Now Very Bad…

Tag: 1984

  • Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984)

    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984)

    140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

    Unfairly lumped in with the “odd-numbered Trek movie” theory, but it sort of fits. Definition of a bridge movie, one of my favorites anyway.

    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

    Spoiler-free Movie Review of Star Trek III: The Search for Spock:

    February 27, 2015: I actually wrote the above 140-character review during the summer of 2014 when the film was celebrating its 30th anniversary, but held it since I planned to do a full series on the franchise. With the sad news that broke earlier today about the death of Leonard Nimoy, however, I’ll do a quick one to honor his passing, and plan to revisit his directorial debut in more depth at a later date.

    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

    I saw the first 4 Star Trek movies in the theater as a kid, even if I was too young to get much out of the first one (I still have never re-watched Star Trek: The Motion Picture, actually. I think the only time I saw it was in the theater in 1979 unless I’m forgetting it – I understand it’s pretty forgettable.) But I have very vivid memories of seeing Search for Spock. It may be partly because of my age, but I’d like to think it was mostly because of the anticipation. It was the first one I was really looking forward to going to see. Wrath of Khan was both an unbelievable film and a total cliffhanger. The path for the next movie was set and I couldn’t wait to see how they were going to resolve it. I remember discussing the movie with my dad and talking about what I thought would happen; I remember seeing the posters in the Chestnut Hill General Cinema and getting excited. I couldn’t have known it then, but I was beginning to view and appreciate films with a more critical eye that would one day lead to being the opinionated snob before you.

    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

    The main problem with Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, and I mean the only one that really matters, is that it had the bad fortune to follow the greatest movie in the series, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Khan is arguably one of the greatest science fiction films of all time, so anything that had to try to top it was in for a rough time.

    Despite the aforementioned disadvantage of having a tough act to follow, it did have the benefit of having a very good foundation and setup already laid out for it. The film inherits the naval feel of the Starfleet that Nicholas Meyer established in Khan and gets to build on characters and a plot previously established as well. It even gets to keep the score by James Horner, who comes back to build on one of his finest works.

    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

    The two films are really bookends (even if the story arc wouldn’t be complete until the end of #4. After Khan’s ending, everyone knew exactly what had to be the story for the sequel – the title even spelled it out. So the question would simply be how they got there. Depending on who you listen to, either Leonard Nimoy was reinvigorated by #2 and eager to return for #3, or he would only return if he was allowed to direct. The latter is the story I always heard growing up, but I believe that his story may have been confused with Shatner’s because the accounts I’ve read in the intervening years seem to indicate that Nimoy was energized by the execution of the Khan storyline (who wouldn’t be?).

    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

    Nimoy had directed a few TV episodes, but this would be his feature film directorial debut. In that regard, Search for Spock is quite interesting; it keeps a lot of the feel that Meyer established, but it definitely has its own pacing and focus.

    While Spock is seldom on screen, he hovers over every scene as the raison d’être, keeping for a tight narrative. His physical absence however gives other members of the ensemble some welcome screen time and depth. DeForest Kelley’s Bones, as the third leg of the stool, is bumped up to nearly leading man status, and it is an absolute blast to see George Takei’s Sulu & Nichelle Nichols’ Uhura kicking some rank and file butts in their civvies. When the Enterprise is staffed by only five crew members, it provides an entirely different dynamic in contrast to the military precision of the previous film, recalling the days of the classic TV show (minus the redshirts…)

    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

    With the focus so completely on Spock’s journey, it’s perhaps understandable if not entirely excusable that the MacGuffin is carried over exactly from Khan. There’s a very “blow up the Death Star again” feeling to the whole Genesis storyline, now that the Klingons are seeking the exact same thing this time.

    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

    How about those Klingons? I really like their ruthlessness and their Bird of Prey ships are phenomenally designed – among the most iconic starships ever, which was getting hard to do post Star Wars. Also, let me just say that I love Christopher Lloyd. I really do. He does a great job with a fairly plain character, but he’s just a little too recognizable to completely disappear into the role. I just can’t quite forget that I’m watching “The Reverend Jim Ignatowski, as himself”. Apparently one of the other Klingons is played by John Larroquette – I don’t know how I never knew this before today. (on right, below)

    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

    On the whole, Search for Spock does a really good job for a movie that frankly isn’t about anything. The whole picture was a checkbox that needed to be filled in after the somewhat obvious decision to make the ending of Khan a cliffhanger for all practical purposes. All it had to do was bring back the character so things could get back to normal. It is entirely to the credit of the filmmakers that the movie does more than this. It can’t stand on its own, of course, but neither does it feel completely Reliant (heh, heh) on the pictures that bookend it.

