Ludwig ou le crépuscule des dieux

First released in 1972,with a running time of three hours,the movie was a colossal flop and it was sold by auction.It was the eighties before it was re-released as TV series,with a lot of added scenes :the running time was nearing four hours and the restored scenes gave the movie more substance.Now the film is often broadcast as a whole but its length and its very slow pace might repel some people.

It should not be missed though;it is one of Visconti's peaks,and probably the most underrated .In "la caduta dei degli"(1969),history was on the stage ,with the rise of the Nazis:the hero,Martin,(also played by Helmut Berger),was some kind of puppet in the hands of his mother and the Hitlerians.In "Ludwig",he stands alone,it's really the story of a solitary man,trying to establish a lasting relationship with one human being:first, Sophie,Sissy's sister :but it was not to succeed because he treated her like a Wagnerian heroin,or a Sissy ersatz .Sissy (Elisabeth,Empress of Austria)was not fooled:"do you want me to be your impossible love? " she says;of course she knew Ludwig was an invert.Wagner made use of Ludwig because he helped his career,but there was no friendship from him.Ludwig had to content himself with his (male) lovers he used to pick up everywhere around.

As the movie progresses,Ludwig is more and more alone,and his megalomania knows no bound.He makes up for his sad destiny with his extravagant castles,but politically he was still aware.He first refused to raise troops during the 1870 war and reluctantly did because of the Prussian' s pression;that might be the reason why,when you come to Bavaria today,the people there do not accept the fact Ludwig ended his life as an insane.

Helmut Berger was to make another movie with Visconti(gruppo di famiglia in un interno,1975),then his career quickly waned after Visconti's death;it was really too bad,because he had shown he could be an impressive actor.Romy Schneider portrayed Sissy for the fourth time(after the famous mushy trilogy "Sissi" "Sissi die junge Kaiserin" "Sissi ,Schicksal einer Kaiserin",which Schneider hated,),but this time in a historically accurate way.She acted as though she had got a score to settle with this character.(hear her lines about her husband and her family:it's a far cry from the Ernst Marischka's trilogy)

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.

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.

As a deeply interest on European's history, I'd already knew about this mad king of the Bavaria a long time ago, Ludwig just came at my hands this years and was too long, then I had decided spent the last friday night watching this restored Visconti's masterpiece, what a great movie indeed, but the cut off version stayed lame and was a flop at release time, assembled again it's was the closest that they could get as early Visconti's concept, the king Ludwig was presented as a lunatic man for arts, sponsored the financial excesses of Richard Wagner, and drained the already rundown Bavaria's treasury on those useless Castles which he dares to build in exchange of the penury of his people, also Visconti alludes the decaying process of a King who wasn't linked with reality at all, he living in a parallel world as screened, plus Visconti was visionary when cast Helmut Berger whose had an extremely sameness with the real Ludwig, what a lucky, just mourns a small appearance of Sissi (Romy Schneider) on the plot for obvious reasons, furthermore exposes the odd Ludwig's weakness as his shy behavior and how he handles with your latent homosexuality as well, the history as a whole teach us that the ordinary statesmen rarely go down in history, instead those mad rulers that through their wacky minds were often recalled, aside be too long more than four hours the picture doesn't tired me, due so valuable asset to understand the German merger and how it really did happens, it gave me priceless clues for whom Germany deserves his unification, apart the Ludwig the mad the movie brings to light the German's history!!

Resume:

First watch: 2020 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 9

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.

>