Richard Claeys wrote:

>>The updated version runs just under three hours (2 hrs., 58 min.),
>>and, according to Forman, rounds out the drama by fleshing out the two
>>protagonists.  Salieri has several more scenes, including a seduction
>>and humiliation of Constanze that earns this edition an "R" rating. . .

Bill Hong responded:

>The restored scene with Constanze and Salieri does add in an extra
>dimension which explains the nature of their interactions later on,
>especially in the deathbed scenes.

Though it might be fun to study Salieri's technique, this would add little
to what any thoughtful viewer could infer from the original release; it
would add nothing, really.

>There are some other smaller scene additions/restorations, both with
>the younger Salieri alone (intoning prayers /pleadings to God), and
>with Salieri and Mozart together.  Other domestic scenes with Mozart
>and Constanze also provide more glimpses into their relationship,
>especially with regard to family finances.

Again, nothing we couldn't guess.  I'm more impressed by the skill of the
editors of the original with each sentence Bill writes here!  Less is more.

>A dressing-room scene with the soprano who sang in "Abduction from the
>Seraglio" emphasizes Salieri's suspicions about her relationship with
>Mozart.

Ah.  If this scene were to be included, some of our doubts about Shaeffer's
insight or scholarship might be justified.  Personally, for me, this scene
would be unnecessary, dramatically, and would have spoiled the movie.  The
way Signorina Cavallieri slapped Mozart was plenty for me.  (Gosh, I have
a dirty mind, don't I?)

>>While acknowledging the risks of slowing down the action, Forman
>>believes the additions bring the final product closer to what he and
>>Peter Shaffer had in mind.  For what it's worth, one critic who sat
>>through the update --Glenn Lovell of the San Jose Mercury News--describes
>>it as a mixed bag--definitely more bloated, ponderous and slower in pace
>>than the original, but ...

Good for Glen Lovell.  I feel sorry for Forman.

>And our Moderator added:
>
>>[Oh, damn, another version I'll have to buy.  They have this racket
>>down, don't they? ...--Dave]

I wouldn't buy it.  [How could I possibly resist such a detailed and
persuasive argument?  -Dave]

>My guess is that the folks here and elsewhere who hated the movie, and
>those who loved it, won't be swayed to the other side by the changes
>Forman made.  However, if you do want to see it on the big screen, the
>enhancements seemed worthwhile to me.

Certainly; I'd pay $7.50 to see it again on the BS.  [But would deny me
my $15 to watch it any time I like on my big screen.  You are just plain
mean.  -Dave]

Arch