    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

    It’s actually my second favorite Trek film; partly because it is more of an extension of Khan than a singular film, partly because I remember it so fondly from when it came out, but mostly because it’s just very good. It’s the right amount of funny, the action is good and it takes chances by ending some things you didn’t expect. Also, it opens with the emotional scenes from Khan that gut me every time. And I promised myself I wouldn’t cry. Again…

    Poster:

    Trailer:

    Bechdel Test:

    Fail

    The Representation Test Score: B (7 pts)

    (http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

    [schema type=”movie” url=”http://www.startrek.com/” name=”Star Trek III: The Search for Spock” description=”Admiral Kirk and his bridge crew risk their careers stealing the decommissioned Enterprise to return to the restricted Genesis planet to recover Spock’s body.” director=”Leonard Nimoy” actor_1=”William Shatner” actor_2=”Leonard Nimoy”]

    Main Cast William Shatner Kirk, Leonard Nimoy Capt. Spock, DeForest Kelley McCoy, James Doohan Scotty
    Rating PG
    Release Date Fri 01 Jun 1984 UTC
    Director Leonard Nimoy
    Genres Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi, Thriller
    Plot Admiral Kirk and his bridge crew risk their careers stealing the decommissioned Enterprise to return to the restricted Genesis planet to recover Spock’s body.
    Poster Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
    Runtime 105
    Tagline The final voyage of the Starship Enterprise.
    Writers Gene Roddenberry (television series Star Trek), Harve Bennett (written by)
    Year 1984
  • Beverly Hills Cop (1984)

    Beverly Hills Cop (1984)

    140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

    How huge was this movie? It was released in December & was still the biggest hit of 1984 & the highest grossing R-rated film of all time…

    Beverly Hills Cop

    Spoiler-free Movie Review of Beverly Hills Cop:

    Beverly Hills Cop was released 30 years ago today; I just watched it again for the first time in many years. In hindsight, actually watching the movie really wasn’t necessary – I must have seen it 30 times in the 80’s. Still, I could hardly believe upon rewatch how completely I remembered every line, every scene.

    I was curious to see if the film still holds up, though, and it certainly does. A lot of these action comedies do, so long as they are careful not to tie themselves too closely to current trends. So while the 1980’s are clearly alive and well in Beverly Hills Cop, the movie more or less could take place at any time. I don’t recall a single pop culture reference that pinned the movie to 1984 and ran the risk of making it irrelevant. (There is a great bit about doing an interview of Michael Jackson for Rolling Stone magazine, but since both the magazine and MJ’s career spanned multiple decades even that gag still plays.)

    Beverly Hills Cop

    I probably don’t need to recount what an enormous success this film was, and I certainly can skip any summary of the plot. This movie was a monster. The best parallel is certainly Ghostbusters, 1984’s other massive, you gotta see it smash hit. As I’ve noted here before, 1984 saw a higher than average number of big-time movies, but the ones that had the largest pop culture impact had to be Ghostbusters and Beverly Hills Cop. On what do I base this assessment? T-shirts. True, both films had huge selling soundtracks packed with charting singles that filled the airwaves for months, but so did Purple Rain. But after Beverly Hills Cop, people actually wanted Mumford Phys Ed shirts, just because Eddie Murphy’s character wore one. Think about that; a character in an R-rated comedy wears a faded t-shirt from an Illinois high school and suddenly people all over the world are ordering it.

    Beverly Hills Cop

    There’s a lot of reasons why this movie was such a success:

    • It’s a quality production, made by talented filmmakers like director Martin Brest and DP Bruce Surtees
    • Daniel Petrie, Jr.’s script is great
    • The supporting actors are great, including 80’s stalwarts like Ronny Cox, Paul Reiser, Bronson Pinchot, Judge Reinhold & John Ashton (who would team up with Martin Brest again in 1988’s Midnight Run)
    Beverly Hills Cop
    Damon Wayans at left…

    But really it all comes down to Eddie Murphy. He was unbelievably hot at the time, but this is his first starring role – the first test of whether he could carry a picture by himself. The answer, of course, is a resounding yes, as his charisma and wit from stand-up and Saturday Night Live are just as evident here.

