Amadeus (Double Sided Disc)

I love this movie! Wolfgang’s craziness, the music, the story of a true genius. The film is done so well with the characters, costumes and storyline that it shouldn’t be missed. This movie is long but worth every minute.

Not at all sure that it’s a historically correct in all aspects as far as Seliari and his feelings towards Mozart because not enough research done on that but as a film in itself, performances are wonderful and moving and the music is outstanding

Movie 3 of 1984 and 113 overall in my journey through films of my lifetime.Everyone around me seems to have very diverse tastes in music. I have a monolithic ear with some branching interests, or even sounds for the sake of utility. For example I will seek out and take the time to listen to all different kinds of metal music. I've loved that genre since the first time I heard it. My friends all "grew out of it" but not me. I still love it. Metal takes me to heights, it makes me feel important or what I'm doing has great meaning. I do also enjoy classical but I won't seek it out like I do metal. Rather it's useful to me like when I'm studying or falling asleep. With all of this it may come as little surprise that I never sought out to see "Amadeus."Recently two efforts in the entertainment industry have been very instructive. First is the movie "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" where it tried so hard to subvert audience's  expectations that it actually threatened the canonocity of itself and any subsequent entries into the series. The second is the final season of "The Game of Thrones" which suffers a similar fate. "Amadeus" also subverts expectations but it's subtle unlike the two former examples. Where our two examples went over the top to give grand twists to the point that we were barely even being told a coherent story "Amadeus" was subtle. For instance: at the beginning we think the story will be seen from the perspective of a priest that may be seeking a confession from a man that might be Mozart himself. Of course music is used very effectively to demonstrate that this man is not Mozart. It's jarring in a wonderful way. Later, another example of toying with audience vision, we discover that the narrative is running through the rival of Mozart (which itself is brilliant). His condemnations are reasonable, his objections to Mozart make perfect sense as this kind of a man is not worthy of such greatness. Where the surprise comes is the objection to Mozart isn't actually directed at him at all but at God. This level of talent can only be provided to an instrument of God. This introduces us to the theology that permeates and informs the ethos of the culture. An astute viewer should have been very surprised by this turn of events. The best part is that while it "drops the other foot," so to speak, it shifts the story in a way that could not be forecast. No writer or filmmaker today has anywhere near the sense to tell a story this way. Additionally we should grant that this is a unique story and required a deft hand to write.Aside from the incredible twists, we actually need them because the story has the challenge of presenting Mozart as not only a once in a generation genius, but as a socially awkward baffoon. The efforts accomplish their goal and it's quite a treat.The second half slows the pace down, it also spends a little more time showing Mozart doing his work. What doesn't slow down is its continual efforts to demonstrate his genius. The joy of watching "Amadeus" truly is its expression of the gifts of this man and it ultimately accomplishes its goal in its own ingenious way. This was the best movie of this retrospective so far!Pros-as genius as its subject-brilliant use of the expected use of music-wardrobe and set pieces immerse you-all elements of the cast and crew are flawlessCons-some may not like this period of history and it is seeped in it.

ORIGINAL VERSION. The one that won the Oscar.Just-Okay yet Popular Italian composer Salieri is in love, or lust, with a beautiful singer. Opera singer. Christine Ebersole. Who on earth wouldn't be?But he fears, oh so much, that she instead loves his personal, inner-twisted demon of a surreptitious rival in the bratty, spoiled genius known as Mozart. So on stage, after a great performance, Mozart gives this opera singer, in whom Salieri is, as mentioned, in deep love with, flowers. Then, out of nowhere, Mozart's fat future mother-in-law and most importantly, Mozart's beautiful future bridge-to-be, his lovely fiance, are lifted onto the stage, and introduced. Mozart is a deer caught in headlights as the beautiful singer... No, as Salieri WATCHES the singer slam the flowers at Mozart and STORM like a tempest off the stage.AND NOW WE CUT TO: The old Salieri, who we go back and forth from, saying, "That's when I knew, the creature had had her..." Basically, that's when it was all too clear where the little devil's pitchfork was all along... where he, Salieri, wanted to be. And with the same talent; a gift of God given to a clown, in his opinion. In modern terms: Really Famous Musicians get all the tail.NOW THE DIRECTOR'S CUT:Instead of cutting back to the aged Salieri after the singer shows her passionate jealousy that loudly rivals that of Salieri's silent hatred... The scene doesn't cut, it actually continues. For a long, pointless, boring, plodding while, until the no-longer jealous but now more curious Italian composer visits the singer in her dressing room. Herein, we get a boring, soap operatic seven-minute scene where she finally, says that she slept with MOZART. At this point, his jealousy means nothing. So when we cut back to him telling the priest, "THAT'S when I knew..." It means nothing at all.Sorry fans of the Director's Cut, but the editors, all professionals, KNEW, like Salieri KNEW... what ANYONE WOULD KNOW when to cut that scene and when to KNOW just why the flowers were used as a weapon, and there are other examples as well as other lame characters and disposable avenues added to what was originally, THE ORIGINAL PERFECT FILM, yet this one "creature flower" scene in particular really embodies the differences between the Theatrical movie that won the Oscar and was, from opening night, considered one of the greatest movies of all time, from the Vanity Project Hatched-Job that allowed a once-great director, now old and, obviously out of touch, to spray-paint a mustache on the Mona Lisa. In the eighties, Milos Foreman, who had already won for CUCKOO'S NEST, wasn't blacklisted. He wasn't Orson Welles trying to get his vision across with everyone against him. So what's the problem? Maybe these answers will suffice:1) Boredom for a director with nothing to do and2) The Studio makes MORE money with another version, thus making it the ONLY version and...God knows why. Why! WHY!!!Oh well. It's tough to find the ORIGINAL THEATRICAL nowadays; that is, in Blu Ray Remastered format. But I'm telling you, as someone who knows a thing or two about this movie, having seen the original about 100 times since at the theater as a kid, loving to see Pinto from Animal House playing this really talented crazy guy, and then, years later, after so many viewings, sitting in compete awe at the changes and additions that were basically a 20-minute dead third wing on an already soaring angel in flight...The original IS the classic. Always was, and always will be. That's not opinion. It's fact: the movie that played in theaters was the better one. If you weren't there to witness it, you would not know. Which is WHY it is, and was, and always will be, the better and... ONLY ONE to see. For the Director's cut... yes, that's it...What's wrong with the Director's cut is there are simply... Too Many Notes.That God what I saw in theaters so long ago was what I searched to finally see, even though it's the cardboard Warner Brothers old school non-remastered DVD. But so sad for a young generation who will grow up on brilliance ruined by money, driven by mediocrity.

