Just came across this interesting write-up on Ferry to Hong Kong on the IMDB.
Welles is at his most putty-nosed grotesque in this lame comedy, essaying the role of one Captain Cecil Hart aboard the appropriate named ferry boat Fat Annie. Capt. Hart minces about with little pinkie extended as co-star Curd Jurgens makes a fool of himself, being way too "curdled" for this sort of romantic leading man role. Ferry to Hong Kong was supposed to be funny, but is only morbidly fascinating, as are so many of Welles' films from this era.
___
Truly Tragic
After boy-genius Orson Welles gave us his debut masterpiece `Citizen Kane', followed it up with the wonderful `Magnificent Ambersons' (and who could forget his charismatic Harry Lime in Carol Reed's `The Third Man'?), he really had nowhere to go except down.
But I never expected to see him as he is in `Ferry to Hong Kong', mugging and pulling faces to try to produce cheap laughs in an awful English accent. He even waddles around at one stage with a board strapped to his back, all dignity gone. To paraphrase a well-known script-writer from Stratford `When great Orson fell, what a fall was there!'
Otherwise this is a pretty poor attempt at a comedy with perhaps some interest for those who want to see ever-changing Hong Kong as it was in the late Fifties.
Ferry to Hong Kong - Orson as Singapore Cecil
-
Harvey Chartrand
- Wellesnet Advanced
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Ottawa, Canada
-
jaime marzol
- Wellesnet Legend
- Posts: 1091
- Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 3:24 am
....................
i had read the concept for Ferry From Honkong, and on paper, the idea for the movie i thoght we pretty interesting. didn't come across the film till years later. i remember thinking it would have been better had welles and jurgens switched roles.
"jurgens a little too curdled," i like that.
i had read the concept for Ferry From Honkong, and on paper, the idea for the movie i thoght we pretty interesting. didn't come across the film till years later. i remember thinking it would have been better had welles and jurgens switched roles.
"jurgens a little too curdled," i like that.
"Nowhere to go except down..."
I've heard so many times about the 'spectre of failure' associated with Welles, how he didn't live up to his potential, on and on. I remain supremely happy with his entire body of work, and think his films such as The Trial, Falstaff, and even F for Fake were breaking new ground for Welles and showed his undiminished interest and capacities for editing, writing, and performance.
Movies are made outside of Hollywood, you know.
As to the 'woefully' limited number of films he directed, well, how many films did we get from Stanley Kubrick, or Erich von Stroheim, or Terry Gilliam, or David Lynch? Is stature synonymous with output?
So, of the regular arguments, I'm just weary. Besides, I'm still turning up new radio shows to listen to after twenty years of collecting. That's some depth.
As for the crappy roles, and commercials, again, he was a self-financed uncommercial movie director earning money to live, why anybody is embarassed by that I'll never fathom.
Just found the Othello DVD today. I know Jaime prefers the original cut, and not Beatrice's version, but this one looks fantastic, the sound is not a distraction, and it's still a stunning film. Yes, I'd prefer the original version on DVD, but Bea's release is still an upgrade from my VHS of the original. It's odd that the restoration was done at all, since the original has perfect sound, as evidenced by the laserdisc from years back. I guess they didn't have access to this when they wanted to release it over here. Anyone know?
I've heard so many times about the 'spectre of failure' associated with Welles, how he didn't live up to his potential, on and on. I remain supremely happy with his entire body of work, and think his films such as The Trial, Falstaff, and even F for Fake were breaking new ground for Welles and showed his undiminished interest and capacities for editing, writing, and performance.
Movies are made outside of Hollywood, you know.
As to the 'woefully' limited number of films he directed, well, how many films did we get from Stanley Kubrick, or Erich von Stroheim, or Terry Gilliam, or David Lynch? Is stature synonymous with output?
So, of the regular arguments, I'm just weary. Besides, I'm still turning up new radio shows to listen to after twenty years of collecting. That's some depth.
As for the crappy roles, and commercials, again, he was a self-financed uncommercial movie director earning money to live, why anybody is embarassed by that I'll never fathom.
Just found the Othello DVD today. I know Jaime prefers the original cut, and not Beatrice's version, but this one looks fantastic, the sound is not a distraction, and it's still a stunning film. Yes, I'd prefer the original version on DVD, but Bea's release is still an upgrade from my VHS of the original. It's odd that the restoration was done at all, since the original has perfect sound, as evidenced by the laserdisc from years back. I guess they didn't have access to this when they wanted to release it over here. Anyone know?
Sto Pro Veritate
-
Harvey Chartrand
- Wellesnet Advanced
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Ottawa, Canada
Ferry to Hong Kong is Citizen Kane compared to Necromancy, a real stinker Welles made in 72 for the hack Bert I. Gordon.