    Beverly Hills Cop

    The physical work from 48 Hrs. evidently paid off, as well, as while the movie is rightly remembered for the comedy, the action end of the equation is very strong. The 1980’s certainly hosted a lot of these action comedies and the one thing they had in common is an authenticity in the effects. There’s a weight to the car crashes and fights, necessitated by a lack of digital technology that frankly kept these things a bit grounded in reality – while of course being anything but realistic.

    Beverly Hills Cop

    Finally, a word about the female lead, Lisa Eilbacher as Jenny Summers. (Actually, she’s the only named female in the film. Also one of only two women who speak in the movie. Now that I reflect on it, I don’t think I remember seeing the camera focus on even five women in the whole picture. Even the strippers are relegated to the background.) Anyway, it’s great and practically unique, but the character of Jenny is not the love interest. She and Axel are friends and nothing more. It’s sort of refreshing.

    (That’s the optimistic side of me; the pessimistic side of me wonders if she would have remained a love interest – as she was in earlier versions of the story when Mickey Rourke and Sylvester Stallone were attached to the project – if the lead character were white.)

    Beverly Hills Cop

    Beverly Hills Cop is that rare modern movie that works almost exactly as well as it did on its release date 30 years ago. Go watch it again – just watch out for the banana in the tailpipe…

    Poster:

    Trailer:

    Bechdel Test:

    Fail

    The Representation Test Score: D (3 pts)

    (http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

    Beverly Hills Cop Representation Test

    [schema type=”movie” name=”Beverly Hills Cop” description=”A freewheeling Detroit cop pursuing a murder investigation finds himself dealing with the very different culture of Beverly Hills.” director=”Martin Brest” actor_1=”Eddie Murphy” ]

    Main Cast Eddie Murphy Axel Foley, Judge Reinhold Det. Billy Rosewood, John Ashton Sgt. Taggart, Lisa Eilbacher Jenny Summers
    Rating R
    Release Date Wed 05 Dec 1984 UTC
    Director Martin Brest
    Genres Action, Comedy, Crime, Drama, Thriller
    Plot A freewheeling Detroit cop pursuing a murder investigation finds himself dealing with the very different culture of Beverly Hills.
    Poster Beverly Hills Cop
    Runtime 105
    Tagline In Detroit a cop learns to take the heat. In L.A. he learns to keep his cool. [Theatrical Australia]
    Writers Daniel Petrie Jr. (screenplay), Danilo Bach (story) …
    Year 1984
  • The Terminator (1984)

    The Terminator (1984)

    140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

    Nearly perfect sci-fi/action film just as good as it was 30 years ago. Streamlined & tight. Best in the series. That’s right, I said it…

    The Terminator

    Spoiler-free Movie Review of The Terminator:

    30 years ago, in a year already crowded with great movies, Orion Pictures released The Terminator. In the wake of the movie, James Cameron was launched into a career that would soon earn him a place as an A-lister & Ahnold would blast into the stratosphere. It was an amazing movie and enjoyed the reputation it rightly earned.

    The Terminator

    Then 8 years later, a funny thing happened: The Terminator became suddenly less impressive of a film. What actually occurred is that they released a sequel, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, with legendary special effects, great stunts, a more ambitious story and a newly kick-ass heroine in Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton). It was funny and exciting and the original film suddenly looked dated and underachieving.

    The Terminator

    Everyone fell victim to this bit of revisionism. I remember being reluctant to go see T2 because I couldn’t imagine how they could improve on the original, and then walking out of the theater convinced that the 1984 film was a dinosaur.

    The Terminator

    On the 30th anniversary of the release of the first film, it’s time to reexamine this movie and revisit this premise and come to the proper conclusion: The Terminator is the best film in the series.

    The Terminator

    “Are you kidding?”, you say, “T2 was so much better – it’s amazing!” Yes, T2 is amazing – it’s one of the greatest movies in the genre and one of my personal faves. But with clear eyes, The Terminator is a better and more unique film.

