I hate the Moor...

[A Kid Ran]

...and apparently, so do the people who "restored" Othello.

While watching my DVD of Othello tonight, i caught the most distracting sound artifact i think i've ever heard on a film's soundtrack.

It occurs at the beginning of the scene where Othello prepares to kill Desdemona. After he turns out the first candle, the music swells and Othello pulls apart the curtains to reveal Desdemona, who is pretending to sleep.

Well, the music dies down and we hear a television in the background--it's hard to make out what's being said, but i distinctly heard a news anchor say CBS.

Granted, i was wearing headphones, but is this really what a million dollar restoration gets you?

???

[Roger Ryan]

Yeah, I caught the same thing the last time I watched the DVD. I'm wondering if it was a mastering issue at Image Entertainment or if it was present during the actual audio mix of the film itself.

[Terry]

I could pull out my old vhs copy, but even without CBS news playing in the background the audio is so abysmal that I don't wish to suffer it again any time soon (or ever for that matter.) Daddy really is dead and so is his film.

[ToddBaesen]

When I recently got a copy of the European cut of OTHELLO, I compared it to the 1992 Castle Hill–Beatrice Welles "restoration." To my shock it became extremely apparent just how badly this film was mangled by the work of restoration producers Michael Dawson and Arnie Saks and their "loving" restoration team. Since OTHELLO had been so long out of circulation, it was rather difficult to complain about their work when it appeared in 1992, as their was nothing to compare it with, until the Criterion LaserDisc came out.

Now, these same producers are at work "restoring and improving" Orson Welles greatest masterpiece, CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT. Thankfully, that film is more widely available for comparison before the fact, so let us hope we can stop any hack restoration work on that film from ever seeing the light of a projector.

Beyond the above flaws mentioned on OTHELLO, it also appears there was a total lack of research or any attempt to consult with any Welles' principal collaborators on the film, including the many actors, editors, cameramen and composers who were still alive and living in Europe in 1992. As a result, any work that was done to correct the flaws in the sync of the soundtrack were sheer guesswork and completely incorrect.

In fact, many more errors were committed to the restored soundtrack, than actually existed in the original print! Now, for instance, we get to see several scenes featuring actors mouthing lines without dialogue coming from their lips. In one astounding instance of sheer incompetence, we see Cassio mouthing lines being spoken by Michael MacLiammoir, which of course, are supposed to be spoken by Iago. On top of this, many actors line readings of Shakespeare’s text have been altered from Welles intended version, whenever the restoration sound editor felt he needed to snip out a few words to better fit the dialogue to the actors lip sync. And this all happened in only the first 30 minutes of the film!

Now, being fully aware of the breath of the incompetence of Mr. Dawson and Mr. Saks, we can easily discredit their work on CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT before they unveil their new stereo version on critics who are either too lazy or too uniformed to realize what a travesty they might be seeing. Let's just hope it never even gets that far!

[Tony]

One of the complaints about the 1992 Othello was they carved the dialogue out of the soundtrack and then threw the soundtrack away; they then fitted the words to the actors mouths, and re-recorded all of the foley sounds and the music (the latter without consulting the composer, Lavagnino). Welles was a big fan of Lavagnino, and he described the opening funeral music as "hair-raising". just compare the Beatrice version of the music with the original, and you'll see the difference between "hair-raising" and something less than that. They took away so much of that film's power.

With Chimes, the reviews at the time complained about the sound. So Dawson and Saks (do we know for sure they are working on it?) will have that on their mind. I wouldn't be surprised if they did the same thing as on their Othello: carve out the dialogue and fit it to the actor's mouths, and (unless they have separable soundtrack elements) re-foley the film, and again re-record the music in stereo. Lavagnino's family almost sued last time for the damage done to their father's work; I wonder if they'll decide this time that enough is enough?

And of course, the problem is not only replacing elements, but changing the delicate and precise balance and mix of those elements. For example, François Thomas told me that Welles processed, mixed and edited the music for the Trial to the point where the composer was quite upset. And I recall Welles telling Bogdanovich that he had done a "Beatles" on the music for the Chimes battle, recording the music backwards, overlaying tracks, re-mixing, etc. In other words, Welles was also a master of sound, and his soundtracks can not, and should not, be replaced or tampered with.

