their own story of genius.
This issue aside, the picture is one of fantastic colour and scale, crammed with lavish costumes and wonderful architecture. This keeps the eyes occupied, but the ears get the biggest reward. The film uses a large amount of Mozart's music, and does so in a way which is carefully considered. For example, when the insane and enfeebled Antonio Salieri (F. Murray Abraham) reminisces on the sheer beauty of Mozart's compositions, we hear music to match his words, "And there... an oboe, high and unwavering... until a clarinet takes over, and forms a phrase of such longing..." The effect is deeply moving. Examples of this collaboration of music and picture are many; when Mozart (Tom Hulce) swaggers through the streets of Vienna taking swigs from a bottle of wine, we hear a jolly piano concerto; and he is hurled into a mass grave to the sorrowful Lacrimosa of his requiem mass. The music should move any viewer, however much they confess to hating anything classical. If you haven't seen this film, watch, or rather listen, for the scene where Salieri inspects samples of Mozart's music. The originality in switching the music as he turns the pages is profound. The acting is superb, particularly from Abraham. Hulce's cackle provides comic relief, and his wonderfully child-like mannerisms are testament not only to his acting skills, but to Forman's exceptional direction and vision. On the other hand, we are shown two moments of antithesis, namely when he is composing at his billiards table (his face taking on a look of such mature concentration), and when he is dictating his Confutatis to Salieri. Yes, we do get to see Mozart compose, and talk about tonic, dominant, second measures, etc. I would have preferred to have seen more of his thought processes though, because Forman's glimpse of how Mozart applied his genius is extremely exciting to watch, but short lived. Characterisations are brilliantly engineered. Salieri is scheming and yet outwardly indifferent to Mozart. We can see that he loves the music of his superior, and yet is torn apart by his own inadequacy. Inadequacy is a fitting word for Salieri's skill as portrayed by Forman, who wanted to give the greatest contrast possible in terms of the virtuosity of the two men, without making Salieri look like a complete cretin. He is, after all, known as maestro Salieri. Constanze Mozart (Elizabeth Berridge) is on first appearances a giggling girl, and yet through the course of the film we are shown that she is very shrewd, and is ruthless when dealing with finance. Roy Dotrice's Leopold Mozart has a masterful air, and maintains an oppressive paternal hold over his son even after his death, the analogy being the use of an enveloping cloak. The cloak is used as part of Leopold's street wear, but is also part of the costume of the statue in the first showing of Don Giovanni, where Salieri is certain that the imposing figure of the giant statue represents the recently deceased Leopold. In short, Forman presents us with a marvelous psychological essay on weakness and power, both superficial and real. This is obviously no average biographical motion picture, but a film conceived with an intelligence nearing that of it's subject. We are shown Mozart's virtuosity several times, which again provides wonderful excitement. He not only plays variations of his music thought up on the spot (at the party scene) but plays them in the styles of other composers, upside down. He infuriates Salieri by arranging a welcoming march actually written for Mozart (and taken to be wonderful by the Italian up to this point), showing off his outstanding skills whilst looking around at the assembled courtiers and cackling with glee. Those who have watched this scene with me have either laughed or smiled in sheer wonderment at a majestic combination of music, acting and direction. This film is a gem, combining sometimes ridiculous comedy with deep tragedy. On the negative side, it would benefit opera buffs more than concert goers, because opera is the dominant musical genre of the movie. (Specially designed opera productions have been woven into the film; greatly extending it's length but adding that extra colour and vibrancy). The film becomes heavy and slow moving as it nears its astonishingly refreshing conclusion at the lunatic asylum, noticeable largely due to the contrast with a lighter beginning. This may test the patience of some viewers, but once the credits roll, I guarantee that the majority of those who have watched Amadeus will be struck by the passing of such a wonderfully colourful and rewarding masterpiece, and will not want to move from their seats until the tranquil piano concerto fades away. The film deserves all its eight Oscars, and I give it 9 out of 10.
This issue aside, the picture is one of fantastic colour and scale, crammed with lavish costumes and wonderful architecture. This keeps the eyes occupied, but the ears get the biggest reward. The film uses a large amount of Mozart's music, and does so in a way which is carefully considered. For example, when the insane and enfeebled Antonio Salieri (F. Murray Abraham) reminisces on the sheer beauty of Mozart's compositions, we hear music to match his words, "And there... an oboe, high and unwavering... until a clarinet takes over, and forms a phrase of such longing..." The effect is deeply moving. Examples of this collaboration of music and picture are many; when Mozart (Tom Hulce) swaggers through the streets of Vienna taking swigs from a bottle of wine, we hear a jolly piano concerto; and he is hurled into a mass grave to the sorrowful Lacrimosa of his requiem mass. The music should move any viewer, however much they confess to hating anything classical. If you haven't seen this film, watch, or rather listen, for the scene where Salieri inspects samples of Mozart's music. The originality in switching the music as he turns the pages is profound. The acting is superb, particularly from Abraham. Hulce's cackle provides comic relief, and his wonderfully child-like mannerisms are testament not only to his acting skills, but to Forman's exceptional direction and vision. On the other hand, we are shown two moments of antithesis, namely when he is composing at his billiards table (his face taking on a look of such mature concentration), and when he is dictating his Confutatis to Salieri. Yes, we do get to see Mozart compose, and talk about tonic, dominant, second measures, etc. I would have preferred to have seen more of his thought processes though, because Forman's glimpse of how Mozart applied his genius is extremely exciting to watch, but short lived. Characterisations are brilliantly engineered. Salieri is scheming and yet outwardly indifferent to Mozart. We can see that he loves the music of his superior, and yet is torn apart