THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND Thread - 2015-2017

[Roger Ryan]

I don't think you can stress enough just how much footage exists for this film. Welles was shooting on-and-off for six years and was experimenting with improvisation and multiple formats (35mm, 16mm, 8mm and videotape). From my understanding, even Welles didn't view everything that he shot. The sheer amount of material dwarfs almost everything else Welles directed (possibly QUIXOTE comes close). Hopefully, the cataloging done in the 70s was good enough that post-production will be more like pulling material from a library instead of going on a treasure hunt, but, like the producers have noted, this project is the creation of a whole new film, not a restoration or reconstruction of one.

For the 1998 TOUCH OF EVIL reconstruction, Rick Schmidlin and Walter Murch had the negative for the edited 1958 theatrical release, a print of one preview edit and the famous opening shot sans credits (preserved only so foreign language titles could be superimposed for releases in non-English speaking countries). That's essentially three pieces of film to work from as opposed to the thousands of pieces of film TOSOTW must be built from.

[RayKelly]

Hopefully, the cataloging done in the 70s was good enough that post-production will be more like pulling material from a library instead of going on a treasure hunt, but, like the producers have noted, this project is the creation of a whole new film, not a restoration or reconstruction of one.

Quite true. In my conversation last week with Filip Jan Rymsza and Frank Marshall, it was made quite clear that a great deal of cataloguing has taken place in France over the past six months. The contents of the 1,083 reels of negative is known and it will make it easier for scanning and editing.

[RayKelly]

If that's the case, then it will be interesting to see how much pressure is put on them to finish it, since they're playing with the public's money now.

If the money is not there, I don't know what they can be expected to do, except continue the hunt for more resources. When you contribute to a crowdfunding campaign, it is a free-will donation. You are not a partner in the decision-making process.

[mido505]

Quite true. In my conversation last week with Filip Jan Rymsza and Frank Marshall, it was made quite clear that a great deal of cataloguing has taken place in France over the past six months.

Ray,

Karp states on page 264 of his book that Showtime, at the height of their involvement, digitized the non-negative footage of TOSOTW to which they had access, and that Kaul viewed eleven hours and sixteen minutes of it. Are you aware of this and, if you are, do you know if Kaul, Rymsza, and Marshall have access to it?

[RayKelly]

Showtime, at the height of their involvement, digitized the non-negative footage of TOSOTW to which they had access, and that Kaul viewed eleven hours and sixteen minutes of it. Are you aware of this and, if you are, do you know if Kaul, Rymsza, and Marshall have access to it?

I cannot speak with any certainly as to what they have access to. (I know they have a deal with Showtime for the North American cable TV rights). I do know the negative footage, which totals 18 or 19 hours and is being shipped to California, is what is needed to make a finished film.

[mido505]

I do know the negative footage, which totals 18 or 19 hours and is being shipped to California, is what is needed to make a finished film.

That's a given. But technically the negative is not needed until the final cut is locked. Of course, negative footage might exist that has not been printed, although common sense tells us that the footage that went to Oja, and ended up with Showtime/Marshall/Kaul/Rymsza, and was digitzed by Showtime, was the important material that Welles worked on over the years.

My point is that if 11-12 hours of digitized footage exists, and the producers have access to it, the editor can begin playing right now.

PB stated a while back that he had edited a sequence that Orson previously had not cut. That interview/article is posted somewhere on Wellesnet. That statement intimates that PB had access, at some point, to the digitized footage.

My larger point is that the Indiegogo campaign has, up until now, been sluggish. These guys need to do more than work the interview circuit. They need to generate real interest, build momentum, create buzz. The best way to do that is to show some stuff. We've all seen the same couple of AFI bits. It's boring. Give the world a taste of some new, exciting material, in preliminary/provisional form. People need to know that there is a film there, and that this is not some antiquarian geek crusade.

It's time for the "professionals" to show us how professional they are. No more artists need apply. Orson's the artist. We need some people who know how to get things done.

[Le Chiffre]

They need to generate real interest, build momentum, create buzz. The best way to do that is to show some stuff. We've all seen the same couple of AFI bits. It's boring. Give the world a taste of some new, exciting material, in preliminary/provisional form. People need to know that there is a film there...

Well said, Mido. Even though it's been written that the Indiegogo campaign is bombing, I'm pleasantly surprised at how well it has done so far, considering that they've demonstrated nothing new from workprint materials, and nothing at all from the negative. They've raised almost $150K purely on trust, which may be due to the generous media coverage, or a tribute to the love so many people have for Orson Welles films in general. But that will only take them so far, I would think. Taking nothing away from the heroic effort so far of Rymzsa and the others, eventually people are going to need to be shown, not only that there is a film there, but that it is being put together as well.

[RayKelly]

My point is that if 11-12 hours of digitized footage exists, and the producers have access to it, the editor can begin playing right now.

Playing with it for what purpose? If you are paying an editor (and you have limited funds), you want him to work on materials that will be in the final product. You want him working on a 4K digital scan off the negative, not digitalized images from a 30-year-old film print.
We already have seen the AFI special clips. Distributors and serious investors want proof that the 40-year-old materials in Paris can yield a theatrical quality print.

