Interlude in Prague

This movie is a nuanced presentation of how toxic masculinity affected women in the 1700s. While ostensibly about Mozart and a performance of the marriage of Figaro in Prague, the movie provides a speculative fiction of how Mozart came to compose Don Giovanni, based on "real life" occurrences. We are presented with a highly credible representation of an abusive, powerful man who exploits women of all backgrounds with impunity. Although the theme is tragic, the celebration of the era's lifestyles and the magnificent music sugarcoat the grim message. Beautifully photographed with B role of historic Prague to enjoy, fine acting performances, and gorgeous costumes, it is suitable for 14+ audiences and serves as an important warning to girls and young women today.

An interesting tale set at the time Mozart conducts The Marriage of Figaro in Prague, in 1786. In the opera, the count is determined to seduce the countess' maid, Susanna who is betrothed to Figaro, who works for the count. This opera was somewhat revolutionary in that it held up the count to scorn and ridicule. Aneurin Barnard was a delightful Mozart, as was Morfydd Clarke as the beautiful soprano to sing Cherubino on the new opera, Don Giovanni. However, Adrian Edmondson was excellent as Herr Lubach, but Dervla Kirwan just grated as his wife. The wonderful irony was seeing the angry and grief-stricken Mozart channeling his anger towards the baron in getting revenge. Lots of beautiful music, and period costumes.

Really enjoyed this based on relatively unknown period in Mozart's life when he had an affair and was writing Don Giovanni. Beautifully directed, lovely music as you'd expect, and lots of insight into Mozart though the gripping story..

Positive aspects: the settings in the style of 18th century, the costumes, the music of Mozart

but regrettably there are too much negative aspects in it: the script could be better - and no, it´s not based on facts as another review claimed: it's a fantasy story with fantasy persons, Mozart never met a Baron with name Saloka or a woman Suzuzana Lubtak, the story is completely fiction...lame fiction...only Josepha Duschek existed really. Besides that, most of the persons are wearing permanently wigs but those were already dated during this time period (1788)...moreover Mozart never visited Prague in this year (longer stays 1787,1791) and the film music in modern style between Mozarts music sucks really...it ruins the last oddment of authentic atmosphere in this movie. Don´t know what the filmmakers thought whilst deciding for this unsuitably music. Why don´t they use Mozarts music for all the scenes (they can choose from thousands of movements)

My title does not say that it is an accurate reconstruction, and it probably does not set out to be, as just how much is known of the events of October 1787 might be up for debate. That the overture was a last minute composition is apparently true, as is the fact that the Duscheks were prominent in Prague's operatic world, but I expect that much of the rest was a rich blend of fantasy and artistic licence. However, the location choice of the Estates Theatre, the genuine venue of the opera's premiere, was a terrific touch.

Seeing Cilla Black's hubby pop up as Mozart was a surprise, but he did a far better and more credible job than.the clown-like Tom Hulce in 'Amadeus' some 33 years earlier. And having a real life Don Giovanni imposing his attentions on the women of the city was an interesting twist as a suggestion of Mozart's inspiration for the story, especially with a servant named Laporel, so similar to the opera's Leporello.

But the truth is that Mozart only arrived in the city 11 days prior to the planned premiere, so by that point he must have already composed just about everything, if not the overture. That premiere was postponed by two weeks, but apparently only for organisational reasons.

I have seen Don Giovanni countless times over the last 60 years or so, and that made it intriguing viewing for me. However the shooting was way too dark - yes, I know they only had candles and oil lamps in 1787, but as an audience we need to be able to see the faces and have a clear grasp of what is going on. And the dialogue was at times so mumbled that I would have liked subtitles. So in conclusion, 7/10 is a fair score.