by his own inadequacy. Inadequacy is a fitting word for Salieri's skill as portrayed by Forman, who wanted to give the greatest contrast possible in terms of the virtuosity of the two men, without making Salieri look like a complete cretin. He is, after all, known as maestro Salieri. Constanze Mozart (Elizabeth Berridge) is on first appearances a giggling girl, and yet through the course of the film we are shown that she is very shrewd, and is ruthless when dealing with finance. Roy Dotrice's Leopold Mozart has a masterful air, and maintains an oppressive paternal hold over his son even after his death, the analogy being the use of an enveloping cloak. The cloak is used as part of Leopold's street wear, but is also part of the costume of the statue in the first showing of Don Giovanni, where Salieri is certain that the imposing figure of the giant statue represents the recently deceased Leopold. In short, Forman presents us with a marvelous psychological essay on weakness and power, both superficial and real. This is obviously no average biographical motion picture, but a film conceived with an intelligence nearing that of it's subject. We are shown Mozart's virtuosity several times, which again provides wonderful excitement. He not only plays variations of his music thought up on the spot (at the party scene) but plays them in the styles of other composers, upside down. He infuriates Salieri by arranging a welcoming march actually written for Mozart (and taken to be wonderful by the Italian up to this point), showing off his outstanding skills whilst looking around at the assembled courtiers and cackling with glee. Those who have watched this scene with me have either laughed or smiled in sheer wonderment at a majestic combination of music, acting and direction. This film is a gem, combining sometimes ridiculous comedy with deep tragedy. On the negative side, it would benefit opera buffs more than concert goers, because opera is the dominant musical genre of the movie. (Specially designed opera productions have been woven into the film; greatly extending it's length but adding that extra colour and vibrancy). The film becomes heavy and slow moving as it nears its astonishingly refreshing conclusion at the lunatic asylum, noticeable largely due to the contrast with a lighter beginning. This may test the patience of some viewers, but once the credits roll, I guarantee that the majority of those who have watched Amadeus will be struck by the passing of such a wonderfully colourful and rewarding masterpiece, and will not want to move from their seats until the tranquil piano concerto fades away. The film deserves all its eight Oscars, and I give it 9 out of 10.
Perfect Film
redrobin62-321-20731129 April 2017
As of this writing, I have about 90 reviews on IMDb. I'd only began submitting reviews a few years ago, so the films I'd seen in the past were never reviewed by me. I thought I'd take the time now to give a quick review of the 10/10 films I'd seen in my life.
First one up is "Amadeus," and to me, the best film ever made. It's the movie I compare all others to, including classics like "The Godfather," "Citizen Kane," and "Schindler's List."
"Amadeus" has it all - excellent acting, excellent cinematography, excellent costume design, excellent music production, excellent set design, perfect combination of comedy and tragedy, and tons and tons of classic, memorable lines, especially those delivered by Salieri. I saw this movie in the theatres when it first came out. I was 18 years old and it made me fall in love with classical music.
Director Milos Forman is truly a wonder, given that he's helmed quite a few films that made my top 25 list - "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" and "Ragtime." How fitting it should be, then, that my favourite song of all time appears in one of his films, "Hair." Coincidence? I think not. The man's a genius, plain and simple. He's also caused me to structure some of my screenplays and novels based on "Ragtime." Talk about influential.
First one up is "Amadeus," and to me, the best film ever made. It's the movie I compare all others to, including classics like "The Godfather," "Citizen Kane," and "Schindler's List."
"Amadeus" has it all - excellent acting, excellent cinematography, excellent costume design, excellent music production, excellent set design, perfect combination of comedy and tragedy, and tons and tons of classic, memorable lines, especially those delivered by Salieri. I saw this movie in the theatres when it first came out. I was 18 years old and it made me fall in love with classical music.
Director Milos Forman is truly a wonder, given that he's helmed quite a few films that made my top 25 list - "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" and "Ragtime." How fitting it should be, then, that my favourite song of all time appears in one of his films, "Hair." Coincidence? I think not. The man's a genius, plain and simple. He's also caused me to structure some of my screenplays and novels based on "Ragtime." Talk about influential.
Amadeus Speaks for All Mankind
richcarter1504 May 2004
In 1984, Saul Zaentz, Peter Shaffer and Milos Forman collaborated in bringing a truly remarkable life to the silver screen. The story of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, through the eyes of rival composer, Antonio Salieri. The film is complete with an insightful script (courtesy of Mr. Shaffer), magnificent acting, wondrous sets and costume designs, incredible choreography (thanks to Twyla Tharp), and, above all, the glorious music of Mozart himself.
The movie of Salieri's life, through which Mozart played an integral part, is told in flashback mode, beginning in around the year 1822. An old and perhaps emotionally disturbed Antonio Salieri attempts suicide, and in doing so, apologizes for killing Mozart some 31 years earlier. He survives and is admitted to an insane asylum, where he tells a young priest his tale of jealousy and mediocrity.
The priest is fascinated and alternately troubled by the lengthy and emotional story. Salieri tells of growing up in Italy with a father who did not care for music; and how he rejoiced for the chance to go to Vienna after his father's untimely death. He tells of how he first had met the young Mozart, and how immature and dirty minded Mozart was. He also tells of how "The Creature" had an intimate relationship with the girl that Salieri had cared for. Most importantly, however, he confided in the priest that he had learned to hate God for giving him a deep love of music, only to deny him the talent to create truly memorable music. He thought God had given him Mozart to mock him. Salieri's heart filled with such rage, such hatred and such jealousy, that he had vowed to himself to make God an enemy and to kill the young Mozart.
