ORSON WELLES: MARTYR
OF THE UNDERGROUND |
INTRODUCTION
Orson Welles was a genius. Yea, yea, we all know.
We've all heard it before, but does anyone REALLY
know why or even care? It doesn't seem that way.
Orson Welles' name gets tossed around like a bag
of dirt, and more or less gets treated that way
as well. Sure, sure everyone loves Citizen Kane,
I mean it's the greatest film of all time. Right?
But why does the world look at Welles' first film
in such a holy and glowing light, while at the
same time, dismissing the rest of his work as
a constant string of failures. His filmography
reads like a list of nice try's or better luck
next times to the average moviegoer. I realize
that nowadays Welles' is, in some ways, getting
his due, what with the restoration of Touch of
Evil and a new generation of filmmakers speaking
his name with hushed respect and awe. But alas,
it's the perfect example of too little, too late
I'm afraid. I mean the man is dead and buried,
almost 14 years ago in fact. Orson Welles' may
have lead one of the most puzzling lives in modern
pop history. How can a man be the most praised
and celebrated genius in film and at the same
time, remain an overlooked outcast? It's either
the truest and most overwhelming testament to
the actual genius of Welles. The fact that he
is regarded as a genius despite his lack of acceptance
and freedom he received in the Hollywood realm,
or it's the punch line to a long and sad joke
of a confusing and enigmatic life.
THE
BEGINNING (OF THE END) 1941
When Welles' went to Hollywood for the first time
in 1940, he did things no one had done before.
He changed the way filmmakers were perceived and
treated by the Hollywood system. With 'Citizen
Kane' (1941), Welles' created the star as director.
He also kicked opened the doors for first time
filmmakers, by getting the most talked about contract
of all time, a contract that gave a first time
filmmaker full control over his film, including
the final cut of the movie. Welles' made 'Kane',
released it and basically opened and closed the
Hollywood door on him self, all at the same time.
By making 'Kane', he was thrust into the limelight
as Hollywood's golden boy and bad boy. He set
in motion a reputation for biting the hand that
fed him, for kicking authority in the ass, a character
trait that would ultimately bring him farther
and farther down, throughout his life. The main
authority figure that Welles' kicked in the ass
with 'Citizen Kane' was newspaper tycoon, William
Randolph Hearst, the man the film, for the most
part, was based on. Alienating a man with the
clout and power of Hurst was a bad idea for any
one at the time, especially a new face in a growing
world. Hearst, of course, took notice of Welles'
treatment and started the ball in motion that
continued to push Welles' farther and farther
from the good graces of the Hollywood elite. Just
for the sake of extreme example, 'Citizen Kane'
contained the most notorious cinematic slap, possibly,
ever delivered. A celluloid low blow that, if
it hadn't already, certainly sealed Welles' fate,
at least in the eyes of Hearst. In the film 'Citizen
Kane', Kane's last word on his deathbed is Rosebud.
This is the catalyst for the entire film, the
whole purpose of the movie is to find out the
significance of the word Rosebud as it relates
to Kane's life. Apparently, Rosebud was a thinly
veiled Hearst reference that, no doubt, sent Hearst
over the edge. You see, according to legend (and
Gore Vidal), Rosebud was what Hearst called his
mistress, Marion Davies', clitoris. Welles' apparently
found this out from a man by the name of Charles
Lederer, a nephew of Marion Davies and a frequent
guest at Hearst's California home. This is certainly
a prime example of the clich; 'give him an inch
and he'll take a mile' working to it's fullest
potential. And it was Welles' first mistake in
a long line of wrong moves. As a result of Citizen
Kane', Hearst set out to destroy the film, going
as far as trying to buy all prints of the movie
from RKO so he could burn them. RKO, of course,
denied Hearst, but this didn't stop Hearst from
starting a massive smear campaign that didn't
necessarily affect the film 'Citizen Kane' as
much as it did the rest of Orson Welles' life.
THE START OF SOMETHING BAD 1942 - 1948
After the success of 'Kane', Welles' was set to
direct a new film, a movie that would eventually
become the most tragic, realistic and honest film
he ever made, 'The Magnificent Ambersons' (1942).
Ambersons is considered by many, to be Welles'
finest moment, despite the fact that Welles' original
and final edit of the film ran 132 minutes as
opposed to the final studio cut of 88 minutes.
