This film could have been great, based on its rather accurate facts and atmosphere, but at a second and deeper look it seems a hidden failure to me. Let me try to explain that, as I flatter myself to be knowing Beethoven's oeuvre rather well. First, from a musical and historical point of view, besides the smaller, yet passable inaccuracies or doubtful things (the orchestra was smaller, Lobkowitz may have had more guests attending to the new symphony, Haydn may not have been that 'intellectually' expressing himself and not even present, etc), the main flaw is that a new composition very rarely makes its full impact already at its premiere. The various reactions of the audience look oddly exaggerated, even though people attending concerts in that era and especially in Vienna have been reacting spontaneously at the details of music. Then, of course no orchestra on Earth could have played so fine (Gardiner is one of the greatest conductors of our time) that huge, complex and ground-breaking masterpiece at first sight, and thus the struggle between Beethoven's expectations and the musicians' possibilities would have brought in a more accurate and dramatic element to the movie.
Secondly, from a cinematic point of view, if you weren't a Beethoven buff, it's hard to bear a film centered around the performance of a single work which lasts 45-50 min. I doubt whether that premiere really generated immediately the feel of one of the greatest turning points in music history (which of course the Heroic Symphony was). Much more dramatic and with a great potential for evolving would have been the genesis of the work in Beethoven's mind during his extremely busy years of 1801-1803 (growing deafness, the hints at suicide in the 'Heiligenstadt testament', the failed relationship with Julie Guicciardi, the acquaintance with Bernadotte, the growing infatuation with Josephine, the many compositions etc). In its present state, the film is static, the characters are not evolving, and Ian Hart's performance is almost one-sided (and he looks strangely unfamiliar with that long hair, while Beethoven had a shorter hairstyle in his younger years). On the plus side is the presence of Beethoven's 'immortal beloved' Josephine, but why did they pile up so many emotional events during that concert (even twisting their time line)? That's lame, unreal and melodramatic.
And sadly, despite all these, in a way this may be the best Beethoven movie so far, because it's the most accurate and tightly knit. But strangely, as I have said before, it almost missed its point.
Secondly, from a cinematic point of view, if you weren't a Beethoven buff, it's hard to bear a film centered around the performance of a single work which lasts 45-50 min. I doubt whether that premiere really generated immediately the feel of one of the greatest turning points in music history (which of course the Heroic Symphony was). Much more dramatic and with a great potential for evolving would have been the genesis of the work in Beethoven's mind during his extremely busy years of 1801-1803 (growing deafness, the hints at suicide in the 'Heiligenstadt testament', the failed relationship with Julie Guicciardi, the acquaintance with Bernadotte, the growing infatuation with Josephine, the many compositions etc). In its present state, the film is static, the characters are not evolving, and Ian Hart's performance is almost one-sided (and he looks strangely unfamiliar with that long hair, while Beethoven had a shorter hairstyle in his younger years). On the plus side is the presence of Beethoven's 'immortal beloved' Josephine, but why did they pile up so many emotional events during that concert (even twisting their time line)? That's lame, unreal and melodramatic.
And sadly, despite all these, in a way this may be the best Beethoven movie so far, because it's the most accurate and tightly knit. But strangely, as I have said before, it almost missed its point.