As the movie moves along, carrying with it a deep sadness of the human condition, it also celebrates life by giving the audience joyous music, wonderful atmosphere and a general appreciation of humanity for not only eighteenth century Europe, but in any age where music speaks for our emotions.
The movie won eight Academy Awards in March of 1985. The only reason it did not win nine was that Tom Hulce was nominated for best actor instead of best supporting actor. He actually was in a supporting role, and in a strange twist of irony, F. Murray Abraham won the best actor statuette; citing probably the only time when Salieri beat out Mozart in anything.
The movie itself was shot in Prague where Milos Forman said "(It) is a gem because it's possible to pivot the camera a full three hundred and sixty degrees and never encounter a modern vision." Very few new sets had to be built, as the scenes and buildings they found were quite often apropos to their needs.
Amadeus works well on virtually every cinematic plane that exists. It is a masterpiece that must be viewed multiple times to receive what the film has to offer. The emotions of humanity, through the eyes of the troubled Salieri, indeed speak for all of mediocrity. He is their champion and their king.
The movie of Salieri's life, through which Mozart played an integral part, is told in flashback mode, beginning in around the year 1822. An old and perhaps emotionally disturbed Antonio Salieri attempts suicide, and in doing so, apologizes for killing Mozart some 31 years earlier. He survives and is admitted to an insane asylum, where he tells a young priest his tale of jealousy and mediocrity.
The priest is fascinated and alternately troubled by the lengthy and emotional story. Salieri tells of growing up in Italy with a father who did not care for music; and how he rejoiced for the chance to go to Vienna after his father's untimely death. He tells of how he first had met the young Mozart, and how immature and dirty minded Mozart was. He also tells of how "The Creature" had an intimate relationship with the girl that Salieri had cared for. Most importantly, however, he confided in the priest that he had learned to hate God for giving him a deep love of music, only to deny him the talent to create truly memorable music. He thought God had given him Mozart to mock him. Salieri's heart filled with such rage, such hatred and such jealousy, that he had vowed to himself to make God an enemy and to kill the young Mozart.
As the movie moves along, carrying with it a deep sadness of the human condition, it also celebrates life by giving the audience joyous music, wonderful atmosphere and a general appreciation of humanity for not only eighteenth century Europe, but in any age where music speaks for our emotions.
The movie won eight Academy Awards in March of 1985. The only reason it did not win nine was that Tom Hulce was nominated for best actor instead of best supporting actor. He actually was in a supporting role, and in a strange twist of irony, F. Murray Abraham won the best actor statuette; citing probably the only time when Salieri beat out Mozart in anything.
The movie itself was shot in Prague where Milos Forman said "(It) is a gem because it's possible to pivot the camera a full three hundred and sixty degrees and never encounter a modern vision." Very few new sets had to be built, as the scenes and buildings they found were quite often apropos to their needs.
Amadeus works well on virtually every cinematic plane that exists. It is a masterpiece that must be viewed multiple times to receive what the film has to offer. The emotions of humanity, through the eyes of the troubled Salieri, indeed speak for all of mediocrity. He is their champion and their king.
The casting of Hulce was a problem for me.
bandw13 December 2013
I am sure that casting Tom Hulce as Mozart was a great risk, but unfortunately that was the main thing that kept me from enjoying this movie. It wasn't all Hulce's fault, since there was a decision to have him insert an exceedingly irritating cackle at pretty much random points. Whoever dreamed that up must have really liked the idea, since there is one final cackle that closes the movie after all of the end credits have run. Hulce's attempts to act as an orchestra conductor were on a par with what you would expect from some untutored middle school student, what with gesticulations that mainly just kept the beat.
Mozart was a musical genius who challenged the hidebound opinions of the times as to what was deemed acceptable. In that he is little different from early rock-and-roll stars. As presented he was a young, brash, free spirit (so at least the audience was spared the ponderous, agonized artist trope) with few endearing qualities. Granted, there seems to have been a large disparity between Mozart the person and his incredible music, but I cannot believe that he was quite the fool as what is seen here; the personality set forth was not credible to me. If only we had a time machine.
There are some good things, like a couple of good performances. F. Murry Abraham is a standout in his subtle portrayal of Antonio Salieri. In this movie Salieri is a tragic figure. He was a popular and respected musician in the court of Emperor Joseph II. Beethoven and Schubert were among his students and I think Salieri gets somewhat of a bum rap in this movie. Solieri's torture was to recognize the difference between his talents and the pure genius of Mozart causing a serious conflict between jealousy and awe. I have seen this scenario played out in the workplace and it would have worked out for the best if the inferior party had just accepted that he was out-gunned; the results were unfortunate, as with Salieri. I thought that Jeffery Jones was particularly effective as Emperor Joseph II. He could walk the fine line between haughtiness and genuine feeling with aplomb.
The staging of the opera segments is brilliant. In fact a movie with just extended opera segments, so presented, would be a treasure. As appropriate, Mozart's music plays a central role. But they never let it play for any decent length of time. Particularly irritating was the interruption of the staging of the final scene of "The marriage of Figaro" with a voice-over from Salieri. Couldn't they at least spare a few minutes to let the audience appreciate one of the most beautiful pieces of music ever written? If that piece does not convince anyone of Mozart's genius, then there is no hope that that appreciation will ever be sparked. At least they had enough sense not to interrupt the Lacrimosa from Mozart's Requiem played over his burial. The brief scenes from "The Magic Flute" left me wanting more--the translation into English for those scenes was clever.
The production is lavish and a delight to watch. The film deserved its Oscar for costume design--the costumes must have been a major expense. The filming is first rate with sets and architecture that created (at least for me) a feel for what 18th century Vienna must have been like. Some scenes were filmed in an opera house where Mozart himself conducted.
