Criterion F For Fake DVD

[Glenn Anders]

Okay, Tim. Flying blind here.

Let me get away from my favorite usual suspect and suggest Francoise Widhoff. I had overlooked her on the cast list.

A few years ago, I saw a strange little film, LIVES, at the San Francisco Film Festival. Forgot all about it, but you never know when you may need such films.

One section of the film (the others were about a butcher and a doctor) concerned a wander that Francoise Widhoff took through the abandoned building where Welles had once maintained an office and editing facilities. It was a sad little segment, scattered with discarded dinner plates and scraps of film, and narrated by Widhoff, who had served as Welles' assistant for a number of years. There is an air of regret, hurt and betrayal in her words, for she seems to have cared very much for him and his enterprises, at one time.

Turns out this film was put together by Alain Cavalier, himself a vest-pocket Wellsian maverick (LA RENCONTRE, 1996), and Widhoff is married to him. She is a major producer for d'Astrophore Films, which should ring a bell.

Because she is listed as an assistant and "Special Participant" in the cast list of F FOR FAKE, Francoise Widhoff may be your woman, Tim.

Hope that gives you the right clue.

Glenn

[etimh]

Yes! I suspected it might be her from the "F for Fake" credits but had no way of knowing. Based on your reporting I think I'll go with it. Thanks for picking your brain and "connecting the dots." Tim

[maxrael]

stefan wrote:

I also had problems with the Criterion F FOR FAKE DVD for which I did some researches. We were able to trace the original ELMYR-film by Reichenbach which was the basis of F FOR FAKE. Could you imagine that Criterion even didn't try to include this very revealing item? It's not the only thing I miss on this DVD, there also won't be neither Oja Kodar nor the restored color trailer for F FOR FAKE nor clips of THE MAGIC SHOW.

see this thread

[Harvey Chartrand]

A New York Press story on the rediscovery of F FOR FAKE

http://www.nypress.com/18/22/film/ArmondWhite2.cfm

[Glenn Anders]

Well, Harvey! We need more reviews like this one.!

Nice to see Mr. Armond White make the connection between Welles and Altman, F FOR FAKE and THE LONG GOODBYE.

Glenn

[Harvey Chartrand]

I bought the F FOR FAKE DVD on the weekend.
I admire how 56-year-old Welles was trying to reinvent himself with an "à tout prendre" style of filmmaking in which there is not a vestige of the old Wellesian technique, but I must also agree with Lotte Eisner's assessment that F FOR FAKE is not even a movie (as revealed in Jonathan Rosenbaum's excellent liner notes).
I think it is a remarkable achievement in editing, but the images (often blown up from 16 mm) are nothing special, for the most part. Other than the scenes at Lourdes, Orly and SNCF train station.
What really turns me off, though, is the tone of the film, which is too arch for my taste. Like a comedian who laughs at his own jokes, Welles is very much aware of his cleverness here, and it is damned annoying. Welles lost me when he started musing over the possibility that Elmyr might be a "fake faker." F FOR FAKE is undone by its fatal "cleverness."
I recall my English Lit professor dismissing Welles as "old hamface" circa 1976. We were watching bearded Orson narrating some PBS educational series on literary works of art. I defended Welles with brio, but now would have to agree with my prof. As he got on in years and became Orson the Personality, his acting suffered for it. He was breathier, he wheezed a lot. All those damned cigars were taking their toll on his Voice of God. From the mid-1970s on, he would only play Orson the Magician or Orson the Talk Show Host, and was never again able to deliver a great acting performance, this man who had achieved theatrical immortality with his JULIUS CAESAR on Broadway and who had delivered a towering and Oscar-worthy performance as Charles Foster Kane.
I was much more impressed with the 90-minute DVD extra – the documentary ORSON WELLES: THE ONE-MAN BAND, which features clips from his many unfinished projects.
Based on the footage shown here, I think THE DEEP would be a better bet than THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND as Welles' last great film. VIENNA looks like a mini-masterpiece. The LONDON skit in which Welles plays several characters is a testament to his genius with accents and a makeup kit. However, I find Welles' MOBY DICK readings utterly static. Here is a director whose camera once glided over rooftops, reduced to making a film that consists of nothing but boring head shots against a blank screen.
Much as he wanted to demonstrate a flair for comedy, Welles had a very limited gift for generating laughter. Some of his wounded and baffled expressions in THE TAILOR SHOP skit are priceless, as he is mocked by tailors Charles Gray and Jonathan Lyn, but the skit is simply not funny. The timing is way off. Nor does Welles fare any better with THE HUMOR OF WINSTON CHURCHILL routine in silhouette, which is downright painful to watch.
I enjoyed the excerpt from the F FOR FAKE trailer that is used in ONE-MAN BAND. It's in good shape, unlike the entire trailer shown as an added feature (in black and white). How odd that this 10-minute trailer was filmed three years after the release of F FOR FAKE.
One final observation: Why do we call this film F FOR FAKE? The title that appears on screen is simply ?, drawn in over a shot from EARTH VS THE FLYING SAUCERS that appears on the Movieola screen. Fake title, I suppose...

