Maestro

It's an old (and unanswerable) question: to what extent is it possible - or desirable - to separate the art from the artist? Is it possible to appreciate the art simply as art, and not to delve into the (sometimes tawdry) details of the artist? Or are the art and the artist so inextricably entwined that you cannot understand the one without knowing the other?

I very much lean towards separation. I fell in love with Bernstein's music the first time I saw West Side Story mumble years ago at an impressionable age; which is why I was disappointed that there was so little West Side Story in this film. Surely a biopic of a composer should feature that composer's music pretty heavily?

Of course, we all know that beneath every great artist is a human being - usually with a collection of human flaws. But does this matter? Well, it matters here. What we mostly get is a film about Leonard the man, and his complicated marriage to Felicia Montealegre. Much of this was new to me. I knew that Bernstein was bisexual, but didn't care. I find that I also don't care about most of the other details of his life which were revealed to me - although if the film was truly about the man, not his music, his record as a human rights activist should probably have been at least touched on. But never mind that: I came for the music, and didn't get enough.

Not that this film is without merit. Bradley Cooper's performance is first class - there's one sequence in which he truly shows us the passion of a great conductor - and Carey Mulligan is as riveting as ever. Cinematography and sound are both excellent.

Overall, this is a good film, but ultimately a disappointing one.

Maestro (2023) seems a very flimsy "biography" of Leonard Bernstein. We learn just about nothing of his life. Music. Wife. Boys on the side. Other than that?

The film stars Bradley Cooper and a fake nose. He (Cooper, not the nose) also co-wrote, directed, and produced and is being hailed for his work and artistic ambition. Coincidentally, I'm reading Barbra Streisand's new 970-page memoir and in her section on Yentl, she recalls the reviews that lambasted her colossal ego to star in a film she also co-wrote, directed, and produced.

Anyway, I found Cooper's performance to be hysterically hammy (yes, I know Bernstein was flamboyant) and Mulligan's wife just plain annoying. Such self-centered people who were always "on." They were exhausting to watch ... but that's the whole film. There's no background material, Just them swanning about like characters out of Auntie Mame screaming "I was never in the chorus!"

This will likely reap a slew of Oscar nominations and Cooper will probably beat of DiCaprio and Cillian Murphy for best actor. Wry. Hold the ham!

I went to Maestro expecting a film that would chronicle the life of one of America's, if not the world's, great composer/conductors. I've seen Leonard Bernstein many, many times, starting at age 8 when my grandfather took me to Bernstein's music for kids on Saturday mornings at Lincoln Center. I had no idea who he was at the time, only that people called him Lenny. My grandpa took me to meet him and he was spellbinding. I remember him looking right threw me with his expressive eyes.

He loved kids and loved to teach them about music. Turns out grandpa and Lenny went to Harvard together, hence I got a personal introduction. Bernstein is the guy that got me hooked on classical music and music in general, but I didn't learn anything about his musical career, his childhood, his years at Harvard, his work in Europe, who inspired him, etc.

The making of West Side Story is really interesting (if you know the story) but nothing about it in this film and I mean "nothing.; We get a tiny glimpse of Candide, but nothing about its composition or insight into the Maestro's process. We get zero insight into his Missa Brevis, perhaps on the highlights of his career.

Bradley Cooper blew me away. I've seen Lenny up close many times and I've talked to him a few times. Cooper nailed it, and the scene at St John of the Divine is probably one of the greatest musical scenes ever captured on film. Cooper's conducting is simply amazing. He worked very very hard to capture the speech, mannerisms, and the Bernstein attitude and texture toward music. I cannot speak highly enough of Cooper's performance, but we get so little insight into the musician, and that was so disappointing.

Carey Mulligan? Her performance is nothing less than spectacular, in fact all the acting is extraordinary, but it's not a story. The Bernstein children really have nothing to do in this film, and I have no idea why Lenny's sister was included as she has very little to say or do. Overall, a very perplexing film ... not sure what he was going for. In fact, I kept waiting for it to start. The emphasis was all on style, and believe me, it's beautiful to look at.

Obviously made for the Academy to truly honor Bradley Cooper remarkable transformation into the hoity toity world of Leonard Bernstein. Yes, we know he is going to be great in this role. But sometimes when you surround yourself with Oscar level material and talent, it could seem like it's just fishing for the Little Gold dude.

This is what it felt like. Though, simultaneously...he's just good.

Actor turned directors don't always work. Especially virtuosos that started clownish and end up in the serious zone. Cooper is that guy. Following in the footsteps of Clint Eastwood rather than, say Charles Laughton. It felt like a natural transition for Cooper who seemed to fine tune his energies towards more serious endeavors outside of things like "The Hangover" flicks.

"Silver Linings Playbook" was the start.

And who are his mentors in directing if it weren't the top tier directors.... David O' Russell, Paul Thomas Anderson, Spielberg, Scorsese or Clint Eastwood himself.

What this film struggles with, is the interest level. A lot will go over modern audiences head. Simply because we only know him as the guy who did the music to "West Side Story" And even THAT is stretching it. Cooper doesn't focus his energy on that rather this "love" story of a woman who fell for a gay guy. This would've been interesting 30 years ago. Now, not as intriguing.

Carey Mulligan is the best thing in this movie. At times, she is very much a Katherine Hepburn North Atlantic phony. But when some of the veil of her pain rises to the surface, she drops the pleasantries and tells it like it is.

There is a moment during a Thanksgiving party where we see some of the best acting I've seen between two people. Dialogue is somewhat on the nose, but boy do they both play it to the hilt. It's phenomenal, the ability to get to a screaming match with the words actually meaning something. That is an accomplishment.

Things get slow when the self-indulgent conducting moment creeps in. Yes, we know Brad studied a long time to get Bernstein's mannerisms. Do we really have to see all of it?

Other things that bothered me... it still feels like a very cold movie. Aside from Mulligan, his entire family seems to have been plugged in as trope characters to get you more understanding of the guy. They don't add much. Perhaps that was attempting to be subtle. It felt like subterfuge.

This was Oscar bait in absolute.

A struggling musician agonized by his own genius, talents, and creativity and trapped in loveless marriage filled with guilt. Both look the other way while one has an affair and realize the importance of one's own partner too late. Right now, at the top of my head I can think of 'Fosse/Verdon', 'A Star Is Born', 'George & Tammy', 'Walk the Line', 'Dreamgirls', 'Daisy Jones & The Six', and etc. (Wow, that's a lot.) Biographical genre is especially tricky because it has to excel the life of actual historical figures. 'Maestro' could have been so much better if it delved into the introspective and artistic side of Bernstein deeper or provided a different and fresh point of view on his life rather than reciting his personal life. His autobiography or research would be more fun and interesting than this explanatory movie.

There were a few futile attempts to make the movie look more artistic, abstract, and ambiguous. They failed because they serve no purpose but to look pretentious. White and black, camera movement, the use of light and shadows, and musical aspects. They are all good attempts, but for what? By doing so, is the story getting stronger? Do they enhance what viewers feel? Waste of time and films.

Bradley Cooper's performance is disappointing. He never acts; he imitates. When he's on the screen, we know clearly that he's acting. It's hard to be absorbed and immersed into the screen because he always pushes the audience away with his trying too hard. I get that he wants to emulate Bernstein's twangy voice. However, emotions and messages he delivers are more important than his likeness of Bernstein's tone, accent, sound, or mannerism. He focuses on what's outside of Bernstein rather than what would be inside of him. There is a 10 minute sequence of Cooper conducting, and it's screaming 'Look how good I am!!!'. It's one of the highest points for emotions to burst out for the audience, and I started to laugh.