My second Charles Vidor biopic in what could be called the Classical Cinematic Universe: Franz Liszt plays a supporting role in the earlier made Chopin biopic "A Song to Remember" and here Chopin and his mistress George Sand get a prominent scene in the story of Franz Liszt. There's a reboot of this universe waiting to happen if only more people cared about 19th century composers.
What the movie is, which will polarize viewers, is a thorough opportunity to experience music by great composers as they might in the mid-1800s. No less than 40 musical interludes occur, and unlike today's music biopics, these are not small moments, they nearly all play uninterrupted! This makes for a bloated runtime well over 2 hours, but a rare immersive opportunity to sit and listen to an actor portraying a master performer/composer as a recreation of their era. Read the reviews on IMDb and you'll see viewers either hate this or love this depending on their passion for the music itself. And the movie feels to be 70% concerts, which makes an inevitably weary experience that sacrifices a more deft plot.
Peculiarly, the movie features startlingly low percentage music by Liszt himself. It is a well done plot point that Liszt was a champion of his peers, and helped Chopin, Wagner, and others reach fame they wouldn't have without a master performer like Liszt showcasing their work. But this is intentional to the story. The finest example is a scene where Liszt is playing Chopin on the piano in the background, while Chopin's lover and Liszt's lover discuss their merits as composers vs. performers in the front of the scene. Cinematic subtext to perfection. The Liszt inner debate of whether he was a superior composer or performer is a major plot point. I love these components of the plot, for they shed light on who Liszt was in a way that a Wikipedia article never could. And yet, they're overshadowed by the main draw.
The main story is about Liszt's multiple lovers and the challenging decisions that come with this. It's 1960, so discussion of love, sex, and marriage is very reserved. Only 15 years later, Lisztomania has Roger Daltery playing Liszt as a sex-fueled rocker; this one makes his romances a true conflict of faith. It's great material, but definitely dated in its more calm approach.
Director Charles Vidor died early into production, and was replaced by legendary director George Cukor, who it appears was determined to stay within Vidor's vision of a music biography. The result is something slightly authorless: it's a grand period epic, with little outstanding choices, give or a take a few cool shots. If this were released today, it would get roasted for being thin on story and heavy on music sequences without enough subtext behind them.
The film is shot in Cinemascope but the DVD version I have is shoddy at best. This is a perfect example of an old movie that may get forgotten by time and will not get the 4K restoration reserved for classics such as Gone With the Wind, or Criterion essentials of the highest caliber. Makes you wonder what movies will disappear in time. Had I not been studying the work of Chopin & Liszt, I would have never watched this, especially given it wasn't well reviewed to begin with. And yet, despite its flaws, there is plenty to glean from it, mostly for classical piano buffs, but perhaps for others as well.
(Side note: I do wish I could access a list of all the names of the pieces, they don't always make an effort to tell you what is what. It isn't mentioned in the film, though I learned in my own research, that Liszt's championing of Beethoven, the equivalent of a celebrity endorsing an under-appreciated artist today, is what has elevated Beethoven to superstardom. That could be a movie in of itself)
What the movie is, which will polarize viewers, is a thorough opportunity to experience music by great composers as they might in the mid-1800s. No less than 40 musical interludes occur, and unlike today's music biopics, these are not small moments, they nearly all play uninterrupted! This makes for a bloated runtime well over 2 hours, but a rare immersive opportunity to sit and listen to an actor portraying a master performer/composer as a recreation of their era. Read the reviews on IMDb and you'll see viewers either hate this or love this depending on their passion for the music itself. And the movie feels to be 70% concerts, which makes an inevitably weary experience that sacrifices a more deft plot.
Peculiarly, the movie features startlingly low percentage music by Liszt himself. It is a well done plot point that Liszt was a champion of his peers, and helped Chopin, Wagner, and others reach fame they wouldn't have without a master performer like Liszt showcasing their work. But this is intentional to the story. The finest example is a scene where Liszt is playing Chopin on the piano in the background, while Chopin's lover and Liszt's lover discuss their merits as composers vs. performers in the front of the scene. Cinematic subtext to perfection. The Liszt inner debate of whether he was a superior composer or performer is a major plot point. I love these components of the plot, for they shed light on who Liszt was in a way that a Wikipedia article never could. And yet, they're overshadowed by the main draw.
The main story is about Liszt's multiple lovers and the challenging decisions that come with this. It's 1960, so discussion of love, sex, and marriage is very reserved. Only 15 years later, Lisztomania has Roger Daltery playing Liszt as a sex-fueled rocker; this one makes his romances a true conflict of faith. It's great material, but definitely dated in its more calm approach.
Director Charles Vidor died early into production, and was replaced by legendary director George Cukor, who it appears was determined to stay within Vidor's vision of a music biography. The result is something slightly authorless: it's a grand period epic, with little outstanding choices, give or a take a few cool shots. If this were released today, it would get roasted for being thin on story and heavy on music sequences without enough subtext behind them.
The film is shot in Cinemascope but the DVD version I have is shoddy at best. This is a perfect example of an old movie that may get forgotten by time and will not get the 4K restoration reserved for classics such as Gone With the Wind, or Criterion essentials of the highest caliber. Makes you wonder what movies will disappear in time. Had I not been studying the work of Chopin & Liszt, I would have never watched this, especially given it wasn't well reviewed to begin with. And yet, despite its flaws, there is plenty to glean from it, mostly for classical piano buffs, but perhaps for others as well.
(Side note: I do wish I could access a list of all the names of the pieces, they don't always make an effort to tell you what is what. It isn't mentioned in the film, though I learned in my own research, that Liszt's championing of Beethoven, the equivalent of a celebrity endorsing an under-appreciated artist today, is what has elevated Beethoven to superstardom. That could be a movie in of itself)