Spielberg's WAR OF THE WORLDShttp://us.imdb.com/ne - Director used 1938 script.

[jbrooks]

I'm intrigued by the notion that Spielberg could easily snap his fingers, pay some cash, and have The Other Side of the Wind finished and available to the world. I suppose that must be true -- and the comments of Oja, Graver, and Bogdanovich have suggested as much. (Not necessarily that Spielberg could do it -- but more generally that all that is needed now is money). So why has Frank Marshall not stepped up to the plate to get the film finished? Marshall worked on the film after all, and he seems to have enjoyed the experience greatly. Why has he not used his own resources or prodded his buddy (and former producing partner) Spielberg to pony up the funds?

My fear is that the reason that no one has gone the extra mile to get The Other Side of the Wind finished is because no one thinks it will be very good. (I certainly hope that I am wrong on that point and that people in the know do not think that or that, if they do, they are wrong.) But that's my fear.

Certainly I have seen enough of it myself to know that it will be another "F for Fake" more than another "Citizen Kane" even if it can be finished in some sort of complete form. That isn't to say that it can't be great (as F for Fake is), but it certainly isn't going to "wow" the general movie-going public or even probably most critics.

[Orson&Jazz]

It seems to make any director part of the elite to say they admire Welles. Sort of elevating their status and intellect to say they idolize Welles for his revolutionary impact in the world of film, while spouting shop-talk (camera angles, cinematography, etc.) to prove their point.

Any director can say they like Welles and list a variety of his films they admire to sound sincere. Hell, if they can afford it, collect obscure memorabilia attributed to Welles to look authentic.

But, it takes a serious Welles lover to donate their time, energy, and cash to show they truly love the man for his contribution to cinema.

So far, I only count Bogdanovich as a serious fan of Welles. Spielberg, as far as I'm concerned, only fills the part of an opportunistic Welles elitist to boost his own image.

And it irritates the hell out of me to know that Spielberg will make millions on this film. Millions that originally belong to Welles. Millions that Welles was entitled to to finance his unfinished films. Millions that can satisfy the hundreds of fans that yearn for the day that they can lay their eyes on another completed Welles film.

And to hell if the critics deem any emerging Welles film terrible. I'd just be glad that one of his films will again appear on the silver screen, while for a brief time Welles will again grace us all with his presence.

[Harvey Chartrand]

I saw the trailer for Spielberg's remake of WAR OF THE WORLDS. Spielberg has opted for a Reality TV look. Frenetically spliced together, all the scenes look like pickup shots, filmed on the spot by a TV news crew. There is a special effects scene that probably cost more than all of FALSTAFF: an elevated expressway over a working class district is zapped by the unseen Martians; the massive overpass twists and buckles and falls onto the houses as Tom Cruise flees with his family.
I have to see this movie.

[Tony]

I think the bottom line with all those people in the 70s and 80s who professed a real respect for Welles was that while they knew his place in history, they believed he was burned out, and also incapable of making a profit. So they were sincere in their appreciation, but also sincere in their desire not to hurt their reputations and careers by getting involved with an embarrassment, both artistically and financially. They could even rationalize that they were doing Welles a favour by not providing him with the opportunity to embarrass himself and sully a great body of work. In fact, some of my friends think this, people who are life-long Welles fans. One friend just hates all of Welles work in colour, and thinks it's pretentious and weak: The Immortal Story, The Deep, Orson's Bag, The Merchant of Venice, The Other Side of the Wind, F For Fake and The Dreamers. And Maybe Welles did exhibit a less sure hand when he abandoned black and white. (Interestingly, two of his last productions, The Big Brass Ring and king Lear were to be in black and white, as Welles was emboldened by the success of Raging Bull and Manhattan, both in glorious black and white.)

Anyways, any Welles picture in the 70s and 80s probaly would have lost money, just as all his other pictures had, so ask yourself this: if you were a studio exec, responsible for a production company, would you finance a Welles film, knowing with 99% assurance that it would lose money, just so you could show respect to the man?

I doubt any of us would: look what happened to George Schaefer. Still, it's amazing how close he came, what with this awful reputation as difficult, a money-loser, in ill health and burned out: Apostrophe gave him money for both The Other Side of the Wind and F For Fake, that millionaire businessman offered to pay for the Big Brass Ring as long as Welles could get a big name male lead (which of course he couldn't), the French government actually made him an offer to produce King Lear, but Welles thought the offer not enough, and the producers of The Cradle Will Rock actually hired him but had financial problems.

Who knows? Sometimes I think there is a God, and he protected Welles by not letting him create an artistic disaster; other times, I think it's all a greater loss than Ambersons. As Marin Ritt wondered:" I just don't know why Orson didn't make more films!"

[Orson&Jazz]

I suppose I was a little hasty in my last reply.

But, damn it! I get angry when I think of how Welles was treated. It seems like he wasn't allowed to make another masterpiece.

It's like the crabs in a pail story. You don't need to cover the pail, because if a crab was trying to escape, you can gaurantee that there will be crabs pulling the escaping crab down.


Hollywood is full of crabs.

[Glenn Anders]

The Crab we have been praising and condemning here, from what I've read recently, suggests that he made at least one homage to Welles' "War of the Worlds" by setting his version in New Jersey, as Welles did his.

That's a start toward a positive review.

Now, just don't blow it, Steve!

Glenn

[babus]

Orson&Jazz
I can understand the frustration you seem to have about Welles not having gotten enough recognition or not having been given enough opportunities to direct movies and have full control. But we should just be happy with what we have of his work. Who knows what would have happened of his career had the original reels of citizen Kane been burnt as Hearst wanted. The movie was very close from disappearing completely. We should be so grateful that there are 13 movies (i think) that he directed, some were butchered, but we still have 1 hour the magnificent Ambersons, and about the same of Lady from Shanghai, and something close to what he wanted for Touch of Evil.

