Just read between the lines of his audio commentary to this calamity of a film. To be honest there aren't that many lines in the first place as Russell seems lost delivering an audio commentary on his own and without Mark Kermode to prompt him and keep him on track. There are long gaps in the commentary that are occasionally broken by dull observations from the director. This is not a DVD review but Russell's commentary does reveal a great deal about the huge flaws in this film and the director who seemed so obsessed with shocking his audience probably comes as close as he ever did to apologising for taking things too far even by his own extreme standards. Some of his comments can be easily re-interpreted: Russell: 'Raising money on classical subjects is not the easiest profession so I'm taking a holiday from that.' Actual meaning: 'No one will allow me to make another feature film on the life of a composer after the monumental disaster of Lisztomania.'Russell: 'To really appreciate the film you'd have to know quite a bit about the reality behind Liszt.' Actual meaning: 'If you knew nothing about Liszt before seeing the film then you'll be none the wiser afterwards.'Russell: 'Maybe it wasn't as successful as I'd have hoped it would be.'Actual meaning: 'It was a catastrophe that ruined my career.'Russell: 'In drawing the facts together I've probably annoyed the Wagner family more than I might have.' Actual meaning: 'I deeply offended and insulted the Wagner family for showing the following: 1) Wagner as a vampire who sucked blood from Liszt's neck 2) Wagner as a mad Frankenstein-like scientist who used his music to create a monster in his laboratory that would turn Germany into a great country3) Hitler as another monster that was created out of Wagner's body. Russell: 'I raised the odd eyebrow as I saw it.' Actual meaning: 'This film is totally over the top and I'm embarrassed by it.'Russell even stops his commentary nearly 6 minutes before the end of the film as though he couldn't bear it any longer and wanted to get out of the studio as quickly as possible. I don't blame him.I saw Lisztomania out of curiosity as it had been denounced as the most extreme of Russell's films so I shouldn't have been too surprised by what I saw but there really is nothing to recommend this film apart from Paul Nicholas who is actually quite good as Wagner.The film critic Alexander Walker likened Russell's The Devils (which incidentally is a much better film and nowhere near as over the top when you consider the subject matter) to the masturbatory fantasies of a Roman Catholic boyhood. Lisztomania seems like the masturbatory fantasies of the director himself. There's really no pleasure to be had in watching someone as talented as Russell undoubtedly was taking his career and flushing it down the toilet. Give it a miss.

Do not waste a minute of your time on this. It is a truly awful film by any standard. It tries so hard to be funny, different, clever and over-the-top, but it just fails and fails and fails.... Please change your drugs, Mr. Russell. It does not even deserve the time it took to write this short review. Enough!And now IMDb tell me that a review must contain at least 10 lines. That's a bit like the film itself, then - nothing there, really, just a lot of noise and spectacle stretched out for no good reason at all. And, no doubt, a lot of people got paid a lot of money for it - a shame.

I really don't even know where to begin to convey how dreadful this movie turned out to be. Words pale next to what you are subjected to. For years I kept hearing what a genius Russell was, Women in Love, The Devils, and Tommy... and when it came down to it... I watched all of these movies with that uncomfortable feeling that I was not enjoying myself and really thought I should be. Especially with Tommy. Thirty minutes into the movie I felt like I was going to jump out of my skin because it was obvious we were being exposed to MTV -like vignettes featuring prominent artists in bizarrely staged scenes.Over time I never lost that feeling on Ken Russell movies. It was always the feeling that someone knew how to do it right... but chose to do it in a sensational manner instead. He comes across to me as a director who chose to ignore story, character development and emotional connection in favor of trying to freak the viewer out visually. By doing this.. he took subjects that could have been important and reduced them to semi-pornographic peepshows that don't even have the capacity to excite us. He missed the point...everywhere. Absolutely everywhere.

Probably the worst of Ken Russell's great composer biopics, but still wildly enjoyable. Throwing caution (and every other bit of sanity) to the wind, Russell concocts a real trip with this one. It's a most contemporary period film. Roger Daltry is Franz Liszt as pop star but he's not really acting...he's Roger Daltry. He's also pretty dull but Russell had the the good sense to fill the supporting cast with the likes of Paul Nicholas (late of TOMMY), sexy Fiona Lewis and the always welcome Ringo Starr (as the Pope). Russell doesn't so much direct a movie as he creates a pre-MTV video. It's all senseless, over-the-top fun. A big deficit, aside from the vapid Daltry is the film's unnecessary length...surely the REAL story of Liszt would require some length, but with a running time over 90 minutes, this particular LISZTOMANIA is about 30 minutes too long. Look fast for an Oliver Reed cameo.