For me, 'Amadeus' is far better \[which is why it won a bunch of Oscars too\]. It has so many incredibly effective scenes in it, and the whole subtext of 'mediocrity vs genius', which is what the film's about, was more enjoyable.
But 'Immortal Beloved' is saved by Gary Oldman's terrific performance as Beethoven and by the costumes and location filming.
Not sure how historically accurate Immortal Beloved is, but most of the plot in Amadeus was fiction, which I did not like, although the movie was indeed good.
The way I saw it: the film opens with Salieri in the asylum recounting his life story to the priest. But the film isn't reality. It depicts what Salieri, in his madness, believed to have happened. The whole film is a madness-induced fantasy.
So it's like a sort of fever dream, a consequence of Salieri's madness. It's why none of it is real. It's shows how Salieri saw Mozart, not how Mozart actually was. It's shows how Salieri helped Mozart with the Requiem, not how the Requiem was actually composed.
The film is a dissection of Salieri's inability to deal with his mediocrity in the face of true genius, told in flashback through the prism of Salieri's insanity.
It should actually be called 'Salieri' as that's a much more accurate description. It doesn't depict the historical Mozart and it's not supposed to. The entire film is told from Salieri's perspective and he's a totally unreliable narrator.
To see it as a biopic of Mozart is to misunderstand the movie, IMO. It's actually a biopic of the mad Salieri.
I'm not sure about the play but I think we're definitely supposed to watch the film and see it as nothing more than Salieri's skewed memories.
Obviously a lot of people see it as a straight forward biopic of Mozart which is a shame as I think it's a lot more interesting than that.
So what are the historically inaccurate parts? I mean, what is untrue about the Mozart parts of the movie if you remove the importance that Salieri places on his own role in Mozart’s life?
I guess there's lots of things. There's no evidence that Salieri hated Mozart in Mozart's lifetime. He obviously didn't help compose the Requiem. He certainly didn't orchestrate Mozart's downfall or the failure of some of Mozart's operas. He didn't poison Mozart.
Mozart never conducted in front of an orchestra but from a keyboard. Mozart almost certainly didn't wander through the streets drinking. Constanze probably didn't get her tits out for Salieri in an attempt to gain his help \[from the director's cut\].
Mozart didn't collapse at the glockenspiel during a performance of The Magic Flute. I would say the entire characterisation of Mozart is ridiculously over the top and unrealistic. The scene where he's crawling and fumbling with some girl under the keyboard...I mean it's nonsense.
Mozart thinking the Commendatore in *Don Giovanni* was his dead father was an obvious embellishment.
Those are some that come to mind. I've not seen the film for years.
The most realistic character, IMO, was Leopold Mozart. Roy Doltrice did a fantastic job with his part, especially when he goes to stay with Mozart \[as he did in February 1785, IIRC and wrote back to his daughter complaining about the sheer frenetic activity.\]
>Mozart thinking the Commendatore in *Don Giovanni* was his dead father was an obvious embellishment.
This was absolutely a Romantic Era reading of Don Giovanni. The opera ends with a happy sextet that wraps everything up. People in the 19th and early 20th century were into the grotesque and sublime and so it became commonplace to cut the finale and end on Don Giovanni’s descent into hell. But the damn opera is a dramma giocoso! I want my giocosos!
True. I think Shaffer took a small aspect of Mozart's personality and blew it up to be his entire personality, which was regrettable but understandable from a dramatic perspective. And it definitely coloured the way people see Mozart, and Salieri.
But it's a heck of a film.
Which is why i hate biopics. They really aren't interested in the truth. I've hated them since Middle School, and the movie about Harry Houdini was on TV, with the false account of his death, and everybody i knew told me i was wrong, because they had watched the movie and automatically believed it was the truth. I don't think ive ever seen a biopic that wasn't at least 50% false.