There are lots of people who have lots of talent who never get discovered, maybe cause they don't try hard enough or did not know the right people or simply were not at the right place at the right time, so we should be happy that welles got his break, and left us all those movies, radio shows and so on to enjoy.

[Orson&Jazz]

Yes, I suppose you're right. Welles left an awesome legacy. And I assure you, his legacy is greatly appreciated. Not only by me, but the many individuals who visit Wellesnet!

Trivia for War of the Worlds (2005)
'Steven Spielberg ' owns one of the last copies of the 'Orson Welles ' radio script, which he purchased at an auction. The director wanted to make the film years ago, but decided against it when Independence Day (1996) was released. However, the director wanted to work with 'Tom Cruise ' again after Minority Report (2002) and picked War of the Worlds (2005) as their next project.

I just wonder if Speilberg is going to give credit where credit is due. Do you suppose he will at least tip his hat off to Welles while the credits roll? At least a tiny acknowledgement? I know there is the possibility that they did not follow the radio script to a T, and used H. G. Wells' novel as the basis of the movie. But I know they must have patterned the movie from the radio script some what. For example, the setting is in New Jersey. Welles and Koch should get some credit. Spielberg had the idea for a long time now, and with the help of Welles' & Koch's radio script. This script was the brainchild of Speilberg's idea to do the film, so I'm gathering that that deserves a place in the credits at least!

[Jaime N. Christley]

You know, Orson Welles DID NOT ACTUALLY CREATE 'THE WAR OF THE WORLDS.' Not sure what you think Spielberg owes Welles.

[Glenn Anders]

I think babus has it about right.

As for the Mercury Theater Producion of H.G. Wells' "The War of the Worlds," the script seems to have developed like many of the others -- written by the stable of writers, in this case, Howard Koch, under John Houseman's supervision, with input by Welles. But in the sense a director creates a movie, Welles did create that memorable production. Even more so because he did it for Radio; under his own hand, live, as it happened.

That's why he liked Radio so much. That's why he hated to give up his movies to the producers. So long as he was editing them, creating them, he might improve them.

Or so he claimed.

Glenn

[Orson&Jazz]

I know he didn't create WOTW.


I mean, not to be rude but WOTW is synonymous with Orson Welles not H.G. Wells. Sad, but oftentimes true. When people bring up WOTW, they automatically think the radio show. H. G. Wells did not terrify the country; Welles did. I was just hoping that Speilberg was going to be courteous for the use of the Welles and Koch script and give a little acknowledgement.


That's all.


But, I am being naive. Hollywood is the crab pail. So, I will not have faith that Welles and Koch will be acknowledged for anything. Obviously people already think they do not deserve any thing.


I will just hope that this will bring Welles back into the spotlight again and be satisfied with that.

[Jaime N. Christley]

No, no, no, no, no.

I know he didn't create WOTW.

Sorry to be rough, but you don't show that you know it.

WOTW is synonymous with Orson Welles not H.G. Wells.

Wrong.

When people bring up WOTW, they automatically think the radio show.

Not all people. Maybe stupid people. If you want to defend the stupid people in this country, be my guest. Otherwise, no.

H. G. Wells did not terrify the country; Welles did.

Jesus, that was almost SEVENTY YEARS AGO.

Hitler terrified the country - maybe he should have thanked Hitler when he made Schindler's List.

I was just hoping that Speilberg was going to be courteous for the use of the Welles and Koch script and give a little acknowledgement.

Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't. He's not obligated to. Orson Welles did not create 'THE WAR OF THE WORLDS.'

But, I am being naive. Hollywood is the crab pail. So, I will not have faith that Welles and Koch will be acknowledged for anything. Obviously people already think they do not deserve any thing.

All the hand-wringing in the world isn't going to change anything. Get over it.

[babus]

I agree, i don't think Welles is synonymous with the war of the worlds. He is maybe to us because we are Orson welles fans but a lot of people don't know about the radio show let alone don't know anything about Orson welles. That is mostly true of the younger generation, which will constitute most of the audience for the Spielberg movie.

[R Kadin]

WOTW is not a Welles property, no matter how notorious the Mercury Theater's treatment became.

As this site's extensive coverage of Welles' radio career demonstrates, there were a good many other adaptations of famous works in which he was keenly involved; however, regardless of their successes, none conferred any enduring exclusive rights on Welles & co. They remained available for others to tackle and properly so, although the Mercury treatments often set an awfully high standard with which to compete.

Conrad's Heart of Darkness was one such broadcast, successful enough for Welles to include it on the short list and to develop it for the Mercury's planned Hollywood debut. Yet we are not giving Francis Ford Coppolla the gears for bringing it to the screen without going on and on about any Welles connection. And, despite both mens' successes with their respective adaptations, it remains Joseph Conrad's creation every bit as much as WOTW belongs to H.G. Wells.

Would Spielberg have chosen it as a project had it not been for Orson's infamous experience with it? Possibly; he has engaged in plenty of projects with far more modest histories. And it offers the flip side of a theme he famously explored in "Close Encounters of the Third Kind."

Would he have contemporized the story and located it in New Jersey? Probably, re the former, since H.G. Wells had contemporized his treatment; probably not, re the latter, since the East Coast has not been a big location favourite with him, so far. And it's a moot point, either way, since he has already freely acknowledged, for the record, the role that the Welles broadcast and its script played in his case.

Now, can we possibly stop beating this poor old, dead horse?

[Orson&Jazz]

yes, I'm done beating the poor dead horse.



I've been fully reprimanded.



And excuse my rather enthusiastic fanboyish ranting posts. I guess I kind of lose all logic and reason when it comes to Welles.


Please forgive my fanboyism.