 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
84.135.130.234
I have seen the original cinema movie twice, and as I saw this one for $10 I could not resist.
This version is more logical and explain a lot more, still I prefer the first one, even if it was more confused, it had a certain quality of mystery I missed with this one.
Still a good and very enjoyable film.
Follow Ups:
He chose absolute "nobodys" for a major, major production. Is it the concept of not having pretty faces detract from the story and scenary?Any thoughts.
( huh? )
It was such a famous play, in the West End & Broadway, with famous British actors (e.g. Ian McKellen, among others), that Forman wanted a fresh take on the material and unknown actors, without any baggage from the stage productions.He specifically wanted to avoid a typical Hollywood period film stocked with famous British thespians. He felt American actors would impart a certain energy and honesty to the film version that was intrinsic to his own vision of the material.
Tom Hulce was maybe a little fresher and more energetic than some poepl liked.
As good as F. Murray Abraham is in Amadeus, I would've loved to have seen Ian McKellen in it - he was fabulous as Salieri on stage.
As well recieved as it was, none of the main characters had a breakout as a result. Once again, reassigned to B-movies and sitcoms.
( huh? )
that explains a lot, for example why we had to endure some very flat, midwestern American accents (in the case of Tom Hulse and his Constanze, for example) that seemed quite out-of-place in comparison with Salieri, the Emperor, Schikaneder, etc.
Emperor Joseph II ( Jeffrey Jones ) did for me the best job in Amadeus.
I presume he made it through his legal tribulation. I haven't heard.
( huh? )
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1027041jones1.html
n
( huh? )
$ 20.000
Officially yes...But " I " think that money may play a role too...Like we all knows. Look at Barry Lyndon´s pretty face O´Neal....
so bad, in fact, that Salieri's descendents should sue for liable.Nevertheless, I quite enjoy the original. Re: the latter, applying logic to a fallacious premise never appealed to me.
Tom Hulce is a vulgar Mozart, but the part of Mozart's that was uncontrolled and irrepressible is quite accurately displayed. He gambled so much that these days (well, 10 years ago) the mob woulda had him whacked for his failure to pay.
And the bit about his wife and her. . . er . . . uh . . . less than supportive nature and less than noble motives would seem to be dead right. But then, how much patience was she supposed to have?
Whatever: terrific movie with even better music.
This film was about the genius of mozart told as an art - it was after all a fairly close re-telling of the Peter Shaffer play - though there were previous stories. The play is better than the film in that it is made more clear that this is a story from Salieri's perspective - and thus that allows historical mistakes to be tossed out as "well it is from one person's memory" especially when it's all fictitious.Still we don't go to movies or documentaries for historical truths and nor should anyone be going to history textbooks that you got in elementary school for historical accuracy. I'm not sure why there is a fuss over how Mozart died - he did -- simple.
Amadeus is one of the better films available if for no other reason than it intrduces Mozart's to a lot of people who may not have really bothered to give Mozart's music a try or classical music a good listen. Excellent performance from Abraham and Hulce.
It's clearer in Shaffer's play (which I was lucky enough to see on stage) than it is in the film, but the real drama is about the nature of art and genius. The historical Salieri & Mozart are the characters through which this theme is explored and developed, and Salieri is actually the protagonist.
Well human mind is curious by nature, and if a man of this stature died and was burried in a mass grave, one is entitled to ask " why "...
Of course it is only an academic question, and we can live with his music without asking what may look trivial.
The latest theory about his death is that he has some kind of very shameful sickness that is why he was put under the soil so quickly and the doctors later on always refused to tell any thing about.....
Though this scenario is not unlikely, given Mozart's penchant for ribaldry. The pox, mayhaps?Whatever, Salieri had nothing to do with it, mediocre composer though he was!
But if it may have been some sexual dicease they would have not put him in such hurry in the grave, and what is most curious in a mass grave, where nobody would be able to find him again, and all the mystery from the doctors....
Mozart was not vulgare or only for the damn stupid prude. he was a free man, and how brillant! have you read his letters.
In every while there is a human being that let us look up high above in the sky.
Has a small renaissance, his work is being played more frequently at the moment.
but it isn't Mozart.Then again . . . I was Wagnerian tenor. Whatever my virtues, I was not (nor was anyone else) the voice Melchior was. Nor the artist Windgassen was.
Oh well. At least I did it!
ps: Having dressed up in armour and screamed at the top of my lungs (not really, but the image counts), I actualy prefer Monteverdi and Mozart, though "Die Walküre" is still quite something!
Bon Soir!
Bonjour,
No Salieri is no Mozart! It sounds when compared rather amateurish, but on his own it is quite good in my ears.
Wagner, yes Wagner.... Why was it such a bad person, since I learnt so many details on his life it just did spoil the pleasure I had to hear his work...
My loss.
Though I am only a soprano...my two favorite opera composers are Monteverdi and Mozart.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