And lets not fail to mention the fact that RKO
saw fit to film an entirely new and happy ending
for the film, without involving or even contacting
Welles'. In fact, Welles' was in Rio de Janeiro
during the butchering of Ambersons. For lack of
a better term, Welles' was screwed by the studio.
This was to be the start of a very, very bad trend
that became standard for Welles' and his films,
a trend that virtually forced him into obscurity
and near financial ruin. But once again, the very
fact that 'The Magnificent Ambersons' is considered
by many to be one of the greatest movies ever
made, even though it misses the mark of Welles'
original vision of dark despair and groundbreaking
visuals by around 44 minutes, just adds to Welles'
undeniable genius.
This was the slow start of Welles' retreat into
the underground, the only place where he could
truly realize and present his intended vision.
Of course this also meant that Welles' lost his
association with supposed 'respectable' studios
and distributors, which meant that he lost a large
chunk of his audience and money as well. His creative
vision gained in independence, but his output
and outlet seemed to slow from film to film. He
became a struggling artist, a strong contrast
to his early beginnings in Hollywood, where he
originally had the world on a silver platter it
seemed. Welles' didn't dig completely into the
underground until much later in his career, but
the Ambersons debacle was, for sure, the first
spade full of dirt in that direction.
Next there was 'Journey Into Fear' (1943), a film
that Welles' involvement in was basically ignored.
He co directed it with Norman Foster, and he co
wrote it with Joseph Cotton. Both acts went uncredited
and the film was perceived at RKO as a mess and
a dark spot on their roster. Welles' did the final
editing of the film, unpaid, and received no credit
for any involvement in the film accept for acting
in it. I guess they couldn't deny that fact.
'The Stranger' (1946) was next and the story was
no different. Welles' was allowed no control over
the production, even though he was the director.
'The Stranger' became more of a testing ground
for Welles, to see if he could do what he was
told and deliver the goods. He did, but in retrospect,
Welles' has said 'there is nothing of me in that
picture' and he has gone as far as calling it
the worst film he ever made (which it is). The
irony is that it's the only film he ever made
that showed a profit in its first release. What
does this say about the viewing public? I'm not
sure, but I don't think it's good.
'Lady From Shanghai' (1948) is another example
of Welles' original vision being tampered with.
His final edit of the film ran 155 minutes, Columbia's
final cut ran a mere 86 minutes, complete with
a tacked on song and dance number from the films
star, Rita Hayworth. 'Shanghai' is possibly Welles'
most peculiar animal, it is a film that is both
loved and referenced, and hated and forgotten.
Viewer's either seem to watch every frame with
baited breath or heavy eyelids. One can only imagine
the reaction to Welles' 155 minute version of
the film. Welles', once again was defeated by
the studio and forced to put his name on what
he saw as a ghost of his former film.
After 'Shanghai', Welles shifted gears considerably.
He took on a project that seemed to reflect, not
only his own life at times, but the dark world
that was spreading all around. During the latter
part of the 1940's, the world was a very scary
place. There were atomic bomb tests at Bikini,
civil war in China and Greece, the death of independence
in India, bloodshed in Palestine and the beginnings
of the Cold War and the Red Scare here in America.
Amongst all this trouble, evil and darkness, Welles
made his most troubling, evil and dark film, 'Macbeth'
(1948).
DESCENT INTO THE UNDERGROUND 1948 - 1955
With 'Macbeth', Welles began a new direction.
Of the film 'Macbeth', Welles' has said he had
been drawn into it, and that he took it just as
a job, a way of proving his competence. Ironically,
Macbeth is one of Welles' finest films, mixing
dark, smoky Noir imagery with the backdrop of
Shakespeare's rosy words, witches, ghosts and
despair. Welles shot Macbeth in 23 days, for a
cost of around $700,000. Keep in mind that Welles'
last film, 'The Lady From Shanghai' cost a little
over 2 million dollars. With Macbeth, Welles'
used the medium of film to it's fullest, using
sound as much, if not more, as images. Of course,
Welles' invention did not go over so well at the
Republic studios editing room. Apparently, Welles'
sound experiments and usage of traditional Scottish
accents, caused many a problem. Welles' was, once
again, out of the country working on future projects,
and as a result of his leaving and trusting a
studio to remain true to his vision (did he ever
learn?), the final and full cut of Macbeth went
unseen for decades. At the time of it's release,
Macbeth was seen as a disappointment, sub par
to Olivier's 'Henry V'. Of course now, it's regarded
as one of the finest film adaptations of Shakespeare
and one of the most groundbreaking films in the
use of sound as it relates to imagery. But of
course, this fact really doesn't matter to good
old Orson, now does it?
