Is Oja Kodar holding up The Other Side of the Wind?

[Le Chiffre]

As far the other website you mentioned, I have had "dealings" with the operator and tend not to put too much stock in his views.

I don't place much stock in his views either, but are they really his views or someone else's? That's what I'm wondering.

[MartynH]

This is my first post for years. I have followed Wellesnet from afar.

However, I gave money to the film thinking it was all done with the red tape etc. And it clearly isn't. Whichever way it tries to be sugar coated it is still a mess. Is it better than before the Indigogo campaign started? Who knows. But the campaign should never have been started until all the 'barriers' were sorted. People gave money thinking it was all done and dusted.

Can I go back into hibernation now?

[RayKelly]

This is my first post for years. I have followed Wellesnet from afar...
Can I go back into hibernation now?

Don't you dare! Welcome back to the fold.
It's safe to say that completing TOSOTW has not gone as smoothly as had been planned.
Hopefully, things will be sorted out very soon.

[I=Eye]

Martyn H wrote "I gave money to the film thinking it was all done with the red tape etc. And it clearly isn't. Whichever way it tries to be sugar coated it is still a mess. Is it better than before the Indigogo campaign started? Who knows. But the campaign should never have been started until all the 'barriers' were sorted. People gave money thinking it was all done and dusted."

Here are some more observations from my source, sympathetic to Oja, that might answer some of the points raised by others:

Of course, starting the Indigogo campaign was the real kicker, wasn’t it? It was a great presentation, but you can’t do that until you make sure that everything is legally taken care of. It’s like someone sending out invitations to his wedding, buying a ring, renting a church, hiring a band, and not bothering to tell anyone that he hasn’t even asked the girl for a date yet!

It’s not a question of anyone's motive. It’s a question of incompetence. Why else would they have to resort to that ridiculous Indiegogo campaign in the first place? Some people, including the May 6th NYT article, defend Frank Marshall by saying his success is based on the fact that he never puts his own money into his films (a “number one rule of financing in Hollywood”), but it’s not like it would be setting a precedent where other filmmakers would come looking for a check. It’s a film that he worked on! He got his start with Orson Welles. He was a nobody working on this film as an associate line producer. So there should be at least a sentimental motive for him to cash a check for this film. Even if the film turns out bad, he can at least say he tried. Just a guess, but perhaps Oja sees the failure to get any financing from Marshall as another example of the overall incompetence displayed by the people overseeing this project.

Sure it’s normal to have stumbling blocks related to funding, and in fact, Orson Welles dealt with that problem many times, as Oja undoubtedly well knows. But what’s not normal is to keep the people you’re dealing with completely in the dark about what’s going on. That’s an amateurish blunder. She signed a “performance-based” contract, whereby things would be taken one step at a time, as in “you give me some of the money, I give you some lab access to the negative.” These people couldn’t even get the first step right.

Oja wants to see the film get finished, but she wants it done right, and by the right people. People who cannot be trusted financially cannot be trusted artistically either.

Regarding how to remove so much negative from a lab, it would take only one ignorant lab technician (who would not demand written documentation) for the negative to have been loaded up and taken away. What do they need the negative for anyway? Why not just do a 4K scan in Paris? The NYT on May 6th quoted Filip Jan Rymzsa as saying they needed the negative in LA because the language barrier and time difference in France made scanning too difficult to perform there. Maybe that is a fact, but it is also a fact that possession is nine tenths of the law, and once the negative is in LA, anyone could be pretty much home free to lay claim to it for good. From what I've heard, the original contract that Oja signed provided for lab access to the negative in Paris, not taking posession of the negative itself.

[Antone]

Well, I must give credit here credit is due – your “source” should be applauded for presenting theories and “facts” for which the term mind-boggling seems insufficient.

1 - Let’s begin with the premise that, as your “source” states, It’s not a question of anyone’s motive. It’s a question of competence.

This presents a fairly clear debate – who is more competent in producing films, completing films and putting together deals to produce and complete films: Frank Marshall or Oja Kodar.

Indeed, Mr. Marshall was “a nobody” when he worked on The Other Side of the Wind. It’s a little known fact, but very few people start their careers as a somebody – unless you are talking about those with a famous lineage, tons of inherited money or something else out of the ordinary. The manner in which Mr. Marshall became a “somebody” however, is an interesting story that involves his producing: The Indiana Jones films; the Back to the Future Trilogy; the Bourne franchise; The Color Purple and Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Perhaps his ability to successfully act as producer on these films is the result of a lucky rabbit’s foot or having kidnapped a leprechaun, but, putting those theories aside, let’s entertain the notion that he may be competent at producing a film and putting together a deal to do so.

Now, let’s look at Ms. Kodar’s competency. I’m sure there are a few exceptions, but her acting career consisted of appearing in films that were directed by Orson Welles, with whom she was having an affair – and achieved a level of distinction substantially below that of Pia Zadora. The same can be said of her writing and directing career. Don Quixote aside (we all know how well that worked out) her producing career since Orson’s death is equally unremarkable, if not non-existent. Since Mr. Welles’s death, she has created almost nothing except for Jaded. I suggest we hold a screening of that film and then discuss her accomplishments and competency as a director.

In truth, Ms. Kodar’s areas of competency – whatever they may be - seem to be outside the world of film. She appears to have even not been terribly good at serving as an heir, which begs the question of how people might react to all of this if it were Beatrice Welles rather than Ms. Kodar sitting across from Mr. Marshall and Mr. Rymsza. Would the intrepid “source” apply the “facts” in the same way? Another question for another day, I suppose.

