Amadeus Biopic

Amadeus Milos Formans ikon Amadeus produced in 1984 is both great as far as theatrics go and telling a twaddle, tho at long delay rather presents an inaccurate depiction of Mozarts life. Told from the flash back vista of an aged Antonio Salieri in an insane asylum to a priest for a confession, the icon reveals Antonios introduction to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, his professional career with Mozart, and his bitter rivalry and tr severallyery of Mozart. The use up depicts an inaccurate account of Mozarts life but pipe down delivers on the pieces which he composed.Through bulge by the film, were exposed to what are clearly historical inaccuracies. I understand that this film is an adaptation of the original Peter Shaffers Amadeus performed on Broad counseling in the 1980s and for purely theatrical purposes to endow the story with a plot, these changes had to either be implemented or save purely fabricated in order for the story to make sense. However, some of the irrational interpretations of Mozarts life are middling impossible to ignore for both whizz who change surface had even the simplest understanding of his life, such(prenominal) as myself.The p reddenedominant trait of Mozart that stuck out to me like a sore thumb was his high pitched cackling laughter. The photographic films laugh for Amadeus was constructed from letters that referenced Mozart having an infectious, giddy laugh lots like metal scraping glass according to Forman. However, Robert L. Marshall, author of spud as Musicology Amadeus, discredits this notion as there were no citations that provided the existence of such letters. Since Mozart lived over two centuries ago, theres no possible way to know exactly how he sounded.However, the brilliant Mozart in the film is suppose to be Gods creature (The Latin translation of Amadeus translates to make lover of God or beloved by God) that usurps the mediocre Salieris position as the articulatio of God. So in effect, his laugh is Go d mocking Salieri in his averageness which further drives the frustration and anger of Salieri towards Mozart thus pushing the plot along. composition were on that subject, there is little evidence that Mozart and Salieri actually rivaled each different to the extreme that the photo depicts. Certainly, they were rivals, but they were professional rivals.By professional rivals, I mean that even though they often butted heads in their pursuit of practice of medicine and their attempted publicity of their works, they let off prise and pri analyzed each different greatly. Despite Salieri being the inferior harmonyian, he still pooled great respect from Emperor Joseph II and his subjects and served as coquet composer, director of the Italian opera, and court conductor. Mozart on the other hand came as an outsider therefore did not possess the same influence or reputation as Salieri. To me, this just appears to be the politics of medication its not what you know, its who you k now.Regardless, Salieri rightfully didnt concur a reason to hate Mozart as more than as the movie shows because his influence alone virtually neutralized Mozart as a threat. Im sure when Mozart attempted to get his operas on the Italian stages it must have certainly irked Salieri, but neer to the degree of violence. However, once again the fiction is created in order to develop a sensical plot line. Without that aggressive rivalry, theres no movie. One last thing that I personally found confusing is that absence of Joesph Haydn from the wide-cut movie.History tells us that Mozart and Haydn met somewhere 1783 or 1784 and instantly hit it off. They both admired each others work immensely and Mozart even went as far as to dedicate six string quartets to Haydn as a tribute to the father of the string quartet. Throughout their lives, they were in correspondence with one another up until Mozarts death. However, despite this documented historical fact, Haydn is still left out of the movie. The movie itself is about two famous unstained composers so why not add Haydn to attract Haydn fans to the play or movie?One empennage lone(prenominal) guess as to why that is. Perhaps Forman thought that the addition of another prominent classical composer would in conclusion lessen the importance of the feud mingled with Mozart and Salieri. But Forman fashioned other characters throughout the film in order to serve roles that further drove the plot, so why not use Haydn instead? Or at least mention him? At one point in the film, Mozart mentions that he doesnt care for Gluck (which is also inaccurate, he was an admirer of Gluck), but nevertheless, he still at least mentions the name.At this point its all guesswork and I cant find anywhere an explanation for his absence. The movie is riddled with other inaccuracies that raise a lot of questions, but if anything I learned in English is true, its that in order to point any literature thats fiction or watch any movie, y oure supposed to suspend yourself in willful disbelief center that enjoy it for what it is without dissecting it too much, which I can honestly and wholeheartedly allege I did. Although it doesnt give an accurate portrayal of Mozart, Salieri or the orbit its supposed to be placed in, it still gives an enjoyable experience.Despite the incorrect depiction, the melodious pieces revealed chronologically throughout the film are in fact the offspring of Mozarts genius. Whilst enjoying each piece as much as the next, I dont have the musical ear or expertise to discern which piece is being played in which diorama, deviation from the operas. However, the films composer John Strauss created a two disc soundtrack for the film and I have to admit, even though I lack the expertise, I am knocked out(p) by Mozarts ability.Luckily, between the internet and my own mothers personal love for music (Fortunately, she had a library of CDs that included many of Mozarts work), I was able to essenti ally find each individual piece indoors the movie. I have to ordain, my favorite musical piece offered in the movie is the finale of the Don Giovanni. Perhaps some of it is because of the twist that Salieri puts on it that only he understood that the horrifying apparition was Leopald raised from the dead The inference that I took from that between the monumental sounding music and the fervently conducting Mozart in the scene is that Mozart poured his personal misfortune of not living up to his fathers expectations in his work. It just makes it seem to be so personal, so passionate. I know that was the movies intent for me to feel that way, but I couldnt answer getting sucked in, between seeing the gargantuan black commander interpret in the deep bass voice is what seems to me to be such an accusing tone allegorically accusing his son in front of the conception as Salieri puts it.All the while the plot twists during this play, as the madness grew within Salieri as he discovers s uch a simple way to destroy Mozart. Its just so epic, for lack of better words. One of the brighter operas in the film The Marriage of Figgaro has a much lighter note. Despite all of the red tape Mozart endures, he nevertheless through the exceptionally brilliance of his music and borderline arrogance persuades the emperor to allow him to perform his opera.While we obviously never get to see the whole thing, the music and performance we do see is good. I wouldnt say I particularly cared for it. The colors, the notes, the lighting, its just too bright. However, the most impressive part of it is that his confidence in his music allowed him to break the traditional rules in order for his perform his opera. This seems metaphorically to portray the fact that Mozarts music didnt follow these contemporary musical rules of the time which contributed to his genius.Perhaps thats a long stretch, but thats direct what came to mind. While the movie is composed (Pun intended) of Mozarts work, it would take an entire divulge paper to dissect each one individually. Regardless, each piece performed in the play is enjoyable from one degree to another. Overall, I have to say I was more than happy with this movie. For a while, I dreaded honoring the movie thinking it would be a long drawn out boring biographic film, but to my surprise it shared little characteristics with a biography.The central thematic message of the movie is mostly if not only fictitious, but still lays a foundation in which the movie tells existent information about Mozart and sets a stage in which one can hear the pieces and enjoy them chronologically. To be frank and honest, if these fabrications of the bitter rivalry between Salieri and Mozart werent there, I would have had a hard time rightfully appreciating the Mozart as seen in the movie. Not to say his music is bad, its brilliant, but the underlying plot is what made the movie so interesting.Ultimately, if youre face for historical facts about W olfgang Amadeus Mozart, look elsewhere. If youre looking for a movie thats interesting and loosely based on one of the humankinds greatest composers who ever lived, look no further. Biliography Amadeus (1984) 10 Mistakes. cinema Mistakes. Web. 08 Mar. 2012. . Amadeus. IMDb. IMDb. com. Web. 08 Mar. 2012. . Irving, John. Mozart The Haydn Quartets. Cambridge Cambridge University Press, 1998. Who Killed Amadeus? Suite101. com. Web. 08 Mar. 2012. .