Graver memorial update

[Mr. Bernstein]

I attended the Gary Graver memorial/tribute at the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood on Sunday, January 21st and to say it was different, let alone, a bit of a shock, would be an understatement. About 300 people filled up the theatre, as slides of Gary's movies (good and bad) played on a continuous loop on the screen. About halfway into the ceremony, a shocking and disturbing "hush" came over the audience, when a film clip of Oja f#cking some guy in a car for 10 minutes took over the giant screen (you know the scene: non-stop grinding/humping/thrusting). About 2 minutes in, anyone who brought children, quickly picked them up and headed for the exits. About 5 minutes in, a huge chunk of the audience were making a mad dash for the exits, as sighs, whispers and comments could be heard as to why they would show such a graphic, sex scene at the memorial of someone who just died! As a final thought, there were many touching moments throughout the tribute, but Wellesian or not, the programmers could've showed another more light-hearted scene from "TOSOTW", such as Jake's party scene, ("Yes, of course you are"). I'm all for a good sex scene (who isn't?) but the decision to show Oja's emotionless cinematic orgasm (in it's entirety no less), at what was basically a wake, was the wrong call.

[rizibo]

Thanks for the report on what happened in the tribute to Gary Graver. I agree with you that the sex scene in Other Side of the Wind may have been inappropriate for a memorial especially when kids are present. However, I can see why this sequence was selected. This scene is one of the most beautiful scenes shot by Graver. It may be the most beautiful sex scenes ever. It is definetely the most unique with all the flashes of light on Oja. The editing is great with the progressively rapid cutting as the scene reaches the climax. The sequence also is unique with Oja appearing in ecstacy while the man she is having sex with is appearing to remain unsatisfied during the entire tryst. The movie has a parallel story of the aging director who has no success in courting Hollywood in making a movie. Maybe the sex scene symbolizes the failure of an artist in achieving fulfillment in his art. I think this is the tragedy of Orson Welles. Because of the great craftmanship and great meaning of this scene, I think it is not pornography but instead great art. I hope this movie will be released soon.

[The Night Man]

I also attended the Graver memorial and while showing the car/sex scene from TOSOTW may not have been the best idea, the audience, which seemed to be composed mostly of friends, relations, and colleagues of Mr. G., appeared to me to take it in stride. I didn't hear any comments and frankly I didn't see any stampede for the exits during the clip, although people were coming and going throughout the lengthy (3-hour) tribute.

Surely most of them were aware of his extensive career in exploitation filmmaking. With titles like ATTACK OF THE 60 FOOT CENTERFOLD and BIKINI HOE DOWN among his credits I doubt that many were seriously shocked.

There were encomiums from Curtis Harrington, Russ Tamblyn, John Phillip Law, Ross Hagan, and Bud Cort (whose "performance" I found obnoxious and more inappropriate than the TOSOTW clip). Wellesian tributes came from Joseph McBride (who said that Graver's style was strong enough to force Welles to adapt his own style to meet it), Myron Meisel, and Bill Krohn (who referred to OW as "the godfather of independent filmmakers"). Written tributes were sent by Oja, Stefan Droessler, and Todd McCarthy. Not a word from Beatrice, though!

The most amusing story came from Joseph McBride, who told of learning from Graver that he had worked with Ed Wood. While at Graver's house he browsed through Gary's collection of his own work, but didn't see Wood's name on any of the tapes there. Graver sheepishly admitted that the film was so bad that Wood had taken his name off it! The film, by the way, was a soft-core quickie called ONE MILLION YEARS AC/DC.

The final speaker was a gentleman by the name of Frank Frazolla(?), a film editor who had helped Graver write a budget for the completion of TOSOTW. He spoke of Graver repeatedly getting the response from prospective backers after viewing the footage that "there's not a film there". Mr. Frazolla, however, maintained his own belief that there is a film in the material. Someone else (I don't recall who) said that Graver's death would probably mean the end of any possibility of TOSOTW being completed.

[NoFake]

"The final speaker was a gentleman by the name of Frank Frazolla(?), a film editor who had helped Graver write a budget for the completion of TOSOTW." Frank Mazzola?

[The Night Man]

Frank Mazzola?

Must have been him. I wasn't familiar with the name (obviously) and didn't know of his involvement with the project.

[rizibo]

A previous post showed that Graver gave an interview in an Australian Film festival and he said TOSOTW will be released in June 2007.
http://www.afc.gov.au/newsand....97.aspx

[NoFake]

What's also interesting is this:

We were just at the NFSA looking at a 16mm film in our collection called Orson Welles Tonight. You think it's something special. Can you tell me about it?

Before we started shooting The Other Side of the Wind in January 1971, we did a series of short stories, specifically for a department store called Sears Roebuck in the States. They were going to sell a console, like a television set, and on it you could play programs [supplied by Roebuck]. The first one was Orson Welles, and then they were going to have variety shows, music and everything. I don't know if they ever did that, or if it sold very well. But it was exclusive to the department store. You had to buy the console set, and then you got this program Orson Welles Tonight.

Apparently the film still exists. Has anyone seen it?