[jaime marzol]

it's always real pleasure to read a film review and feel that the writer is not blowing out his ass for his paycheck, he's passionate about what he's writing, and he knows what he is writing about. great review.

[etimh]

Well Harvey, I don't know where to begin on your comments about Fake but, to put it simply, I think you blew it. I don't want to be presumptous and assume that you are new to the film, but if so, this is a film/document which requires multiple intensive and critical viewings to unlock all of its mysteries and treasures.

It is a masterpiece not only of Wellesian cinema but also of general cultural criticism. While it serves as an illuminating metacommentary on Welles own work (actually returning to and reflecting upon some of the deep themes of Kane), it was also ahead of its time in anticipation of contemporary visual culture's obsession with hyper montage editing strategies and cut and paste appropriation. And the philosophical inquires it tackles regarding the nature of art, authenticity and truth, are profound, and in some cases, yet to be resolved convincingly by contemporary philosophy.

In your critique of the "quality" of the visual material found in the film, I ask you to pause and consider the experimental (at the time) nature of what Welles was doing. For instance, the appropriated material from the Reichenbach piece was not just a case of making a fortuitous discovery of some available footage. Welles use of this pre-existing film was yet another layer of commentary on the true nature of "authorship" within the cinematic text--is this Welles' film we are watching, or Reicenbach's? And the free utilization of prints of varying visual quality further deconstructs the preciousness of the "beautiful" film shot and contributes to the work's questioning of aesthetic precepts, assigned value, etc.

You also lament the ironic and sometimes sarcastic tone of the proceedings. Not only does this levity simply function as a way of keeping things in perspective, but it also quite cleverly reflects the fundamental commentary of the film--that the absurdity of the historical events portrayed are only eclipsed by the absurdity of the discourse generated around them. All unfolding within a world dictated by an essentially absurdist set of doctrines, beliefs, and institutions. Consider the old pharse, "You couldn't make this stuff up!"

I was struck by this film almost immediately when I frist saw it maybe five years ago. I was blown away by its technique and its address and its consideration of issues that I had been grappling with for years. So I have obsessively re-viewed the film more times than I'd like to remember. But each time I not only discover subtle little material things--a shot here that captures a curious glance, a comment there that explains something previously unconsidered--but the film's overall meanings transform and morph with new profound depth. It actually "grows" on you in many peculiar and interesting ways.

So, I hope you have a chance to go back and watch the film again, and again. Regardless, I would be interested to hear if any of your opinions shift while you explore this undeniable MASTERPIECE. Now, where have I heard that before?

Tim

[etimh]

I'm proudly blowing out of my ass--where's my paycheck?

[Wilson]

On a side note, a film of the Irving-Hughes affair is apparently in the works. From the NY Daily News:

"Richard Gere will play Clifford Irving, the con artist who did 17 months in the hoosegow for gulling the New York publishing world into believing his book "The Autobiography of Howard Hughes" was real and authorized. Irving emerged from jail to become - what else? - a publisher, printing the book himself and ending up the subject of Orson Welles' documentary "F for Fake." "Chocolat's" Lasse Hallström will direct the Disney flick ..."

