Ambersons "Rumor" - Complete cut supposedly destroyed, but..

[71-1045893605]

I've heard from a few scholarly sources that a longer cut of "Ambersons" is indeed, stored in a monastery in Rio. Sounds like a great movie idea where two bungling, vaudeville actors trek up to Brazil, searching for "Ambersons". Oh, wait, didn't Hope and Crosby do that in "Road To Rio"?

On that 1930's (lost?) Karloff-Lugosi/satanic movie. Wasn't that "The Black Cat" which they made together in 1935?
If not, then I've never heard of it. Neither have any of my Lugosi/Karloff collector-friends.

[Welles Fan]

The reference to the Sunrise restoration and the mention that the home video release is "another department" is interesting. I guess it was the home video guys who made the bizarre decision to not offer the Sunrise DVD for sale?

[Lance Morrison]

that's so crappy, why do you have to buy 3 movies just to watch Sunrise...I have written them telling them how stupid it is but obviously they dont care that the best movie in their "Studio Classics" collection cant even be directly purchased.

Thanks for the info on the greed restoration

[Welles Fan]

Noel Shane: I agree with you on the "special" stuff that many feel is so necessary for a DVD release. I usually watch that stuff once, and if it is a movie I am really familiar with, I get bored with hearing the same old stories I've already heard. I really could care less if Rear Window or Casablanca has some "documentary". However, I guess they may be of interest to film neophyres.
In the case of Warner's Kane, I think the added disc actually does more harm than good, as it repeats the myth that Welles only made one great film (Kane), and even undermines the greatness of that film as it depicts it as little more than a mean attack on a great man's privacy by some callow youth who was really a jerk. If I loaned out the Kane disc and got it back sans the second disc, I would not mind it in the least. I love the first disc, though!

However, the supplemental material to Criterion's Ambersons laserdisc is extremely interesting and valuable IMO. You get a commentary by Robert Carringer explaining the film's history, and he even points out what is missing, and who re-shot what scenes. The "visual essay" he provides, with stills from the cut scenes and story boards and the entire script are important in trying to get at least a hint of what the original film may have been like. They also included the best known print/negative of the film, too. I only hope Rick Schmidlin or someone does find "the missing stuff" so as to make the Criterion special edition irrelevant.

Lance: The Greed restoration by Rick Schmidlin is awesome! Some of the best and most important scenes in the movie were the ones Rick restored with stills and new intertitles. This works particulalrly well with silent movies, as the viewer is already accustomed to reading titles. There are so many stills for Greed, and Rick moves in on some for closeups. It really is fairly seamless. As I remember the film, I seem to remember seeing it all as one moving picture. I don't think the effect would work as well with a sound film, though. If TCM shows it again, it's a must-record film. You will really be shocked at how much was cut. Greed is easily as bad a job of cutting as Ambersons was.

[jaime marzol]

we differ.

i love a well made dvd/disc. i love listening to a film professor peeling back layers to reveal meanings i had never noticed before. i mostly opt to watch the same great films over and over, rather than venture into never before seen films, and possibly waste 2-hours. so new handles, hidden meanings, and new depths in characters and meaning, are marvelous to find.

the delight in film watching that i've derived from reading david bordwell, is what i'm trying to put in the stranger, and it's what i look for in a classic film disc.

we all have different taste, we all look for different things. i posted what i like to look at. it's simple as that.. this road to film appreciation is not for everyone, but if one guy reads something i wrote about KEY LARGO, and next time he watches KEY LARGO he watches with different eyes, and finds new handles of meaning in scenes that he never noticed before; and those handles lead to the discovery of other handles of meaning, and enjoyment, what the hell is wrong with that?

it's like the art of watching films, 101

[jaime marzol]

In TOUCH OF EVIL, when Vargas rampages through the strip club, every angle we are given of his rampage comes at us from every angle we are given of the strip club on prior visits. The angle of shots of Vargas’ rampage, in fact, summarizes, and caps all the other visits. It gives us closure. This comes at the end of the movie. The reason we need this closure is because prior to the rampage when we visit the strip club we visit it at different times of day, and different activities are going on, naturally, making it look like different places. It’s not, since the film covers a 24-hr period, it can only be the same place at different times of day.

