JIF Questions

[Terry]

Howard is trying to get through a door when he is held up in the corridor by Mr Mathews. What's on the other side of that door? Is it his stateroom? When he does get to his stateroom, it looks different from the one he was in originally. Was his complaint "haven't you got any better accomodations" rewarded with a change of rooms?

It's an odd edit going from Kuvetli on the deck to Howard held up by Mathews, to Howard meeting Mueller on the walkway, to Howard entering his new (?) stateroom. It would make more sense to flow from Kuvetli on the deck, to Mueller on the walkway, to Howard trying to get into his room, to Howard entering his room.

And the next morning, what room was Howard going to and why when he found Kuvetli dead on the floor? He shouldn't have been going to speak to Kuvetli, as Kuvetli should have gone ashore in the pilot boat to arrange for Mueller and Banat's arrest.

[Tony]

Store: I guess youv'e seen the missing scene fron jif on youtube; where on earth would they get that?

Ps: did jaime really give you your name?

[Terry]

The "missing scene" is from the UK version of the film, which appears to have been released first. When Welles was given a week or weekend to do a cleanup edit on the film (though he had to stay within the 69 minute running time,) he dropped some scenes, added others, tightened sequences, shot a new ending and added Joe Cotten's narration. This Welles version remains unseen in Europe, so far as I know.

Store Hadji is a devotee of Consumerism on a sacred pilgrimage to the shopping mall.

[Tony]

Have you seen the UK version, and if so how do you think it compares?

[ToddBaesen]

Looking at the cut scene Desconstructionist909 has posted, note that this scene (that runs over two minutes), plays out in one long take... and is also quite important in the plot. It indicates that Graham's wife (Ruth Warrick) after talking with Col. Haki believes her husband has left her for another woman!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ysz0bxqAfvE


Hopefully, Warners will put out a version of JOURNEY INTO FEAR with both the uncut European version that runs 71 minutes and the U.S. release version that runs only 69 minutes, when they eventually release the film on DVD.

There are rumours Warners wants to release an ORSON WELLES box DVD set, consisting of KANE, AMBERSONS and JOURNEY INTO FEAR (with both versions). You may recall, Turner, released just such a set of the RKO Welles films on VHS many years ago, but of course they had no bonus material or alternate versions.

[Terry]

Both prints are so fragmentary as to be ruinous. Even combining all the footage from both versions leaves one with an overly abridged film. And key points such as Josette being a prostitute with Gogo as her pimp are completely lost. Without that essential fact, Gogo's attitude towards Howard is completely inexplicable.

The UK version features Welles prominently in the credits. "A Mercury Production by Orson Welles," "Screenplay by Orson Welles and Joseph Cotten" - interesting that his name was removed from and diminished in the US release - Welles distancing himself from the project or RKO banishing the name they had just very publicly tarnished?

UK:



US:



UK:



US:



UK:



US:






The UK version also has a longer first reel (especially in the extended nightclub scene with the magic act) and a different ending (with Mrs. Graham yelling at her stupid husband who is up on a ledge for no reason she can fathom.) It lacks any narration, and I prefer it without.

Except for the inserted and reshot kiss scene when Howard meets up with his wife finally, it appears to me she's quite sick of Howard and is much more receptive to the attentions of Colonel Haki. I wonder how the original Meeting of Howard and Stephanie at the Hotel Room Door played. Coldly, I suspect. Following the inserted reshot, Stephanie doesn't give a damn about leaving Howard to the creepy company of Mueller and Banat and is much more interested in having a drink with Haki. She even refers to herself and Haki as "us." And Howard has shown much more interest in Josette than he did for Stephanie in the film, especially in light of the deleted "Bickersons" scene at the beginning of the film.

Welles tried to throw out this content with last-minute narration both incongruous and contrived, but what the actors tell me with their performances belittles this. Howard and Stephanie hate each other, and who could blame either of them?

Unless Roger chimes in with words to the contrary, I'm going to move the Mr. Mathews corridor scene to after the meeting with Mueller and immediately before Howard enters his new stateroom. And if that winds up not working, I'll try something else. Unlike Welles, I have more than a single weekend to play with the editing.

I should also use the credits featuring Welles' name, which I didn't do before.

Films truly aren't ever finished - only abandoned.

[Roger Ryan]

Store Hadji - You're welcome to edit your version any way you like.