However noble his intentions, Welles slummed and damaged his reputation in scores of lousy pictures.
His bad movies are just as much an integral part of his legend as his classic directorial efforts.
To the uninitiated (meaning most of the public), Welles is more familiar from his appearances in dreadful movies directed by others than he is from Falstaff, F for Fake, Filming Othello or The Dominici Affair. (Has Filming Othello ever been televised anywhere other than on German TV?)
Charlton Heston didn't even know Welles had played (let alone directed) Falstaff when he advised him to tackle the role before he got too old. (This would have been around the time that Heston was looking for someone to direct his Antony and Cleopatra, which he finally directed himself.)
But Heston probably caught Ferry to Hong Kong on the late show one night and sat, shaking his head in disbelief, saddened to see the dreck the Great Director was appearing in — not two years after directing Heston in the masterpiece Touch of Evil.
However noble his intentions, Welles slummed and damaged his reputation in scores of lousy pictures.
His bad movies are just as much an integral part of his legend as his classic directorial efforts.
To the uninitiated (meaning most of the public), Welles is more familiar from his appearances in dreadful movies directed by others than he is from Falstaff, F for Fake, Filming Othello or The Dominici Affair. (Has Filming Othello ever been televised anywhere other than on German TV?)
Charlton Heston didn't even know Welles had played (let alone directed) Falstaff when he advised him to tackle the role before he got too old. (This would have been around the time that Heston was looking for someone to direct his Antony and Cleopatra, which he finally directed himself.)
But Heston probably caught Ferry to Hong Kong on the late show one night and sat, shaking his head in disbelief, saddened to see the dreck the Great Director was appearing in — not two years after directing Heston in the masterpiece Touch of Evil.
It's odd, I heard that the first time the makers of Ferry To Hong Kong heard the film thought of as a comedy was when Welles described as such in an interview: up until they had thought of it as an action drama. Anyway:
Store Hadji said: "I've heard so many times about the 'spectre of failure' associated with Welles, how he didn't live up to his potential, on and on. I remain supremely happy with his entire body of work, and think his films such as The Trial, Falstaff, and even F for Fake were breaking new ground for Welles and showed his undiminished interest and capacities for editing, writing, and performance.
Movies are made outside of Hollywood, you know."
Amen. Sometimes some people(such as that IMDb reviewer)'s gloating over the crap Welles appeared in seems rather morbid to me. I can see the appeal, lots of people love a good sob, or even a sadistic chuckle, over how the mighty fall. But to me a Welles who had a continuous career making compromised films in Hollywood would have been a far more tragic figure than the Welles who refused to put his name on anything that wasn't his, and so had to work as a jobbing actor.
Re: stature and output, Indeed, I think any filmmaker worth bothering with would rather make a dozen great films than 100 average-to-poor ones. For example, Robert Bresson made a tiny number of films by the standards of Billy "One-Shot" Beaudine, but I know whose work I, and I suspect the majority of film lovers, would rather watch.
Harvey said: "However noble his intentions, Welles slummed and damaged his reputation in scores of lousy pictures."
Well, it's odd, but I don't think Welles would be respected as he is today solely for his acting if he hadn't been a director. Of course, if he had taken better roles, his acting might have really shone, anyone know if he was offered any really good roles he turned down?
Harvey also said: "To the uninitiated (meaning most of the public), Welles is more familiar from his appearances in dreadful movies directed by others than he is from Falstaff, F for Fake, Filming Othello or The Dominici Affair."
Well, the thing is, those of us who come here aren't uninitiated. We're initiated, we know why the crap roles were taken, so, personally speaking, I don't think we have to worry too much about what the uninitiated know. To many people, Welles is a ham actor who made one good movie (though most of them don't see what's so good about it): I don't put myself into the shoes of those people, mentally speaking, because I imagine it's a very boring place to be.
"But Heston probably caught Ferry to Hong Kong on the late show one night and sat, shaking his head in disbelief, saddened to see the dreck the Great Director was appearing in — not two years after directing Heston in the masterpiece Touch of Evil."
That's an interesting image. If only Heston could have known as he shook his head that within a few years he'd have made Skyjacked and Airport 1975 , eh?
Store Hadji said: "I've heard so many times about the 'spectre of failure' associated with Welles, how he didn't live up to his potential, on and on. I remain supremely happy with his entire body of work, and think his films such as The Trial, Falstaff, and even F for Fake were breaking new ground for Welles and showed his undiminished interest and capacities for editing, writing, and performance.
Movies are made outside of Hollywood, you know."
