The Magnificent Ambersons

THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS

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. 

Where to start with this one?  

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.  The editor was Robert Wise.  

Welles was out of the country while most of this unfolded, and it's intriguing to consider what might 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 goodwill ambassador to Latin America by the Government and so started to make an anthology film of life in the lower Americas.  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 of how far Welles' star had fallen.

While most can acknowledge the innovations of CITIZEN KANE, even if they don't care for the film itself, it's not generally understood that AMBERSONS was just as innovative in its own ways as his previous film. The film's visual look is what most people gravitate to, but there are other, more subtle innovations that were lost in 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 medium of film*.  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 no 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. Since most of the edits occurred after the halfway point, much of the scene still remains 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, the cut-in-half kitchen scene explains that some of the Amberson land had been sold because they needed the money.  In fact, just about all of the 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's hands is more complicated.  Superficially, this became the first in many films in which Welles lost control. Looking at it a little more closely, 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 project before AMBERSONS was fully edited, and one has to wonder why. 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.

Based on what is known about the original version — the continuity script for that version exists  —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. Lastly, it was emphatically not a "feel-good" movie at a time when the United States was adjusting to life in wartime.  All of these factors would have impacted its chances at the box office.  Aside from the above, the film was flawed by 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 of the highest order 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 matters — what works in print sometimes just doesn't work on screen.  If Welles had played the lead, he might have made 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.  This is just my opinion, of course.

* 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).

The Finest Hours 3D

Directed by Craig Gillespie.  Written by Scott Silver, Paul Tamasy & Eric Johnson.  Stars Chris Pine, Casey Affleck, Ben Foster, Eric Bana, Holliday Grainger.  
2016, 117 minutes, Color, Rated PG-13.

Summary:
In February of 1952, one of the worst storms to ever hit the East Coast struck New England, damaging an oil tanker off the coast of Cape Cod and literally ripping it in half. On a small lifeboat faced with frigid temperatures and 70-foot high waves, four members of the Coast Guard set out to rescue more than 30 stranded sailors trapped aboard the rapidly-sinking vessel.

3D Rating:  ** 1/2 out of *****

At first glance, this seems like an odd choice for a 3D film.  More than half of it takes place at night, in poor lighting conditions and with weather further obscuring things.   The film is based on a true story and was originally intended as a smaller budget film.  It grew considerably in both scope and budget during production and ended up as a big-budget special effects bonanza.  Whether it needed a big budget to tell this story is debatable — it probably didn’t — but it ended up with over 1,000 visual effects shots.  

The core story is compelling, and the storytelling is intelligent, efficient, and respectful.  This respectfulness also results in a curious downplaying of the danger inherent to the events depicted.  Kind of like how a date can be too respectful if you are in the mood for some action--sometimes you just want something more and if your date is unwilling you can mistake it for a lack of interest.  I do not think that the filmmakers were uninterested in their audience.  I think it more likely that the original small film idea got swamped by the visual effects needed to make it more of an action film. 

All this said I liked the film.  Now, on to the 3D.

3D disclaimer:  I have a LED TV that can display digital 3D.  My 3D reviews are based on how things look on my set. I am aware that other methods of displaying 3D may be different.

THE FINEST HOURS was filmed in 2D and converted to 3D in post-production.  According to the director the filmmakers planned for 3D while making the film.  This is not always the case, so this attention to framing coupled with the significant amount of CGI layers results in a fairly robust 3D environment.  It does not hold a candle to a real 3D film, of course, but the conversion quality is above average.  

There are very little in the way of "pop-out" effects in the film, but depth is truly outstanding, which helps sell the different environments.  There is one shot that involves a verbal message being relayed from the top deck of the ship down to the engine room that is a good encapsulation of the benefits of the 3D in this film.  As each crew member relays the message, we see another hallway, stairwell, or open room that, subconsciously, reinforces the illusion that these characters are on an actual ship.  It's an impressive shot, made even more impressive since they were not on an actual ship and the shot in question was pieced together from multiple shots on the soundstage as a visual effect.  Any scene with weather also works effectively in 3D, which is most of the film.   

I won't say the 3D made this a dramatically different experience from the 2D version, but it's effective enough that it will be my go-to format if I watch the film again.  As stated above, this was an odd choice for 3D but it turned out to be a reasonably rewarding 3D experience.  It was not released on physical media in 3D in the United States as Disney had abandoned 3D by 2016.