One thing, however is certain, if this is an issue of competency, Ms. Kodar’s well of unseen competency in the field of film production must be immense, given that it outweighs not only Mr. Marshall’s, but also those of the entire Showtime network and the endless list of others who have tried and failed to complete a deal with Ms. Kodar over the years. Mr. Marshall has been involved in a few of the aborted deals as has Mr. Bogdanovich. Ms. Kodar, however, has been involved in all of them. That said, it’s such a shame that someone (Ms. Kodar) who wants this film to be completed has dealt only with incompetents for going on 30 years. It must be a colossal strain to go through life dealing with buffoons who’ve apparently fooled the film industry for decades, while knowing that you alone are the one that is genuinely competent. How does she go on?

2 – Your “source” asserts that Ms. Kodar wants it done right, and by the right people. People who can’t be trusted financially cannot be trusted artistically either.

Given Mr. Welles’s somewhat iffy relationship to money and the funding of his projects, leading to the conclusion that your “source” is essentially making an argument that Orson himself couldn’t be trusted artistically to complete this film – since he couldn’t be trusted financially. Very confusing.

3 – It would take only one ignorant lab technician for the negative to have been loaded up and taken away…It is also a fact that possession is nine tenths of the law and once the negative is in LA, anyone could pretty much home free lay claim to it for good.

I am going to venture a guess that your "source" is not an attorney. Possession is not actually nine tenths of the law, especially when something physically large and of value has been stolen, much less shipped overseas and particularly after it’s been reported on in the New York Times and discussed on CBS News. Under that premise, Mr. Marshall could rob a bank in Paris (after discussing the bank itself in the newspaper a few months prior) and, so long as he got the money to Los Angeles, would be in the clear – what with possession being nine tenths of the law and all.

Frankly, we can argue all day about the size of Mr. Marshall and Mr. Rymsza’s pants and their ability to stealthily spirit 600-1000 cans of film out of a lab, into a van, onto a plane and back to Los Angeles, but do you truly think that someone with Mr. Marshall’s career and reputation would put those two things on the line in order to steal this film? Did his and Mr. Rymsza’s plan also include the assumption that no one would ever notice that the film was gone until after it was on the screen and then (imagine Mr. Marshall’s evil laugh as he rubs his hands and twirls his Snidely Whiplash mustache in glee) it would be too late!

God, what a nefarious pair.

As for your “source,” you might want to consider the possibility – just the possibility – that what they are saying makes absolutely no sense.

[mido505]

I=Eye wrote: Oja wants to see the film get finished, but she wants it done right, and by the right people. People who cannot be trusted financially cannot be trusted artistically either.

Given that Oja seems content to let the people who cannot be trusted financially or artistically for $1 million, be trusted artistically and financially for $1.4 million, I am having a hard time taking anything you write seriously, even if I want to.

I guess $400,000 buys a lot of trust.

Am I missing something?

[RayKelly]

An update on the 1 year anniversary of the big announcement:

http://www.wellesnet.com/the-other-side-of-the-wind-the-year-in-review/

[tonyw]

And to think I over-optimistically added the DVD of THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND for my the final film in my May Welles class!

[Le Chiffre]

Not to worry, Tony. I've got something even better for your next Welles class...my 35-minute reedit of HOT MONEY:
https://vimeo.com/143893171

[Jeff Wilson]

And to think I over-optimistically added the DVD of THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND for my the final film in my May Welles class!

If it was any May this century, it was probably over-optimistic.

[Le Chiffre]

The original deal hit a snag a few months after producers Filip Jan Rymsza, Frank Marshall and Jens Koethner Kaul reached an agreement with Kodar last October. The producers could not attract a suitable distributor to finance the film's completion without first showing footage edited from the 40-year-old negative, which remains in storage at a film laboratory outside Paris.  Kodar would not release the negative without payment, so alternative funding efforts were explored and eventually obtained, leading to a lump sum payment of $1 million being offered to her in July. Unfortunately, Kodar had grown unhappy with the delays, and her relationship with the producers turned frosty, according to multiple sources close to her.

"We have never agreed to release the negative unless certain demands are met, the producer never met them, as a matter of fact, they breached our contract from October 2014 in January 2015," Sasha Welles wrote in an exchange of emails with Wellesnet.  "The October 2014 agreement was automatically null and void when producers failed to deposit finances and create an escrow by the date agreed in the contract."
He added,  "Since then until present we have not reached another agreement. We are not looking to 'renegotiate,' our demands have been known and (the) same for some time now."

...numerous individuals (investors, attorneys, executives and others) who have been involved with the project since the late 1990s all told a variation on the same tale in which Kodar derailed attempts to complete the film by reneging on agreements; pitting investors against each other; secretly shopping for better deals and shifting her allegiances at critical junctures.

"Demands", says Sasha, as if it were some kind of hostage situation. From this I gather that a simple lack of trust on both sides has all but done the project in. I wrote several years ago that, if the people who owned the various rights to this film had any brains, they would all work together and cooperate to get the film ready for the centennial. Obviously, that's not going to happen now. They still have a slight chance to get the film ready as a companion piece for Kane's 75th anniversary next May, but the prospects for that are starting to look dim too. After that, I think any release of the film would be greeted with a yawn and a shrug for the most part. Looks like all these people have blown their golden opportunity.