Amen. Sometimes some people(such as that IMDb reviewer)'s gloating over the crap Welles appeared in seems rather morbid to me. I can see the appeal, lots of people love a good sob, or even a sadistic chuckle, over how the mighty fall. But to me a Welles who had a continuous career making compromised films in Hollywood would have been a far more tragic figure than the Welles who refused to put his name on anything that wasn't his, and so had to work as a jobbing actor.
Re: stature and output, Indeed, I think any filmmaker worth bothering with would rather make a dozen great films than 100 average-to-poor ones. For example, Robert Bresson made a tiny number of films by the standards of Billy "One-Shot" Beaudine, but I know whose work I, and I suspect the majority of film lovers, would rather watch.
Harvey said: "However noble his intentions, Welles slummed and damaged his reputation in scores of lousy pictures."
Well, it's odd, but I don't think Welles would be respected as he is today solely for his acting if he hadn't been a director. Of course, if he had taken better roles, his acting might have really shone, anyone know if he was offered any really good roles he turned down?
Harvey also said: "To the uninitiated (meaning most of the public), Welles is more familiar from his appearances in dreadful movies directed by others than he is from Falstaff, F for Fake, Filming Othello or The Dominici Affair."
Well, the thing is, those of us who come here aren't uninitiated. We're initiated, we know why the crap roles were taken, so, personally speaking, I don't think we have to worry too much about what the uninitiated know. To many people, Welles is a ham actor who made one good movie (though most of them don't see what's so good about it): I don't put myself into the shoes of those people, mentally speaking, because I imagine it's a very boring place to be.
"But Heston probably caught Ferry to Hong Kong on the late show one night and sat, shaking his head in disbelief, saddened to see the dreck the Great Director was appearing in — not two years after directing Heston in the masterpiece Touch of Evil."
That's an interesting image. If only Heston could have known as he shook his head that within a few years he'd have made Skyjacked and Airport 1975 , eh?
-
jaime marzol
- Wellesnet Legend
- Posts: 1091
- Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 3:24 am
.................
hey, i resent any knocking of that poverty row prodigy, william (one shot) beaudine. he's not as good as ulmer, but his movies were made as cheaply as ulmer's. i am a bowery boys fan. i also like some of the other crap he directed.
i saw heston on tv the other day. it didn't look like heston at first, he looked like a wax figure from the hall of presidents at disney world. i turned up the volume, and he was on becaause he's been diagnosed with alzheimers disease. poor chuck. what an awfull thing.
i sort of started liking him lately. there was some awfull movie my wife was watching, and i caught sight of heston entering a wedding with a rifle pointed at the groom and bride. it was hillarious. the movie was not hillarious, heston entering a wedding with a rifle was.
i though, "well, he has a sense of humor!"
store hadji, where the hell are you. email me for the trades. i want don q.
cinema_vortex@yahoo.com
hey, i resent any knocking of that poverty row prodigy, william (one shot) beaudine. he's not as good as ulmer, but his movies were made as cheaply as ulmer's. i am a bowery boys fan. i also like some of the other crap he directed.
i saw heston on tv the other day. it didn't look like heston at first, he looked like a wax figure from the hall of presidents at disney world. i turned up the volume, and he was on becaause he's been diagnosed with alzheimers disease. poor chuck. what an awfull thing.
i sort of started liking him lately. there was some awfull movie my wife was watching, and i caught sight of heston entering a wedding with a rifle pointed at the groom and bride. it was hillarious. the movie was not hillarious, heston entering a wedding with a rifle was.
i though, "well, he has a sense of humor!"
store hadji, where the hell are you. email me for the trades. i want don q.
cinema_vortex@yahoo.com
Jaime: "hey, i resent any knocking of that poverty row prodigy, william (one shot) beaudine. he's not as good as ulmer, but his movies were made as cheaply as ulmer's."
Oh, I wasn't knocking the man, I hear some of his early stuff is very interesting, and I liked Ghosts On The Loose for it's home-made feel, it's just that if I was given the choice between watching a Bresson film or a Beaudine film, I'd watch a Bresson film.
I like Heston too (hope the references to those bad airplane movies didn't sound nasty, I just suddenly thought of it with that image of Heston shaking his head at the TV, one actor watching the lengths another has to go to, and looking at Chuck's filmography of late, he's getting the kind of narration, cameo and presentation jobs Welles did in his later years).
For years I thought Heston was just a squarejawed type, but then I heard about the years he spent trying to get Antony And Cleopatra made, and the attention he paid to Olivier's preparation for the role of the Mahdi in Khartoum .
Heston going into a wedding with a rifle! I have to see that, any idea what the title was?