I'm pleasantly surprised at how well it has done so far, considering that they've demonstrated nothing new from workprint materials, and nothing at all from the negative.

Well, the reason they turned to crowdfunding is because they did not have the resources to acquire, scan and edit the negative. So, they don't have anything at present to show. (Funny if fans require proof before donating money, just like those cold studios we criticize).

[RayKelly]

Audio of the 5.12.2015 NPR interview with Peter Bogdanovich and Filip Jan Rymsza.
http://www.wellesnet.com/peter-bogdanovich-filip-jan-rymsza-take-orsonslastfilm-campaign-to-airwaves/

[atcolomb]

Audio of the 5.12.2015 NPR interview with Peter Bogdanovich and Filip Jan Rymsza.
http://www.wellesnet.com/peter-bogdanovich-filip-jan-rymsza-take-orsonslastfilm-campaign-to-airwaves/

By chance driving home i was switching radio stations and on my NPR station i just picked up the begining of the interview and it does sound promising if they can raise the 2 million to finish the film. It's kinda of short interview but glad it was broadcast.

[Le Chiffre]

Ray Kelly wrote:
Well, the reason they turned to crowdfunding is because they did not have the resources to acquire, scan and edit the negative. So, they don't have anything at present to show. (Funny if fans require proof before donating money, just like those cold studios we criticize).

Ray, hardcore Welles fans like you and I don't require proof, but more casual Welles fans might. Two or three minutes of negative footage might be enough to coax many of them off the fence. I don't know how much it would cost to put together a two or three minute demo, but it couldn't be that much. Seems to me it would behoove the Wind team to do something like that as soon as they can. Hopefully, they're thinking the same thing.

[RayKelly]

I don't know how much it would cost to put together a two or three minute demo, but it couldn't be that much.

They have to scan the negative first. To make a demo, maybe you only have to scan a few select reels. I don't know the cost. With money in short supply, the demo should hbe a scene you would use in the final product.
If we are only talking about showing something to the casual fans, just use the Wind clips from the AFI special -- and not the versions from One Man Band. I have a laser disc and the clips look great.

[Le Chiffre]

If we are only talking about showing something to the casual fans, just use the Wind clips from the AFI special -- and not the versions from One Man Band. I have a laser disc and the clips look great.

That's an interesting idea. Those AFI scenes from Wind were probably taken from the negative. I've only seen the AFI OW tribute on VHS. I don't think it's available on Bluray or DVD, which might give an idea of what it would look like in a theatre.

[mido505]

If we are only talking about showing something to the casual fans, just use the Wind clips from the AFI special -- and not the versions from One Man Band. I have a laser disc and the clips look great.

And so we end back at my original point:

If 11-12 hours of rushes have already been digitized by Showtime, and the producers have access to them, a new demo real can be put together relatively quickly and, more importantly, cheaply. It will not be perfect, but it will be interesting. More importantly, it will help generate interest.

For example, Peter Bogdanovich, in an interview with Peter Tonguette, talks about badgering Welles to shoot a scene in one take, like he did in AMBERSONS. Welles would bitch about not having the right actors or technicians to pull it off, but he finally relented and staged a oner with PB and Huston that went on for a couple of pages of dialogue. If that scene has been digitized, it can quickly, easily, and fairly cheaply be synched up and shown.

I listened to the NPR interview; it's nice, and likely accounted for a fundraising bump. But after 6 days we're only at $154,000.00; that's about $25,000.00 per day, about half the rate needed to hit the goal. We can't just appeal to people's higher natures while droning on about the artistic and historical importance of TOSOTW. That and five dollars will get you an NPR tote bag. People need to learn about TOSOTW, become excited about it, begin to want it, crave it, demand it. Marketing is about creating a need that doesn't exist. Why should you donate to this project? Here, let us show you.

We need a touch of the old carny world that Welles loved so dearly; we need a touch of William Castle. Back in the old days the boys at Hammer and AIP would come up with a title and a poster before they had a film, or often even a script; they would then secure financing from a major based on the assumed attractiveness of the proposed campaign.

We are not far from that territory here.

Time to start thinking outside the box.

[Jarpie]

I think they made a mistake that they put the crowdfunding campaign to IndieGoGo as Kickstarter is much more popular and has much larger userbase, I think they could already have a lot more in pledges if it'd been in Kickstarter.

Indiegogo has a MAJOR advantage over Kickstarter. You can keep the money raised whether you meet your goal or not! If you set a $2M goal on Kickstarter and raise $1.9M, you get nothing. With Indiegogo's Flexible Funding drive, if you set a $2M goal and collect only $1M, you get to keep the $1M to use toward your project. It requires donors to place a great deal of trust into the campaign drive.

True but I think there would've been good enough chance that they'd gotten full 2 million in Kickstarter, and they could've set the goal lower, like 1 million. That being said, they need to keep promoting this in -everywhere- and get coverage in consistent basis, which I grant isn't easy, also they need to keep putting up updates and new stuff out gradually.

One very useful thing they could do is to put out interviews with industry people every five or so days, like Bogdanovich, Martin Scorsese and so on and get the mainstream press to get them out, basically shill the hell out of it.

In crowdfunding it's not nearly enough to just put the project up and hope for the best.