Mozart was a musical genius who challenged the hidebound opinions of the times as to what was deemed acceptable. In that he is little different from early rock-and-roll stars. As presented he was a young, brash, free spirit (so at least the audience was spared the ponderous, agonized artist trope) with few endearing qualities. Granted, there seems to have been a large disparity between Mozart the person and his incredible music, but I cannot believe that he was quite the fool as what is seen here; the personality set forth was not credible to me. If only we had a time machine.
There are some good things, like a couple of good performances. F. Murry Abraham is a standout in his subtle portrayal of Antonio Salieri. In this movie Salieri is a tragic figure. He was a popular and respected musician in the court of Emperor Joseph II. Beethoven and Schubert were among his students and I think Salieri gets somewhat of a bum rap in this movie. Solieri's torture was to recognize the difference between his talents and the pure genius of Mozart causing a serious conflict between jealousy and awe. I have seen this scenario played out in the workplace and it would have worked out for the best if the inferior party had just accepted that he was out-gunned; the results were unfortunate, as with Salieri. I thought that Jeffery Jones was particularly effective as Emperor Joseph II. He could walk the fine line between haughtiness and genuine feeling with aplomb.
The staging of the opera segments is brilliant. In fact a movie with just extended opera segments, so presented, would be a treasure. As appropriate, Mozart's music plays a central role. But they never let it play for any decent length of time. Particularly irritating was the interruption of the staging of the final scene of "The marriage of Figaro" with a voice-over from Salieri. Couldn't they at least spare a few minutes to let the audience appreciate one of the most beautiful pieces of music ever written? If that piece does not convince anyone of Mozart's genius, then there is no hope that that appreciation will ever be sparked. At least they had enough sense not to interrupt the Lacrimosa from Mozart's Requiem played over his burial. The brief scenes from "The Magic Flute" left me wanting more--the translation into English for those scenes was clever.
The production is lavish and a delight to watch. The film deserved its Oscar for costume design--the costumes must have been a major expense. The filming is first rate with sets and architecture that created (at least for me) a feel for what 18th century Vienna must have been like. Some scenes were filmed in an opera house where Mozart himself conducted.
Hatchet job on Salieri
son_of_cheese_messiah26 August 2010
In a telling scene, after Mozart has performed his genius work to tepid applause, Salieri, self-confessed patron saint of mediocrity, performs his to wild acclaim and receives a medallion from the emperor.
That is rather like this receiving so many Oscars and so much praise.
It is not a bad film, indeed it is often visually stunning, however at well over 3 hours it does flag in many places. The use of quite earthy American accents among the gentry of 18th century Europe is also somewhat grating (although this is what may have endeared it to the academy awards)however the real problem is the script.
The script labours the same point of coarse genius versus pious mediocrity over and over. There is a curiously 20th century lack of deference to one's social betters (such as Mozart's wife constantly and annoyingly always referring to him as "Wolfy").
But this pales by comparison to the hatchet taken to Salieri. The author has taken the real life rivalry and created a fantasy completely removed from history. Salieri had nothing to do Mozart's requiem or indeed Mozart's death. The true history is actually far more interesting than this fabrication.
Salieri as written here, is a one dimensional villain. One almost expects him to be swirling a moustache. Of course this is merely a film, a piece of fiction. But since it deals with real historical characters, it does have a duty not to slander someone unfairly.
That is rather like this receiving so many Oscars and so much praise.
It is not a bad film, indeed it is often visually stunning, however at well over 3 hours it does flag in many places. The use of quite earthy American accents among the gentry of 18th century Europe is also somewhat grating (although this is what may have endeared it to the academy awards)however the real problem is the script.
The script labours the same point of coarse genius versus pious mediocrity over and over. There is a curiously 20th century lack of deference to one's social betters (such as Mozart's wife constantly and annoyingly always referring to him as "Wolfy").
But this pales by comparison to the hatchet taken to Salieri. The author has taken the real life rivalry and created a fantasy completely removed from history. Salieri had nothing to do Mozart's requiem or indeed Mozart's death. The true history is actually far more interesting than this fabrication.
Salieri as written here, is a one dimensional villain. One almost expects him to be swirling a moustache. Of course this is merely a film, a piece of fiction. But since it deals with real historical characters, it does have a duty not to slander someone unfairly.
One of the greatest films of all time.
johndoherty4 February 2001
One of the greatest movies of all time. This is a movie that speaks for itself. Beautiful Cinematography and stellar performances by all especially F. Murray Abraham who carries the film. Tom Hulce was a terrific choice for this movie. True this is historically incorrect but it doesn't matter this film works on so many different levels... the music ahhh the music. Mozart is pure genius and his music touches this film and everyone involved. You can just sense that Mozart's inspiration drove everyone on this film to perfection. A must see film for all!
Ravishing in sound and vision
DRIAINCLARK1 April 2002
The unseen star of this film is the Academy of St Martin's in the Field, London. Buy the soundtrack and you will be rewarded with some of the most stunning music you can hear. Mozart's music excells with brilliant treatment and dies with a bad performance. And that, after all, is what the film is about. Without his music, Mozart would be lost in time, a fate that the narrator of the story, the composer Salieri, saw as his own. Ironically, while Salieri has indeed been completely overshadowed by Mozart, his music still survives and has its followers.
