National Theatre Live: Amadeus

When I first saw the painted set of the ball room, with its incredible perspective, framed by a classic theatre's stripped proscenium arch, I marvelled in the possibility of intertwining elements of 18th century Italian opera, in which the play's story revolves around, with more modern elements. Nevertheless, this idea is never fully explored. Even if the point was to show the difference between the royal court and its composer's restrictive view of things and the outlandish personality of the titular character, being this initial set as a figure of the first, there could have been a greater use of such a strong device.

This is not to say that there aren't some interesting ideas in the staging, following this initial idea. Like the literal deconstruction of classic elements, with the pillars used loose from their context, in a reinterpretation of the classic in conjunction with the modern. Where even people and the orchestra are themselves part of the scenery, static and yet minimally changeable, like living wax figures, there to express the world that Salieri intends immutable, according to his divine plans, but which is gradually transformed with the presence of Wolfgang's music.

But the worst felony comes in the play's filming, in this case inherently relevant to its enjoyment as such. There are clear interesting moments, such as when Salieri reads Wolfgang's music pieces and the director intelligently frames the performance of those behind the first composer, as the tormenting of the rival's genius upon him. But otherwise, it is almost as the director himself didn't know how to approach the filming of the play, although so many elements seem obvious as apparent framing devices.

With such a strong element in that initial set, what could have been used to create striking filmed perspectives, enhanced by a particular camera position, instead gives way to cut frames without a clear intent. And, for example, when in the middle of a scene, Salieri is focused with a spotlight, while exposing his inner thoughts to the audience, the camera is unable to emphasise this in the remaining scene, instead choosing the simplest and most uninspired way, through close-ups on the actor.

Fortunately, this is overall more prominent in the first act, and generally saved by the lead performance that captivates you from start to finish. And so, these missteps never entirely take you from the experience.

1984's 'Amadeus', an adaptation of Peter Schaffer's play (a great one and the historical inaccuracies never bothered me), is one of my all-time favourite films (top 10 actually). Wonderfully made with amazing music and one of my favourite best actor performances (F Murray Abraham) ever. Also get a lot of pleasure out of the National Theatre Live productions, not just of Shakespeare but also Arthur Miller, Tennessee Williams and various film to stage productions, and make a real effort to see as many as possible and miss very little.

A production of the stage play, this 2017 production of 'Amadeus' is very good and often excellent, with it even being epic theatre at its best. Do prefer the film personally though, though being more familiar with that may have something to do with it, and have seen better National Theatre Live productions. So there was a slight air of disappointment, but that is in comparison and not knocking the very high quality of the production.

The production looks great, especially with the very meaning of lavish costumes. Not just the rich colours but also the immaculate attention to detail. The photography allows the viewer to feel the full impact of the spectacle while not being chaotic that it becomes dizzying. Can find nothing to fault the music, then again it is Mozart, one of the few composers out there who never wrote a bad note. It is beautifully performed by the orchestra and singers and is lovingly conducted, absolutely loved the use and integration of them and their interaction, would go as far to say that was a masterstroke touch.

How the orchestra and singers were used provided a lot of tension and entertainment value, heightening Salieri's envy. The spectacle looks beautiful and proves to be more than striking images, managing too to not over-shadow the drama. The emotion is not lost in any way and Michael Longhurst has a long to thank for this. The supporting cast are all strong, particularly from Geoffrey Beavers and Tom Edden. As Constanze Karla Crome is a marked improvement over Elizabeth Berridge in the film. The tremendously powerful Salieri of Lucian Msamati dominates, rightly too as Salieri is the most interesting character and the most complex.

Did find myself though less sold on Adam Gillen as Mozart. For my tastes he overdid and over-emphasised the immature/humorous aspect of Mozart, and the way he did it was like a Marx Brother in the modern day, it got in the way of the emotional depth. One would not get the sense that he was a complex man. His chemistry with the cast and Msamati was done right though.

Otherwise, albeit it was somewhat of a big drawback, a very good production. 8/10

The character of Mozart in 'Amadeus" is one that cries out for a skilled and seasoned actor of nuance, verve, humanity, and layers.

Especially after we've had the award-winning performance of Tom Hulce in the movie, immortalized on film for all time.

With the enormous stable of British talent available, why the National Theatre chose Adam Gillen, and why he was allowed to present a cringe-worthy performance that is like fingernails on a chalkboard, is baffling to me.

Especially when we know actors like Andrew Scott could have done an infinitely better job -- a stellar job, in fact.

I found Adam Gillen's performance unendurable, and had to turn the YouTube video of this off. This is unfortunate, because I really wanted to see how the play differs from the film.