    The Terminator

    Five Reasons The Terminator is better than Terminator 2:

    #1. Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn): Reese is an interesting character, a soldier who has volunteered for a one-way trip to the past. A man out of time who must quickly get up to speed in order to fulfill his mission – to risk and likely give his life for a woman he doesn’t know. He’s in a world he can’t possibly understand and is up against an unbeatable machine, but he never loses hope or determination to keep Sarah Connor safe. That – that right there is why this movie works so well. It’s not the fx, it’s the humanity. By contrast, the sequel has no meaningful characters or relationships. Sarah is so excellent of a character, but it really isn’t her picture this time around. Her character arc actually occurred off screen, in between the movies. May be why they did a tv series around her. No, John Connor is our protagonist (and to a not small degree so is the Terminator), which leads us to:

    The Terminator

    #2. No Edward Furlong. My problem isn’t really with the actor, particularly. It’s the character. It’s even the very idea of the character. The next great sci-fi/action film with a ten-year-old protagonist will be the first. Is there no reason that he couldn’t have been older? I love the attempt to try to have the series timeline mirror ours, but it really doesn’t totally work anyway, so maybe just write a more interesting and less irritating character and let the geeks retcon all this stuff to their hearts content. The underappreciated mixed bag that is Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines showed what would happen if you put an older John Connor in more or less the same situation and it was a much more effective dynamic, even if the film as a whole didn’t quite gel. (Except for the ending – one of the best endings I’ve ever seen…)

    The Terminator#3. The rating. Again, it’s not necessarily that going from an R to a PG-13 is a problem (although I can’t name one instance of this being a good decision), it’s what it represents – a move toward the middle. An attempt to appeal to the largest possible audience, which simply can’t be done without dulling the edge of the material; which leads us to:

    #4. No jokes from Ahnold. The jokes are funny. It doesn’t matter. You’re taking a step down the wrong path. By the next film it will degenerate into camp. I laughed when I was supposed to in T2, but time makes that crap dated and cheesy. The only reason that the Louis Tully rule doesn’t apply to the T-800 is that he was the title character in the first picture and can’t really be considered a minor character.

    The Terminator#5. Finally, and most importantly, the run-time. The sequel was 136 minutes in theaters, 153 minutes in the director’s cut. The original by comparison was a half hour shorter at 107 minutes. It’s more tightly paced and just more direct. The pacing perfectly complements the rich but not complicated story.

    The Terminator

    It is, after all, a great story (although it may not be as original as first thought – author Harlan Ellison received a settlement and on-screen acknowledgment after he successfully demonstrated the possible plagiarism of some of his work on the tv show The Outer Limits – which Cameron proudly named as an influence on the picture). Cameron excels at creating interesting dialogue and personality for minor characters. Some of the effects are dated, but not as much as you might think. The amazing work by the late Stan Winston still holds up very well.

    A franchise was practically a necessity with such a rich concept. If later films never quite lived up to the excitement of the original, that’s ok – it’s a hard act to follow, and each successive installment has offered something interesting. With a new film, Terminator: Genisys, in post-production and due for a July 1, 2015 release, the series that Cameron created seems to be stronger than ever.

    Poster:

    Trailer:

    Bechdel Test:

    Pass

    The Representation Test Score: C (5 pts)

    (http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

    The Terminator Representation Test
    [schema type=”movie” name=”The Terminator” description=”A human-looking indestructible cyborg is sent from 2029 to 1984 to assassinate a waitress, whose unborn son will lead humanity in a war against the machines, while a soldier from that war is sent to protect her at all costs.” director=”James Cameron” actor_1=”Arnold Schwarzenegger”]

    Main Cast Arnold Schwarzenegger Terminator, Linda Hamilton Sarah Connor, Michael Biehn Kyle Reese, Paul Winfield Lieutenant Ed Traxler
    Rating R
    Release Date Fri 26 Oct 1984 UTC
    Director James Cameron
    Genres Action, Sci-Fi
    Plot A human-looking indestructible cyborg is sent from 2029 to 1984 to assassinate a waitress, whose unborn son will lead humanity in a war against the machines, while a soldier from that war is sent to protect her at all costs.
    Poster The Terminator
    Runtime 107
    Tagline In the Year of Darkness, 2029, the rulers of this planet devised the ultimate plan. They would reshape the Future by changing the Past. The plan required something that felt no pity. No pain. No fear. Something unstoppable. They created ‘THE TERMINATOR’
    Writers James Cameron (written by) and, Gale Anne Hurd (written by) …
    Year 1984
  • All of Me (1984)

    All of Me (1984)

    140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

    Fun, screwball physical comedy is slightly more mature than what Martin had been doing, but not much. Dated but leads are still very funny.

