Directed by Orson Welles. Written by Orson Welles. Stars Tim Holt, Joseph Cotten, Dolores Costello, Anne Baxter, Agnes Moorehead, Ray Collins.
1942, 88 minutes, Black And White, Not Rated.
1942, 88 minutes, Black And White, Not Rated.
Rightly or wrongly, the original version of THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS stands as one of the great lost films in the history of Hollywood. This was Orson Welles' second film for RKO, after CITIZEN KANE. The controversy generated by KANE did not translate into box office dollars, so when the first cut of AMBERSONS tested poorly, RKO instructed the film's editor to shorten it dramatically and reshoot some of the more extreme scenes to be more palatable. Said editor was Robert Wise.
Welles was out of the country while most of this went down, and it's intriguing to think what may have happened had he been in the country. Evidence suggests that he was not opposed to making changes and memos exist where he suggests even more drastic restructuring than what ended up in the released film. The story of why he was out of the country is an interesting story in itself--he was appointed a good will ambassador to Latin America by the Government and so started to make an anthology film of life in the lower America's. Although jointly funded by the U.S. Government, RKO pulled the plug based on the footage being sent back, which was also most likely as an indication for how far Welles' star had fallen.
Then there are the sets. Going against convention, Welles had the Amberson manor constructed as a contiguous multi-story set. The detail lavished on the set was impressive (and expensive) and contributes enormously to the believability of the setting. It also allows for some highly expressive (“arty”) shots that use both depth and shadows to outstanding effect.
While Welles does not act on screen in AMBERSONS (the only time he was ever able to do that for one of his films) he contributes the narration. The first few minutes of AMBERSONS are an absolute joy to behold mainly due to his rich baritone voice. It is also worth noting that the first half hour of the film is the least molested of what remains. There are deletions, but nothing in the way of new scenes.
100% of the long takes mentioned above were compromised by the pre-release editing done to "improve" the film. The two biggest areas that were harmed were the ball sequence--a long single take that wound from one end of the set and back again, all while dialogue scenes and dancing took place. Welles claimed it was an entire reel of film, but even if it wasn’t it was still a tour de force. As most of the edits occurred after the halfway point of the story, much of the scene still exists in the film as it is relatively early in the story. Not so lucky was the original ending with Agnes Moorehead's emotional explosion chopped off before it really gets going. Likewise cut in half was a kitchen scene where it is explained that some of the Amberson land had been sold because they needed the money. In fact, just about all of scenes that illustrated how society was changing, for better or worse, and how it affected the family were lost in the re-editing.
I think that if the original 131 minutes version had been released in 1941, it would have died a death at the box office, so it's reasonable that RKO would have tried to "fix" the film. The question of whether the film was taken out of Welles' hands is more complicated. Superficially, this became the first in many films that Welles lost control of.** Looking at it a little closer, however, it's an open question whether Welles was removed or whether he removed himself. He left for South America to film his Latin American film before AMBERSONS was fully edited, and one has to wonder why he did that. Was he simply naïve, or was he aware that the film was problematic? Perhaps he didn’t have the stomach for the compromise needed to appease the studio. Sheer irresponsibility also cannot be discounted.
While most can acknowledge the innovations of CITIZEN KANE, even if they don't care for the film itself, it's not generally as understood that AMBERSONS was just as innovative in new and different ways than his previous film. The visual look of the film is what most people gravitate to, but there are other more subtle innovations that were lost due to the editing. Specifically, the original version of AMBERSONS featured multiple scenes of extremely long takes with intricate camera moves and/or subtle character interactions. This is not to suggest that Welles was being theatrical in the way of stage plays, but rather theatrical in the film medium*. The shot length for many of these scenes originally were far outside the shot length norms of 1940's Hollywood. The film is also much darker—literally and figuratively—than typical films of the era, with deep shadows that mirror the characters emotions.
Then there are the sets. Going against convention, Welles had the Amberson manor constructed as a contiguous multi-story set. The detail lavished on the set was impressive (and expensive) and contributes enormously to the believability of the setting. It also allows for some highly expressive (“arty”) shots that use both depth and shadows to outstanding effect.
While Welles does not act on screen in AMBERSONS (the only time he was ever able to do that for one of his films) he contributes the narration. The first few minutes of AMBERSONS are an absolute joy to behold mainly due to his rich baritone voice. It is also worth noting that the first half hour of the film is the least molested of what remains. There are deletions, but nothing in the way of new scenes.
100% of the long takes mentioned above were compromised by the pre-release editing done to "improve" the film. The two biggest areas that were harmed were the ball sequence--a long single take that wound from one end of the set and back again, all while dialogue scenes and dancing took place. Welles claimed it was an entire reel of film, but even if it wasn’t it was still a tour de force. As most of the edits occurred after the halfway point of the story, much of the scene still exists in the film as it is relatively early in the story. Not so lucky was the original ending with Agnes Moorehead's emotional explosion chopped off before it really gets going. Likewise cut in half was a kitchen scene where it is explained that some of the Amberson land had been sold because they needed the money. In fact, just about all of scenes that illustrated how society was changing, for better or worse, and how it affected the family were lost in the re-editing.
Based on what is known about the original version--the continuity script exists for that version--it was an artistic triumph but not an "easy" film. The film is also aggressively "arty" and that may have also been a problem with audiences outside of the bigger cities. This would have hurt its chances at the box office. The fact is, the film was flawed in having one of the most unlikable lead characters in film history. I happen to think that Tim Holt is fine in the role, and played it exactly as Welles wanted, but the character is a cad and it colors much of the story. The fact that the film's portrayal is a faithful rendering of the character from the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel does not really help things--what works in print sometimes just doesn't work on screen. If Welles had played the lead, he may have been able to pull off making the lead character more likable. This may have improved its chances at the box office. Maybe.
That said, I also 100% believe that if the long version had been released it would be considered a filmmaking masterpiece, right alongside KANE. It probably would have taken a generation for it to outlive its box office failure, but like it or not, art generally prevails.
* On a side note, I personally have always viewed Mike Nichols' peak period (1966-1973-ish) to be "Wellsian" in nature as he approached things in a similar manner--long takes with a striking visual touch.
**. LADY FROM SHANGHAI (1948), MR ARKADIN (1955), TOUCH OF EVIL (1958).
No comments:
Post a Comment