Archive for September, 2006

Review of Welles play in Paris

Thursday, September 28th, 2006

Leslie Weisman has graciously sent along this report on the Paris production of Richard France�s�Welles play which has captivated theatergoers across Europe, but apparently, as with most Welles projects, it has yet to find backers for a U. S. production.

��* * * * * * * * * * ��OBEDIENTLY YOURS, ORSON WELLES�In Paris�By Leslie WeismanEarlier this month I had the great pleasure of seeing this play, written by the esteemed Welles scholar and author Richard France (Orson Welles on Shakespeare, 2001; The Theatre of Orson Welles, 1977) and adapted for the French stage by actor and writer Jacques Collard. "Obediently Yours, Orson Welles" has been translated into French, German, Dutch, Portuguese, Spanish, Polish, and Italian, and staged in as many countries. Failing a close-to-home venue, I did the next best thing, seeing it in a city that he loved and, judging by the full house and enthusiastic, sympathetic reception, one that remembers him, and returns the sentiment:�Paris. [This may be the appropriate place to note that I am a friend of Mr. France, and have worked with him. That said, what follows is my honest appraisal of seeing the play.]� Conveniently situated about a block from the Champs-Elys�es Cl�men�eau metro station, the Th��tre Marigny�s Salle Popesco, the "modern" half of the two-theater complex, seating about 300, is an ideal venue for an intimate portrayal of Welles.�The play is a marvel of economy that takes us through his life from the perspective of his last year, as his attempts to obtain financing for DON QUIJOTE from friends (in some cases, this appellation should be seen as carrying invisible quotation marks) and associates are set against a carefully structured, temporally shifting shadow play of episodes from his life and career.�Not an overly rosy portrait � no one would accuse the author of trying to whitewash Welles�it is nonetheless an intimate, affecting, and affectionate one.� The setting is a recording studio, where Welles is making the infamous radio commercials which, while essential sources of money that would allow him to make his own films, perhaps inevitably earned him the derision of the mean-spirited and the uninitiated � another reason this play should be on everyone�s play list, and not just Wellesians�.�

(more...)

THE DREAMERS: Orson Welles poetic masterpiece

Monday, September 25th, 2006

Here's a rare�treat.� A long scene from Orson Welles script of... �

���
THE DREAMERS (1982)�

Directed by Orson Welles. Screenplay by Orson Welles and Oja Kodar, based on The Dreamers and Echoes by Isak Dinesen.� Cinematography (in color) by Gary Graver.� Music by Erik Satie.�

Starring

Orson Welles as Marcus Kleek�
Oja Kodar as Pellegrina Leoni�

While no other actors were officially cast, Welles was hoping to obtain the services of the following actors:

Timothy Dalton as Lincoln Forsner
Oliver Reed as Guildenstern
Bud Cort as Pilot
Peter Ustinov as Baron Clootz
Alida Valli as Eudoxia�

and

Jeanne Moreau as Donna Lucetta Boscari

(Welles describes Moreau�s character in the script as having �a frizzled and deplorable red wig, two eyes, glittering with intelligence, which peer out at Lincoln from behind a mask of simple avarice and complicated wickedness. This is none other than DONNA LUCETTA BOSCARI herself, notorious from Vienna to Palermo, expert in poisons and aphrodisiacs, procuress to the higher clergy, and as we have seen � a hopelessly addicted gambler.�)�


Welles wrote the screenplay for this poetic masterpiece in 1978 and began shooting some short "test footage" of the picture in the garden and interior of his house in the Hollywood Hills throughout the early eighties.

This scene from Welles script is interesting to compare with the test footage Welles shot�that is included in ONE MAN BAND (on the Criterion DVD of F FOR FAKE).

The scene�takes place high in a Swiss Monastery, during a raging alpine snowstorm. Three ex-lovers of the great Opera singer, Pellegrina Leoni have converged to witness her play her final� scene� a death scene. Welles plays her Dutch friend and patron, Marcus Kleek.�

The script gives a much better idea of how Welles would have approached the material, since all we see in�the test footage is�a simple monologue by Welles, with no sense of the many effects he had planned to use in�the scene.� As the script indicates, these would have included long dissolves and double images, as well as reverse shots to the three men who are listening to him tell his story� �

________________


The OLD GENTLEMAN has stepped out of the shadows.

