Don Quijote

[The Voice of Cornstarch]

Bonanni would like to realise the film the way it is now. Unedited material, because, like he repeated some times "Nobody will be able to replace Orson, not even me". He doesn't feel he'll be able to remember how he and Orson started the editing of the film (in fact there was a first editing of the movie that Welles took with him when he left Italy). Bonanni CANNOT move the material, since he is in legal trouble since 92 with Patxi Irigoyen and Oja Kodar. I still think "signing papers" is a way to make our voice heard...I really don't know what would happen later (if anything would happen), who would get the material, if this is going to help or to put things worst...Well, I don't know if i'm doing right or wrong, i just know i can't think that material will go lost..

I'm sorry but I still don't understand what your goal is.

Signing Petitions is, you know, . . . Quixotic

What does

realise the film the way it is now...unedited material

mean?

How would you, or Mr. Bonnani like this story to end. If we know where we're going, we might be able to figure out how to get there.

[halfaorson]

Sorry, I think it was clear. My wish (and Bonanni's i guess) is to realise the material just the way it is, without editing. Or, if the copy of the editing that Bonanni and Welles did (that Orson took with him after he left Italy) "shows up", then Mauro would try to do an editing, with humility and respect (the opposite of what Jesus Franco did). I don't see no other solutions...if anybody else grabs this material, we will have another "moviecide". So the number one problem is to SAVE this material from decomposition, by passing it to digital, for example. I imagine doing a restauration of the film will be way more expensive, and will take more time. Now is needed a fast solution..the material is from 55-69. In 69, Orson and Mauro were already experiencing problems, because the film was "too old" and crystallized. You can imagine how it is now... Anyway, if anybody got a better idea of signing petions, giving them to Bonanni, just to show him our support, hoping he will do a act of "civil disobedience" like i said, let me know. I would do anything really. I see this is the only thing we can do, and is not a little thing.

[The Voice of Cornstarch]

In What country was legal action taken? Italy? Does Mr. Bonanni need assistance with funding legal representation in Italy?

So I assume the Civil Disobedience is editing the material after it shows up, because there is a court order to surrender the foootage.

Ok, let us assume the material shows up.

Does anyone know the cost of digitizing that much footage?

Is there another analog solution temporarily?

if the copy of the editing that Bonanni and Welles did (that Orson took with him after he left Italy) "shows up", then Mauro would try to do an editing, with humility and respect (otherwise). we will have another "moviecide". So the number one problem is to SAVE this material from decomposition, by passing it to digital, for example.

[halfaorson]

I see The Voice of Cornstarch (sorry i don't remember your name), you are a real Cartesian . Actually I DO NOT have an answer for your questions. First, I'd like to "sign papers", the more that we can, to show to Mauro our gratitude for protecting this material until now, and to show him how desperatly we hope to see this material safe, and hopefully, realised. Mauro is a person who was completely left alone in his fight, showing him an "international" support would absolutely help him taking a decision. Which decision, I cannot say.

[Bantock]

He doesn't feel he'll be able to remember how he and Orson started the editing of the film (in fact there was a first editing of the movie that Welles took with him when he left Italy).

Orson Welles shot "Don Quixote" in the late 1950 and early 60's. He died in 1985. He had 25 years to complete the film but never bothered. This means that either he didn't think the film was worth completing, or he did complete it in secret and it is stored away somewhere.

I recently bought a cheap copy of a book called "The Complete Films of Orson Welles", by James Howard, published in 1991. In the intro Howard claims that Gary Graver told him that "Don Quixote" was completely edited, with a complete soundtrack, but the two had not been synched up into a composite print. Could this be what Welles took with him when he left Italy? If so, what was it that he left with Bonnani? Left over footage?

I sympathize with Bonnani, but if he is not able to afford proper storage for the film, he should turn it over to those who can. Isn't that what the court ordered him to do anyway? I thought Orson Welles's will was pretty clear that all the footage from the unfinished projects was Oja Kodar's property, including the Don Quixote footage. It seems to me that Bonnani doesn't really have much of a case, and the fact that someone is appealing on his behalf to an Internet chat room shows how despoerate his case is. But if he's really fearful that Kodar will destroy the footage if it is turned over to her, which seems pretty far-fetched to me, then maybe he could take a camcorder to it and sell it on the grey market.

[The Voice of Cornstarch]

Lucy and Glenn,

Could you give a refresher on this issue.

We have one side on this thread, what happened legally?