[Jaime N. Christley]

I don't have anything to say about Harve's review that I haven't said already.

In other news, I lent Gary Tooze of DVDBeaver.com the Japanese disc of the film for his comparison pages. I thought the Japanese disc didn't look to bad (although I haven't watched the Criterion yet), but Tooze is pretty merciless:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare11/f-for_fake.htm

[R Kadin]

Jaime - hopefully you picked up one of Gary's little region-free DVD players in the bargain. What a great deal! As every Welles collector knows, the more region-free viewing capability you have, the better off you are.

BTW, Gary's soo right about the superiority of the Criterion discs. I, too, thought the Japanese to be the bees knees 'til I gotta load 'a dese. Geeze!

I also tried to order the Italian F4F just for the colour trailer, thinking that I might create - strictly for personal use- a disc with the Criterion print and the colour trailer; but DVD.it emailed back saying it wouldn't ship to North America. Since I had succeeded in obtaining "Storia Immortale" from it before, I don't know if that's a new policy altogether or just particular to this title (my Italian's not good enough to make out those fine distinctions). Bummmer! :angry:

While we're on the Criterion disc, its inclusion of "One Man Band" shouldn't be overlooked as a sweet treat, either. As we know, that chockful and hard-to-come-by item is a real boon to anyone's collection. Granted, not everything included is immortalizing, nor was it evidently intended to be. Apparently Welles would just dash off the odd joke here and self-indulgence there, perhaps with little more intent than to amuse himself and his friends and, perhaps, one day to have them at the ready to round out episodes of an eclectic TV series like "Orson's Bag", should the chance ever come his way.

And, at the risk of being less than academic, that erotic scene from TOSOTW alone more than delivers on the whole package's promise. Welles' profound misgivings about the ability to depict sex credibly onscreen were such that I was most intrigued that he actually went for it. Something must have happened along the way to change his mind, be it advances in film technology or in audiences' willingness to accept a rough-hewn look and feel (I've not read where public mores were among those considerations). Nevertheless, whatever it was, it allowed him to break down one of the few cinematic barriers that he had previously acknowledged and we're now left with a record of how he stormed right through it. Thanks, Criterion - and God bless you,Oja!

One more thing (for anyone who's made it into this posting this far): comments about disappointment in Welles' visuals in F4F disappoint me. I applaud Welles for seizing upon a style that was everything his preceding work was not. As he had Jake Hanneford memorably proclaim in TOSOTW, "..what we must never do is borrow from ourselves."

Furthermore, Welles knew that "visuals" are as validly created by the deft assembly of individual shots as they are by bravura combinations of angles, lighting, focus and camera movements. The former are available to filmmakers of almost any budget, while the latter are not. By wonderously displaying that potential in F4F, Welles, IMHO, manages to assure fellow mavericks out there to take heart: the marvellous is, indeed, attainable and sitting right in front of them on their editing tables just waiting to be found. For such a gift, alone, the entire Sundance Festival crowd should honour him both shamelessly and ceaselessly.

Was his tone in F4F too "arch"? Perhaps, in spots. Perhaps his paplable affection for his own conceit is something of a generous liberty taken; but isn't it so much fun simply to go with it, damn any prickly aesthetic misgivings? And isn't giving in to that sense of fun one of the very things that people do when they succumb to a con-artist's charm? Frankly, then, I find that tone in F4F most appropriate.

[Jaime N. Christley]

Jaime - hopefully you picked up one of Gary's little region-free DVD players in the bargain. What a great deal! As every Welles collector knows, the more region-free viewing capability you have, the better off you are.

As a matter of fact, I did! It's a fine player, I agree, the perfect replacement for my increasingly unreliable Sampo.

[Chirpy_Sabz]

I really liked this film...Its so entertaining and unusual. Nothing like I have ever seen.

I got the Criterion dvd...I loved the extra feature it had "Orson Welles: One Man Band"...I watched it so many times since I got this dvd.

[etimh]

Indeed Chirpy--its pretty. But is it...art?

Just kidding--I worship this film.

Tim