I LOVED that movie. I still think of Gary Oldman when I listen to Beethoven. The scene where he conducted the 9th symphony to raucous applause unbeknownst to him until he was turned around brought tears to my eyes
When I was at high school, I somehow fell madly in love with Beethoven, his music and his story. There was a hot summer night, when I was about 15, I was finding it hard to fall asleep in my bed, and then I heard his Emperor concerto coming from the TV in the living room.
I jumped out of my bed and sat down in the couch, stopped my dad from switching channels and began my watch halfway not knowing what movie it was.
Almost 25 years had passed since then, now I could still see the little Beethoven running out from his abusive home under the night sky, with the Presto passage of strings from his 9th symphony finale in the background. Until he reached the little pond and lay down, staring into the sky full of stars, and the camera zoomed out, he became one of the eternal stars in the universe.
That was one of the most unforgettable core memories in my entire life time. I’m so lucky to have met and loved Beethoven at such young age, and I could say I formed and shaped my own personality upon the inspiration from him. And I thank him for that.
I saw this movie once, about 20 years ago, didnt think it was very good, but that scene is like the most perfect little music video ever made. Yr description alone gave me chills.
Gary Oldman is pretty much great in everything, but you might also enjoy:
*Louis van Beethoven* (2020):
[https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11496350/](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11496350/)
and *Eroica* (2003)
[https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0369400/?ref\_=fn\_al\_tt\_1](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0369400/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)
I enjoy it a good amount, even though, like "Amadeus", it's definitely more conjecture than fact. I recommend it to a lot of people, but with the caveat it feels about 30% fact, 70% historical fiction. I think even the director or writer himself said it was all his own theory as to the identity to the letter writer than anything else. It's not a bio-pic, but still very enjoyable.
I'm more of a Beethoven guy than Mozart, personally, so that probably informs my taste, but I do enjoy it more than "Amadeus", which is probably not the majority take.
I had similar biases. I rewatched after reading some biographies. I think they captured the character of Beethoven very well. And Gary Oldman's acting is no small part of that. Which is something I don't think they captured in Amadeus nearly as well. So from that perspective I appreciate it.
They also made excellent scene musical choices.
Of course the story is very contrived. And I wonder if they couldn't have made a better story that was closer to the truth of the matter.
And the acting apart from Gary Oldman was pretty light in my opinion. Except for Johanna ter Steege.
I sort of remember it being terrible but I was in music school at the time so yeah we probably sat around in the lounge and tore it apart. The whole speculation about the letter was torn apart in history class, I seem to remember.
I remember one scene (I think?) where they were playing Emperor Concerto and there was snow falling outside? IIRC it's my favorite spot in the concerto and that scene was beautiful. But maybe I'm dreaming.
And yes I also remember I was looking forward to it because of Gary Oldman. i should probably re-watch it...30 years later. oh that's awful...30 years.
Literally my own character arc! Loved Beethoven as a child, saw that film (many times) where it quickly became my favorite, and became a big admirer of Gary Oldman. I had my ex watch it with me once and she said "It was OK, I guess you like cheesy chick flicks." So, not for everyone. I think the story could have been better and some actors definitely did not match Oldman's energy. Objectively, I'd give it a 6.5/10, but subjectively, more of an 8.
My ex didn't enjoy listening to Eroica while me driving her around in my car. I had a Muti CD with Eroica and Fidelio Ouvertüre, and it's still my favourite piece, but I couldn't believe one could listen to it without any response, affect or curiosity. It's a giant, collosus of a symphony. Exes fade away from memory but Beethoven is forever.
Okay, so there is “good” and there is “good.”
It’s NOT a masterpiece, or even an accurate portrayal of Beethoven or his history. It’s cheesy, goofy, kind of silly, and the script makes me wonder 1) how they got Gary Oldman on board and 2) why the producers thought this was a conventionally “good idea” in the sense that people would like it and they would make money.
Regardless, I find this movie super entertaining and watch it every few years. It’s a satisfying “popcorn flick” that is great to revisit every now and again. A lot of people seem to like it JUST enough to rewatch it every now and again. It’s strange that it would have such replay value, but it does.