Très bon acteur de mozart

Film ancien, toujours agréable à regarder, les musiques sont magnifiques !!!

Still resonates as an epic of sumptuous quality after all these years. Truly magnificent, includes cast, locations, and of course the music. A very interesting item included in the extras is the behind the scenes interview of how they filmed 'Salzburg' in a soviet controlled country ( this was before the Berlin wall came down), amazing.The extra 20 minutes of the directors cut, for me, actually didn't add anything to the original film, I can understand why they cut those scenes originally. But the film is still a masterpiece.

品行方正で生涯独身を貫き、音楽の才能を与えて欲しいと神様に誓ったサリエリが、女性を軽く扱い礼儀のないモーツァルトに失望し、嫌悪感を抱くようになったのは理解できます。神様が自分には与えてくれなかった音楽の才能をモーツァルトに与えてる事に嫉妬して、影で彼の就職を邪魔したり、家政婦を無料で彼の家に派遣してスパイさせたり、表面は親しげに良い人のフリをしているが、彼の音楽を創作する時の方法や秘密を探ろうとする宮廷作曲家としてのプライドと執着心がすごかったです。徹底的にモーツァルトを作曲家として仕事に就けないように意地悪したり、憎悪する気持ちは天才モーツァルトの音楽の素晴らしさを誰よりも理解できるという他人の才能を見抜く能力だけ神様に与えられた凡庸な才能しか持たずに生まれたサリエリの虚しさ、悲哀。何回も見るたびに、作品の深みを感じて、サリエリの後悔と懺悔に涙が出てきました…モーツァルトが畏れを抱いていた父に対する心情を利用して、レクイエムを作曲させた後半のストーリーは、サリエリの執着心がエスカレートして狂気となり、どんどん怖くなっていく部分が最初はあまり理解できなかったが、何回も観てるうちに、自分(サリエリ)では、自分の行動を止められない領域まで、至っていたのかな？どちらかが、亡くなるまで、走り続けるしかないと覚悟していたのかな？そうだとしたら、あまりにも寂しい結末…。最初の方で、サリエリが牧師の前でピアノを弾くシーン…サリエリが作曲した曲は大衆に広まらず、モーツァルトの作曲した曲は認知されて(良い曲ですね)と言われて、ニヤッとサリエリが笑うところが、私には痛々しかったです。王様や周りの音楽家がいる宮廷では、大絶賛されていた自分の曲はどれも知らず、サリエリが宮廷から追い出したモーツァルトの曲が大衆の記憶に残り、支持されてる事実に驚愕してるからです。モーツァルトが存命中は、人気がなく、亡くなってから、その功績が認められて、モーツァルト自身は天国にいたら、どんな風に思っているのだろうか？サリエリ自身がはモーツァルトと比べないで、自分に与えられた才能を見抜く目を生かして、後輩を育てる仕事に生きがいを見いだす事ができていれば、違う人生になっていたのかな？いやいや、モーツァルトが自分の才能に溺れずに、もっと謙虚に、人を見下さずに交流していたら、周りから可愛がられて、尊敬される人生になっていたかも…女性関係に節度があれば…圧倒的な実力、音楽の才能を与えられて生まれてきたモーツァルトの素晴らしさに、誰よりも魅了されて実際に会う機会を楽しみにして、曲を作り待っていたサリエリに対して、馬鹿にして曲を変えてしまうモーツァルトは、やっぱり精神的に幼い。人の気持ちを理解して振る舞う礼儀作法を父親から学ばなかったのが、サリエリに執着された最大の原因だったのかもしれないと私は感じました。何回も繰り返して観たくなる素晴らしい作品です。販売してくださって、ありがとうございました。

ein witziges sehenswertes Musical über Mozart und Salieri in der vorzüglichen Verfilmung von Milos Forman.