MARCUS KLEEK
The truth, young gentleman?

LINCOLN raises his head and looks at his old enemy.

MARCUS KLEEK
Now that you've cornered her and killed her, you want the truth?

LINCOLN discovers that all his ferocity has drained suddenly away...

MARCUS KLEEK
I have known this woman at a time when she was known to all the world by her real name. Before that I have known her. I saw her first on a small theatre stage in Venice and she was then sixteen years old. I bought a villa for her near Milan. And when she wasn't traveling, she stayed there, and had many friends around her. And sometimes we were alone together...
And then we used to laugh such at the world. And we would walk together in the garden, arm in arm. I alone, of all people, knew her.

GUILDENSTERN stirs in the shadows.
Until now, LINCOLN has net been aware of his presence.

GUILDENSTERN
You? -- you were her lover?

The OLD MAN meets his eye. Dismisses the word with contempt.

MARCUS KLEEK
Lovers!... I have seen her lovers... running about yapping around her, flattering and fighting...
No, young gentlemen � I was her friend.

(With great pride) At the gate of paradise when the keeper of the gate shall ask me who I am, I shall give no name and no position in the world. But I shall answer him:
"I was the friend of Pellegrina Leoni."
(more...)

Richard France’s play “Obediently Yours, Orson Welles” is now playing in Paris

Saturday, September 23rd, 2006

Richard France�s play OBEDIENTLY YOURS, ORSON WELLES is now playing in Paris at the Th��tre Marigny until Oct. 29.

Our European correspondent Allegra saw the play while she was in Paris and tells me it's quite wonderful, noting that the actor M. Drouot at times seemed almost to be channeling Welles. If you live or are going to be in France anytime during October you can order tickets here:

Tickets

Marigny - Salle Popesco
Carr� Marigny, avenue Marigny
75008 Paris

There is also a nice piece by David Larre (in French) here that has three pictures of M. Drouot as Orson Welles. He looks uncannily like Orson!

Article

Joseph McBride’s new book explodes a myth: IT’S ALL TRUE was under budget

Monday, September 18th, 2006

Joseph McBride's new book on Orson Welles features two chapters on the saga of the making, and unmaking ofTHE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND. It's the most comprehensive coverage of this unfinished Welles masterpiece that has yet been seen.

In the book Mr. McBride also goes into some detail about the early problems Welles encountered when he went to Brazil to film IT'S ALL TRUE. Among the astounding revelations are a "smoking gun" phone call between RKO vice-president Reginald Amour and Phil Reisman, where it's plainly clear that Welles had not gone over budget on IT'S ALL TRUE, but was actually about $500,000. underthe 1.2 million budget that RKO had allotted for the film.

Here are some of the factual memos from the RKO files that speak for themselves:


George Schaefer was under intense pressure from RKOs board in New York to cut the studio's mounting losses, so he wrote a heartfelt letter to Welles, noting how he had stood by him during the Hearst and industry efforts to suppress CITIZEN KANE. Now, with his own job on the line, George Schaefer asks Welles for a bit of cooperation and gratitude. To deliver his letter, he personally sent RKO executive Phil Reisman to Rio, who also had instructions to bring IT'S ALL TRUE to a quick conclusion, even if it meant shutting the production down. A few days before Reisman left for Rio, RKO Vice-President Reginald Armour called him in New York to discuss the situation.


REGINALD ARMOUR & PHIL REISMAN(Transcript of phone call):

April 27, 1942

REGINALD ARMOUR: Youre elected for Rio, brother.

PHIL REISMAN: ...I want to find out from the legal department about Welless contractwhat rights he has... Do you have the breakdown of the actual cost to datewhat the Mexican part of the picture (My Friend Bonito) has cost to date? Has there been any budget set?

REGINALD ARMOUR: Noit will be about $1.2 million altogetherbut we dont want to talk to him about thatwe dont want him to know.

PHIL REISMAN: Someone must have told himbecause when I was down there he was telling everyone the picture would cost a million dollars. Its going to be a documentary filmand well never get it back. George is sending me down there with the right to shut the God damn thing off if I want toand bring him home and take the loss right now.