[halfaorson]

It's really hard to believe Orson finished the editing, because Bonanni got the material to finish it, and Orson never cameback to Italy to take it, that's why he left us in this Hamletic question now.
Dear Lucy, you think Bonanni should give the material to Oja, after what happened with Jesus Franco? I got elements to say my opinion but I couldn't meet Oja in Udine last February like i hoped, so I won't say nothing against her. But the story speaks by itself.
Let me put something clear: BONANNI DIDN'T ASK FOR NO HELP. It's a decision that i took. We should always remember we got the opportunity of talking about DQ now because Mauro saved the material from being destroyed by the warehouse where it was guarded in 1970.

All of your questions guys are legitimate, but I don't got an answer for all of them. Actually I'd love to know what Orson wanted to do with this material. I'd love to know which one is the solution. I'm out of the situation just like you, I don't own no material. The only fact I know is : 1_ Welles' DQ footage is still available 2_ I saw some parts from it and is amazing 3_ I do feel I got the duty to do anything to preserve it.

It's just as simple as this. The only practical thing i can do right now is to try to collect signs, to give them to Mr. Bonanni, and to hope this can help to take a decision. I do not have many answers, I do NOT know what Orson wanted. I just see a Michelangelo dying day after day and I want to do something...simple as that.

[David N]

Is Lilly Library aware of this situation? Wouldn't they be interested in pursuing something like this? It's very frustrating to see another Welles film being treated this way. If it's a legal matter, can't someone credible try to push this and arbitrate it? I know UCLA film archives restored Macbeth. Aren't they interested? Perhaps someone who has contacts at either of these institutions could request their thought on this. I'm not sure if signatures by us Welles addicts, well meaning though it may be, will really accomplish anything.

[ToddBaesen]

According to Bantock's's post:

Orson Welles shot "Don Quixote" in the late 1950 and early 60's. He died in 1985. He had 25 years to complete the film but never bothered. This means that either he didn't think the film was worth completing, or he did complete it in secret and it is stored away somewhere."

This is the kind of totally inacurate statement and the kind of lack of familiarity with Welles work that makes some of us here want to tear our hair out. It's also, without a doubt, the kind of short-sighted "believe everything you hear thinking" that plagued Welles througout his career.

Some more examples:

"Did you also know that Orson Welles was Gay?

Did you know Welles also had several sons?

Oh, but I read that somewhere, so it must be true!"


Now, it seems to me, anyone with the slightest interest in Welles or his career would know that Welles loved Don Quixote, totally and completely, but because he was never beholden to a studio to complete the film, he didn't feel he needed to. As Welles said, why should I have to complete it, if I used my own money to film it?

It also seems to me, that people should know by now that many stories, articles books and movies have appeared about Welles, that have completely distorted the truth about what he actually said, did or wanted to do. The primary exhibit being Pauline Kael's essay in the CITIZEN KANE BOOK. Other Welles biographies filled with inaccurate information include:

Charles Higham's biography

and

David Thomson's disgraceful ROSEBUD.

But Welles certainly never claimed to have finished editing DON QUIXOTE... in fact it was just the opposite... he wanted to keep on working on it, and he claimed he didn't understand why he should have to answer the question, "When are you going to finish Don Quixote?" when it was a private project.

In my opinion, the truth about why he didn't finish it was not because he didn't want to, but because he didn't have the funds to do it properly, and also because he didn't want to show it until it was done to his satisfaction.

Now, Jess Franco's version obviously was not something he would every have condoned if he was alive, and Oja Kodar also never approved this version.

In fact, it's only becasue she kept control over the rights to QUIOXTE in the U.S., that the Franco abomination has never been allowed to be shown here.

[The Voice of Cornstarch]

The restored (to its original form) version of MACBETH,was coordinated by the UCLA Film & TV Archives preservation officer, Robert Gitt.

[Roger Ryan]

Is Lilly Library aware of this situation? Wouldn't they be interested in pursuing something like this?

While I can't speak for the Lilly Library's interest in this matter, I'd like to point out that the library does not currently have any Welles film footage on file ( I believe a videotape of a few minutes of Welles' 1936 "Macbeth" stage production is the only "moving image" material they have associated with him). I also don't believe the library has suitable facilities for properly storing film footage either. As far as Welles' films are concerned, the Lilly collection is focused almost exclusively on the years 1939 - 1948 (scripts, documents, correspondence and photographs). What remains of Welles' work as an independent producer from 1950 on (films, scripts, etc.) was left in the care of Oja (apart from the rights to "Othello" which went to Beatrice). Oja entrusted all of the unfinished film materials to the Munich Filmmuseum in 1996; this would include the "Don Quixote" footage she inherited from Welles.

