MOVIECLUB #2 - Due Monday 4/13: Amadeus

Amadeus (1984)

Okay, after a bad April Fool's joke (naming Ishtar as our next Movie Club pick), the REAL votes are in--and we're going with Milos Forman's Amadeus from 1984.. Forman is most widely known for his impressive adaptation of Ken Kesey's novel One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest in 1975. He's also responsible for the hippie musical Hair (1979), The People vs. Larry Flynt (1996), Man on the Moon (1999), and--most recently--Goya's Ghosts (2006)..

Playwright Peter Shaffer (also known for writing Equus--the play that will henceforth be remembered as the stage production that revealed Harry Potter's manjunk to the world) adapted his own original play for the script. The movie would go on to be nominated for 11 Academy Awards, winning 8 of them (including Best Picture, Director, Screenplay, Leading Actor, etc.).

I don't know much about the story, aside from it being a semi-fictional account of Mozart's life in the 18th century. Instead of looking up a plot synopsis, I suggest we all go in with as blank of a slate as possible. For the record, I've never seen this either--but I'm a fan of Forman. And I loved Cuckoo's Nest (even though the book was better!!). Amadeus currently sits at #84 on IMDB's Top 250 with an average score of 8.4. Interestingly, it was listed as #53 on AFI's original "100 Years, 100 Movies" list. But it failed to appear on the 10th Anniversary edition of the same list in 2007. I don't have the exact numbers, but the budget appears to have been appx $12M, while the film grossed over $50M at the box office. As one final piece of trivia, it has the rare "honor" (alongside The English Patient) to be one of the only Best Picture winners to never crack the weekend box office Top 5. It peaked at #6, in its eighth week.

According to Wikipedia (the source of all of my knowledge), Amadeus has been parodied in some of my favorite shows (including The Simpsons, Mr. Show, 30 Rock, and Family Guy). It's always nice to finally understand a few more pop-culture references. Everybody who watched Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore has the benefit of being in on a particular Dumb & Dumber joke.

Finally, there appears to be a director's cut floating around out there. I'm not totally sure which version Netflix offers. It appears that the DVD version is the theatrical cut, and the Blu-Ray is the director's cut. But I might be wrong about that. I can't really recommend either (having not seen 'em), but if someone has a strong opinion on this, please let your voice be heard. Otherwise, I suggest just watching whichever version you can get your hands on first. We can compare notes later. I think everybody should just go ahead and post your responses as soon as you've seen the movie. For me, I have the most to say within 24 hours of any given viewing. We can either use spoiler bubbles or people can just avoid the thread until they're ready to chime in.

whew, sorry for the long post..

last thing: there's still plenty of time to participate in the first round of Movie Club. so, if you have the time, try and catch Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore before hunting down Amadeus. For the record, Amadeus appears to be pretty damn accessible, so nobody should have trouble with this one.

happy viewing!


Recommended Double-Feature: Equus (1977)

More Suggestions:
Valmont (1989)
Ragtime (1981)
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975)
Animal House (1978)
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006)
Ratatouille (2007)

Well, I guess I'll be the first to reply:

I just discovered this movie club last night but I wanted to get in ASAP so I didn't just watch Amadeus , but I've seen it twice in my life so I can recall most of it.

First view was in Middle School Music class and I thought, wow, this movie looks and sounds terrible. But it gets you hooked pretty quick. As an adult and avad movie watcher I was able to see the true qualities of this film. F. Murray Abraham does a great job and deserves his Best Actor award.

I thought the character of Mozart was very annoying and not sure how much of it is true, but he was so annoying. Not sure if it's Tom Dulce's doing or just the way it was written. Being so childishy and non-caring about anything.

The music is this movie is one of the best, it actually makes Mozart music cool, similar to what Kubrick does with Mozart and Beethoven.

If your doing a report on Mozart, I wouldn't recommend using this movie as a reference since I believe most of it is false but looking at as a movie, it's a great piece of art. It has a great balance between everything a movie should have with acting, directing, music, costume, editing. And a nice build up for a wonderful tradgey of an end.

All movies of this similar brand don't really stand up to Amadeus. They all tend to be boring, but something about the darkness of Amadeus draws you in and holds you until the final seconds.

