Ludwig II: Glanz und Ende eines Königs

Helmut Kautner's biopic of the famous king was dwarfed by Visconti's four-hour mammoth magnum opus (1972).It did not deserve to fall into oblivion though.Of course people will complain because the writers passed over in silence the fact that this king was gay.In 1954,what else could they do? When they filmed Tchekovsky's life,they did the same.

Some people will say that Helmut Kautner took the easy way out : he made Ludwig's so called impossible love for Sissi the reason why he did not marry.Visconti's Elizabeth was not fooled when she ironically asked her cousin:"you want me to be your impossible love?" And however,I like this film: there are beautiful romantic scenes between OW Fisher and Ruth Leuwerick: "look at those clouds up above,they seem very near from each other but they are actually faraway"or "down there ,it's eternity" .The pacifist side of the king is highlighted,which made him a man ahead of his time ;what could such a man do in the company of such wolves as Bismarck and the other politicians of the era.Klaus Kinski -nowadays the most famous actor of the movie- appears as Otto and he makes each of his three scenes count: particularly impressive is that scene when he feels the first effects of the madness: Visconti's Otto is rather bland by comparison.

But the reason why you should give this movie a chance is its cinematography:the colors are splendid indeed ,sometimes luminous when Sissy urges Ludgwig to remain pure ,sometimes dark under an ominous sky when the king's megalomania knows no bound anymore.Dig that scene where the king and Sissy's sister Sophie are all alone in an opera theater and the girls breaks down crying "I cannot stand that anymore".Wagner's music enhances all the film and Visconti's and Kautner's treatments are not that much different as far as the musician is concerned.

At about the same Time,Ernst Marischka began his Sissy saga.

I saw this film over a decade ago and remember being stunned by its beauty and quality. I have seldom been so impressed. I wish I could see it again to confirm this impression. This is the real Ludwig movie, not the Visconti version. I find it sad that so much quality work is forgotten.

June 1886, Munich...a new life in freedom has begun for a unique man...the streets of the city see mournful processions; flags, trumpets and bells proclaim the tragic death of the Bavarian king. The impressions among the audience are diverse...their dilemmas touch us: was he a great man 'too good for his times' or merely an eccentric not capable of ruling? A rose placed on his coffin by a beloved soul seems to whisper the story bringing us through a wonderful flashback to the heyday when everyone was so young, so joyful, so musical and the dream that night would shine one day seemed so promising...

The figure of Ludwig II together with his elaborate castles built in Bavaria is mostly associated with Luchino Visconti's 1972 masterpiece. And deservedly so because maestro's film develops the psyche of the 'fairy tale' king together with his motives for weird isolations and discoveries of his own sexuality. Thanks to its length, the use of details, music, contrasting images of white vs. black, of snow vs. darkness and the entire development of the mental states, Visconti's film remains unique and stays away from the traditional view of a feature film. Yet, fewer people know that a long time before 1972, this wondrous German film had been made, the film that still leaves a visual impression in the viewer. Although Kaeutner's film is made in the spirit of the post-war 'Heimatfilms,' the result has little to do with the saccharine sweetness that has, often undeservedly, been 'baptized' as 'kitsch.' This film still proves a certain variety of reasons why it is highly worth viewing.

The aspect that touches us most are the exquisite images, camera shots that leave more sensitive viewers breathless. Valuable cinematography by Douglas Slocombe and elaborate sets of authentic castles where the events actually took place, lavish wardrobe and bright colors make the film a visual feast. That aesthetic merit of the film is also beautifully executed in many romantic scenes that depict Ludwig's spirituality. There is also an excellent use of juxtaposing images that clearly portray the reality vs. fantasy - an aspect that played a decisive role in the king's life.

That aesthetic merit leads to the key quality of any movie...performances. O.W. Fischer, a renowned German actor of the time, does a terrific job combining a sympathetic personality with the eccentric mind, enthusiasm with isolation, link of an artist with the separation of the character. He appears to be at two levels here: as being himself, on his own and as a reflection of the love of his life - Empress Elizabeth widely known to viewers as Sissi (Ruth Leuwerik). To understand him, we are led to understand Sissi - from the very beginning, we are supplied with this perspective: two similar loving souls.