[Bantock]

Since Oja Kodar entrusted all of the "Don Quixote" footage to the Munich Filmmuseum, then it seems to me that Mauro Bonnani should do the same.

Dear Lucy, you think Bonanni should give the material to Oja, after what happened with Jesus Franco? I got elements to say my opinion but I couldn't meet Oja in Udine last February like i hoped, so I won't say nothing against her. But the story speaks by itself.Let me put something clear: BONANNI DIDN'T ASK FOR NO HELP. It's a decision that i took. We should always remember we got the opportunity of talking about DQ now because Mauro saved the material from being destroyed by the warehouse where it was guarded in 1970.

I agree with you halfaorson that Bonanni deserves a lot of credit for saving and storing the footage for so many years, and if he turns over the footage, the Munich Filmmuseum should make sure that he receives all due credit. But from what I understand, a court has ruled officially that the footage is not his property to keep, therefore he has no other option other then to ignore the court ruling, which is not likely to do anyone any good, least of all the film itself. You said yourself that Jess Franco was working with leftover scraps when he made his version of the film, so that should be kept in mind when judging it's quality, or lack of.

Todd Beason wrote:

According to Bantock's post:

Orson Welles shot "Don Quixote" in the late 1950 and early 60's. He died in 1985. He had 25 years to complete the film but never bothered. This means that either he didn't think the film was worth completing, or he did complete it in secret and it is stored away somewhere."

This is the kind of totally inacurate statement and the kind of lack of familiarity with Welles work that makes some of us here want to tear our hair out.

Do you have proof that it's inaccurate?

It's also, without a doubt, the kind of short-sighted "believe everything you hear thinking" that plagued Welles througout his career.

Some more examples:

"Did you also know that Orson Welles was Gay?

Do you know for a fact that he wasn't? He certainly had plenty of gay friends. Not that that proves anything, but people are free to say what they want now that Welles is dead, and people are free to ignore it if they want.

Did you know Welles also had several sons?

Do you know for a fact that he didn't?

In my opinion, the truth about why he didn't finish it was not because he didn't want to, but because he didn't have the funds to do it properly,

That's rediculous, how much money did he need to edit an already shot film and create a soundtrack for it? I've read that Orson Welles made $10,000 an hour for voice-over sessions. If that's true, then his was probably one of the most expensive voices in the world, and there were obviously many people willing to pay that price for it. There's no reason why he couldn't have finished the "Don Quixote" film if he had truly wanted to.

Welles certainly never claimed to have finished editing DON QUIXOTE... in fact it was just the opposite... he wanted to keep on working on it, and he claimed he didn't understand why he should have to answer the question, "When are you going to finish Don Quixote?" when it was a private project.

No, he was not obligated to finish the film, but that does nothing to refute my original statement, which was that, if Orson Welles had really felt that the film was worth finishing, he would have found a way to finish it.

[Roger Ryan]

If there was one film that Welles preferred to tinker with instead of actively seeking to complete, it would be "Don Quixote". He said as much in interviews. Rightly or wrongly, Welles was always interested in adding a certain measure of topicality to his work which would often result in him changing his initial conception of a project over time. The "Don Quixote" he started making in the mid-50s was a different animal than the one he was editing in the late 60s. By the 70s, when Franco's reign came to an end in Spain, Welles felt that his conception of "Quixote" had to be completely reworked again. As Welles said, he was not under any obligation to complete the film because he was making it for himself, not another producer or studio. Each of the unfinished/unrealized projects Welles worked on from the 1960s to his death have specific reasons for why they were left incomplete; I think "Quixote" was the one he simply enjoyed playing with as an intellectual exercise free from the pressures of the moneymen.

[The Voice of Cornstarch]

Bantock,
Your comment,

Orson Welles made $10,000 an hour for voice-over sessions. If that's true, then his was probably one of the most expensive voices in the world, and there were obviously many people willing to pay that price for it. There's no reason why he couldn't have finished the "Don Quixote" film if he had truly wanted to

speaks for itself of the extent of your knowledge of the life of Orson Welles after 1948.

[tonyw]

But, again, despite all these possible avenues we have to reckon with Beatrice and her team of lawyers who would claim the rights and put the material again into limbo where it would suffer further deterioration.