This movie had great wigs.

End of story.

Okay (cracking knuckles)... Let's do this.

Amadeus is one of those movies that everybody should see. If only because it was created. As soon as one person had seen it, they needed a second to talk about it with. And the domino effect ripples out from there until anyone, anywhere can refer to someone as "a Salieri" and have everyone in the room understand the reference. It's part of our popular culture, so we might as well catch up with it.

I really don't know much about the original play--nor do I know if it's still performed. Nonetheless, I feel like the finished film may belong just as much to Peter Shaffer as it does Milos Forman. I know I said something similar about Ellen Burstyn and Martin Scorsese in reference to Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore, and I promise I won't bring this up with every Movie Club entry. But Amadeus just seems so theatrical that I can't imagine a film director could be solely responsible for it.

Anyway, on to the movie itself. Amadeus, it must be noted, is much more Marie Antoinette than Barry Lyndon. Not to say Foreman didn't liberally borrow aspects of the latter. But the overall presentation and approach is very "modern." It's intentionally anachronistic in style. There isn't 80s music, and Pac Man doesn't make an appearance. But, at the same time, Forman makes no effort (and intentionally so) to create a film that feels like the 18th century. Sure, the settings and costumes are fitting to the time, but the overall presentation itself is constantly giving a knowing wink to the audience.

The casting is representative of this. Using Charles Deetz (or Principal Rooney, if you prefer) as Emperor Joseph II would seem like a major blunder in any other production. But, in this context, it actually works--or, at the very least, fits. In a more serious, more historically-based movie, he would seem horribly out of place. This particular casting decision is a prime example of where they wanted to take this film. The cast itself is a veritable Who's Who of "That Guys." Talented actors who you can't quite place, but stand out for their strong performances. Quirky, more often than not in this case, but strong.

Elizabeth Berridge (remember the girl from Tobe Hooper's Funhouse?) is way out of her league here. But, I must say, her breasts gave a performance worthy of two Supporting Role statues. Tom "Pinto" Hulce's performance, portraying the titular character, rests on a precarious place between atrocious and brilliant. Personally, I liked it. As an aside, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Brad Pitt modeled some of his roles on the mannerisms of Hulce's Mozart. Watch this movie and tell me there's not traces of Hulce in Pitt's Jeffrey Goines, Mickey O'Neil, Chad Feldheimer, or even Tyler Durden. But the real star of the movie is F. Murray Abraham's Salieri. Amazing performance. This character is easily the best, and most interesting, part of the film. Amadeus is at its best when exploring the complexity of Salieri. Everything clicks when Mozart is treated as an unreachable idiot savant. Or as a mysterious novelty. Or as an unknowable divinity. When we see him through Salieri's eyes, he is a caricature of an eccentric genius. A fucking rock star. Hulce's performance, in these scenes, is brilliant.

But once the movie attempts to unmask Mozart and humanize him for the benefit of the audience, it falls flat. Hulce's portrayal suddenly teeters back from brilliance and on to the brink of atrocity. I realize that the narrative itself revolves around the humanity of Mozart. But this is Salieri's story. And he never really sees Mozart as anything but divine. Even at Mozart's most depraved and pathetic, Salieri is blinded to his true nature. Salieri sees his flaws, but never his humanity. And, in my opinion, for that very reason neither should the audience. It just didn't work. Forman and Shaffer could've easily clued the audience in to Salieri's unreliable narration in a different way. Showing us scenes of Hulce and Berridge bickering at home (reminiscent of Jake LaMotta and wife) simply didn't add anything to the story. We get it: Mozart was human. We get it: Salieri is obsessed.

Superficially, Mozart could've remained a caricature and the story would not have suffered. It's Salieri's character that is begging to be explored--and, don't get me wrong, Forman takes advantage of that. Having never seen the movie, I was nonetheless vaguely aware of the storyline. However, I honestly expected Salieri to be a one-dimensional villain bent on the destruction of a genius. As it turns out, Salieri's not even such a bad guy. He's the only one who even recognizes Mozart's genius for what it is. Salieri is much more a tragic figure than a villain. His obsession overtakes him, but you almost kinda feel for the guy. I mean, heck, he's trying to stack up musically against freakin' Mozart. It's how I imagine Michael Bay feels when in the presence of Martin Scorsese--though I doubt Bay has Salieri's humility.

