The Magnificent Ambersons - Finished Version?

[Roger Ryan]

I wonder if Welles described to Ben Barry what his idea was for the ending? The original closing boarding house scene (and George's auto accident) were meant to take place only about a year after George and Fanny's last night in the mansion. Clearly, due to the age of actors Tim Holt, Anne Baxter, Agnes Moorehead and Joseph Cotten, a new ending shot in the late 60s/early 70s would have to take place approx. 25 years after that "last night" in the mansion (or after George's accident).

As wonderful as it would have been for Welles to have come up with a new ending, it would not have addressed the remaining 40 minutes or so of material removed or changed throughout the rest of the picture. Perhaps Welles would have at least re-edited some of the existing scenes back to their original configuration (in fact, given his habit, I'm certain he would have tinkered with the editing).

[atcolomb]

If i remember correctly Welles wanted to change the ending where they visit George after the auto accident. In the current version of the movie you see Joseph Cotton and Agnes Moorhead walking down a hallway at the hospital looking at each other as the movie fades out and this is what Welles wanted to change?...it would make sense beacause the ending is not the one he wanted.

[Gordon]

I wonder if Welles described to Ben Barry what his idea was for the ending? ... Clearly, due to the age of actors Tim Holt, Anne Baxter, Agnes Moorehead and Joseph Cotten, a new ending shot in the late 60s/early 70s would have to take place approx. 25 years after that "last night" in the mansion (or after George's accident).

Yes, Ben said it would have to take place 20 years after the main story.
I'll ask him if he remembers the proposed new ending the next time I see him

[Glenn Anders]

Thank you, Gordon. There's someone here who always knows the real deal.

That said, you might want to ask Mr. Barry how likely he thinks it would have been for RKO to support the reissue of a commercially unsuccessful film like THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS in the 1970's, whether or not Sight and Sound was ranking Welles and the picture highly. (Fewer Americans could identify the magazine then than now. And that's not saying much.)

But it is nice to know that someone at RKO was willing to sit down with Welles to discuss the issue.

Glenn

[Kevin Loy]

As wonderful as it would have been for Welles to have come up with a new ending, it would not have addressed the remaining 40 minutes or so of material removed or changed throughout the rest of the picture.

Right. For me, though, I would wonder how he would handle the Richard Bennett monologue. As This Is Orson Welles shows, well over half of the monologue is missing from the film, reducing his "profound thinking" to a bizarre, unfulfilled thought.

Another interesting thought, of course, regards just how the closing scene would have been re-shot, and how it would have matched the feel and look of the rest of the film. Would he have used Gary Graver to shoot the scenes or Stanley Cortez? And what about Bernard Herrmann's original sound-track? Obviously, it wouldn't be impossible to re-record it, but would they try to find a compromise between the limited fidelity of the original 40s sound track and a then-state of the art 70s recording, or would they even bother with a technical detail like that?

It would have been very intriguing if Welles had re-shot the ending (especially, in my opinion, if the scene between Joseph Cotten and Anne Baxter talking in the garden had been re-shot as well...it seems to me that their advanced age would give that scene a lot more depth), so it is perhaps a shame that he never had the chance...though, unfortunately, a lot of this could have been prevented if he had held onto his right to make the final cut.

[Roger Ryan]

Perhaps more important than the conclusion of the Major's monologue (for continuity purposes) is the section that precedes it where we were meant to hear the off-screen voices of Fanny and Jack discussing the failure of the headlight they had been investing in. This exchange combined with the cut narration explaining that the Major had forgotten to deed the house to Isabel are the two things that would have explained why the family lost their fortune so quickly, and they were both removed from the released version!

I tend to think that a "garden scene" taking place twenty years later would have to be rewritten. Lucy as a middle-aged woman who has not moved on from a relatively short romance a quarter of a century earlier would be too strange! Also, George's accident would have to be reshot (or cut) since it was meant to follow the "garden scene".

As I mentioned before, I suspect if Welles did get the money and rights to shoot a new ending for "Ambersons", he would have been tempted to re-edit the film as well and probably would have added some additional narration to cover the imposed lapses of continuity.