Why are we confused by the bar visits? Because welles gives us no establishing shots. The establishing shot that we should get for every bar visit is in the opening shot; that deep, penetrating angle we get when the camera looks up from the time bomb.

Just like the INTERIOR visits to the strip bar are synopsized at the end by vargas’ rampage, the EXTERIOR angles of the strip bar that we should during street scenes are synopsized in the opening shot: welles said it himself, everything that is important is in that opening shot. when vargas crosses to the bar from his hotel, before that quinlan stands in front of the honeymoon hotel and mentions susan doesn’t look Mexican, when quinlan and the cops cross the border, when susan looks out her window after pancho throws the bulb, when uncle joe is in the parking shack and chases pancho; only one thing ties all these angles together. The little silhouette of the stripper on top of rancho grande. Welles very painstakingly made sure that little stripper silhouette is on top of every town scene. We don’t get an establishing shot to the bar visits. And once we see every angle of the strip bar in the opening shot, we are never again given the same angle again twice; which stands completely opposed to what any other Hollywood director would do.

The letter boxing unceremoniously slashes off the top, and bottom of every scene. What did welles put at the top of his framing? The little stripper silhouette that ties all these scenes together.

So you see jeff, aesthetics is not a matter of taste, it’s a matter of education, theory, and research. Lots of idiots around think CITIZEN KANE sucks.

[Jeff Wilson]

Jesus, whatever you say. I'm done with the argument.

[jaime marzol]

remember welles came from arkadin to touch of evil. just like that castle in arkadin overlooking everything becomes a layer of meaning, that little stripper sign atop rancho grande overlooks los robles. if you randomly letterbox arkadin you cut out the castle, you lose geometric balancing, beauty, and meaning. does it matter? probably not. most won't notice.
i will tough.

[jaime marzol]

arguing? i thought we were posting points of view.

sorry, did not realize we were arguing.

[jaime marzol]

maybe my views are too radical for this board. i seem to stir up a hornets nest atmosphere. i will refrain from posting opinions.

[Welles Fan]

I still have not seen the letterboxed T.O.E. I taped the "restored" full screen version off cable, but I have never gotten around to seeing the DVD and comparing the aspect ratios. I gotta say I'm kinda curious about it now.

I think I should add a caveat to my earlier post about eschewing "special features". I am annoyed when the special features are the S.O.S. we've heard and seen a thousand times. Or if they are like the boring new Chaplin Today documentaries Warner included with their new Chaplin releases (in which filmmakers describe how the films of Chaplin "inspired" them). I've certainly seen some that have interesting supplements. Like the aformentioned Criterion Ambersons, their Kane, and their Othello. These laserdisc versions featured interesting backstories and details that are not that well known, or at least were not at the time of the laserdisc releases. This is why I am working on my own home-made DVD-R versions of these classic special editions with "extra features" and interesting commentary tracks. Sets like the Warner Kane are worthwhile for the remastered films alone, but I would have preferred a cheaper one-disc version of their Kane.

[Oscar Christie]

Jaime Marzol:

maybe my views are too radical for this board. i seem to stir up a hornets nest atmosphere. i will refrain from posting opinions.

That would be a loss to the board, please reconsider this vow

[Jeff Wilson]

maybe my views are too radical for this board. i seem to stir up a hornets nest atmosphere. i will refrain from posting opinions.

Perhaps it was merely my annoyance showing through at someone who accuses me without proof of odious behavior towards him, who stomps off and posts (at the same place the alleged behavior took place) that he'll never post at Wellesnet again, and then comes running back at the first chance to pimp his projects. And at the site run and paid for by the person he has accused. Ever consider that?

[Lance Morrison]

Jamie, I like your posts, I hope the problems can be resovled, the board would be less were you not here.... and besides friendly argument makes discussions much more interesting and progressive

[Oscar Christie]

This board benefits from a diversity of viewpoints, as long as they're not aggressive, or offensive.