Is it just me, or does the movie spend a bit of time justifying its own existence? When speaking of the Emperor (who is clearly more an "average joe" than anyone else in the room), Salieri says to Mozart, "The man can't maintain attention for an hour, and you gave him four!" When editing this movie down to its 3-hour runtime, could this sentiment possibly echo what Forman and Shaffer were telling themselves? Did they think they were creating art that was above the common man? When assembling the director's cut, were they thinking of the line describing Mozart's music ("...Finished as no music is ever finished. Displace one note and there would be diminishment. Displace one phrase and the structure would fall.")?

Amadeus is so ridiculously over-the-top, it would make Andrew Lloyd Weber blush. It's a fucking gaudy, boisterous mess. Yet, for all of its shortcomings, I don't feel that the movie was a failure in any way. The movie was tongue-in-cheek and deadpan serious at the same time. It was campy theater and pretentious art all at once. But Forman and Shaffer wouldn't have it any other way. Perhaps I'm wrong about this, and I honestly haven't read up on the history the film--so I really could be missing the mark here. But I'm willing to bet that this movie was exactly the realization of somebody's vision.

All in all, this film really wasn't for me--but I found it pretty damn charming nonetheless. In no way do I regret seeing it. In fact, I now feel like I've been missing out on a big chunk of popular culture until today. Suddenly, several more jokes from The Simpsons, Seinfeld, and Family Guy make sense to me. ("But it wasn't Stewie laughing at me....... It was GOD!"). And that's always a good thing.

Along with Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore, this movie is another example of how skilled filmmaking can transcend genres and appeal to any audience. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Amadeus was a great film by any definition--but I recognize its merits. By comparison, I would now describe Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (one of the most dreadful films I've ever seen) as a perfect example of an absolute failure within the same genre while sharing a similar approach to adapting material for the screen. Any theater-centric person who found Perfume intriguing in the least, would most likely love the shit out of Amadeus.


PS. Hey, that was Miranda from Sex and the City playing the maid!

packpaljs wrote:All movies of this similar brand don't really stand up to Amadeus. They all tend to be boring, but something about the darkness of Amadeus draws you in and holds you until the final seconds.

Well put, packpaljs. I wrote my response before reading yours--but it appears we share some common ground when it comes to this film. Thanks for the response.

(now let's see if we can get some of our regulars to do the same, eh?)

I didn't have a chance to re-watch this for the club but I remember watching it a few years ago. I loved it but I do know that while watching it I would occasionally burst into song.

"Amadeus, Amadeus, Come on Rock me Amadeus" by everyones favorite Falco (who died recently BTW).

Seriously I do remember thinking exactly your thoughts about Salieri. He isn't really a villain. He is just a lesser artist whose ego's cracks when compared to a genius. Your Bay/Scorsese comparison is great but my thoughts were more Stephen King/me because at the time I was writing a horror novel and having a terrible time of it and then I read The Shining again and I realized that I suck. LOL I just didn't know Stephen personally so I could take out my frustrations on him. I drank instead.

The movie was over the top but how could it be otherwise. It was set in an era where men wore powdered wigs and dressed in lace... It was as over the top as Priscilla: Queen of the Desert and for the exact same reason.

Donte77 wrote:Seriously I do remember thinking exactly your thoughts about Salieri. He isn't really a villain. He is just a lesser artist whose ego's cracks when compared to a genius. Your Bay/Scorsese comparison is great but my thoughts were more Stephen King/me because at the time I was writing a horror novel and having a terrible time of it and then I read The Shining again and I realized that I suck. LOL I just didn't know Stephen personally so I could take out my frustrations on him. I drank instead.

ha! a good point, there. I suppose, at various times throughout ours lives we all play Salieri to someone else's Mozart. Heck, I imagine most of us have been Mozart--even if unwittingly--to someone's Salieri. (i imagine this is why SilverSurfer is so intimidated by me.. i'm his Amadeus! )