Following 'Macbeth', Welles' delivered what was
an even better adaptation of a Shakespeare classic,
'Othello' (1952). 'Othello' was the first film
Welles' made away from American soil, it was an
Italian production. He began filming in 1948 and
didn't finish until 1952, where it opened in Europe,
wining best picture at the Cannes Film Festival.
The film didn't play in America until 1955, and
when it did, it was dismissed as a curiosity,
another example of Welles' meandering and self-wallowing.
This is more or less a showing of America's lack
luster love for Welles' by this time, no one really
cared about another Orson Welles movie. Here again,
we have an example of a movie scared with troubles,
mainly production problems, that turned out to
be undeniable genius. 'Othello' is a continuation
of the cinematic themes displayed in 'Macbeth'.
One could look at 'Macbeth' as the birth of the
new Welles' and 'Othello' as the new born, learning
to walk and talk on his own. Welles' paid for
'Othello', virtually out his own pocket. He flew
all over the globe taking acting jobs in order
to finance his immense vision of Shakespeare's
tale of revenge and deceit. This, obviously, gave
the film a disjointed feel during filming, sense
the level of cohesiveness was reduced to weeks,
sometimes just days, at a time. With Welles' globe
trotting for production money, the rest of the
cast and crew were left floundering about in places
like Morocco and Rome (that doesn't sound so bad).
If anything, 'Othello' is the true showing of
Welles' ability to conceive and create a masterpiece,
under the most insane and unorthodox conditions.
And considering that it's looked at as a sublime
and wonderful achievement in film, well, it just
adds to the mythos of the genius of Orson Welles.
Now consider that Welles' final cut of 'Othello'
did not get released in the US again until 1992
(a 37 year gap) and you might start to see that
there is something very wrong going on here. Of
course when it did get released again, it was
hailed as a masterpiece, Christ, it even got two
thumbs up!
After 'Othello' Welles' found his temporary savior,
a man named Louis Dolivet. Dolivet was one of
Welles' political advisors in the 1940's. Dolivet
was a man with the two things Welles needed most,
money and a willingness to share it. Welles' made
his next film, 'Mr. Arkadin' AKA 'Confidential
Report' (1955) using Dolivet's money.
'Mr. Arkadin' remains Welles' most self reflective
and self-loathing film. In many ways it was a
deconstruction of 'Citizen Kane' and a parody
of Welles' own failures in life. 'Mr. Arkadin'
is not a great film, but is certainly an intriguing
self-examination and damnation. Even with Dolivet's
involvement in the production of the film, Welles'
still found himself dealing with postproduction
problems. Dolivet took the film away from Welles
during the final stages of editing the film, because
progress was almost non existent and Welles' missed
his deadline. The film was given to an editor,
who made some considerable changes in the film
(what a big surprise). 'Arkadin' opened in Europe
in 1955, it was a failure financially, but it
was a mild critical success. 'Mr. Arkadin' wasn't
seen in America until 1962, 7 years after it's
initial release in Europe. Welles' later spoke
of 'Arkadin' and it's final cut venomously, 'It's
terrible what they did to me on that. The film
was snatched from my hands more brutally than
one has ever snatched a film from anyone- it's
as if they'd kidnapped my child!'