At any rate, if they really are working on Chimes, it's disheartening. What else does Beatrice own? My memory is that Oja owns everything from when she came on the scene, around 1966. So that would be all the unfinished stuff (including Don Quixote, the Deep, The Other side of the Wind, The Dreamers, The Magic Show, and all the scripts) plus Immortal Story, F for fake and Filming Othello. So: just what else does Beatrice own that she can "restore"?
???

[Kevin Loy]

As far as I know (and I don't claim to be a Welles scholar), Beatrice owns the rights to *only* Othello. Oja owns the rights to all of Welles' unreleased and unfinished films. I doubt she has any claim towards The Immortal Story, though I suspect that she might have some rights to F For Fake (but if she does, she certainly does not have a controlling interest in the film).

I thought the 'restoration' of Chimes was being undertaken by the film's producers (or their respective estates, at least), and *not* by the same team that mutilated Othello? I remember somebody posting a while back that they had watched part of the 'restoration' print, and that it was mainly limited to a stereo score...which is a terrible idea, in my opinion, especially since Welles did manipulate the audio during the battle scene, and while it would be possible to approximate that effect (the problem comes in not knowing exactly how he did it...though I'm a bit disappointed to think that the first thing that would come to Welles' mind in a discussion of musique concrete would be the Beatles), it would be impossible to completely re-create it without knowing how he layered and processed the sound (personally, if I were working on a restoration and being forced to remix the soundtrack to stereo, I'd use Welles' original mono mix for that segment...but I'm not, of course). As you also point out, there are issues of ambience and things like that which were deliberate choices by Welles, and while any good engineer could re-create them, it is the essence of tampering with an audio track that isn't terribly flawed in the first place.

If nothing else, audio elements for the score should exist, since it was released on LP (and later on CD, which I have...though I was a bit bummed out that the percussion motif that plays over the closing credits wasn't included), so I'm pretty certain that separate audio elements should exist for the dialogue and foley effects as well.

[Terry]

Chimes doesn't need a restoration. The Studio Canal release is perfect. The only flaw it has is some crackling on the soundtrack in one or two places, and that's something even a non-engineer like me with crap software could fix perfectly. Stereo conversion is as bad an idea as introducing Ewoks into the Battle of Shrewsbury.

Leave it alone and release the Studio Canal version worldwide. Too bad so few people have seen what a glorious print it is.

[chipm]

Where can you get the Studio Canal release?

[Terry]

Amazon.com lists this version, but I don't know if it's the Studio Canal version and therefore can't vouch for the quality. At that price no one should take the chance...

Over on Amazon France I found a listing for a Studio Canal box containing Falstaff, The Trial and The Third Man, but it appears to have been discontinued...

[Tony]

"I'm a bit disappointed to think that the first thing that would come to Welles' mind in a discussion of musique concrete would be the Beatles"

The Beatles were serious business in the 60s; to this day, they are the only rock group/pop musicians to be included in the Oxford Dictionary of Music. Cathy Barbarian and others wrote serious pieces on them, and from "Yesterday" on, they were seen as young pop masters. When Welles was finishing post-production on Chimes, it was in '66, the artistic peak of the Beatles, as they recorded 'Revolver', the Eleanor Rigby/Yellow Submarine 45, and the Strawberry Fields/Penny Lane 45.

And although it was a compliment he mentioned them, I get the feeling Welles didn't like pop! I think he was a classical, jazz and folk musics guy (such as "Samba").
:;):

[Kevin Loy]

Well, I'll mostly leave my own personal opinions about The Beatles to the side, but I found Welles' citation of them to be disappointing for several reasons. For me, tons of different names come to mind when thinking of musique concrete, including Edgard Varese, Steve Reich, Iannis Xenakis, Karlheinz Stockhausen, Pierre Henry, Frank Zappa, etc. (though I must admit that I find the attempts at 'musique concrete' by The Beatles to be highly amateurish at best). *All* of the aforementioned artists created works for tape before the Beatles, and many of them did so decades before the Beatles. On top of that, Otto Leuning and Vladimir Ussachevsky created a tape work for Welles, which was used in a production of King Lear! So I find it highly surprising to think that Welles was so unaware of these other artists that he would feel the need to cite the Beatles, though I have suspected that he might have done so in order to provide an easier parallel than, say, citing Varese in an interview (which is a bit ridiculous in a way...I mean, would you talk about Brian DePalma or about the directors that he constantly...ahem...appropriates ideas from?)

