Ludwig II

I don't know whether to give it a "7" or an "8" so I gave it the benefit of the doubt and scored it "8". VERY nice film, though somewhat longish, about a very artistic, but also paranoid ruler of the 19th century. The period settings seemed, to me anyway, authentic. For example, it shows the interior glass lamps of the 1860s burning to produced light; then showing how by the late 1880s these lamps being the electric lamps that we today are familiar with. Ludwig II was an early advocate of the use of electricity; which was a new technology in his day and age. Other settings are definitely authentic to that day and age, and it is interesting to see how people did things in the 19th century. Having said that; it is unfortunate that medical technology was not then near as advanced as today. Ludwig could certainly have been treated successfully for his paranoia with some drugs that we have today; but were not available then.

Helmet Burger is simply speaking, Ludwig. He very closely physically resembles the historical figure, and I have no doubt that his behavior does also. One gets the nagging impression that Helmut Berger was the reincarnation of Ludwig!! Romy Schneider reprized her role as Empress Elizabeth of Austria; at first with some trepidation then with tremendous enthusiasm. By the time filming ended she certainly felt that her portrayal as a more mature Sissy was the ideal role for her. In fact, the only picture of herself in costume that she displayed in her apartment was of the role she played in this movie.

The major problem with this movie, and the reason why this film was never popular in the United States, is that you have to know quite a lot of European 19th century history to really appreciate it. Until the advent of DVDs; which gave one the opportunity to play and replay this movie at will, and of on-line encyclopedias that allowed one to do some quick historical research- most of the movie was probably unfathomable to most Americans. Today, with the tools that I mentioned this movie can be appreciated by the average viewer. Watch out for the language problem in this movie; it is certainly a little disconcerting at first as this movie has German actors, in roles set in Germany, speaking not German, but rather Italian!

This long and lavish biopic of the mad Mittel European monarch is both Luchino Visconti's grandest and - oddly enough - his most intimate and personal film. Visconti's autobiography in all but name, it tells the story of a cultured aristocrat who ruins himself through an obsessive love of art, luxury and handsome young men. The film paints King Ludwig as a well-meaning but hapless victim of his grasping courtiers, artists and lovers. If Visconti himself was an arch-manipulator and a bit of a sadist, well...Ludwig is one of those films where life and art never do quite match up.

Most revealing is its portrayal of the aging king's obsession with a pretty but none-too-talented actor, Joseph Kainz. It is tempting to view their romance as a mirror of Visconti's own passion for the exquisite Helmut Berger, who - a twist within a twist - actually stars as King Ludwig in this film. In the roles he played without Visconti as his Svengali, Berger is barely competent. In Ludwig (as in The Damned) he gives a staggering performance, ranging from fresh-faced idealism to homoerotic heartbreak to bloated waste.

Shot just after the collapse of Visconti's long-cherished film of Proust, Ludwig is rich in characters who reflect (whether consciously or not) the gilded Belle Epoque monsters that haunt the pages of A La Recherche Du Temps Perdu. As the Empress Elisabeth of Austria, poor Ludwig's magnetic but manipulative cousin, Romy Schneider might just as well be playing the Duchesse de Guermantes. The opportunistic composer Richard Wagner (Trevor Howard) and his scheming wife Cosima (Silvana Mangano) stand in as the vulgar social-climbing Verdurins. The king himself is a kindred spirit of the Baron de Charlus - a doomed aesthete who refined tastes are at odds with his sordid love-life.

With its majestic cast and flawless photography and design, Ludwig has all the makings of a screen masterpiece. Alas, it falters badly in its last hour - which depicts the bourgeois conspiracy that topples Ludwig from his throne. Perhaps Visconti (who identified so closely with the mad monarch) could not face up to the waning of his own powers. He suffered a crippling stroke after finishing this film, and would never again attempt work on such a scale. Ludwig stands as a flawed testament - as a portrait of one enigma by another.

>

In this last part of his German trilogy, Visconti delves the most into the human psyche, and in particular it's contradictory forces within. On one hand the self-destructive urge for physical pleasure, on the other the spiritual search for the sublime. The Dionysean and the Apollonian. Body and soul.

Ludwig II, aka the "mad" king of Bavaria, is dragged to the limits by these two opposite forces. Losing focus on a vulgar reality, he surrenders to sexual perversion and yet also to a search for artistic purity, eventually leading him to madness, and finally to death. Trying in vein to find the sublime and eternal kingdom of the literary heroes he craves for, his behavior becomes more and more erratic until he is violently dethroned (a recurring theme in Visconti's work: the fall of aristocracy and the rise of bourgeois democracy).