###############################

(more...)

Susan Strasberg & John Huston on THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND

Monday, September 4th, 2006


Here's a very nice piece on OSOTW featuring comments from John Huston, Susan Strasberg and Gary Graver, written for the March, 1976 issue of AFTER DARK, a New York based magazine that billed itself as "The National Magazine of Entertainment."

********************************************

ORSON WELLES AND FIVE YEARS OF

"THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND"

By VIOLA HEGYI SWISHER- AFTER DARK - March, 1976


Orson Welles' upcoming new film. The Other Side of the Wind, is already five exciting years old. Parts of it, anyhow. It stars not only stars, but stellar directors, too. Nevertheless, all's Welles. He wrote it. Produced it. Directed it. Masterminded the lighting. The cinematography. He even worked the clapboard that snaps out the number of the scene about to be shot and chalks up whether it's Take Oneor Take Twenty. The only thing he didn't do in The Other Side of the Wind is act. And who knows? He may have done that too by now.

Welles assigned roles with prodigal unpredictability, in some cases casting to type, in others casting against type. John Huston was typecast. Susan Strasberg, definitely not. Huston slips naturally into the role of a big-time director because, of course, that's what he is. His own most recent distinguished directorial achievement is The Man Who Would Be King, which stars Christopher Plummer, Sean Connery, and Michael Caine. Director Huston bypassed actor Huston for King. However, it should be noted that in Wind he enacts with authority the role of director not because he is a director, but because he is an authoritative actor.

As to Welles' other manner of castingagainst typethere's diminutive Susan Strasberg. She combines a flair for feminine chic dramatically interwoven with the fiber of our unisex times and the delicate sensitivity of an instinctual psychic. With all these subtleties going. Susan plays a callous critic. And you know how they are! Citing their separate experiences with Welles, Huston and Strasberg, at different times and different places, arrived at parallel conclusions. The most restrained remark Huston made was a vibrant, "Orson's a rich and varied creative talent."

Her hands painting space-sketches as she described Welles' juxtaposing of 35mm color and blown-up 16mm black-and-white techniques, Susan put it this way: "His concept is brilliant." Clearly, this motion picture, with its film-within-a-film idea and image, can be a new experience for audiences as it was for the participants. "Only Orson could have done this picture."

John Huston, with an air of finality, puffed life into one of those huge, expense-be-damned cigars. Grizzled, gracious as he beamed his personal mid-morning salute to Welles, Huston greeted the California sunshine with matching warmth. All pale gold and green, the canyon outside was only minimally tamed to accommodate the spacious dwelling in an apparent wilderness not far from the Pacific Ocean. Inside the house, pre-Columbian art, modern paintings, booksclassic and contemporaryand the memorabilia of the illustrious gave special distinction to the living room of Huston's home away from home in Ireland.

(more...)

Mercedes McCambridge on THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND

Sunday, September 3rd, 2006

One of the saddest things to realize aboutOrson Welles late career wasthe lack of support he received not only from studios, but fromthe "bankable major stars." Part of the reason he couldn'tlauncha movieduring theeighties was because most top actors, like Redford, Nicholson, Newman, Beatty, Eastwood, etc. were demanding and gettinganincredible amount of money.

One only has to recall the story of Welles trying to cast any of the above actors for the leading role inThe Big Brass Ring, to realize how lucky Welles was in the olden days of Hollywood to havefriendship's withpeople like Marlene Dietrich, Charlton Heston, Anthony Perkins, Janet Leigh, Jeanne Moreau and Mercedes McCambridge.When they got a callfrom Welles most of them wouldusually try their best to drop everything in order to appear in his film. But how times changed...

By 1980, top actors, many of whomstated they loved Orson dearly and would be do anything for him, (like Jack Nicholson and Burt Reynolds),found convient excuses not to appear in The Big Brass Ring--even though they would make at least $1 million.In retrospect, it makes all the actors who agreed to appear in The Other Side of the Wind for virtually nothing, real Wellesian heroes. But as Mercedes McCambridge points out in this wonderful chapter from her 1981 autobiography, The Quality of Mercy, Only a certain breed of actor should ever even try to work for Orson Welles. And to all those actors, who worked soley for ars gratis artis,rather than for profit, we should be erternally grateful.