Oh, I wasn't knocking the man, I hear some of his early stuff is very interesting, and I liked Ghosts On The Loose for it's home-made feel, it's just that if I was given the choice between watching a Bresson film or a Beaudine film, I'd watch a Bresson film.
I like Heston too (hope the references to those bad airplane movies didn't sound nasty, I just suddenly thought of it with that image of Heston shaking his head at the TV, one actor watching the lengths another has to go to, and looking at Chuck's filmography of late, he's getting the kind of narration, cameo and presentation jobs Welles did in his later years).
For years I thought Heston was just a squarejawed type, but then I heard about the years he spent trying to get Antony And Cleopatra made, and the attention he paid to Olivier's preparation for the role of the Mahdi in Khartoum .
Heston going into a wedding with a rifle! I have to see that, any idea what the title was?
-
jaime marzol
- Wellesnet Legend
- Posts: 1091
- Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 3:24 am
..............
i knew you were not knocking beaudine, i was joking. imagine defending the guy. his movies are on an ed wood level, awfull, but fun to watch. Ghosts On The Lose is a lot of fun to watch, and it does look home made. baudine would be a great topic for a documaantary. i also love the bowery boys. leo gorcey is a lot of fun to watch, especially the later films with the card board sets, cheesey plots, and gorcey's dad running the sweat shop.
don't know what movie that heston was in. it's one of those newish bs movies from trendy audiences showing on encore. you can see it the minute heston enters the wedding, dressed in a brown suit, rifle aimed at the altar, the whole thing was done for laughs, and got lots of laughs out of me.
i tend to dislike a lot of celebs who seem to take themselves too seriously, then i see them parodying their image on tv and it softens my attitude.
case and point: herendo rivera. didn't think much of him or his show. i don't like any of those daytime tv shows. one day on some goofy night time television show, again, that my wife was watching, i catch a glimpse of a hospital corridor, the elevator door is closing, herendo in hospital gown running down the corridor trying to cath the elevator. the door is closing, he yells, "hold that elevator, i'm heraldo rivera, the king of day time television." how can you not like a guy who does such a thing? like heston going to a wedding with a rifle.
i rented copolla's dracula, remember watching it, wisshing it would get better, knowing the minute i hit fast forward that would essentially be the end of the movie for me. i think 18 minutes in i was fast forwarding looking for a more interesting scene. didn't find any.
andy warhol's dracula was awfull, but interesting to watch, like a baaudine movie.
how about billy the kid meets dracula, any one see this?
i knew you were not knocking beaudine, i was joking. imagine defending the guy. his movies are on an ed wood level, awfull, but fun to watch. Ghosts On The Lose is a lot of fun to watch, and it does look home made. baudine would be a great topic for a documaantary. i also love the bowery boys. leo gorcey is a lot of fun to watch, especially the later films with the card board sets, cheesey plots, and gorcey's dad running the sweat shop.
don't know what movie that heston was in. it's one of those newish bs movies from trendy audiences showing on encore. you can see it the minute heston enters the wedding, dressed in a brown suit, rifle aimed at the altar, the whole thing was done for laughs, and got lots of laughs out of me.
i tend to dislike a lot of celebs who seem to take themselves too seriously, then i see them parodying their image on tv and it softens my attitude.
case and point: herendo rivera. didn't think much of him or his show. i don't like any of those daytime tv shows. one day on some goofy night time television show, again, that my wife was watching, i catch a glimpse of a hospital corridor, the elevator door is closing, herendo in hospital gown running down the corridor trying to cath the elevator. the door is closing, he yells, "hold that elevator, i'm heraldo rivera, the king of day time television." how can you not like a guy who does such a thing? like heston going to a wedding with a rifle.
i rented copolla's dracula, remember watching it, wisshing it would get better, knowing the minute i hit fast forward that would essentially be the end of the movie for me. i think 18 minutes in i was fast forwarding looking for a more interesting scene. didn't find any.
andy warhol's dracula was awfull, but interesting to watch, like a baaudine movie.
how about billy the kid meets dracula, any one see this?
-
jaime marzol
- Wellesnet Legend
- Posts: 1091
- Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 3:24 am
Jaime: "i knew you were not knocking beaudine, i was joking. imagine defending the guy."
I thought you might be, but I just wanted to be sure, you can never be too sure these days, the other day I read someone on another board say he'll always take time to defend Jesus Franco.
Billy The Kid Meets Dracula : Unfortunately I haven't seen that, it's on the list.
I thought you might be, but I just wanted to be sure, you can never be too sure these days, the other day I read someone on another board say he'll always take time to defend Jesus Franco.