    All of Me

    Spoiler-free Movie Review of All of Me:

    In 1984, Carl Reiner and Steve Martin teamed up for the fourth and final time with All of Me, a slight body-swap comedy based on an unpublished novel (Me Two by Edwin Davis) and titled after the 1930’s jazz hit.

    Millionaire Edwina Cutwater (Tomlin) has been sickly and bedridden all of her life, and now that she’s dying she’s arranged to have her soul transferred into the body of a beautiful young woman named Terry Hoskins (Victoria Tennant) so that Edwina can get another chance at life. She enlists the help of attorney Roger Cobb (Martin) to amend her will, making Hoskins the sole heir so that the Cutwater fortune will be awaiting her in her new body. Through a chain of events that would be unlikely anywhere but in a screwball comedy, Edwina’s soul ends up in Roger’s body – and he’s still in there. The two must work together to exist in one body until they can get Edwina back where she belongs. Of course, it isn’t going to be easy…

    The physical comedy of Martin is top-shelf, right up there with his other 80’s hits, but the dialogue and interplay between the stars is even better. In some ways this is a somewhat insubstantial picture, but the pairing of Martin & Tomlin is comedic gold. The filmmakers utilize a device in which Edwina’s visage is visible to Roger in mirrors, allowing the actors to play directly off of each other, making for great interaction.

    Further comedic excellence is delivered by Roger’s blind friend Tyrone Wattell (played by the always enjoyable Jason Bernard) who nearly steals the picture with his deadpan deliver of lines like “Well, if I can be of any help at all, you are in worse trouble than I thought.”.

    While not one of his more famous pictures, All of Me was a solid hit for Martin, who has the perfect foil in comedy superheroine Tomlin. They are sadly, if predictably, planning a remake, but the original still plays.

    Poster:

    Trailer:

    Bechdel Test:

    Pass

    The Representation Test Score: B (7 pts)

    (http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

    All of Me Representation Test

     

    [schema type=”movie” name=”All of Me” description=”When rich, eccentric Edwina Cutwater died, a crazy guru tried to transport her soul into the body of a beautiful young woman. But the guru goofed. And Edwina’s soul has accidentially taken over the entire right side of her lawyer, Roger Cobb. He still controls what’s left. Now, Edwina and Roger are living together in the same body. He’s losing his job. He’s losing his girlfriend. And he just can’t seem to get her out of his system. No matter how hard he tries.” director=”Carl Reiner” actor_1=”Steve Martin” actor_2=”Lily Tomlin]

    Main Cast Steve Martin Roger Cobb, Lily Tomlin Edwina Cutwater, Victoria Tennant Terry Hoskins, Madolyn Smith Osborne (as Madolyn Smith) Peggy Schuyler
    Rating PG
    Release Date Fri 21 Sep 1984 UTC
    Director Carl Reiner
    Genres Comedy, Fantasy, Romance
    Plot A dying millionnaire has her soul transferred into a younger, willing woman. But something goes wrong, and she finds herself in her lawyer’s body – together with the lawyer.
    Poster All of Me
    Runtime 93
    Tagline The funniest movie since TOOTSIE [Australia Theatrical]
    Writers Edwin Davis (novel), Henry Olek (adaptation)
    Year 1984
  • Amadeus (1984)

    Amadeus (1984)

    140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

    Peter Shaffer brilliantly adapts his own play, Director Miloš Forman delivers a masterpiece. 30 years later still one of the best ever made.

    Amadeus

    Spoiler-free Movie Review of Amadeus:

    In 1984, after a summer of blockbusters and in the middle of an age obsessed with synthesizers, video games, computers, electronics and everything “new”, producer Saul Zaentz presented a two and a half hour movie about classical music composers that had been dead for almost two hundred years. That takes some nerve…

    It helps that the film in question would be based on a successful play and was being written for the screen by the playwright, Peter Shaffer. Amadeus would also be directed by Miloš Forman, an accomplished and challenging filmmaker both in his native country (the former Czechoslovakia) and throughout the world. It was still a big risk, however.

    Amadeus

    Zaentz’s gamble paid off big, bringing in well over twice its budget and winning 8 Oscars including Best Picture. More importantly it is a tremendous movie that plays exactly as well as it did 30 years ago today.

