Sir John Falstaff/Welles Goes Color

[Kevin Loy]

I finally sat down and watched this movie yesterday, and all that I can say is...what a great film. I haven't seen Ambersons yet, so I'll hold short of calling it his greatest film, but it is certainly the best film that I have seen from him yet (which is a hefty statement in itself).
Some random thoughts:

I know people go on about it at length, but the battle scene was nothing short of incredible (especially when considering that Orson only had about 200 extras for it, as I recall). Unlike a lot of battle scenes, there's no attempt to hide the brutality and savagery of it all, and there's no attempt to make it somehow seem glorious. I know that Orson claimed that he never used symbolism, but somehow I think of a certain southeast asian "conflict" when I see this sequence. A stretch, perhaps.

What is really striking about this sequence, though, is how quickly Prince Hal ages during it. More than just showing the nature of war, Welles also shows in one sweep what war does to people. The jovial youth of Hal is strewn aside once the realization of what has happened sets in. Then again, how could somebody still feel youthful after that? Then again, Falstaff more or less stayed the same (that scene where he drags the body up to the King and claims it as his own kill, at least to me, shows the true underlying nature of Falstaff more than anything else in the film. The level of his misinformation becomes nothing more than malevolent opportunism. Of course, that shows why Falstaff can stand around, having a drink and being jolly after the battle while Hal walks off. Falstaff's entire life is a lie, while Hal's life is all too real).

Even more surprising is that Prince Hal isn't quite as Machiavellian as a lot of people have said (at least, not to me). Yes, he does cruely jettison Falstaff, but he does at least remark a certain sorrow for having done so (though it is too late by that point). I tend to think that it was a case of Hal and Falstaff growing apart, more than anything else. Falstaff never really had to accept responsibility, whereas Hal had no choice but to do so.

Overall...what an amazing film. It is a shame that it is in the middle of a legal net, because I'm sure that Criterion could do a fantastic job with this film (in fact, they would be foolish not to).

And I have to ask, where is this botched soundtrack at? Yeah, it doesn't sound perfect, but I didn't think that the speech was muddled. If nothing else, I had no trouble discering what was being said, which wasn't the case when I first saw both Othello and Mr. Arkadin (yeah, that budget DVD release here in the states really is junk, even though the picture transcends it). The looping was also extremely well done, with almost none of the synch problems that, say, the "restored" Othello had. And, of course, there was the score as well, which might not have been on the level with Lavagnino's (sp?) work on Othello, but certainly ranks with the better scores for a Welles film.

As a final thought, can anybody tell why Orson decided to make films in color following Chimes? I still feel that, at least with the meager amount of released color films, something was lost when Orson switched to color, and I apologize for not being able to single out just what it was.

(I also recently read This Is Orson Welles, and after seeing Orson's comments about large portions of The Other Side Of The Wind being improvised, I have to ask if anybody detects a possible Cassavetes influence there)

[Glenn Anders]

No doubt, Kevin Loy, Welles would agree with you about the efficacy of black and white over color. He remarked on it in This Is Orson Welles. If I remember rightly, he laments how superior b&w is for indicating planes of distance. That was important to him because he indicated the emotional warmth of his characters by their juxtaposition with each other and objects within the frame, in his movies.

[Welles may point out in the same place that an elaborate manipulation of shades is necessary to approach a comparable emotional symbolism, in color film.]

However, he was also a realist, to the extent that he knew if he did not master color, his films would be relegated to the art houses (if he were lucky), and he would be considered even more, as they say today, "so-o-o yesterday."

But I sympathize with your observation.

Glenn

[Terry]

Unlike a lot of battle scenes, there's no attempt to hide the brutality and savagery of it all, and there's no attempt to make it somehow seem glorious. I know that Orson claimed that he never used symbolism, but somehow I think of a certain southeast asian "conflict" when I see this sequence. A stretch, perhaps

Vietnam wasn't as big an issue in 1966 as it would come to be. That happened after Tet in 1969 and later when Nixon invaded Cambodia and Laos. I doubt Welles was referencing it in particular, just the death of chivalry in general.

The jovial youth of Hal is strewn aside once the realization of what has happened sets in. Then again, how could somebody still feel youthful after that? Then again, Falstaff more or less stayed the same

That reminds me of that line from The Fountain of Youth. Something about how people in love with themselves never seem to mature or change.