In their scenes, Ludwig's thoughts are manifested and Ludwig's feelings are conveyed. A must see is the scene at Schloss Berg, a very romantic one when they are together, their thoughts are mutual, their desires are similar and the two clouds in the sky occur to 'seal' their common mutual existence 'in Gedanken, in den Wolken' (in thoughts, in clouds). Another very symbolic scene is at the theater when they hold their hands. Of course, the performance of Ms Leuwerik is not comparable to Romy Schneider's portrayals of Sissi, but, actually, the actress offers us a very intelligent glimpse of the character - 'Kaiserin' as seen by Ludwig: through his perceptions, his dreams.

Mr Fischer as Ludwig alone gives an insightful performance. He is a man like hardly any man, a king like hardly any king who has no time for war...he wants to be alone...he loves nature...he adores beauty and art...he has his world, his passions and his idol (Richard Wagner portrayed by Paul Bildt). He is moody...he desires silence but, above all, he desires ULTIMATE FREEDOM. Insightful and psychologically claustrophobic as it may seem, the portrayal has certain limits, which makes watching the film a pleasure because the thoughts do not become too intense. We empathize with the king, we do our best to understand him and recognize something of ourselves in him. Helmut Kautner and O.W. Fischer seem to impose that limit not to make the portrayal unendurable. Another reason is the fact that difficult films were not so popular those days when the depressing images of WWII were still fresh in people.

Among the supporting cast, the actress that is a lovely discovery for me is Marianne Koch as Princess Sophie. Her portrayal shines with special charm, she is lovely as a young woman who loves Ludwig, who wants to marry him...yet, her mother's warning about true happiness in their family gives a new, unexpected standard. The turning point is the moment when she enters the theater with Ludwig and...they are alone...no audience whatsoever! The mesmerizing power that Ludwig captures while listening to Wagner's "Rheingold" occurs to be unendurable for the young princess. The music is so enchanting, so mysterious, so magical, such a blissful moment that seems to touch the very depths of human soul...yet, she cannot stand it. How memorably you can read the intense emotions from her face...tragic desire with tremendous fear. A lovely German actress whom I discovered so late thanks to my best friend.

Finally, a mention must be made of Wagner's music. Since the music had a lasting impact on the king throughout his life, we are supplied with the bits of these specific tunes that seem to touch us, overwhelm us, influence us...

13 June 1886...a new way began for the fairy tale king. No matter if we see it as an act of despair or a dream of utopia...he was a thought provoking figure. This movie is no masterpiece but an important German tribute to the unique personality. A pleasant, enjoyable aesthetic production.

The rather trite and witless script about the life of Ludwig II. of Bavaria, first cousin of the ill-fated Elisabeth von Oesterreich, better known as Sissi, is told by the usual talented Helmut Kaeutner in a wooden and uninspiring way.

Chief problem is O.W. Fischer, fresh after a string of hits, mostly opposite Maria Schell, who to some degree, believed to be the reincarnation of the legendary king himself. His performance is way over the top, to say at least, lacking any depth or even minimal understanding.

The pic's only saving grace is Ruth Leuwerik, again dressed in period costumes and hoop-skirts and looking lovely, as the tormented and doomed Sissi. Leuwerik's regal beauty and patrician manners fit the character like a glove and she steals each scene she's in with her subtle and perfectly nuanced performance. Her sleepy but alert eyes are always saying things not written in the script.

Compare Ruth's tender performance to the sugary confection of the 'Sissi' trilogy or Romy Schneider's later over-nervous and hysterical effort in Visconti's visually stunning but equally empty version some decades later and you see a great, much underrated actress of highest order.

There is a generation divide, as always with cinema, and it is obvious with regards the Visconti's film and the earliest Käutner's version. In the modern times, when it is commercially fashionable to insist on the more prurient aspects of one's biography and when crude obscenity has replaced suggestiveness, it is quite understandable that younger generations should far prefer the eroticism and nauseating aestheticism of Visconti. As a man in his seventies, I must say I was deeply moved by the Ludwig portrayed by Käutner. The camera-work is excellent, the Wagnerian musical background sublime and the rendering of the end of the King quite gripping. It is a great injustice to compare this film with the Sissi series.