I have to admit that I'm not the biggest fan of Thomas Mann, but "Mario und der Zauberer" ("Mario and the magician") is not only one of my personal favorites but possibly one of the best novellas Mann has written. Naturally I was very enthusiastic when I heard that not only was the novel adapted but that Klaus-Maria Brandauer, one of my favorite actors, would play the antagonist Cipolla. And I'm sorry to say that I ended up being rather disappointed.
Not going to go into the story itself in too much detail: changes are that you have already read the book when you're looking for this film and if you haven't, I highly recommend you do so before viewing. In essence it's an allegory on fascism itself, set in Italy during the early days of Mussolini. The character Cipolla stands as a symbol for fascism and/or the various spear-heads like Mussolini, Hitler, but also Stalin.
The problem with the production is the director (Brandauer) himself. Filming his second film, Brandauer obviously hasn't yet gotten a firm grip on directing on the media film and/or has a hard time finding a transition between film and theatre, which is where he as a director is obviously more at home. The film seems less like Mann's "psychological realism" and more like some magical-realism that would have befitted an adaptation of a Franz Kafka story. Sadly, it doesn't end there. As I mentioned: I'm a huge admirer of Brandauer. His performances in films like "Mephisto" or "Oberst Redl" are virtually Oscar-material. Here Brandauer underplays this poignant figure completely. I would have expected him to overplay the role, something along the lines of his role in "Hanussen" (where he also plays a magician-of-sorts, being likewise set during Nazi-times), but Brandauer actually managed to make Cipolla dull and rather boring. Another problem is Julian Sands. Sands is an accomplished actor in it's own rights, but whatever prompted Brandauer to cast him as the liberal, yet slightly naive German Professor Fuhrmann (in the novella he takes the role of a more-or-less passive storyteller), defies all logical or artistic explanation.
Another aspect that murks the picture as a whole: the novella is more or less a short story and Mann masterly manages compress his message and beautiful descriptions into relatively limited space. The movie however is a bit more than two hours, which eventually feel much longer. Comparing novella to film, one cannot help some notice major artistic liberties which Brandauer took with the source-material and again, the reasons seem not entirely clear. For example (and here come the spoilers), in the novel it is Mario (Pavel Greco) who kisses and eventually shots Cipolla on stage, and not Silvestra (Calentina Chico), who then accidentally shoots Mario instead of the dictator-figure Cipolla. Once again, Brandauer doesn't make clear why that is. There are other alterations and additional scenes, which seem to have occurred only to stretch the story.
In essence: if only the film had been directed by a more capable director like Brandauers erstwhile partner Istvan Szabo or, to mention potential German directors, Werner Herzog or Volker Schlöndorf. Had Brandauer concentrated on playing the character as the demonic demagogue of the novella, stuck closer to the source-material and had he reduced unnecessary scenes, even if it would have been "only" a TV-movie, there could have truly been some magic in "Mario and the magician". As it is, it's simply over-ambitious and, considering the source, no more than a 5/10. (And please don't get my low rating wrong: technically it isn't a bad picture, visually as handsome as you'd expect with a budget of roughly 10 Million Euro, but it ultimately fails to live up to Mann's story and what it would have deserved).
Not going to go into the story itself in too much detail: changes are that you have already read the book when you're looking for this film and if you haven't, I highly recommend you do so before viewing. In essence it's an allegory on fascism itself, set in Italy during the early days of Mussolini. The character Cipolla stands as a symbol for fascism and/or the various spear-heads like Mussolini, Hitler, but also Stalin.
The problem with the production is the director (Brandauer) himself. Filming his second film, Brandauer obviously hasn't yet gotten a firm grip on directing on the media film and/or has a hard time finding a transition between film and theatre, which is where he as a director is obviously more at home. The film seems less like Mann's "psychological realism" and more like some magical-realism that would have befitted an adaptation of a Franz Kafka story. Sadly, it doesn't end there. As I mentioned: I'm a huge admirer of Brandauer. His performances in films like "Mephisto" or "Oberst Redl" are virtually Oscar-material. Here Brandauer underplays this poignant figure completely. I would have expected him to overplay the role, something along the lines of his role in "Hanussen" (where he also plays a magician-of-sorts, being likewise set during Nazi-times), but Brandauer actually managed to make Cipolla dull and rather boring. Another problem is Julian Sands. Sands is an accomplished actor in it's own rights, but whatever prompted Brandauer to cast him as the liberal, yet slightly naive German Professor Fuhrmann (in the novella he takes the role of a more-or-less passive storyteller), defies all logical or artistic explanation.
Another aspect that murks the picture as a whole: the novella is more or less a short story and Mann masterly manages compress his message and beautiful descriptions into relatively limited space. The movie however is a bit more than two hours, which eventually feel much longer. Comparing novella to film, one cannot help some notice major artistic liberties which Brandauer took with the source-material and again, the reasons seem not entirely clear. For example (and here come the spoilers), in the novel it is Mario (Pavel Greco) who kisses and eventually shots Cipolla on stage, and not Silvestra (Calentina Chico), who then accidentally shoots Mario instead of the dictator-figure Cipolla. Once again, Brandauer doesn't make clear why that is. There are other alterations and additional scenes, which seem to have occurred only to stretch the story.
In essence: if only the film had been directed by a more capable director like Brandauers erstwhile partner Istvan Szabo or, to mention potential German directors, Werner Herzog or Volker Schlöndorf. Had Brandauer concentrated on playing the character as the demonic demagogue of the novella, stuck closer to the source-material and had he reduced unnecessary scenes, even if it would have been "only" a TV-movie, there could have truly been some magic in "Mario and the magician". As it is, it's simply over-ambitious and, considering the source, no more than a 5/10. (And please don't get my low rating wrong: technically it isn't a bad picture, visually as handsome as you'd expect with a budget of roughly 10 Million Euro, but it ultimately fails to live up to Mann's story and what it would have deserved).