But beyond the music this is an outstanding film. Set in the prettiest and most flamboyant century of the last millennium, it is visually stunning and the writer's portrayal of jealousy is perceptive. The casting of the Austrian King and courtiers, (indeed all the actors in this film) that Mozart needed to impress capture the gentility and courtesy of the time, and also subtly shows their growing indignation and impatience at Mozart's personality and behaviour; the presentation of Mozart as punk musician is probably the only failing in the film. As a theatrical device to show that genius can come in disastrous packages it succeeds well, but anyone with any historic sense of social ettiquette or manners will know that Mozart's sill y behaviour would be well wide of the truth, as might, perhaps, be the concept of Salieri as murderer-in-chief. Only in the final scenes is Mozart's brilliance as a composer truly explored in what amounts to a deconstruction of his final composition - his moving, uncompleted and poignant Requiem mass.
Another unintended star in this film are the candle lit sets and theatres of the 18th Century; their operas and drama ooze a magic that is lacking in the present world and which modern producers might well try to reintroduce; so lovely are these buildings with their flickering lights and theatrical techniques that one is left desperate to to seek out these rare theatres to experience them.
This film leaves one breathless from its visual beauty, its magnificent score and the choreography, indeed, of the two together. Mozart's life had the air of tragedy, and his undoubted genius speaks to us now and forever. This film is a monument to the skills of the writer, maker, performers and, of course, Mozart's music. If you have not yet done so, see it.
But beyond the music this is an outstanding film. Set in the prettiest and most flamboyant century of the last millennium, it is visually stunning and the writer's portrayal of jealousy is perceptive. The casting of the Austrian King and courtiers, (indeed all the actors in this film) that Mozart needed to impress capture the gentility and courtesy of the time, and also subtly shows their growing indignation and impatience at Mozart's personality and behaviour; the presentation of Mozart as punk musician is probably the only failing in the film. As a theatrical device to show that genius can come in disastrous packages it succeeds well, but anyone with any historic sense of social ettiquette or manners will know that Mozart's sill y behaviour would be well wide of the truth, as might, perhaps, be the concept of Salieri as murderer-in-chief. Only in the final scenes is Mozart's brilliance as a composer truly explored in what amounts to a deconstruction of his final composition - his moving, uncompleted and poignant Requiem mass.
Another unintended star in this film are the candle lit sets and theatres of the 18th Century; their operas and drama ooze a magic that is lacking in the present world and which modern producers might well try to reintroduce; so lovely are these buildings with their flickering lights and theatrical techniques that one is left desperate to to seek out these rare theatres to experience them.
This film leaves one breathless from its visual beauty, its magnificent score and the choreography, indeed, of the two together. Mozart's life had the air of tragedy, and his undoubted genius speaks to us now and forever. This film is a monument to the skills of the writer, maker, performers and, of course, Mozart's music. If you have not yet done so, see it.
my number one
dr_foreman23 January 2004
Now, this is my idea of a movie - spectacle, religion, sex, envy, and some of the most stirring music ever composed. And it all seems so modern; a bad visit from Mozart's father is awkward in the same way as a bad visit with my own parents! Here's a film that makes ancient history seem like yesterday, using the same trick employed by all classic films - solid characterization.
It's a shame that so many of these actors never did much else, but maybe that's a blessing in disguise because it allows them to embody their characters without other movie associations getting in the audience's way.
I was worried that the extended edition would hurt the film's pacing (most extended editions are a bad idea - the material was cut for a reason!). But in fact, all of the restored scenes are excellent. I should have expected no less! Beautiful costumes, beautiful locations, beautiful everything...very fittingly, "Amadeus" stands above and apart from the mediocrity.
It's a shame that so many of these actors never did much else, but maybe that's a blessing in disguise because it allows them to embody their characters without other movie associations getting in the audience's way.
I was worried that the extended edition would hurt the film's pacing (most extended editions are a bad idea - the material was cut for a reason!). But in fact, all of the restored scenes are excellent. I should have expected no less! Beautiful costumes, beautiful locations, beautiful everything...very fittingly, "Amadeus" stands above and apart from the mediocrity.
Great F. Murray Abraham and Tom Hulce's laugh
SnoopyStyle6 December 2014
The movie opens with an elderly Antonio Salieri (F. Murray Abraham) confessing to killing Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (Tom Hulce). He used to be one of the great composers of Europe but has since been forgotten. As a boy, he was jealous of Mozart. He was delighted that his boorish father died. He works his way up to being the court composer to Emperor Joseph II (Jeffrey Jones) in Vienna. He is eager to meet Mozart but finds a flamboyant immature sex-fiend. Soon his admiration turns into jealousy of Mozart's Godly gift. Mozart marries Constanze (Elizabeth Berridge).
Director Milos Forman injects a lot of energy into a period piece. Tom Hulce's laugh is infectious. However it's F. Murray Abraham that is the true driver of this movie. It's his jealousy and scheming heart that creates the depths for Mozart. His older self gives so much color to his disgust for Mozart. And the music is operatic. It is not just beautiful and grand but it's also hilarious. There's also special mention to Jeffrey Jones.
Director Milos Forman injects a lot of energy into a period piece. Tom Hulce's laugh is infectious. However it's F. Murray Abraham that is the true driver of this movie. It's his jealousy and scheming heart that creates the depths for Mozart. His older self gives so much color to his disgust for Mozart. And the music is operatic. It is not just beautiful and grand but it's also hilarious. There's also special mention to Jeffrey Jones.
Absolutely brilliant!- funny, charming and touching, a masterpiece!