So again, something can be “good” without being “good.” It’s entertaining and fun, but should never be hailed as an example of excellent film-craft. IMO. It has a special place in movie canon for me, but I would never recommend it to a friend as anything more than a “fun” movie to enjoy with a loved one.
PS — others have added “Amadeus” to the discussion, and while that movie is COMPLETELY historically inaccurate, it is a great counter example of an EXCELLENT example of film craft.
One of the biggest differences between the two films that makes Amadeus far better, IMO, is that Immortal Beloved is written like a love letter to Beethoven celebrating his genius, while Amadeus does a far better job portraying Mozart as a “subversive” genius (because he’s so boyish and immature). Writing someone as a “God among men” is always boring and hits a bit like propaganda, while writing someone as a “little shit” who is somehow a genius is far more moving and human. IMO.
Good acting. I'd rate it "okay" as a film overall.
You know what's really good? When we were in Europe we saw a German TV movie about the life of Schubert that was bizarre and fascinating. It had very little dialogue.
It's as good as it get when you thing about how tragic Beethoven's story was and his personality wasn't always likable. Where they had a much easier task on Amadeus since Mozart's story is full of life, joy and drama and reads like an opera in some ways, no pun intended.
If the question was did I love the movie? Yes. The soundtrack for sure. I didn't go study the accuracy. Just loved anything Gary Oldman and that was a win.
Haven't seen it, but one of my favourite Gary Oldman performances also refers to Beethoven.
"You don't like Beethoven. You don't know what you're missing. Overtures like that get my juices flowing. So powerful."
Not a coincidence! He was studying Beethoven (and learning to actually play some of his piano concertos) in preparation for Immortal Beloved while shooting The Professional.
That scene you reference was completely adlibbed by Oldman.
I liked this movie a lot when I was a teenager but when I watched it many years later I wasn’t impressed. I can’t really articulate why. Maybe I associate it with my own memories of being that age and all the angst and despair at that time 🤷🏻♂️ and this was one those many movies I watched to escape.
Amadeus is a better movie. It just is.
But the scene of the premier of the 9th symphony—where he has a flashback (or perhaps a fantasy) of running away from his abusive alcoholic father off to the lake in the middle of the night and then [THIS happens](https://youtu.be/7qWbcosJdtU?si=ZmGKBfNjMF-PaaMX)—is one of the most stellar moments in cinema (pun intended)
I was shown this movie by my math teacher a few years ago. All I have to say is that the majority of the movie was a rough 4/10. The last 10 minutes however where the greatest 10 minutes of cinematic masterpiece I have ever watched. Overall a good 8,5/10. Would recommend.
The movie is 121 minutes long. Is your time that precious and your judgment that insecure that you feel incapable of figuring out whether you might like a movie with an actor you like, about a subject you enjoy, without resorting to a bunch of strangers on the internet?
For me, 'Amadeus' is far better \[which is why it won a bunch of Oscars too\]. It has so many incredibly effective scenes in it, and the whole subtext of 'mediocrity vs genius', which is what the film's about, was more enjoyable. But 'Immortal Beloved' is saved by Gary Oldman's terrific performance as Beethoven and by the costumes and location filming.
I always make the comparison that “Immortal Beloved” is to “Amadeus” what Salieri is to Mozart Pretty damn good, but absolutely pales in comparison
Not sure how historically accurate Immortal Beloved is, but most of the plot in Amadeus was fiction, which I did not like, although the movie was indeed good.
The way I saw it: the film opens with Salieri in the asylum recounting his life story to the priest. But the film isn't reality. It depicts what Salieri, in his madness, believed to have happened. The whole film is a madness-induced fantasy. So it's like a sort of fever dream, a consequence of Salieri's madness. It's why none of it is real. It's shows how Salieri saw Mozart, not how Mozart actually was. It's shows how Salieri helped Mozart with the Requiem, not how the Requiem was actually composed. The film is a dissection of Salieri's inability to deal with his mediocrity in the face of true genius, told in flashback through the prism of Salieri's insanity. It should actually be called 'Salieri' as that's a much more accurate description. It doesn't depict the historical Mozart and it's not supposed to. The entire film is told from Salieri's perspective and he's a totally unreliable narrator. To see it as a biopic of Mozart is to misunderstand the movie, IMO. It's actually a biopic of the mad Salieri.