Actors like McCambridge, Tamiroff, Dietrich, Moreau, Gielgud, Redgrave, Huston, Keith Baxter, and virtually everyone who ever appeared in a Welles film before the mid-seventies. Those actors usually worked for peanuts, just so they could be in a film by a great director.

****************************************

I'm one of a host of people who were in a film of Orson's that has never been finished. I don't see how it can ever be finished. Those of us who began the film when it began are either dead or unrecognizably older. People change over a span of a decade or more.

The filming turned up from time to time in strange places and stranger situations. One scene was shot in the San Fernando Valley on Mother's Day, in a battered rented yellow school bus filled with life-sized cloth dummies dressed in GI raincoats and frizzy blond fright wigs sixteen of these things strapped into the seats of the beaten-up old bus! The actors were Edmund O'Brien, Cameron Mitchell, Paul Stewart, and I.

It was a hot valley-Sunday morning, and weaving up and down peaceful little streets called Ethel and Dorothy and Eunice was a bus full of strange things to come across on a Mother's Day. People on their way to Sunday service watched us pass. Sitting next to the bus driver on a makeshift stool and facing the rear of the bus was a monster; naked, bearded, and smoking a large cigar! Orson was naked only to his waist, but the churchgoers had no way of knowing that. Gathered around him and over the head of the squeezed-in driver were several half-nude young hippie-type fellows holding camera equipment. We would travel up Dorothy Street and back down Ethel, then across Eunice to Agnes and then back down to Harriet Place. Orson was shooting every Blade of grass on every street. It was hot, and we were hungry and thirsty. We said so.

Orson ordered the poor rented bus driver to stop at a pizza palace. There were some customers seated at the outside tables under the garish sun parasols. It must have been unsettling for those people to see our group pile out of our conveyance, leaving behind, strapped into their seats, the sixteen dummies in the raincoats and blond wigs. Orson refused to alight from the bus. That was just as well.

(more...)

N Y Times Book Review of “Hello Americans”

Saturday, September 2nd, 2006

The New York Times Sunday Book Review weighs in on Simon Callow's "Hello Americans" with an interesting piece by Gary Giddins.� Mr. Giddins makes some excellent points, and we can also be�quite thankful The Times didn't ask Charles Higgham or David Thomson to review the book.� In fact, The Times review serves as quite a refreshing anidote to the toxic piece written in last Sunday's� L A Times by Richard Schickel.� �

SURVIVING "CITIZEN KANE"�

By GARY GIDDINS�

What is it about Orson Welles that drives his chroniclers around the bend? Each emerges from the great man�s messy life and messier legacy convinced that he or she has found the explanatory Rosebud. The mystery they feel obliged to explain is not how Welles survived as an independent filmmaker, creating remarkable films that were not mutilated by producers; but rather, why the erstwhile genius of radio, theater and movies, friend to presidents and champion of civil rights ended up as an obese TV pitchman for cheap wine. Welles�s biographers mingle like the sharks in �The Lady From Shanghai,� devouring one another.�The reputation of his onetime colleague John Houseman has receded from that of a mighty producer, professional elitist and financial investment shill to that of an unreliable memoirist with an ax planted in Welles�s skull. Pauline Kael�s �Raising Kane� cashiered any respect she might have earned as a scholar, not because she got so many facts wrong but because she refused to correct or acknowledge them. In his psychological broadside �Rosebud,� David Thomson expressed the wish that Welles�s �Don Quixote� not be released because, given its �tattered� legend, �actual screenings would be so deflating.� The British critic Clinton Heylin has written a defense of Welles, �Despite the System,� that is so violently ill mannered as to render his good research indigestible.

Complete review here:� Surviving Citizen Kane

The New York Times: Orson’s Back and Marlene’s Got Him!

Saturday, September 2nd, 2006

After The Other Side of the Wind hadbeen shooting for only a few months, Charles Higgham, whoseerror-ridden book on Welles hadrecently been published, wrote this short piece about the filming of OSOTW. It appeared in The New York Times on January 31, 1971, and since Mr. Higgham's piece gets almost 100 % of his facts wrong, it seemslikely, that as other N Y Times reporters have been known to do, he may have simply "invented" many of hisfacts. In retrospect, however, it certainly makes for quite an amusing read. In fact, it makes a nice companion piece to Richard Schickel's recent Welles book review inthe L A Times!