For those who may be completely confused by this thread, the scene where Mr. Mathews confronts Howard with his anecdote about the socialist meeting originally followed Howard's nighttime meeting with Kuvetli in what could be called the "preview" version (running time around 91 minutes). In both the early re-edit (released in Aug. 1942, but withdrawn soon after - at least one print survived and has played in Europe over the past few decades) and in Welles' own re-edit (released in Feb. 1943), the confrontation scene between Howard and Mathews was moved up to follow Howard's visit to the captain. Since this threw the continuity out of whack (Mathews is in a bathrobe preparing for bed, but two scenes later is seen fully dressed in the bar), I think the scene plays much better coming later where it was originally intended.

In the preview version, following the confrontation with Mathews, Howard is interrupted again by Josette who is pressing him to meet up with her after the boat docks. The two of them are then interrupted by Mueller who takes Howard aside for the conversation that remains in the film. I cannot recall if Howard originally got another stateroom or not, but I believe Kuvetli left to alert Haki, then returned to the ship to avoid causing suspicion by his absence. His is murdered by Banat upon his return. He had arranged for Howard to meet him in his stateroom in the morning which is why Howard goes there and discovers the body.

One more note: in his Oct. 1942 re-edit, Welles seems to want to remove any suggestion of the infidelity angle. This may have been imposed by the studio since Welles was definitely playing up the infidelity angle in the various endings he was scripting in Brazil, albeit strictly for comedy relief (the original preview version retained this emphasis on humorous infidelity). The removal of the scene where Haki tells Stephanie of Howard's disappearance may be partially due to this change of emphasis, but there is another logical reason for its deletion: with the newly-imposed Howard-centric flashback structure in place, the scene could not have been "observed" by Howard and, therefore, could not logically stay in the film.

[Terry]

Store Hadji - You're welcome to edit your version any way you like.

Thanks, Ryan. Allow me to return the complement.

[Jeff Wilson]

Thanks, Ryan. Allow me to return the complement.

Roger has long been an example of calm, even-tempered posting here, and his post hardly merits this snide response.

[Roger Ryan]

Store Hadji - You're welcome to edit your version any way you like.

Thanks, Ryan. Allow me to return the complement.

Well, I meant that sincerely. Placing the Mathews confrontation scene after the meeting with Mueller could play just fine. If you're creating a version of a film for your own personal enjoyment, I don't see a problem with experimenting with different sequencing. In some cases (such as when one lacks documentation on the filmmaker's original intent), the same approach can work for an official public release as well.

[Tony]

Store and Roger: Thanks so much for those frame enlargements and your explanations of the differences; I really appreciate it, as I have never seen the British version. Heck, even the title cards are more beautiful in the British version!

Now if only we could get an RKO box set with both JIFs, Roger's Ambersons reconstruction, Ambersons, Kane and the raw footage of IAT with the IAT doc.: that would be something!

[ToddBaesen]

Store and Roger:

Let me second Tony's thanks for the frame enlargements and details between the two versions of JIF. I remember the first time I saw JOURNEY years ago I was quite puzzled by why Welles name was so small at the end of the cast list. Of course, at that time I had no idea that Welles had been fired by RKO and was being punished with a reduced credit!

If either of you put together a new edit of JOURNEY, and it turns out well, maybe you can offer it here as a weed, as I'm sure many people would like to see it since who knows if WB will ever release both versions.

[Roger Ryan]

If either of you put together a new edit of JOURNEY, and it turns out well, maybe you can offer it here as a weed, as I'm sure many people would like to see it since who knows if WB will ever release both versions.

As some of you may know, the Munich Film Museum has done a work-in-progress reconstruction of JOURNEY (Disclosure: I did some research and advised on the project) which combines differing scenes from the two extant versions plus provides stills and intertitles to fill in for the missing footage. The reconstruction has been shown publicly at a few retrospectives and, although it's not available for "weeding", I thought I would give it a mention.

[Glenn Anders]

Roger and Hadji: I, too, am always interested in you sensitive and knowledgeable contributions. The latter part of this exchange prompts me to raise a question which has long been hanging fire:

What HAS happened to the announced Warner Brothers' 2008 DVD set of THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS and JOURNEY INTO FEAR? I had some hope that your work, Roger, with the research by Munich's Droessler and others, might be included.

Could Warners be holding up this release, as Criterion did in the case of MR. ARKADIN, in order to add some of these recently revealed "elements." They said as much at the time of the original promise -- that new or different elements had been discovered -- over a year ago.

Any news or informed speculation?

Glenn

[Michael O'Hara]

Indeed, I was hoping to have some sort of signal from Warners by now. Not a peep. I really thought this was going to be the year. I'm not sure when this year's Warner chat will take place, but hopefully we'll get some answers then. I worry that dear old Beatrice might not want to cooperate.