Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This is an email I sent to two of my friends last night:

---

Okay, first let me get this out of the way: Amadeus was released when I was 23, and only just learning about the fine arts. I *LOVED* it.

...

HOWEVER.

Have either of you seen the Director's Cut?!

OH. MY. GOD.

If you haven't, do.

It's 20 minutes longer (over 3 hours long), and contains a scene so shocking that my jaw dropped.

What's *really* cool is that I've only seen the film once (29 years ago), and I recognize every single scene that wasn't in the original. 'I've *never* seen this before,' I say to myself. Even a brief 3-4 second scene at the beginning when they're rushing Salieri to the hospital is new - I'm sure it is. (*)

But this one scene?

OH. MY. GOD.

It changes the entire movie.

---

(*) I shouldn't have been so sure about that opening scene because I checked, and it's in both cuts.

"Often wrong; never in doubt,"
Rocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing box set.

Quite.

I would recommend to people that they see the original movie first, and then if they ever watch it again, to see the Director's Cut - it *adds* so much to the original, but I think it's very useful to be able to compare the two.

BTW, Meg Tilley had the role as Constanze, but injured her leg and had to withdraw (I suspect you know this, but I sure didn't, and I suspect others don't either).

I *love* the Introidus to the Requiem (K626 - Mozart's final work which you can remember because of the Mazda 626). It is profound and almost painfully simple - I can't find the choral section which follows the instrumental opening which is a crime because this flows right into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A totally brilliant film, so good that it could not be ruined by casting Elizabeth Berridge as Constanze Mozart; not that she didn't try.  I've seen it more than a dozen times.  Maybe that's why I had such a poor reaction to the director's cut, but truly I felt the additional scenes added nothing, and took away from the flow of the movie.

My favorite thing about the movie is the musical transitions; old Salieri humming, moving his arms as if conducting, then suddenly we're back in his memory with him.  Or Constanze's mother yelling at Mozart "selfish!  simply selfish!!" and he's hearing the "Queen of the Night" aria and suddenly we're seeing him conducting the performance.  Just brilliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before the movie was the play. I saw the premiere at the National Theater with Tim Curry as Mozart and Jane Seymour as Constanze. It was brilliant.

I've always heard from everyone (a sample size of perhaps five people) who have seen both that they prefer the play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please let me recommend to all who are interested the film by Joseph Losey of Don Giovanni. You can buy it on Amazon. The most beautiful realization of an opera with a phenomenal cast in authentic locations. The final scene and conclusion are breathtakingly beautiful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before the movie was the play. I saw the premiere at the National Theater with Tim Curry as Mozart and Jane Seymour as Constanze. It was brilliant.

I also saw it at the National Theater and to this day I remember it as one of the best theater experiences I've ever had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished watching the Director's Cut of Amadeus, and I think the additional scenes enhance the film. I think the role of Constanze is strengthened, and her hatred of Salereri at the end of the film makes more sense.

I would recommend to people that they see the original movie first, and then if they ever watch it again, to see the Director's Cut - it *adds* so much to the original, but I think it's very useful to be able to compare the two.

What do you think about my recommendation that people see the original film first, and the Director's Cut second? That seems like such a logical sequence (to me, anyway) that I can't imagine approaching Amadeus any other way.

If you're only going to see the film once? Boy, that's a tougher call - after all, the original film was the one that won the Academy Award, and if you start with the Director's Cut, you're missing out on history (insomuch as you can call an Academy Award "history" (and despite the fact that I seem to highlight them here, I think the Academy Awards - like many awards - are terribly flawed and sometimes even embarrassing)). Maybe it's because so much time transpired between when I saw both films, but the Director's Cut seemed almost like a sequel, or a "part two," or however you want to frame it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think about my recommendation that people see the original film first, and the Director's Cut second? That seems like such a logical sequence (to me, anyway) that I can't imagine approaching Amadeus any other way.

If you're only going to see the film once? Boy, that's a tougher call - after all, the original film was the one that won the Academy Award, and if you start with the Director's Cut, you're missing out on history (insomuch as you can call an Academy Award "history" (and despite the fact that I seem to highlight them here, I think the Academy Awards - like many awards - are terribly flawed and sometimes even embarrassing)). Maybe it's because so much time transpired between when I saw both films, but the Director's Cut seemed almost like a sequel, or a "part two," or however you want to frame it.

I think seeing the original film first and then the Director's Cut second is the way to go.

If you are only going to see it once, I don't think you would go wrong choosing either version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...