A Big Movie

Watched Amadeus in the theater last night. First time I'd seen the film all the way through. An interesting film...because on the one hand, it's a great movie - really strong point of view, excellent craft, well told story, innovative editing (loved, loved, loved the SMASH cuts across time from testing a note or two and blam into the performance)...but on the other hand, I know it my gut I didn't love the movie. It some respects, it felt dated. There was a weird aspect to some of the writing where obvious exposition was repeated to audience once we already understood the situation. There were several, but the most memorable is when we're introduced to Mozart prancing around and playing with his lady friend and Salieri is spying on the situation. We all know this is Mozart. And if it weren't, why is Salieri spying on him? Who does Salieri think this is? Just some baffoon? But only at the end of the scene when Mozart realizes his music is being played, does Salieri realize this is Mozart. On a technical level, this writing is serviceable, although a tad repetitive. I felt like saying..."I get it, already." And this moment wasn't a big deal, but a preview of more moments to come throughout the movie when I'm feeling like "I get it, let's go..." It's not a slim movie, either, watching it after a long day's work is no easy task. A re-cut could take a look at the theatrical cut of Miami Vice and how Micheal Mann introduces us to characters we already know - Crockett and Tubbs - that's a modern character introduction. "F--- you--smart ass audience- we know you know who we are and this is what you caught us doing right now. Boom. Middle of the operation stalking a pimp."

But the other issue is a larger one - the point of view towards artist or genius. Malcolm Gladwell wrote an excellent article on different types of artists - the prodigy vs. the late bloomer. The examples he used were Mozart and Manet. Amadeus celebrates a tired overused trope - the artist/genius-as-prodigy, born with innate talent far far superior to those mediocre poseurs like Salieri. Maybe Amadeus originated this trope, but it feels like a vestige of the 70s - a post-watergate/vietnam distrust of authority and celebration of the lone artist who struggles against an unfair, conspiratorial world against him. In hindsight, this notion feels rather convenient for the great filmmakers of the 70s (many of whom, like Milos Forman were directly imported from the european new wave movements or the americans who were heavily influenced by them). Isn't it easier to say they were broken by the system or by jealous rivals conspiring against them than to acknowledge running out of artistic steam? Does anyone actually believe Coppola, Lucas, and company had more in them after the 70s? Their knees went. We'd love to see great movies from these guys. But did anyone see Tetro? I feel like more people read my blog.

Nevertheless, this is the best movie I've seen in the theater in awhile. Compared to The Informant or Where the Wild Things Are, the level of quality isn't comparable.