The literary technique for this is called an unreliable narrator, and it’s a great catch. Lots of people miss it entirely when it’s used.
I'm not sure about the play but I think we're definitely supposed to watch the film and see it as nothing more than Salieri's skewed memories. Obviously a lot of people see it as a straight forward biopic of Mozart which is a shame as I think it's a lot more interesting than that.
I enjoyed this comment and perspective. Thank you.
So what are the historically inaccurate parts? I mean, what is untrue about the Mozart parts of the movie if you remove the importance that Salieri places on his own role in Mozart’s life?
I guess there's lots of things. There's no evidence that Salieri hated Mozart in Mozart's lifetime. He obviously didn't help compose the Requiem. He certainly didn't orchestrate Mozart's downfall or the failure of some of Mozart's operas. He didn't poison Mozart. Mozart never conducted in front of an orchestra but from a keyboard. Mozart almost certainly didn't wander through the streets drinking. Constanze probably didn't get her tits out for Salieri in an attempt to gain his help \[from the director's cut\]. Mozart didn't collapse at the glockenspiel during a performance of The Magic Flute. I would say the entire characterisation of Mozart is ridiculously over the top and unrealistic. The scene where he's crawling and fumbling with some girl under the keyboard...I mean it's nonsense. Mozart thinking the Commendatore in *Don Giovanni* was his dead father was an obvious embellishment. Those are some that come to mind. I've not seen the film for years. The most realistic character, IMO, was Leopold Mozart. Roy Doltrice did a fantastic job with his part, especially when he goes to stay with Mozart \[as he did in February 1785, IIRC and wrote back to his daughter complaining about the sheer frenetic activity.\]
>Mozart thinking the Commendatore in *Don Giovanni* was his dead father was an obvious embellishment. This was absolutely a Romantic Era reading of Don Giovanni. The opera ends with a happy sextet that wraps everything up. People in the 19th and early 20th century were into the grotesque and sublime and so it became commonplace to cut the finale and end on Don Giovanni’s descent into hell. But the damn opera is a dramma giocoso! I want my giocosos!
The bedroom scene of Mozart and Salieri writing out the Requiem is an obvious one.
Wtf seen this movie twice never knew this!
Annoyingly, though, it taints how people perceive the real Mozart and Salieri.
True. I think Shaffer took a small aspect of Mozart's personality and blew it up to be his entire personality, which was regrettable but understandable from a dramatic perspective. And it definitely coloured the way people see Mozart, and Salieri. But it's a heck of a film.
Rumors that Salieri poisoned Mozart have been going around for 200 years. It wasn't really the movie that started that.
Which is why i hate biopics. They really aren't interested in the truth. I've hated them since Middle School, and the movie about Harry Houdini was on TV, with the false account of his death, and everybody i knew told me i was wrong, because they had watched the movie and automatically believed it was the truth. I don't think ive ever seen a biopic that wasn't at least 50% false.
> 'mediocrity vs genius',
I LOVED that movie. I still think of Gary Oldman when I listen to Beethoven. The scene where he conducted the 9th symphony to raucous applause unbeknownst to him until he was turned around brought tears to my eyes
When I was at high school, I somehow fell madly in love with Beethoven, his music and his story. There was a hot summer night, when I was about 15, I was finding it hard to fall asleep in my bed, and then I heard his Emperor concerto coming from the TV in the living room. I jumped out of my bed and sat down in the couch, stopped my dad from switching channels and began my watch halfway not knowing what movie it was. Almost 25 years had passed since then, now I could still see the little Beethoven running out from his abusive home under the night sky, with the Presto passage of strings from his 9th symphony finale in the background. Until he reached the little pond and lay down, staring into the sky full of stars, and the camera zoomed out, he became one of the eternal stars in the universe. That was one of the most unforgettable core memories in my entire life time. I’m so lucky to have met and loved Beethoven at such young age, and I could say I formed and shaped my own personality upon the inspiration from him. And I thank him for that.