TheLittleSongbird7 March 2010
I adore classical music, and Mozart is one of my favourite composers. When I came across Amadeus in my local charity shop, I knew I had to buy it. I watched it, and I loved it from start to finish. It is true it is not necessarily a true depiction of Mozart's life, but I was so blown away by the quality of the acting, sets, costumes and music that I forgot about that. The film is just gorgeous to look at, Vienna in the film (Prague in real life) looks beautiful, but the sets and costumes are colourful and lavish. The music is utterly majestic, from the Marriage of Figaro, Queen of the Night(brilliantly sung in what is one of the most difficult colouratura arias ever), Requiem in D minor to Don Giovanni, it was a feast to the ears. The script I thought was of exceptional quality particularly during the finale of Marriage of Figaro(one of the most beautiful tender moments in any opera is where the countess forgives her husband), and the direction was very fine. As many reviewers have pointed out, this is more about the mediocrity and envy of Salieri than it is of the eccentric genius of Mozart, thus the story was compelling and intriguing. The acting is wonderful; Tom Hulce is excellent as Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, yeah his laugh is a tad grating, but I loved the manic and eccentric interpretation Hulce gave. Elizabeth Berridge is suitably petite and alluring as wife Constanze while Jeffrey Jones is delightful as Emperor Joseph II. For me though, F Murray Abraham gave the film's best performance, for he was absolutely outstanding as Salieri. Overall, brilliant film, gorgeous to watch, amazing music and essentially a must see! 10/10 Bethany Cox
An Excellent film of describing Mozart's life from wealthy with great fame that shatters in pieces
OriginalMovieBuff2127 September 2004
Amadeus is one tremendous film. The acting was great. Tom Hulce did wonderful and I have only seen him once in a film and that was Animal House. The rest of the cast was great to like F. Murry Abraham did a terrific job in his performance. The music was brilliant, I have never seen a film with such great performances in their plays. I really did admire this movie, everything in it was very interesting and after I watched the film I did a little research on Mozart. The script and directing was superb and the cinematography was brilliant. I couldn't of asked for a better film than Amadeus. I'm glad I saw this film!
Hedeen's outlook: 10/10!! **** A+
Hedeen's outlook: 10/10!! **** A+
Big, fast, crazy, touching, and gorgeous. And with lots of Mozart. Superb stuff.
secondtake3 March 2012
Amadeus (1984)
A million reviews have been written about this deserving movie--and the big points are good ones. And debatable.
One, the play was better. Maybe. The play couldn't use cinematic tricks for its effects, but the movie really took it all much further in movie terms. It's a movie, not an adapted play.
Two, it's inaccurate. Yes. Of course. It's a dramatized movie based on an historic figure. The truths are plenty--the boy genius, the patronage, the music scene in general. The fictions are worth noting, mainly that Salieri didn't kill Mozart (there is zero evidence of this, just chatter). Salieri didn't transcribe Mozart's final Requiem at his death bed. And Mozart's wife didn't sound like a ditzy American. Of course.
Three, the operas are staged in contemporary terms, like dry ice effects. The venues are appropriate, and in fact, Mozart's time is not that far from ours, not in the larger picture.
Speaking of venues, the whole city of Vienna looks terrific--because it's actually Prague. Go to Prague now and it'll have the same effect, though without the gray severity. Yes, Mozart was buried in a common grave. Yes he died too young from still uncertain causes (see Wikipedia for a full rundown of likely options). And yes, he was pretty innovative and radical. And if not as silly as Tom Hulce's interpretation, still a renegade socially and musically.
Is it a good movie? Yes, a great movie. Who won't like it? Well, people with an aversion for historical dramas might, but even here, it zooms with such crazy, fun, funny energy, I don't know why it wouldn't just suck people in. Eventually though there are short scenes that are basically straight opera, with some continuing story along the sidelines. If you hate hate opera, you might have to just marvel at the sets and crazy crowds.
There isn't a bad actor here, or a bad moment, really. And the music, the music! It's wonderful. The performances, take note, are by the high water mark of Mozart performances in the 20th Century--Sir Neville Mariner leading his famed orchestra. Likewise, the opera productions are by one of the great talents of the era, Twyla Tharp. The director Milos Forman has a short resume but it's impressive, including "Hair" as a kind of precursor and "One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest" as proof of some kind of higher ability. (Forman hasn't always been on target, though, notably with his highly polished but pushy and almost abusive "Goya's Ghosts," which has a similar structure to "Amadeus," building a large world around a true rebel artist.)
Anyway, a marvelous movie, a truly lovely experience, beautifully filmed, intensely envisioned, and acted with aplomb (F. Murray Abraham is a wonder as Salieri, young and old). And it is layered with some of the most emphatic and resolved music ever written.
A million reviews have been written about this deserving movie--and the big points are good ones. And debatable.
One, the play was better. Maybe. The play couldn't use cinematic tricks for its effects, but the movie really took it all much further in movie terms. It's a movie, not an adapted play.
Two, it's inaccurate. Yes. Of course. It's a dramatized movie based on an historic figure. The truths are plenty--the boy genius, the patronage, the music scene in general. The fictions are worth noting, mainly that Salieri didn't kill Mozart (there is zero evidence of this, just chatter). Salieri didn't transcribe Mozart's final Requiem at his death bed. And Mozart's wife didn't sound like a ditzy American. Of course.
Three, the operas are staged in contemporary terms, like dry ice effects. The venues are appropriate, and in fact, Mozart's time is not that far from ours, not in the larger picture.
Speaking of venues, the whole city of Vienna looks terrific--because it's actually Prague. Go to Prague now and it'll have the same effect, though without the gray severity. Yes, Mozart was buried in a common grave. Yes he died too young from still uncertain causes (see Wikipedia for a full rundown of likely options). And yes, he was pretty innovative and radical. And if not as silly as Tom Hulce's interpretation, still a renegade socially and musically.
Is it a good movie? Yes, a great movie. Who won't like it? Well, people with an aversion for historical dramas might, but even here, it zooms with such crazy, fun, funny energy, I don't know why it wouldn't just suck people in. Eventually though there are short scenes that are basically straight opera, with some continuing story along the sidelines. If you hate hate opera, you might have to just marvel at the sets and crazy crowds.