And I have to ask, where is this botched soundtrack at?

The only print of Falstaff available in the US has been an $80 VHS tape of absolutely atrocious quality. The soundtrack was so worn you couldn't understand most of the dialogue through the roar of scratches and the visuals were as faded as something shot in 1915 and left outside on the back steps since then. THIS is the print I have feared BWS wanted to restore. Anyway, nothing wrong with Falstaff if you can find a good print.

As a final thought, can anybody tell why Orson decided to make films in color following Chimes

Welles first shot in colour in 1942, all the Brazillian footage was to be colour. That might not have been Welles' decision. He preferred black and white, and argued that there weren't even any great performances in colour - that it was impossible to achieve. The Immortal Story was done for French TV, and he had to do colour if he wanted financing. After that, everything was colour. Maybe he thought you could caoture a great performance after all - or he thought he'd have a better chance commercially with it.

about large portions of The Other Side Of The Wind being improvised

Parts of The Magnificent Ambersons were improvised too, like the strawberry shortcake scene. The actors knew what the scene was about and where it was supposed to go, but improvised it from there. Probably something similar to what he did in TOSOTW.

[Kevin Loy]

Vietnam wasn't as big an issue in 1966 as it would come to be. That happened after Tet in 1969 and later when Nixon invaded Cambodia and Laos. I doubt Welles was referencing it in particular, just the death of chivalry in general.

To some people, it was. That having been said, there certainly was a small, but growing dissent during the mid-60s, which had grown rather large before the Tet offensive. After that, all hell started breaking loose (at least, more than it had). Still, your reference to the death of chivalry seems more apt, especially when considering that Orson spent quite a bit of time trying to film Don Quixote.

The only print of Falstaff available in the US has been an $80 VHS tape of absolutely atrocious quality. The soundtrack was so worn you couldn't understand most of the dialogue through the roar of scratches and the visuals were as faded as something shot in 1915 and left outside on the back steps since then. THIS is the print I have feared BWS wanted to restore. Anyway, nothing wrong with Falstaff if you can find a good print.

Hmm...would it be pointless to start a letter-writing campaign (or, perhaps an e-mail writing campaign) to some company like Criterion, in the interest of having Criterion attempt to get the domestic rights for it whenever the litigation is resolved so that Beatrice doesn't attempt to ruin this film as well?

Welles first shot in colour in 1942, all the Brazillian footage was to be colour. That might not have been Welles' decision. He preferred black and white, and argued that there weren't even any great performances in colour - that it was impossible to achieve. The Immortal Story was done for French TV, and he had to do colour if he wanted financing. After that, everything was colour. Maybe he thought you could caoture a great performance after all - or he thought he'd have a better chance commercially with it.

I don't know that it is impossible, but it is rather difficult to get a great color performance. I can only name a few. Even one of my favorite color films, 2001, has the actors seeming more programmed and mechanized than the machines, which are far more human than their biotic counterparts. Of course, at least to me, I tend to see distinct "human" features in a lot of the space crafts...As far as great performances in color are concerned, at this point in time, The Killing Of A Chinese Bookie (the first version, as flawed as it is, still seems to be far superior to the second version) and Medium Cool are personal favorites right now. Well, I'll add Clifford Irving's performance in F For Fake as an honorary mention.

Of course, something does tell me that the decision to shoot in color was a bit more financially motivated than artistically.

[Terry]

Hmm...would it be pointless to start a letter-writing campaign (or, perhaps an e-mail writing campaign) to some company like Criterion, in the interest of having Criterion attempt to get the domestic rights for it whenever the litigation is resolved so that Beatrice doesn't attempt to ruin this film as well?

Jeff has posted on the Locarno thread that there are two parties in Europe fighting over the ownership of Falstaff, and BWS isn't involved. Subsequently, the only print they could get to show at the festival was scratched and a bit crap. I'm sure once they settle the matter that a company like Criterion would love to release it (with commentary by Jess Franco - hee hee hee.) Not sure if BWS will enter the situation, though it wouldn't surprise me if she did.

I'm not sure you can't capture great performances in colour - I think the argument for B&W is that you don't have the colour palette distracting you from what the actor is doing. Maybe its just that we don't have actors of the calibre we did in the old days. No James Cagney anyway.