And I am generally "Mississippi" to everyone's Arkansas even though that movie reference doesn't have near the pedigree as Amadeus.

completely off topic but how friggin long must I be Marty McFly?!?!?!? I think there is an error as I ran through 750 to 800 to get away and it is still there. Now I am past 850 and no relief in sight. HELP!!!

funny, i just noticed that i'm currently "Fletch".. i feel like there's nowhere to go but down from here (ie. "Host of the Chevy Chase Show"... ugh)

Way to work in Perfume into your depiction of Amedeus, I would find it hard to conect any movie to Perfume. To date, one of the weirdest bad movies I've ever seen. That was a train wreck, yet it had so many opportunities to be better but it was too busy trying to get worse. If that movie ever comes up on the movie club watch list, I'll drop out. Ha!

I'll be watching this movie in a while, but if its anything like perfume I wont finish it.


Perfume is the worst movie i have ever seen!

Nothing can be like Perfume.

packpaljs wrote:Way to work in Perfume into your depiction of Amedeus, I would find it hard to conect any movie to Perfume. To date, one of the weirdest bad movies I've ever seen. That was a train wreck, yet it had so many opportunities to be better but it was too busy trying to get worse. If that movie ever comes up on the movie club watch list, I'll drop out. Ha!

Don't worry, I think I'd instate some kind of "veto" power if ever such a case arose..

But I think the comparison is apt. In fact, I daresay Perfume was--in many ways--directly influenced by Amadeus. Having not read the novel (Perfume) or seen the play (Amadeus), I'm not exactly sure when the moment of "inspiration" occurred. The novel itself could've borrowed from the play or the movie, as it wasn't published until a year after the film was released. More likely, director Tom Tykwer's film adaptation was based on repeated viewings of Forman's movie.

I just googled the two titles, and it seems I'm not the only one who has drawn comparisons. On an somewhat unrelated note, it appears that a few critics have drawn parallels between Ratatouille and Perfume. I've seen both, and the similarities hadn't occurred to me before now.. I certainly won't be rewatching Perfume, but I might sit through Ratatouille again with Perfume and Amadeus in mind..

undeadmonkey wrote:I'll be watching this movie in a while, but if its anything like perfume I wont finish it.

Perfume is the worst movie i have ever seen!

As i mentioned in my (long) review of Amadeus, Perfume is--at best--a failed attempt at recreating Amadeus.. The existence of parallels between the two doesn't bring Amadeus down in the slightest..

NSpan wrote:funny, i just noticed that i'm currently "Fletch".. i feel like there's nowhere to go but down from here (ie. "Host of the Chevy Chase Show"... ugh)

It gets worse. I'm Clark Griswald... Who kept voting for Chevy Chase?

And I liked Perfume. It was a failed attempt at creating something great. But at least it tried to do it. Still don't get what the last ten minutes was about though. That just came out of nowhere.

Thank god for Veto Power. I just checked to see what rating I gave Perfume on IMDB from when I watched the film 2 years ago and surprisingly I gave it a 8/10. So now I must dig into my notes to see why such a high rating, I've only given 6 movies an 8 from 2008 so that's pretty high. Come to see it was mostly because they did a great job with the film technically. Story aside the movie was done almost perfect and when you take in the weird subject matter, that would seem harder too do. Similar to American Psycho, how do you set down with that script and create something that is actually watchable. They would have you laughing one sec and wanting to vomit again. But to end my notes on the movie, I have written, never watch again! Too distrubing.

packpaljs wrote:Thank god for Veto Power. I just checked to see what rating I gave Perfume on IMDB from when I watched the film 2 years ago and surprisingly I gave it a 8/10. So now I must dig into my notes to see why such a high rating, I've only given 6 movies an 8 from 2008 so that's pretty high. Come to see it was mostly because they did a great job with the film technically. Story aside the movie was done almost perfect and when you take in the weird subject matter, that would seem harder too do. Similar to American Psycho, how do you set down with that script and create something that is actually watchable. They would have you laughing one sec and wanting to vomit again. But to end my notes on the movie, I have written, never watch again! Too distrubing.