Billy The Kid Meets Dracula : Unfortunately I haven't seen that, it's on the list.
Kind of curious that this thread started on about Welles' slumming, crossed Charlton's slumming and now will add Warren Beatty's bad trip -- Town and Country (2000), where Heston appeared as a comical grouch with a penchant for rifles. I believe that's where he holds the wedding shotgun as mentioned in this thread.
As far as Ferry to Hong Kong, I'm certain that Welles saw it for what it was, but saw the paycheque for what it could be... More Don Quixote, maybe?
For those unfortunate people who never 'slum' a little, as Neil Young noted, the view from the ditch can be just as interesting as it is from the main road.
As far as Ferry to Hong Kong, I'm certain that Welles saw it for what it was, but saw the paycheque for what it could be... More Don Quixote, maybe?
For those unfortunate people who never 'slum' a little, as Neil Young noted, the view from the ditch can be just as interesting as it is from the main road.
-
jaime marzol
- Wellesnet Legend
- Posts: 1091
- Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 3:24 am
...........
professor Olson, it's good to see you back.
MY TWO CENTS POSTED HERE AT NO CHARGE:
I have no problem with the lousy films, or commercials Welles worked on. I don’t consider them Welles films or Welles projects at all. It’s what he did to support himself. It’s like trying to include in the Kafka oeuvre, the work he did at an insurance company during the day to support himself, so he could write at night. Who really cares what he did at the insurance company. Who really cares what films Welles acted in. They have nothing to do with his work as a director. Personally I wish Welles would have acted in more crappy films, and made more crappy commercials than he did because maybe then we would have more of his work to study.
It seems they use a different, nit-picky ruler when they measure Welles than when they measure other filmmakers. Such a stink about who wrote Kane. If any of them had taken the time to read the screenplay, they would know that most of what is revered about Kane isn’t in the screenplay.
I never heard any one argue Psycho not being a Hitch film because he didn’t write it. I never heard any one argue The Searchers, or The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance as not being Ford films because he didn’t write them.
professor Olson, it's good to see you back.
MY TWO CENTS POSTED HERE AT NO CHARGE:
I have no problem with the lousy films, or commercials Welles worked on. I don’t consider them Welles films or Welles projects at all. It’s what he did to support himself. It’s like trying to include in the Kafka oeuvre, the work he did at an insurance company during the day to support himself, so he could write at night. Who really cares what he did at the insurance company. Who really cares what films Welles acted in. They have nothing to do with his work as a director. Personally I wish Welles would have acted in more crappy films, and made more crappy commercials than he did because maybe then we would have more of his work to study.
It seems they use a different, nit-picky ruler when they measure Welles than when they measure other filmmakers. Such a stink about who wrote Kane. If any of them had taken the time to read the screenplay, they would know that most of what is revered about Kane isn’t in the screenplay.
I never heard any one argue Psycho not being a Hitch film because he didn’t write it. I never heard any one argue The Searchers, or The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance as not being Ford films because he didn’t write them.
-
maxrael
- Wellesnet Veteran
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2001 8:57 am
- Location: London, England
- Contact:
i watched Ferry To Hong Kong a couple of weeks ago... and errrr... my girlfriend loved it!!
i thought Orson was really funny playing the pompous old sea captain! didn't Orson say in This Is Orson Welles something along the lines that he had a fundamental disagreement with Jurgens, with Jurgens wanting to play it seriously, and Orson going for out and out comedy?...
i didn't think it stank... but i don't know if i'd watch if again, if you know what i mean!
i thought Orson was really funny playing the pompous old sea captain! didn't Orson say in This Is Orson Welles something along the lines that he had a fundamental disagreement with Jurgens, with Jurgens wanting to play it seriously, and Orson going for out and out comedy?...
i didn't think it stank... but i don't know if i'd watch if again, if you know what i mean!
maxrael said: "didn't Orson say in This Is Orson Welles something along the lines that he had a fundamental disagreement with Jurgens, with Jurgens wanting to play it seriously, and Orson going for out and out comedy?..."
Yeah, I think Jurgens thought he was playing a tragic hero, whereas Welles thought the film was a farce, because the situation was farcical.
"i didn't think it stank... but i don't know if i'd watch if again, if you know what i mean!"
Indeed, there are some movies (mostly the lightly entertaining kind, like FTHK ) for which once is enough.
Yeah, I think Jurgens thought he was playing a tragic hero, whereas Welles thought the film was a farce, because the situation was farcical.
"i didn't think it stank... but i don't know if i'd watch if again, if you know what i mean!"
Indeed, there are some movies (mostly the lightly entertaining kind, like FTHK ) for which once is enough.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest