Customer Reviews

Tony Palmer's Film About The Salzburg Festival

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This very long(193 minutes) movie covers the entire history and politics of the Salzburg Festival(and to a lessor extent, the history of Austria, itself). It covers in great detail the war years involving the Nazi occupation and the influence of anti-Semitism and the Holocaust on the conduct of the festival then and since, and the efforts to reverse the mistakes that had been made as a result. There are many interviews and clips of the performances that have taken place throughout its history. A great deal of time is spent showing and discussing the enormous influence and investment made by Herbert von Karajan, both architectually and artistically, to the festival. Many other contributors are also covered, some quite controversial. Toward the end of the movie, the future plans and aesthetic direction of the festival is dealt with in interviews with those currently at the helm. Those interviewed include politicians, administrators, and performers, both retired and active, so if you are expecting a movie that deals mostly with performance, you will be disappointed. I was somewhat suprised by the emphasis on politics chosen by Mr. Palmer, but was pleased with the overall product.

Another superb film by this master, and first rate in every way. Palmer spends ample time on the war years, with valuable contributions from artists, patrons, and bundles of magnificent footage, among which is auspicious footage of the building of the Grosse Festspielhaus, after Karajan forced the Salzburg government to cut loose with the funds to achieve a hall large enough for the big works. The film naturally converges on Karajan's incontestable influence on the Festival, and presents a wonderful, multi-faceted look at the courageous and controversial conductor. Some of the comments from various historians I found to be off the mark, especially one who snidely insists that Karajan was simply a Nazi. Well... that is hardly a viewpoint able to stand on its own, as a reality unto itself and separate from many contributing factors. Bohm and Furtwangler are not treated in the same way by historians, though the three conductors are generally understood to have suffered in the same way throughout the Nazi period. But Palmer should be lauded for his completeness in surveying Karajan. Christa Ludwig's remarks are funny and pungent throughout, as might be expected from this great singer. I'm always struck by the remarks of viewers who criticize films like this because they are not simply films of performances. Ignore that kind of criticism. Tony Palmer goes deep with every effort he makes, and I think this examination of one of the great music festivals in the world is one of his finest films. The length of the film is but one indicator of the depth of his presentation. It's refreshing to watch something not expected to be fathomed and disposed of in 60 minutes. If you want to really understand the Salzburg Festival, this film is the perfect place to start. Unqualified recommendation.

Having visited the Salzburg Festival for the past 20 years, I'm pleased to recommend this DVD.
Although, the festival management have openly denounced the movie as inaccurate and misguided, etc., it is an excellent account of the political and artistic history of the most famous music festival in the world.

It is not easy to find even handed commentary on subjects such as Furtwangler and von Karajan. This DVD presents both men in a new light that is much more understanding and less judgmental. The viewer is allowed to draw his or her own conclusions. This is not to say that the NAZI legacy in Salzburg has been understated, quite the contrary.

Directors and retired singers are allowed to state their views on regietheater productions in a constructive way.

A very thoughtful summary of the festival, and where it might be headed.

This DVD is an excellent retrospective documentary on the Salzburg Festival with comment on and, moving to current times, from and about the major personalities who had originally shaped the festival and down through the present day and those so involved today.

As is known, there has been controversy regarding Tony Palmer's documentary and it's hardly any secret of the festival and various personalities of that era continuing their service to same during the Hitler era. In effect, various and sundry 'separating' the idea of Art from that of politics. This does not seem to sit well with Michael P. Steinberg who labels von Karajan as a "Nazi and true believer" [sic] but my problem with the Nazi labeling thing [and essentially, to hear some say it, including 'all' others so involved during the Hitler era] is that the labeler has the distinct benefit of 100% hindsight of duly knowing and in great detail all that was to come and hence freezing a frame of virtually anyone standing near a swastika from 1933 onward [and to the end of the war and the Nazi regime] but then applying what was 'later' learned 'after' 1945, and the KZ horrors and Holocaust therein, well, I'm not so sure that sweeping indictments can or should be made as if to suggest that "then", 1933 onward and even before the '39 Poland invasion, "they should have known better" or "why didn't they just walk away or leave" and if 'they' did 'not' walk away, ahhh, de facto "Schuld" ['guilt'] by association.

Steinberg also comments that the Austrian plebesite after-the-fact was "97% approval" [sic] and thus other comments of a "German invasion" [sic] by Austrians and per Steinberg becomes wholly negated with the suggestion that "they wanted it .. they welcomed it" or, put another way, what 'invasion' ! It's definitely a documentary with the bark on or warts if you prefer and there are some who are prepared to write-off Richard Strauss himself for accepting the Arts post he did during the NSDAP era and it's left to his great-grand daughter [a very attractive lady] to 'explain' which she attributes to his "ego" and in fact total separation of "art from politics." Böhm touches on that point too with regard to his father. Or Furtwängler's widow. Others, it will be noted, seem to be at great pains to 'quickly' mention during their interview that they were just children at the time of the war.

There is also documentary comment on the latter period of the Salzburg Festival and the 'modernization' [!?] of certain classic pieces a la Peter Sellars, et al, with latter day "updated" [!?] Don Giovanni's [Mozart] doing drugs [!] or "Jedermann" suddenly moving centuries ahead and now driving a Ferrari or assorted, IMO, tradition be damned kind of thing and the apparent need for change albeit 'only' for the 'sake' of change as if to say modern is decidedly and allegedly better and folks can 'relate' better to modern times by upping the classics in terms of their original era and setting, as it were, to modern times and scenarios. I disagree!

Personally, I'm not a subscriber to "updating" the classics nor tinkering with the original works of others where some of these "updates" and "tinkerings" have been embarrassing fiascoes where tradition is not 'modified' but literally trampled upon and run into the ground in toto in a sort of can-you-top-this 'presentation' where the outrageous passes for alleged art! Yes, I know, to each his/her own ... but mercifully so! I personally believe tradition has its place and does NOT become "stale" due to its 'age' and thus, goes the Sellars [et al] philosophy, in need of "reviving" when in fact each cast of a great classic play or opera or, since I play classical piano, each interpreter, brings to the piece a different approach, and granted forthwith, but fundamentally 'adheres' to the vision of the composer without 'modifying' same to the point of gross absurdity nor causing it to become virtually unrecognizable in its allegedly 'revived' or 'updated' form. But then, I've been called "an incurable romantic ... stuck in time" although my defense to that is time itself being the measure of the worth of the great classic masterpieces and concurrent classical era [generic wise] traditions that should be both retained ... and defended.

Doc Tony