PEEKING UP FROM THE MANHOLE 1958
After a near ten year exile from Hollywood, Welles'
returned to make what many (including myself)
consider his true masterpiece, 'Touch Of Evil'
(1958). Welles' was originally just going to act
in 'Touch Of Evil', then known by the title 'Badge
Of Evil', which was the title of the book it was
adapted from. If it weren't for Charlton Heston's
involvement in the film, Welles' would have never
had the chance to make the movie. Heston was cast
as the lead, Mitch Holt, the white assistant DA
who saves the day. Heston knew the film had potential,
but wondered who would direct. Universal didn't
know yet, all they could tell Chuck was that Welles'
was cast as the heavy, and that was all the casting
that had been done. Heston suggested Welles to
direct and the studio said sure. Heston carried
an awful lot of clout in those days, he was riding
the wave of the Ten Commandments, so Universal
didn't want to rub him the wrong way. When Universal
offered Welles the job, he said he'd do it if
he could rewrite the script. They said okay, but
he would only receive pay for acting in the film.
Welles' deconstructed the original script, written
by Paul Monash, by reducing the moral ambiguity
and reversing the races of the DA and his wife.
In the book ' Badge Of Evil' and in Monash's script,
the character of Mitch Holt had a Mexican wife,
named Connie, who plays an important part in the
structure and development of the story. Welles
turned the character of Holt into Mike Vargas,
a Mexican narcotics cop. And he turned Connie
into Susan, a blond American girl. Welles' realized
that the idea of an interracial marriage was more
threatening when the man was the minority. This
was Welles' sub consciously, or very consciously,
striking back at the rumors and gossip about his
love for Mexican and black women. It was also
his way of giving the studio something to sweat
over, another kick in the ass.
With 'Touch Of Evil', Welles' grabbed the reigns
and hand crafted a cinematic gem, a virtual candy
store of imagery and decadence. Welles' toppled
the Film Noir universe and spat in the face of
all his life long detractors. This was what should
have been his finest hour, but of course, trouble,
as it always seemed to do, followed Welles. In
the spring of 1957, Welles finished his final
edit of 'Touch Of Evil'. He then went to Mexico
to do some shooting on his 'Don Quixote'. In his
absence, Universal re-edited 'Touch of Evil'.
When Welles' learned of the studio's apparent
treachery, he wrote a letter to Heston in all
caps; 'UNLESS THE STUDIO IS STOPPED THEY ARE GOING
TO WRECK OUR PICTURE - I MEAN WRECK IT, BECAUSE
IT IS NOT THE KIND OF ONE-TWO-THREE, ABC VARIETY
OF COMMERCIAL PRODUCT THAT CAN BE SLIGHTLY WRECKED.
WITHOUT MY HELP THE RESULT WILL BE VERY MUCH LESS
SATISFACTORY THAN THE MOST ORDINARY PROGRAM ITEM.
THE RESULT WILL NOT SIMPLY BE SOMETHING LESS THAN
YOU HOPED. THE RESULT WILL BE GENUINELY BAD.'
Upon seeing the Universal edit of the film, Welles'
then wrote a legendary memo to the studio, pleading
that his final edits be taken into consideration.
This request went unnoticed until last year, 40
years after they were made, when a newly restored,
newly edited version of 'Touch Of Evil' was released,
to rave reviews. Big fucking deal!
DIVING DEEPER AND DEEPER 1962 - 1975
After 'Touch of Evil', Welles left Hollywood as
a director, for good. He went to Europe, where
he made the only film of his career that he had
full and total control over. It turned out to
be his favorite, the film was 'The Trial' (1962).
Welles' made 'The Trial' on a budget acquired
from various European investors and used many
real locations instead of sets (he ran out of
money). 'The Trail' is another incredible example
of Welles' undeniable ability as a filmmaker and
a visionary. It seems as though Welles' produced
his most intriguing and challenging works (Othello,
The Trial, F Is For Fake) under incredibly tense
and thrifty times. This seems to be a part of
Welles' strange desire to work in the underground,
scraping by with the bare minimum, laughing in
the face of problem, producing some of the greatest
art ever brought to the screen.
'Chimes at Midnight' (1966) was Welles' next film.