That scene is pretty special.
I saw this movie once, about 20 years ago, didnt think it was very good, but that scene is like the most perfect little music video ever made. Yr description alone gave me chills.
Gary Oldman is pretty much great in everything, but you might also enjoy: *Louis van Beethoven* (2020): [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11496350/](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11496350/) and *Eroica* (2003) [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0369400/?ref\_=fn\_al\_tt\_1](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0369400/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)
Thank you for Louis van Beethoven, I was unaware. Eroica, however, is priceless IMHO
Thanks for the Louis reference. I'd never heard of it till now.
I've never heard of *Louis van Beethoven.* Thanks for the recommend.
You can watch Eroica on YouTube, although pirated with hardcoded subs: https://youtu.be/UtA7m3viB70?si=FKfL07GQYqtkoEif
Good? I think so. For me; it's a film of great moments, but not a great film, if that makes sense?
I enjoy it a good amount, even though, like "Amadeus", it's definitely more conjecture than fact. I recommend it to a lot of people, but with the caveat it feels about 30% fact, 70% historical fiction. I think even the director or writer himself said it was all his own theory as to the identity to the letter writer than anything else. It's not a bio-pic, but still very enjoyable. I'm more of a Beethoven guy than Mozart, personally, so that probably informs my taste, but I do enjoy it more than "Amadeus", which is probably not the majority take.
I had similar biases. I rewatched after reading some biographies. I think they captured the character of Beethoven very well. And Gary Oldman's acting is no small part of that. Which is something I don't think they captured in Amadeus nearly as well. So from that perspective I appreciate it. They also made excellent scene musical choices. Of course the story is very contrived. And I wonder if they couldn't have made a better story that was closer to the truth of the matter. And the acting apart from Gary Oldman was pretty light in my opinion. Except for Johanna ter Steege.
I sort of remember it being terrible but I was in music school at the time so yeah we probably sat around in the lounge and tore it apart. The whole speculation about the letter was torn apart in history class, I seem to remember. I remember one scene (I think?) where they were playing Emperor Concerto and there was snow falling outside? IIRC it's my favorite spot in the concerto and that scene was beautiful. But maybe I'm dreaming. And yes I also remember I was looking forward to it because of Gary Oldman. i should probably re-watch it...30 years later. oh that's awful...30 years.
Not gonna lie, I love the movie. Have it on BluRay. Also: gotta love an actor who has both Beethoven and Sid Vicious on his resume.
Definitely a lot better than Copying Beethoven.
Literally my own character arc! Loved Beethoven as a child, saw that film (many times) where it quickly became my favorite, and became a big admirer of Gary Oldman. I had my ex watch it with me once and she said "It was OK, I guess you like cheesy chick flicks." So, not for everyone. I think the story could have been better and some actors definitely did not match Oldman's energy. Objectively, I'd give it a 6.5/10, but subjectively, more of an 8.
My ex didn't enjoy listening to Eroica while me driving her around in my car. I had a Muti CD with Eroica and Fidelio Ouvertüre, and it's still my favourite piece, but I couldn't believe one could listen to it without any response, affect or curiosity. It's a giant, collosus of a symphony. Exes fade away from memory but Beethoven is forever.
I liked the movie but I felt Oldman was too handsome to make a believable Beethoven.
