a fresh kane thread - oh my

[blunted by community]

cut to

[ChristopherBanks]

Sounds like another typical "all homos are freaks" Hollywood script scenario to me.

Scenes like this would never have got past the censor in 1941, anyhow.

[blunted by community]

int. kane - night

[ChristopherBanks]

I think you missed the point of what I said.

Anyhow, bad writing is bad writing, the sexuality of the characters has nothing to do with it.

I have to say though, the bit with Thatcher licking his lips everytime Kane comes into the room nearly made me spit my coffee out all over the screen.

[Glenn Anders]

Does it occur to anyone that, possibly, we are being led up the garden path? However that may be, I refuse to believe rumors that this fugitive 92 page scenario is actually the work of the famous 1940's Balkan forger, Blunto B. Komunitai, who was said to have died in a Communist prison. Some claim that he may really have been smuggled to America by the CIA to continue his career of disinformation for Black Ops.

Glenn

[blunted by community]

kane and thatcher urinating. thatcher glances at kane's.

[ChristopherBanks]

The whole screenplay scenario sounds like a "Saturday Night Live" sketch.

[Fat Annie]

Seabanks;
" ? "

[Jeff Wilson]

My reaction was that this whole draft was more or less a gag; I can't believe that anyone working in the movies then would even believe for a second that such a script would be taken seriously by RKO or the public, much less the Hays Office, who would have probably passed out after reading it, and then roundly condemned the entire thing. Considering the seemingly innocuous stuff they objected to, this would have been a field day for them.

[Glenn Anders]

Come on, gang! I don't know about Blunted (who has created a Movie Empire in three weeks time over at My Community), but to me, this piece is obviously a parody, written well after the fact of CITIZEN KANE.

But we are discussing it with straight faces!

Would Mankiewicz, Houseman or Welles have seriously named a newspaper "The Magnificent Enquirer"? [Magnificent . . . Ambersons -- Get it? Ho-ho-ho.] Now it is possible that one of them might have amused himself, years later, having some fun with such a revered film, but according to Blunted, we are really discussing the piece third hand, right? [The work of "The Transcriber."] That is the only way to explain how any of the three mentioned above, each a pretty fair writer, could have turned out this nonsense!

It is 1) a piece of juvenalia turned out by one of them, 2) a send-up by one of them much later, or 3) most likely, a parody produced within the last year.

Blunted: I hope those five nights you spent in that freezing hotel in (you think) Indiana were not within the last three or four months because if they were, you may have been (unknowingly) some place south of the Hoosier State.

Fun.

But time to move on.

Glenn

[blunted by community]

glenn, no body cared about the community, so you can kick at it all you want. it's a dead horse. help yourself.

shouldn't a movie critic watch the movie before writing the review? it's wild that all the experts here have taken such staunch, bloated stands on what this draft is, and none of them have ever seen it!

how does that happen?

talk about rush to judgement.

the screenplay is not ridiculous enough to be a gag. it's a full story, strong noir elements, and an abrupt, solid ending that cause a few people to think it might be unfinished. i traced the narrative paradigm on paper and raised doubt in the party. It's very possible that it is a complete screenplay.

whole segments made it into kane, whole segments were scratched out by welles, whole segments were reworked by welles, and appeared in kane.

the screenplay has some brilliant writing. it has some bizare writing.

maybe it's manks american, and the screenplay's graph of brilliance and ridiculousness matches mank's graph of being on the sauce and off the sauce. Hanging with houseman and not hanging with houseman

this scenario sounds more likely to me than anything any of self-important intellegencia here has posted thus far.

glenn: basing your debunking on the word MAGNIFICENT is pretty weak. Magnificent did not originate with Ambersons. Chances are Mank was aware of the word way before Welles was born.

i wanted to share some of this with other welles fans because i thought it was interesting, and relevent, but fuck it. what's the sense. the genius crew here knows all.

[Jeff Wilson]

i wanted to share some of this for feed back, because i thought it was so interesting, but fuck it. what's the sense. the genius crew here knows everything, even if they never saw, or read it.

You say this, but you're asking people to comment on an item that apparently no one here has read but you. So which way do you want it? Everyone here can say "no comment, I haven't read it" or say what they think based on information solely provided by you, which led me at least to assume the 92 page screenplay is some sort of gay fantasia. I mean, what do you expect?

And Fat Annie/Singapore Cecil/etc etc, end the baiting now. This is your last warning.

[blunted by community]

i did not think it was cool to the collection to post big chunks of it, so i started like building a small wall this week, and next week another 2 or 3 page wall, and so on. but the first wall i errected the town turned out with rotten tomatoes and stones.

i was not posting if for opinions on the work. i was just not sure where in the chronology it stood, and jeff answered that for me.

being a welles fan i thought it would be something cool to share with other welles fans. would not be cool for the collection to post big chunks of it, so i was going to post a few pages today, a few pages next week, and so on. but with my first post the reigning members at wellesnet showed up with rotten produce and screams of fraud. i thought i was going to hear, "wow, cool stuff, lets see more." haaaaaaaa! i made a mistake.

i'm explained out here. lets move on to houseman's book

[blunted by community]

I've held my tongue a few times but the tongue just got loose.

glenn, [PERSONAL ATTACKS DELETED-Mod.]. why not insert a bit of wit, or humor with your crappy comments to give the recipient of your crap a graceful way out instead of having to resort to discussing your mother's sex life on the street.

i read an article that said meek, mild mannered people that get shoved around at work, shoved around in life, are agressive dynamos when they are behind the wheel of a car, or when on the web posting to boards, or chatting. The web is safe. no one can punch you in the face. just something i read that comes to mind when i read glenn, noel shane, and jaime christley.

i've said enough. after a post like this, like passolini after releasing a film, i will get out of town till the furvor dies down.



Edited By Jeff Wilson on Oct. 21 2003 at 09:07

[Jeff Wilson]

Pot, kettle, black, etc. Locking this before it gets even further out of hand.