I'm not sure about this; what do you think?
What I like about the photo above and the style of the liturgy is that there is a clear continuity between how this Mass is celebrated and how the Extraordinary Form is celebrated. We can presume that the Mass above is in English though. We can presume that the propers were chanted as well as the Mass itself and that hymns were kept to a minimal, used only for filler.
We can presume that there were lay readers, maybe even female?
Why do I feel a bit uncomfortable by this photo? Do you? I like solemnity, choreography and reverence, but can it be overdone? Liberace was a great pianist, but sometimes his style was overboard, but that was for entertainment purposes.
Don't get me wrong, I think there is a place for this in the EF and OF Masses. The problem with the OF Mass is that its rubrics are so flexible that you can have extremes, from quite sloppy and banal to he overcomplicated and thus "Liberaceized" style of Mass.
The EF Mass has three primary designations, Low, nothing of the Mass is sung, although there could be devotional hymns. High, where the Mass is sung, but no deacon or subdeacon and Solemn High with deacon and subdeacon. Apart from the Pontifical Masses, this is it.
For the OF Mass, though, a scissors and paste effect can take place, picking and choosing what is sung, not sung, how the Mass is choreography and just how "Liberaceized" it will be or not.
When is too much too much and not enough not enough?