[rizibo]

The interview with Graver stated a cable network was going to release TOSOTW. I read in the following link that Showtime was going to release TOSOTW in the past and I wonder if Showtime will be releasing it in June 2007.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Other_Side_of_the_Wind

[Kevin Loy]

Exactly how much of TOSOTW was edited by Welles? I seem to remember reading somewhere that Welles had a 3-hour workprint, and he had edited approx. 50 minutes of it (but why not edit the whole thing, even if there was very little hope of it being released in his lifetime? At least there would be *something* to go by). And of course, it would be nice to think that the 'cable network' deal is actually going through this time, and that editing was complete (or at least nearly complete) by this point in time, assuming that Graver had any input on it (though I doubt that all hope is lost, so long as Bogdanovich is still around)

[The Night Man]

I doubt that all hope is lost, so long as Bogdanovich is still around

That's what I was thinking, as well, when the comment was made (wish I could recall who said it - I know it wasn't Mr. Mazzola) but of course we don't know what's really going on behind the scenes.

[rizibo]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that Welles had a 3-hour workprint, and he had edited approx. 50 minutes of it (but why not edit the whole thing, even if there was very little hope of it being released in his lifetime? At least there would be *something* to go by).

According to Joseph McBride's book "Whatever happened to Orson Welles" on page 207 "Welles later years found him involved in a protracted fight in France for control of the negative. Claiming precedence as the film's author, Welles sued for ownership...The court agreed that Welles was the auteur of The Other Side of the Wind and as such retained final cut but decreed that Boushehri's (the Iranian financial backer for the movie) part ownership had to be settled before the film could be released. The stalemate between Welles and Boushehri over financial terms and artistic control would continue well beyond Welles's death." Maybe Welles was unable to do any editing during the court battle.

I thought a cable deal was going to happen because of the interview with Graver in the Australian film festival but I emailed Jonathan Rosenbaum (a noted Welles scholar) at www.Chicagoreader.com and he emailed me that there is no deal with a cable company to release the film. This is very discouraging. Showtime was interested in releasing the film in 1998 but backed off after Beatrice Welles objected to someone other than Welles editing the film. According to McBride in page 213 of his book, "According to Bogdanovich, Beatrice is no longer blocking the film's release, and the myriad people who have spent nearly 30 years quibbling over fees and shares of profit are also on the verge of reconciliation: 'The cable company (Showtime) is talking to everyone involved.'" This gives us some hope it may be released.

Maybe we can make a difference if we can send email to Showtime that we are interested in seeing The Other Side of the Wind. If Showtime gets enough email from us (I believe there are over 500 people registered in this site) and from our friends, Showtime might be encouraged that this movie could be profitable just like the reconstruction of The Touch of Evil was when it had a theatrical release a few years ago.

[Glenn Anders]

Worth a try.

Can Larry French Email the membership?

Glenn Anders

[Kevin Loy]

Maybe Welles was unable to do any editing during the court battle.

Admittedly, my knowledge of film editing is very limited, but I've always thought that the workprint itself is edited before the film negative is cut in order to save wear on the negative stock. So if he had the workprint in his possession (whereas the negatives would be held by others, and I'd be surprised to learn that the courts seized a workprint unless it was specifically cited in the lawsuit), that is what make me wonder why Welles was unable to edit the film himself: if he did have a 3-hour workprint for a decade (assuming that he had it that long), and assuming that all of the footage he wanted in the film was contained in that workprint, then it seems odd that he wouldn't have made the time to at least edit the workprint (though, in all fairness, perhaps he thought that there was no possibility of the film ever being released). But considering the complexity of the editing in the two scenes that I have watched, I imagine that editing the film on a part-time basis would have taken an extreme amount of time anyway...

[Tony]

The different opinions of what exactly went on at the funeral service reminds one of Rashomon; or for that matter, Kane: we'll never know 'what actually happened' because there is no objective reality, past the bare physical facts of the people that were in the room and the words that were said. Rather, there are only differing subjective truths, perceptions, thoughts, feelings and emotions of the meaning of the events. Welles quite likely would relish this ambiguity, as his art was based on this idea. From Kane to Fake, we're never sure of anything except that we're unsure of everything: the ambiguous is the norm. The modern world's dilemna. In fact, it's a nice idea for a film: a funeral service of a great person, told 4 times in a row by 4 different individuals, with the perception of the service coloured by the individuals' recollections of their experiences with the deceased.

Flashbacks abound; events are disordered...

Hmmmm.... :;):

[rizibo]

So if he had the workprint in his possession... why Welles was unable to edit the film himself.

According to Joseph McBride in his book "Whatever Happened to Orson Welles" on page 204, "Graver has inspected the negative and found it in good condition, unlike the battered work-print material edited by Welles..." The work print probably became in too poor condition to edit it anymore and Welles couldn't make a new work print because the negative was tied up in court.

The home page here has information that The Other Side of the Wind can't be released because Oja Kodar wants 1 million dollars and Bogdanovich and Beatrice Welles want 1 million dollars. Orson Welles gave The Other Side of the Wind to Oja Kodar in his will. So I can understand her asking for some money for the film. Bogdanovich invested $200,000 of his own money for the film so he is entitled to this amount. But Beatrice Welles has no legal right to ask any money for this film. Her father did not give her any share of the ownership in this film in his will. Her interference with her attorney has caused this film to be suppressed. This interference is a violation of the freedom of speech. Oja Kodar should contact the ACLU to defend her release of this film. The ACLU should defend Kodar and scholars who want to further our knowledge of Orson Welles and his work. We should contact Oja Kodar and ask her to contact the ACLU to resolve this problem.