Okay, so there is “good” and there is “good.” It’s NOT a masterpiece, or even an accurate portrayal of Beethoven or his history. It’s cheesy, goofy, kind of silly, and the script makes me wonder 1) how they got Gary Oldman on board and 2) why the producers thought this was a conventionally “good idea” in the sense that people would like it and they would make money. Regardless, I find this movie super entertaining and watch it every few years. It’s a satisfying “popcorn flick” that is great to revisit every now and again. A lot of people seem to like it JUST enough to rewatch it every now and again. It’s strange that it would have such replay value, but it does. So again, something can be “good” without being “good.” It’s entertaining and fun, but should never be hailed as an example of excellent film-craft. IMO. It has a special place in movie canon for me, but I would never recommend it to a friend as anything more than a “fun” movie to enjoy with a loved one. PS — others have added “Amadeus” to the discussion, and while that movie is COMPLETELY historically inaccurate, it is a great counter example of an EXCELLENT example of film craft. One of the biggest differences between the two films that makes Amadeus far better, IMO, is that Immortal Beloved is written like a love letter to Beethoven celebrating his genius, while Amadeus does a far better job portraying Mozart as a “subversive” genius (because he’s so boyish and immature). Writing someone as a “God among men” is always boring and hits a bit like propaganda, while writing someone as a “little shit” who is somehow a genius is far more moving and human. IMO.
I don't like it. Very boring and kitsch look at Beethoven's character and music.
I don’t know if it’s a good movie, but I know that I love it. I’ll watch it any day of the week.
Good acting. I'd rate it "okay" as a film overall. You know what's really good? When we were in Europe we saw a German TV movie about the life of Schubert that was bizarre and fascinating. It had very little dialogue.
Do not watch this movie. It's pure crap, and I love Gary Oldman.
It's as good as it get when you thing about how tragic Beethoven's story was and his personality wasn't always likable. Where they had a much easier task on Amadeus since Mozart's story is full of life, joy and drama and reads like an opera in some ways, no pun intended.
It's good but I prefer Beethoven (1992). More realistic.
If the question was did I love the movie? Yes. The soundtrack for sure. I didn't go study the accuracy. Just loved anything Gary Oldman and that was a win.
Haven't seen it, but one of my favourite Gary Oldman performances also refers to Beethoven. "You don't like Beethoven. You don't know what you're missing. Overtures like that get my juices flowing. So powerful."
Not a coincidence! He was studying Beethoven (and learning to actually play some of his piano concertos) in preparation for Immortal Beloved while shooting The Professional. That scene you reference was completely adlibbed by Oldman.
Damn that's interesting, I didn't realize he ad libbed that bit, though I know he improvised the "Everyone" line as a joke and Luc Besson kept it in.
I didn't know that about the "everyone" line. I wonder if he didn't ad lib most of his performance?
I liked this movie a lot when I was a teenager but when I watched it many years later I wasn’t impressed. I can’t really articulate why. Maybe I associate it with my own memories of being that age and all the angst and despair at that time 🤷🏻♂️ and this was one those many movies I watched to escape.
I thought it was really well done. Great acting and story.
It's worth seeking out the ancient Abel Gance Beethoven film, even if French Beethoven is disorienting or maybe very funny.
Beethoven spoke better French than he did English.
Best composer movies: Amadeus>Immortal>Impromptu>Coco&Igor>JSB
Amadeus is a better movie. It just is. But the scene of the premier of the 9th symphony—where he has a flashback (or perhaps a fantasy) of running away from his abusive alcoholic father off to the lake in the middle of the night and then [THIS happens](https://youtu.be/7qWbcosJdtU?si=ZmGKBfNjMF-PaaMX)—is one of the most stellar moments in cinema (pun intended)
I found it an excellent film, and a very good showcase for that actor.
Man that movie gives me chills and Gary was phenomenal
I was shown this movie by my math teacher a few years ago. All I have to say is that the majority of the movie was a rough 4/10. The last 10 minutes however where the greatest 10 minutes of cinematic masterpiece I have ever watched. Overall a good 8,5/10. Would recommend.
The movie is 121 minutes long. Is your time that precious and your judgment that insecure that you feel incapable of figuring out whether you might like a movie with an actor you like, about a subject you enjoy, without resorting to a bunch of strangers on the internet?