[Kevin Loy]

That is a good point regarding the monologue. If I hadn't known the basic story before seeing the film, I probably would have been lost...it seems strange, though, that their "effort" to appeal to a broader audience caused them to hack out the straighforward aspects of the scene.

(by the way, I came across this online today:
http://www.bartleby.com/160/
I hate reading books online, but since I haven't come across a print copy yet...)

I'm not so sure that I agree about the garden scene, though. I mean, I wouldn't exactly say that Eugene had gotten over his brief courtship with Isabel (moving past something isn't necessarily the same as getting over something, in my opinion). To put another film example into perspective, consider Raymond Shaw in The Manchurian Candidate, and how he was incapable of moving on after his brief romance.

[Roger Ryan]

I'm not so sure that I agree about the garden scene, though. I mean, I wouldn't exactly say that Eugene had gotten over his brief courtship with Isabel (moving past something isn't necessarily the same as getting over something, in my opinion).

Kevin - You may have misread my post. My intent was to suggest that the same dialogue spoken about Lucy's relationship with George, but twenty years later, would seem too strange, suggesting as it would that Lucy never found another love and continued to live with her father. It works in the story for her to claim she doesn't want to get into a serious relationship again since only a few months have passed since she broke up with George. But twenty years later...!

On the other hand, you are correct about Eugene's much longer relationship with Isabel. Eugene is romantic to a fault and one gets the impression he will never truly move on from his nostalgic connection to Isabel. Welles' original boarding house ending demonstrated how Eugene's blind devotion to her was unbecoming in light of Fanny's plight.

[Kevin Loy]

Roger

I did understand your post, but my point was that some people have felt emotional alienation after experiences during their youth that could conceivably cause them to end up in that imagined scenario. Admittedly, it is far fetched, because emotionally scarring experiences are generally much more traumatic than the causal end of a young love affair (as opposed to it ending from, say, a sexual assault, which certainly has left people emotionally crippled), but I doubt that it is impossible. (As I said before...though he's a fictional character, keep Raymond Shaw in mind here)

The point with Eugene, of course, was to show that this sort of thing happened in the story itself. Eugene did move on from his courtship, but he never really got over it (as he said at the party, Lucy was the only reason why he didn't regret stepping through the bass), and it is pretty obvious that he didn't get over how it ended the second time. With Lucy, I think it might be a bit more complex. After reading the book's text for the street corner scene, I considered that perhaps Lucy felt some responsibility for disrupting her father's happiness (though it isn't explicit in the film, this is in the book:

“I don’t know when I’m coming back. Mother and I are starting to-morrow night for a trip around the world."
At this she did look thoughtful. “Your mother is going with you?”

Which gives it, in my opinion, a completely different tone than the scene in the film). Now, it is one thing to miss your own chances at happiness, but to cause somebody else to lose their chance at it?

Fanny is another interesting case. As somebody who obviously had feelings for Eugene, they went completely unfulfilled, but...instead of getting over it, she let it dominate her life. Considers how she breaks down during the kitchen scene when George and Jack start teasing her: so (please excuse this, ladies) girlish in its sentiments...this is the response of somebody who has lived with her feelings about Eugene for a long time, either through a lack of ability or interest in moving past them.

So, I do agree that it would seem abnormal for Lucy to end up in a similar situation, but I think this film proves that it certainly wasn't uncommon in their midland town.

[Glenn Anders]

I agree with you, kevin, that advanced age would have given the final scene more strength. And Welles would have found a way to deal with the other problems. He would have relished the opportunity.

For some reason, he felt that THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS was the film of his life. This is one he really needed to finish.

Glenn

[Gordon]

There's a lively discussion of Ambersons including:
Ryan's structural ideas about the film, Glenn's theory of Kane and Ambersons as representing the ying and yang of American society, Mteals's conjecture that George and Fanny might not be so happy after the wedding, Roger Ryan's ideas about the use of mirrors, that can be found in another thread on Ambersons currently on going in the Radio section. I'm linking it for reference here