Another Shakespeare adaptation, this time Welles
took the recurring character of Falstaf and created
a film centered around him. Using portions of
'Richard II', 'Henry IV' (parts I & II), 'Henry
V' and 'The Merry Wives of Windsor', Welles crafted
the ultimate Shakespearean epic, a beautiful,
dreamlike film, filled with humor, wit and an
overwhelming affection for life. It's rather amazing
that 'Chimes at Midnight' turned out so beautiful
and free feeling, considering all of the problems
that came with the making of it. The film was
shot in segments in certain areas of Spain in
the winter of 1964-65. The film constantly ran
into problems. There were problems with money,
with Welles getting sick, the winter, the lack
of availability of many of his main actors in
the film, problems with location and the ridiculous
fact that Welles' had to trick his producer into
believing they were making a film of Treasure
Island! The film, according to Welles, cost around
1.1 million dollars, which is pretty amazing considering
all of the battles, armor and attention to period
detail that the film has. Even more astonishing
is the fact that producer, Emiliano Piedra, said
the film cost around $800,000! Of course this
is the guy who thought they were making Treasure
Island, so take his assumption for what it's worth.
For Welles' next project, he turned to the French
for funding. He directed a film for French TV
called the 'Immortal Story' (1968), based on the
novella written by Isak Dinesen. 'The Immortal
Story' received funding only because Jeanne Moreau
agreed to play the lead female role in the film.
Welles was not entirely content with the product
or his production restraints. The film had to
be in color, sense it was for TV the studio would
make no acceptions. Welles was not a fan of color,
he found it to be too modern and industrial. Also
the sound was bad. The money Welles' received
was certainly a modest sum, and he did what he
could with it. The final result was, once again,
a great film, a simple film that conveyed the
ideas and language of the book beautifully. While
it may not be one of his most visually striking
movies, it is a wonderful film that tells a wonderful
story, beautifully. It's strange that the three
literary adaptations Welles' made in the 60's
(The Trial, Chimes at Midnight and The Immortal
Story) are probably the least seen of all of his
films, yet they make up some of the best and most
adventurous work he ever did. Hmmm, I wonder why?
The last film Orson Welles' made was the most
charming, witty and astonishing film he ever made.
It was a brilliant mixture of all film, of fiction,
of essay, of documentation. It was also probably
the most simple and fun thing he ever did. It
was called 'F for Fake' (1975). It was Welles'
most obscure project, his most underground if
you will, and his most youthful and optimistic.
Basically the film is a reworking of a French
TV show, shot by the films producer, Francois
Reichenbach, about an art forger named Elmyr de
Hory. Welles added a ton of new footage, spanning
topics as broad as Welles' own 'War of the Worlds'
to Clifford Irving, who wrote a fake autobiography
of Howard Hughes. 'F for Fake' remains Welles'
most puzzling and fresh film, he really seems
to be enjoying every minute of it, and he doesn't
seem to care if the viewer gets it or not. Of
the limited number of people who saw it on it's
initial release, it seems that most got it, or
at least got their own feelings out of it. And
I think that's more of the purpose of the film,
as well as all of Welles' work, to present a highly
personal idea, and allow the viewer to gain emotional
content from it. Basically, he was doing what
he talked about early on in his career, conveying
emotion as opposed to ideas. Welles' once said,
'You could write all the IDEAS of all the movies,
my own included, on the head of a pen. It's a
form that may grip you or take you into a world
or involve you emotionally - but ideas are not
the subject of films.'
A TRAGIC DIGNITY
When one looks at Welles' existence in film, it
really seems as though his life went backwards.
Starting out as a 'Genius' in everyone's eyes,
then slowly becoming an outsider, his brilliance
recognized by less and less as time went on, while
his films became more and more personal and internal.
And finally his departure from film making, ending
with a breezy, celluloid poem that had the eyes
of a young and happy man, just starting out in
the world of underground film, an unknown, an
unrecognized genius, just trying to say something
about his life in relation to ours. Just for the
record, Welles' once told a reporter ' A film
is never really good unless the camera is an eye
in the head of a poet.'
One has to wonder what Welles' body of work would
have been like had he maintained a good reputation
in the studio system. God only knows what his
original cut of 'The Magnificent Ambersons' was
like, or his initial cut of 'The Lady from Shanghai'.
Had he remained Hollywood's golden boy would he
have made films like 'The Trial' or 'Chimes at
Midnight'? It's hard to say, but at least one
can find a little good in all the bad that seemed
to run wild throughout the life of Orson Welles.
In fact, maybe Orson put it best when he said,
in describing his most personal character, Mr.
Arkadin; 'to show that a man who declares himself
in the face of the world, I am as I am, take it
or leave it, that this sort of man has a tragic
dignity.'
© Sam McAbee
| |
| |
|