There isn't a bad actor here, or a bad moment, really. And the music, the music! It's wonderful. The performances, take note, are by the high water mark of Mozart performances in the 20th Century--Sir Neville Mariner leading his famed orchestra. Likewise, the opera productions are by one of the great talents of the era, Twyla Tharp. The director Milos Forman has a short resume but it's impressive, including "Hair" as a kind of precursor and "One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest" as proof of some kind of higher ability. (Forman hasn't always been on target, though, notably with his highly polished but pushy and almost abusive "Goya's Ghosts," which has a similar structure to "Amadeus," building a large world around a true rebel artist.)
Anyway, a marvelous movie, a truly lovely experience, beautifully filmed, intensely envisioned, and acted with aplomb (F. Murray Abraham is a wonder as Salieri, young and old). And it is layered with some of the most emphatic and resolved music ever written.
Grrr...the history teacher within cannot allow me to completely enjoy this film.
planktonrules11 March 2012
Sometimes, it's hard to be a retired history teacher. After all, when I see many historical films, I see the errors in the script--where the writers take HUGE liberties with facts. As a result, you would NOT want to go to certain movies (such as "Pocahontas") with me, as I invariably complain about the crappy writing and lack of historical accuracy. While "Amadeus" is a gorgeous film to watch, it is also a film you would probably not want to watch with me! While vaguely following the events of the adult Mozart's life, so much of the film is wrong--terribly, terribly wrong. And, in the process, the film does a terrible disservice to the memories of the folks portrayed in the film. To me, history is like a holy book--you don't just change it to meet your needs--but here in "Amadeus", facts just aren't particularly important. In the film, Antonio Salieri is a bitter, nasty no-talent. It's easy to urinate on his memory today--it's not like he has family members who will defend him after 200 years! And even worse is the portrayal of Mozart who is shown to be a two-dimensional man. On one hand, he's a musical genius. On the other, he's a blithering idiot whose laugh makes your skin crawl--and there's absolutely no evidence that this aspect of the character is the least bit like the real Mozart.
Now if you completely ignore history, the film is good---very good. The sets and costumes are lovely and it looks as if you have been transformed back to the 18th century. It certainly deserved Oscars for Art Direction, Costume Design, Makeup, Direction, Sound and other technical categories. F. Murray Abraham is great as the conniving Salieri--even though he's very fictional. Tom Hulce, on the other hand, is so annoying at times with his horrid and piercing laugh that I could see why this film didn't result in him being catapulted into stardom. Without this laugh, he would have been MUCH better.
Why couldn't they have just created a story about FICTIONAL characters instead of fictionalizing real peoples' lives? If this had been done, the film would have been exceptional in every way. As it is, it's a severe irritant to anyone wanting to know about the real life characters portrayed so badly in this film. And that laugh...that HORRIBLE laugh has got to go!
Now if you completely ignore history, the film is good---very good. The sets and costumes are lovely and it looks as if you have been transformed back to the 18th century. It certainly deserved Oscars for Art Direction, Costume Design, Makeup, Direction, Sound and other technical categories. F. Murray Abraham is great as the conniving Salieri--even though he's very fictional. Tom Hulce, on the other hand, is so annoying at times with his horrid and piercing laugh that I could see why this film didn't result in him being catapulted into stardom. Without this laugh, he would have been MUCH better.
Why couldn't they have just created a story about FICTIONAL characters instead of fictionalizing real peoples' lives? If this had been done, the film would have been exceptional in every way. As it is, it's a severe irritant to anyone wanting to know about the real life characters portrayed so badly in this film. And that laugh...that HORRIBLE laugh has got to go!
Amedeus : Director's Cut Completes The Story
happipuppi1316 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I have seen the original version of "Amedeus" 6 times and no doubt, it is and always will be a deservedly crowned masterpiece and Best Picture. While I agree with that 100% , I've always had this feeling that there could or should have been more to it.
Not because the original was cut by 20 minutes but because it seemed to have more focus on the absurdity of W. Amedues Mozart himself.(Wolfgang Amedeus Mozart 27 January 1756 - 5 December 1791 age 35.)
Yes, he's the title character, but the point of view of the story is told by Salieri (August 18, 1750 - May 7, 1825) and it seems, aside from his aged version of himself and the times we see his young self on screen, in the original cut, his story of his disillusionment with God seems too quick.
In this director's version, we find out more than we had before about this. Scenes of him quietly praying but at the same time crying out to God to help him have as great a gift as Mozart.
Every failure and snub he receives in his life, from the arrival of the young genius culminates in his declaring God his enemy and burning the Holy Cross in the fireplace. The new scenes help build it to a better climax on that note.
Along with this the expanded story of when Mozrt's wife secretly visits Salieri to show her husband's work to him,to gain a paid teaching post. This leads to the deleted section of Salieri telling her to "come back in the evening" , for illicit purposes.
Once she later arrives and removes her top garment exposing herself,for whatever reason, he decides to instead have her shown out the door. I'm assuming out of his own sense of decency, he decided not to go through with it. It's Mozart he wants to punish, not her. Even though he has just the same.
Lastly, there's also the funny scenes with Mozart trying to instruct a nervous young girl while her family and dogs make constant noise. It's something that causes him to storm out and feel indignant at having to put up with something like this. It adds only a little to the overall story.
With the film expanded to 3 hours,again, I feel I saw a much more complete storyline, with both Salieri & Mozrt represented equally on screen. .... but whether in it's original form or this version, there's no way I'd ever rate "Amedeus" less than 10 stars.