Considering that 'jazz' was more or less a popular music form when Welles was growing up (that depends on how you define 'jazz' as well), and that Samba is still very popular in Brazil, it isn't entirely accurate to say that he didn't like 'pop' music (which has to be the vaguest of the vague genre titles...well, outside of 'world music'. Isn't all music world music, outside of Sun Ra?).

[alan smithee]

The work of these restorers-adulterators of Othello is really dreadful. Comparing between the 1952 and 1992 soundracks shows how much the second is more dolby-stifled in music, lacks in terms of clearness, is heavy altered in mixing: now, in spite of Welles intentions, the dialogue predominates over the music, foley sounds are badly rerecorded and remodelled etc. And the scene of Desdemona's death is one in which the heavy "Pendowski's touch", even without help of any tv in background (that I can't hear in my old vhs of the 1992 edition), is enough to smash down the equilibrium of Lavagnino's score and Welles original mixing. As Tony says, Francois Thomas report about that disastrous operation ("La tragédie d'Othello", in "Positif", june 1996). Anyway, I don't know at all the 1955 american version, neither, of course, the further "NJ variant" of that one. At least six versions of Othello seems to be - or have been - in existence.
1) The italian dubbed print, screened at première in Barberini cinema in Rome (november 29, 1951) and now in italian Cineteca Nazionale (also with 2.000 meters of moroccan rushes, the "Othello Doubles" , finded out in 1994). In the opening titles, the reported musical conductor is not Willy Ferrero but Franco Ferrara, who actually will work with Lavagnino in Mambo (Rossen) or Tutti a casa (Comencini). A misprint or what?
2) The english spoken print, that won the Cannes Festival, identical to 1).
3) Another english spoken print, different from the above mentioned; Welles was working about that in prevision of Cannes, but, unsatisfied and lacking of time, he decided at the end to show the 2)
4) The american 1955 print, redubbed, reedited and resynchronized - in one word, "manipulated" - by Welles itself mostly in the first 30 venetian minutes (precise references on changes and modifications are provided by Francois Thomas).
5) The New Jersey print, the variant overrided by the roadroller of "restaurators" Saks & Co., more different than 4) from european 1952 version (see F.T. study in Positif for references).
6) The tragically restored 1992 print.

[Terry]

I always thought the New Jersey print (the one restored by BWS) was essentially the same as the 1955 US version, although with crap sound that would make it one of those flawed distribution prints of which Welles spoke. What other manipulations had been done to the NJ print, and by whom? There are some differences in dubbing and editing between the 1992 version and the Criterion release of the 1955 print, but I thought those changes were solely the product of the 92 restoration. If not, who was doing the changes to the NJ version? That variant has had an odd history.

The 1955 version has changes all the way through, at least in terms of dubbing, such as the complete replacement of Suzanne Cloutier's lines. And the soundtrack sounds manipulated, as though the rework was done at different times in different places on equipment of varying quality, which probably it was. The Cannes print has much more cohesive sound technically, and it's a shame that particular version is so obscure and rarely seen (and heard.)

Very interesting that the Moroccan rushes survived; I'd never heard of those either. Not that wishing does any good, but a new Criterion box compiling the Cannes print, the 1955 version, and the first Italian or French language print would be nice; the rushes would make a great extra. No, I wouldn't want the 92 version in the box.

Actually, the English Cannes print has at least one difference from its French equivalent; that gruesome closeup of the dead Desdemona only appears in the French one and disappears thereafter.

[Roger Ryan]

Actually, that close-up of Desdemona was in the 1952 English language version screened in Locarno in 2005. I agree that the audio track (to this early cut) had a much richer, more consistent quality than what is heard on the '92 "restoration" and persumably on the unretouched 1955 version as well. For my money, that '52 English language cut with the expanded, more smoothly-edited Venice sequence, the rich audio mix and that stunning Desdemona close-up is the definitive "Othello" (and I would be happy to part with said money if this version could get a legitimate release on DVD).

[Terry]

That's weird. The copy of the English Cannes version I've seen doesn't have this shot - it has the same one from the 1955 and 1992 versions... Too many variant prints roaming around.

That closeup is powerful. I wonder why Welles removed it.