Visconti directs this paradox with a highly elegant style, influenced by the romanticism of painters like Caspar David Friedrich and Frederic Edwin Church. The movie reaches a climax at around the third hour, when Ludwig and his protégé Joseph Kainz travel together through the endless frozen night, so that Ludwig shows Kainz his "real kingdom, the mountains under the moonlight, a world for ourselves, pure and uncontaminated". "Think about your soul, not about your body" Ludwig tells him. This a last hurrah. After Kainz's rejection, Ludwig declines further in decay and resignation.

The events depicting the conspiracy that dethrones him are grotesquely-staged and almost out of sync, emphasizing Ludwig's confusion and ill mental-state. Knowing his downfall is near, he confesses to one of the staff how he believes in the immortality of the soul and God's justice. "I've read many things about materialism", he says, "but it will never satisfy a man, cause he doesn't want to be put in the same level as beasts". That's a rare confession for Visconti.

After he is captured, the film once again alters in style, to a kind of austere chamber-cinema with a funereal feel. Near the end (and his death), Ludwig says to psychiatrist professor Gudden: "There is nothing more beautiful and fascinating than the night. They say the cult of the night, of the moon, is a maternal cult. The cult of sun, of daytime, is a masculine myth, therefore paternal. However the mystery, the greatness of night, for me lie in the infinite sublime kingdom of the heroes, which is also the kingdom of reason. Poor Dr. Gudden, you are forced to study me from dawn to dusk and from dusk to dawn. But I am an enigma, and I want to be an enigma forever, for the world and for myself".

Just like man. Sublime.

For many many years I wanted to see this movie, a film you never get to see on TV or at a Visconti retrospective at the NFT or one of the Curzon cinemas here in London. Perhaps it is so because this film has been so much underrated by critics and public that it drags far behind the director's most famous and praised works (The Leopard, Rocco, La Terra Trema, etc).

I read in a biography of the director that "Ludwig" was a mammoth project that took four production companies from different countries to put up the budget, it obsessed and consumed Visconti to the the extent of almost killing him when he suffered a stroke as a result of long working hours and too much mental strain, went well over schedule and budget and finally was taken away from the author's hands by the producers and butchered and re-edited in order to make it shorter, simpler and more viably commercial. The result was a mess almost half of the length of the original and with a lot of key scenes missing, presenting an inconsistent story full of plot holes and with characters appearing now and then from nowhere. It took several years after Visconti's death for his usual collaborators (d'Amico, Nanuzzi) to gather the missing sequences and re-edit the film into a cut as close to Visconti's idea as it could be. The result is a a DVD edition of 228 minutes. This movie, visually speaking, is with "Death in Venice" probably Visconti's most beautiful,lavish and rich in colours and small details. As to the story, I agree with other viewers on the fact that it is a bit too overlong and it drags at places and some sequences could have been shorter without the plot missing anything. But then it seems like Visconti deliberately wanted to give it that sedate pacing in order to suit the dreamlike mental state of the protagonist during his reclusion in his castles and his lapses into his own fantasy world. In order to understand better Ludwig's personality I read one of his many biographies after watching the movie for the first time, and then I watched it again, and I could appreciate better Visconti's approach to the character. I think this is a movie worth of its director, and even with its flaws and extreme length it deserves better criticism and appreciation than it unfairly got since it first came out in 1972.

Helmut Berger is quite good here and has a remarkable resemblance to the real Ludwig, Romy Schneider is as beautiful as ever and the real Bavarian locations are breathtaking. The night sequence with Ludwig and Elizabeth riding in the snowy forest in the moonlight is one of the most beautiful and romantic I have ever seen in film. The cinematography alone makes "Ludwig" worth watching if you like beautiful things.

Hopefully this movie has gained some appreciation and seems to be getting better reviews nowadays that it did in the past. Many call it Visconti's lost masterpiece. Although I don't think it is one of his greatest works thematically speaking, it surely stands among the most beautiful and lyrical and it is one of my favourite choices for a long winter evening.

I loved it. The historical story is phenomenal of course, but its treatment by Visconti is not banal either. I just saw the restored version (I am speaking of the 4-hours long version in Italian (subtitled in English) in a movie theater recently on a big screen, and that kind of total immersion in the world of "mad" king Ludwig gives you empathy with this notoriously elusive character, as bizarre as his behavior might have appeared to his contemporaries, and a sensual feel for the era. I am still swooning over the lush art direction, astounding costumes, plethora of decorative details - and it certainly does not hurt that the film crew used the real Bavarian locations of Ludwig's life. Gorgeous Romy Schneider's as Empress Elizabeth of Austria steals the screen from Helmut Berger on her few appearances, but , oh boy, all the actors do a great job, and by the end of movie, this entire cast of strong and weak characters becomes as familiar to the viewer as... your own family.