[Roger Ryan]

Parts of The Magnificent Ambersons were improvised too, like the strawberry shortcake scene. The actors knew what the scene was about and where it was supposed to go, but improvised it from there. Probably something similar to what he did in TOSOTW.

Store Hadji - I'm afraid the legend of the "strawberry shortcake" scene being wholly improvised is a false one. Virtually every word from the first kitchen scene in "Ambersons" comes directly from Tarkington's novel; the entire film is extraordinarily faithful to the original text in this way. The only changes I found were the reference to the shortcake itself (in the novel George is eating salmon salad) and Fanny's line "You're going to get fat" followed by George's reponse "I can't help that..."; the rest is verbatim from the novel. The only scene in "Ambersons" I suspect might have been heavily improvised would be the closing "boarding house" scene which isn't in the novel nor was it found in Welles's original shooting script. Most of Eugene's lines can be found near the end of Tarkington's book, but the strange distracted cadence suggested by the cutting continuity seems like it could be the result of improvisation - I guess we'll never know.

[catbuglah]

I know people go on about it at length, but the battle scene was nothing short of incredible

They seem always mention it along with the one in Alexander Nevsky and BraveHeart, and maybe another one. Chimes, I think is one of my favorite Welles' films, but they're all great. Henry IV is such a famous story and Welles, although possibly his most idiosyncratic take yet on Shakespeare, gives a lively, vivid, compelling rendition.

[Glenn Anders]

It may have already been mentioned, but Welles had been working on this combination of Shakespearean Chronicle Plays, in several mediums, for decades, most notably, in his ill-fated Broadway extravaganza, which helped put an end to the Mercury Theater as a resident theatrical company there.

Glenn

[chrissie]

Relating to this discussion (though not contributing to it), I just made a couple of screen grabs from Chimes...

Chimes Spanish DVD

Chimes Spanish TV broadcast

The latter being a print mentioned on here by me and others a few times recently. As you can see, the former has a problem with vertical screen lines (minor), also the high-contrast tone adjustment has washed out some of the details and etc.

Fabulous film! Nothing constructive to add.

[bactor]

Chrissie,

Where did you get the Spanish TV version from?

~ Bactor

[chrissie]

It's not that rare. If I have it, it can't be terribly rare. I am open to trades.

[Kevin Loy]

It may have already been mentioned, but Welles had been working on this combination of Shakespearean Chronicle Plays, in several mediums, for decades, most notably, in his ill-fated Broadway extravaganza, which helped put an end to the Mercury Theater as a resident theatrical company there.

I take it that you are referring to Five Kings (when was that actually staged?), which had (if I'm not mistaken) Burgess Meredith as Prince Hal. Mind you, I think Burgess Meredith was a worthy actor (hey, any guy who had a piece specifically written for him by Edgard Varèse is alright in my book), but I can't imagine him doing Prince Hal justice (especially not by 1964/65, given his age at the time), and certainly not to the extent that Keith Baxter did, who emphasized just the right amount of youthful exuberance on the cusp of unwanted adulthood and responsibility. But hey, maybe it would have made the picture more successful in 1966:
"The Penguin meets The Shadow in Orson Welles' Chimes At Midnight"
or,
"Burgess Meredith, star of TV's Batman, leads a wonderful cast including Harry Lime, err, Orson Welles in Falstaff"

And, of course, the producers could have reissued it again in the late 70s to capitalize on Burgess being in the first three Rocky films...nah, I wouldn't have liked it as much without Keith Baxter as Prince Hal.

(out of curiosity, since he was basically the leading actor in the film, why was Baxter's name buried so deeply in the opening credits?)

As for Chrissie's screen captures, the difference is quite noteworthy (though it looks like a bit of sharpness might still be lacking in the Spanish TV print). Since that version was on Spanish TV, does that mean that it is in Spanish, or was it in English and dubbed, or what?

Being the typical fanboy that I am, I did submit a title suggestion to Criterion, since I can't imagine any other company in the US who would be interested in the film and who would do a good job with it. Of course, nothing will probably come of it.

[chrissie]

I'm really not sure exactly where that print of Chimes is from, but it's in English -- no subtitles or dubbing. Maybe someone else can be more specific.

[chrissie]

Ah. It was just pointed out to me that this copy of Chimes was taken from a broadcast on French satellite channel CineCinema Classic back in January.