That'd be like telling Mozart his music has "too many notes",so...well, there it is. {END}
Not because the original was cut by 20 minutes but because it seemed to have more focus on the absurdity of W. Amedues Mozart himself.(Wolfgang Amedeus Mozart 27 January 1756 - 5 December 1791 age 35.)
Yes, he's the title character, but the point of view of the story is told by Salieri (August 18, 1750 - May 7, 1825) and it seems, aside from his aged version of himself and the times we see his young self on screen, in the original cut, his story of his disillusionment with God seems too quick.
In this director's version, we find out more than we had before about this. Scenes of him quietly praying but at the same time crying out to God to help him have as great a gift as Mozart.
Every failure and snub he receives in his life, from the arrival of the young genius culminates in his declaring God his enemy and burning the Holy Cross in the fireplace. The new scenes help build it to a better climax on that note.
Along with this the expanded story of when Mozrt's wife secretly visits Salieri to show her husband's work to him,to gain a paid teaching post. This leads to the deleted section of Salieri telling her to "come back in the evening" , for illicit purposes.
Once she later arrives and removes her top garment exposing herself,for whatever reason, he decides to instead have her shown out the door. I'm assuming out of his own sense of decency, he decided not to go through with it. It's Mozart he wants to punish, not her. Even though he has just the same.
Lastly, there's also the funny scenes with Mozart trying to instruct a nervous young girl while her family and dogs make constant noise. It's something that causes him to storm out and feel indignant at having to put up with something like this. It adds only a little to the overall story.
With the film expanded to 3 hours,again, I feel I saw a much more complete storyline, with both Salieri & Mozrt represented equally on screen. .... but whether in it's original form or this version, there's no way I'd ever rate "Amedeus" less than 10 stars.
That'd be like telling Mozart his music has "too many notes",so...well, there it is. {END}
Let's Face It
DavidsGuy18 January 2024
There's so much gratuitous gushing here from commenters who can't seem to shower enough praise on this film that I think you need to stop and take some deep breaths before you pass out. Get a grip and keep repeating to yourself, "it's only a movie, it's only a movie..."
No, Amadeus is not "the greatest film of all time" or the "masterpiece of all masterpieces," or "brilliantly perfect and flawless," etc. Etc. Yes, it's generally a good film, especially if one likes elaborate costume dramas and biopics (and Tom Hulce is as cute as a bug's ear -- one just wants to tickle him) but it's also badly in need of editing. Must every opera and ballroom dance sequence be so long and shown again and again? Plus, it's not exactly an accurate depiction of Mozart's life. The actress playing Mozart's wife was badly cast and gives the impression that she was hired straight out of a high school play. (No wonder her career never took off.) Also, both F. Murray Abraham and Tom Hulce, as good as they are, ham it up at times as if they're in a contest to see whom can out-ham the other. And yes, as some have pointed out, it did win eight Oscars but that's mainly because Hollywood loves rewarding spectacles and extravagant period pieces, especially during the 80s. (Remember Gandhi, The Last Emperor, and Platoon?) And let's face it, when most think of this film, they don't think of the music, the story, or the costumes, but Hulce's laugh as well as...The Fart. Now there was a perfectly flawless fart, the greatest fart to ever explode from the silver screen! No other fart will ever equal it! I'm simply overwhelmed by the brilliance of The Fart! Why wasn't The Fart nominated for an Oscar?!
No, Amadeus is not "the greatest film of all time" or the "masterpiece of all masterpieces," or "brilliantly perfect and flawless," etc. Etc. Yes, it's generally a good film, especially if one likes elaborate costume dramas and biopics (and Tom Hulce is as cute as a bug's ear -- one just wants to tickle him) but it's also badly in need of editing. Must every opera and ballroom dance sequence be so long and shown again and again? Plus, it's not exactly an accurate depiction of Mozart's life. The actress playing Mozart's wife was badly cast and gives the impression that she was hired straight out of a high school play. (No wonder her career never took off.) Also, both F. Murray Abraham and Tom Hulce, as good as they are, ham it up at times as if they're in a contest to see whom can out-ham the other. And yes, as some have pointed out, it did win eight Oscars but that's mainly because Hollywood loves rewarding spectacles and extravagant period pieces, especially during the 80s. (Remember Gandhi, The Last Emperor, and Platoon?) And let's face it, when most think of this film, they don't think of the music, the story, or the costumes, but Hulce's laugh as well as...The Fart. Now there was a perfectly flawless fart, the greatest fart to ever explode from the silver screen! No other fart will ever equal it! I'm simply overwhelmed by the brilliance of The Fart! Why wasn't The Fart nominated for an Oscar?!
Am I the only one who thinks this movie is boring?
maniuis27 June 2011
I have been reading some of the reviews of the IMDb "critics"... for God's sake! Did these people even bother to watch the movie? Also I am very shocked to see this movie has got an over 8 rating. This is a very boring title. The only good thing about the film is the score -well, it had to be given that it was mostly written by a W.A. Mozart...
Other than that, this movie is a simple waste of time. The acting is awful and the guy who portrays the legendary music genius should be in a circus. F. Murray does a nice job acting but he is the only one. Too bad the man who wrote the script did not know what he was doing.
I wonder if people who "admire" this movie do so because of the movie itself or because of the real Mozart and his heavenly music.
Go rent Kung Fu Panda and enjoy a truly good movie.
Other than that, this movie is a simple waste of time. The acting is awful and the guy who portrays the legendary music genius should be in a circus. F. Murray does a nice job acting but he is the only one. Too bad the man who wrote the script did not know what he was doing.
I wonder if people who "admire" this movie do so because of the movie itself or because of the real Mozart and his heavenly music.
Go rent Kung Fu Panda and enjoy a truly good movie.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