**********************************

ORSON'S BACK AND MARLENE'S GOT HIM!
By CHARLES HIGHAM, author of "The films of Orson Welles"

For months now, Hollyood has been talking about a secretly made feature film being directed by Orson Welles, his first American movie since "Touch of Evil" 14 years ago. Made largely on location in Los Angeles, the picture's cast includes Marlene Dietrich, and it is financed by Welles himself. Shooting began last September, but few have know exactly when or where since; the crew has been loyally silent, few of the cast can be reached for comment. In a controversial exchange in these pages last year, Peter Bogdanovich, Welles's Boswell, denied that Welles was making the picture at all, even though he had assisted him in the production, which was shooting at that time. Yet the same day that Bogdanovich's denial appeared, Welles was creating a sequence at Century City, and there wasn't a self-respecting gossip in town who hadn't spread word of it.

The picture is "The Other Side of the Wind," a story written by Welles about a crusty, veteran director of the Henry Hathaway/John Ford breed who comes back to Hollywood after a long exile to be confronted by the self-conscious intellectualism and Beverly Hills hippiedom of Hollywood in the 1970's--with fantastic and often funny results. Typically, Welles has been shooting off the cuff, improvising the story daily. It hasn't been settled whether John Huston or Welles himself will appear in the role of the director, whose scenes are to be shot last.

Nobody knows when the picture will be finished: shooting was interrupted recently when Marlene Dietrich had to return to Paris to attend the funeral of her close friend, Coco Chanel.

Paul Mazursky, director of "Alex in Wonderland," who appears in the film, told how he came to be in it on a radio show I conduct: he was at home one evening when Bert Schneider, an independent producer, called him to ask if he would like to appear in a film of Orson Welles's. "Naturally I said, 'Yes.' To all of us, he's the idol. When Bert said, 'Come to Welles's house tonight,' and gave me the address I couldn't believe it. I went over, and quite a few directors were there to play the scene with me: Monte Hellman, Bob Rafelson and others. I'm excited by Welles's improvisatory methods, which have influenced my own."

The scene in which Mazursky and the directors of "The Shooting" and "Five Easy Pieces" appear concerns a sudden power failure that plunges Marlene Dietrich's Bel Air dinner party into darkness. The guests start interviewing each other obsessively. It is characteristic of Welles that he should combine in the sequence an impish humor at the expense of the contemporary film scholar's interviewing obsessions, and an overriding concern, visible in all his films, with the nature of human identity.


Akradin rides again.

ORSON WELLES: “But Where Are We Going?”

Friday, September 1st, 2006

Shortly after Welles had begun filming The Other Side of the Wind, he published this piece in Look magazine (Nov. 3, 1970), about the rise in prominence of young directors who were now seen as the driving force behind Hollywood's biggest box-office hits. Films like Dennis Hopper's Easy Rider and Paul Mazursky's Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice - both of whom would appear in The Other Side of the Wind as spokesmen for the hip new generation of young Hollywood filmmakers.  But, ironically, although these directors were given the same kind of freedom Welles had on Citizen Kane - a fact which Welles wryly notes in his opening remarks - they strangely succumbed to the same fate as Welles with their follow-up films. Both Hopper and Mazursky produced box-office disasters. The Last Movie virtually ended Hopper's directing career, while Mazursky's Alex in Wonderland, came very close to sinking his.

At any rate, Welles essay here is a vintage piece of his writing acumen which makes for a superb introduction to his own script that was very much written in the spirit of experimentation and freedom that the late sixties engendered.

Of special note is how prominently Welles speaks of Napoleon, whose story Stanley Kubrick was, at the very same time, vainly trying to convince MGM to finance for his own epic film about the life of the French Emperor.

****************************************

BUT WHERE ARE WE GOING?

By Orson WellesLook, November 3, 1970

Just at this modish moment, everybody under 30—and his idiot brother-wants to be a film director. And why not?

(more...)