Donald Satz wrote:

>Steve Schwartz wrote:
>
>>It is undoubtedly one of the worst, most pretentious pieces of tripe it's
>>been my misfortune to sit through.
>
>Didn't like it? Sorry to hear that.  Amadeus is one of only four movies
>I've ever bought - it was great.  The acting and the pacing were perfect.
>Not being a "deep" movie, Amadeus needed a fast pace and it worked
>beautifully.  The flow of the music was excellent as well.  Accuracy?
>Truth? Hey, it's the movies, and movies is magic.

But the trouble is that the public at large do NOT see such films in the
context of pure fictional entertainment.  They see them as documentary
biographies.  We think it's supposed to fun but is it really.

If anyone has this film video in their collection would they kindly look at
the credits and see if there is anthing there like "All resemblence to any
person dead or alive is unintentional" or "This is a work of fiction not a
documentary".  I guarantee you won't find any such statement.  Because the
film IS indeed presented as a factual account.  As such it deserves all the
wrath which some of us have heaped upon it.

This brings us back to what I said a couple of months ago IE that the
public think that Mozart is classical music and that films like this and
"The Music Lovers" portray truth.

If we want to have a more accurate representation of music which includes
a fairer perception of the merits of composers like (for instance) Mahler
then it is up to us to support truth in all matters pertaining to classical
music including Hollywood movies.

Bob Draper
[log in to unmask]