haha, it WAS disturbing!!

packpaljs wrote:Thank god for Veto Power. I just checked to see what rating I gave Perfume on IMDB from when I watched the film 2 years ago and surprisingly I gave it a 8/10. So now I must dig into my notes to see why such a high rating, I've only given 6 movies an 8 from 2008 so that's pretty high. Come to see it was mostly because they did a great job with the film technically. Story aside the movie was done almost perfect and when you take in the weird subject matter, that would seem harder too do. Similar to American Psycho, how do you set down with that script and create something that is actually watchable. They would have you laughing one sec and wanting to vomit again. But to end my notes on the movie, I have written, never watch again! Too distrubing.

I loved Perfume and I was a fan of the book from before the movie. I thought it was odd but it just seemed to work for me. Sure it was unrealistic and over the top but umm well have you really thought about plausibility for many movies.

A retarded guy going to war, playing ping pong and sitting at a bus-stop for 3 hours.

A platoon of soldiers sent into a war zone to find one surviving brother.

Two hitmen trying to retrieve a case and a washed out boxer not throwing a fight being an exciting movie.

Joe Pesci being a tough ass-whipper for the mob on the east coast.

Joe Pesci being a tough ass-whipper for the mob in Vegas.

Guys fighting with electric swords and flying ships around a giant moon looking ship.

Well I never brought up the plausibility, in fact I complimented the movie for doing such a good job with the weird subject. My reason for not wanting to watch it again was the distrubing part. The same reason I won't watch Funny Games, The Hills Have Eyes (Remake), The Accused. These movie fall on a list of mine where I'm glad I saw it once but couldn't take a 2nd view.

Didn't mean to accuse you of it. I had a friend say he hated Perfume because the plot was ridiculous. I countered that the plot of 98% of the movies out there are ridiculous.
Sure it was weird and disturbing but, umm, well, so am I most of the time.

I'm with you, my brother is the worst to watch a movie with. All he does is comment on what could or couldn't happen, or what would have really happen. Yet this same brother loved Twilight and saw it in the theaters 3 times. Question marks linger over my head!

I had saw this movie before, that's why it took so long for me to watch it again. Anyways, I love the integration of the music and the cuts. The performances are all amazing. Anyways, I'm watching Heckler right now and I can't really find the right way to form the right words.

Amadeus 6/10

Finally saw this film, have to say I liked it. I thought it was pretty funny, the ending dragged a bit though. Agreed about the performances, they were great. Mozart's laugh was hilarious.

ok this is going to sound dumb, I kept waiting for Beethoven's 5th symphony throughout the movie, as its the only classic song that i know of, and during the final funeral scene i realized that beethoven was a totally different dude than mozart

overall i enjoyed, although, if it wouldn't of been of for this movie club, i would of never watched it.


P.S. I dont see where yall get the resemblance between this and Perfume?

undeadmonkey wrote:i realized that beethoven was a totally different dude than mozart

if it wouldn't of been of for this movie club, i would of never watched it.

ha! i daresay these are the two best responses our little club has elicited so far

P.S. I dont see where yall get the resemblance between this and Perfume?

i apologize if i'm being redundant here, but for starters: both movies take a very theater-centric approach to film-making.. the performances in each are all deliberately over-the-top and would probably work equally well (if not better) on the stage.. both movies are technically period-pieces, but the direction is overtly (and intentionally) self-aware.. that wording sounds a bit pretentious, but--to put it another way--neither director had any intention of making their stories believable in terms of history.. both Amadeus and Perfume are about as anachronistic as you could get without having your protagonist walk around listening to an ipod..

none of this is inherently pejorative or complimentary.. keep in mind that, despite the comparisons, i think Amadeus worked in many ways that Perfume did not.. i'm really just trying to describe a particular departure from "traditional" film-making.. in the same way that many stage-productions demand (and necessitate) BIG performances (and, sometimes, BIG costumes, make-up, set-design, etc--all within the confines of a tangible stage), these movies don't take full advantage of the film medium--instead, they embrace the principles of theater..

if none of that makes sense, let me try one final rewording of my thesis: both movies are really GAY

haha, I see your point