    The quality of the filmmakers is on display almost immediately, as the story opens with an aged Antonio Salieri (F. Murray Abraham in his greatest role) shouting his confession that he killed Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, begging for forgiveness as he cuts open his throat. What a grabber! You can practically hear those who were dragged to the movie theater whispering admiringly to their spouses, “Whoa! I thought this was going to be boring music and people in wigs?”

    Amadeus

    The premise of the play and film is at once wonderful writing and complete nonsense. Salieri did not kill Mozart, he did not suggest that he killed Mozart, no serious people think that he killed Mozart. According to scholars of the men, the two may have had some rivalry between them, but nothing suggests the level of disrespect or hatred shown here. They were both competing for work and the favor of Emperor Joseph II, but there is plenty of correspondence signifying that they were respectful colleagues. It is true that Mozart complained in his lifetime that Salieri was more at favor and trying to obstruct his career, but this seems to be mostly based on Mozart’s complaints against the Italians in general, and there are other letters from Mozart implying a friendship.

    What I didn’t realize before doing research for this review is that Shaffer’s play is actually based on a tragedy called Mozart and Salieri by Alexander Pushkin that was staged only six years after Salieri’s death. Rimsky-Korsakov would adapt it into an opera at the turn of the century. It was here that the apocryphal tale that Salieri, filled with jealousy at the musical superiority of an “idle” man, poisoned Mozart were first aired. So there were rumors, but none that were taken seriously. What we really have here is a clever writer taking a fascinating bit of history and fictionalizing it dramatically to make for an entertaining tale about genius and jealousy.

    Amadeus

    The story is set in 1823, when Salieri, recovering in an insane asylum from his suicide attempt, narrates his tale to a priest who has come for his confession. The film plays out over a number of years through flashbacks, but mainly focuses on the ten year period from 1781-91 in which Salieri and Mozart were colleagues in Vienna.

    The story is captivating, with whip-smart dialogue and a brilliant narrative that, along with Forman’s expert direction, leads to an engrossing picture whose pace is more engaging than a 153-minute movie has any right to be. The tale ebbs and flows and there’s a diversity of scenes and emotions that make the film always seem fresh and never long.

    Amadeus

    The acting, of course, is wonderful. Abraham delivers a best in show performance as Salieri, with a range of emotion and subtlety that is a perfect match with the complex score. Tom Hulce is charismatic and mesmerizing as Mozart, greatly humanizing such a legendary figure. Both were nominated for Best Actor and while Abraham justly was awarded the statue, I feel Hulce was robbed by not being classified as Supporting Actor.

    Amadeus

    Elizabeth Berridge put in a great performance as Mozart’s wife Constanze, though a lot of her work was left on the cutting room floor. (Restored with the 2002 Director’s Cut.) All of the supporting players are excellent, with Jeffrey Jones’ humorous turn as Emperor Joseph II standing out. Also exceptional is Simon Callow, who played Mozart in the original London production, as Emanuel Schikaneder, Mozart’s friend and author of the libretto for The Magic Flute.

    It’s a quality production in all respects. The score is predictably brilliant, the costumes, makeup and art direction are award-winning and it’s really just a gorgeous picture. Forman invited choreography legend Twyla Tharp to work her magic on the picture. They had previously collaborated on Hair & Ragtime.

    Amadeus

    Amadeus is a captivating story and an amazing film. Enjoy it often…

    Poster:

    Trailer:

    Bechdel Test:

    Fail

    The Representation Test Score: C (5 pts)

    (http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

    Amadeus Representation Test[schema type=”movie” name=”Amadeus” description=”The incredible story of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, told by his peer and secret rival Antonio Salieri – now confined to an insane asylum.” director=”Milos Forman” actor_1=”F. Murray Abraham” actor_2=”Tom Hulce” actor_3=”Elizabeth Berridge”]

    Main Cast F. Murray Abraham Antonio Salieri, Tom Hulce Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Elizabeth Berridge Constanze Mozart, Roy Dotrice Leopold Mozart
    Rating PG
    Release Date Wed 19 Sep 1984 UTC
    Director Milos Forman
    Genres Biography, Drama, Music
    Plot The incredible story of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, told by his peer and secret rival Antonio Salieri – now confined to an insane asylum.
    Poster Amadeus
    Runtime 160
    Tagline Amadeus. The man. The music. The magic. The madness. The murder. The mystery. The motion picture.
    Writers Peter Shaffer (original stage play), Peter Shaffer (original screenplay)
    Year 1984