So...should I watch Franco's Don Quixote?

[cartergold]

Just like I state in the subject, should I watch Franco's Don Quixote?

I realize that the objective opinion of it is that it is awful. I know of nobody who would defend it. From what I understand (though I could be wrong), it also effectively the reason why many unfinished Welles films are remaining unfinished. Just reading about how the thing was assembled makes me squirm. So there are no redeeming qualities to it.

But I have to admit that there is a part of me that wants to see it.

I don't ironically watch bad films. I'm not going to find a so-bad-it's-good low budget film just so I can find ironic enjoyment. I watch Mystery Science Theater 3000, but that is the extent of my watching bad movies on purpose. I also have plenty of other actual good films to watch that take a far higher priority than Franco's Quixote. So I have no desire to watch Franco's Quixote as a joking pleasure.

But as I continue work on my own book about Welles, there is a part of me that truly wants to know how bad Franco's Quixote is for my own sake. I have doubts about my own work, which I suppose just comes from being a writer already. I want to be able to say to myself "No need to feel bad about your work. At least it isn't Franco's Don Quixote!" with some authority. I feel like I'm looking for justification to sit through it and have an opinion of my own, but I don't know if I can work up the fortitude to actually sit through something as reviled as Franco's Quixote.

Maybe I've answered my own question somewhere in my rambling, but I'd like to hear from other Wellesnetters. Should I put myself through it or should I just keep it unseen?

[Roger Ryan]

Franco's Don Quixote is worth seeing just to glimpse some of the camera compositions Welles chose or to get a taste of what the lead performances would have been like. However, the end result is not at all successful at telling a coherent story. The impression one gets is that Franco had devised his own storyline and narration then attempted to shoehorn Welles' footage in to fulfill the visual component (a bit like what Welles did with the Reichenbach footage in F For Fake, but with none of Welles' skill).

Here's a sample for you (note the atrocious video chroma-key effects!):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbo6ZT4eoTA

Since, apparently, not enough footage was shot to allow a complete story to be presented (or, at least, that footage is not readily available), a far better representation of Welles' Don Quixote film can be found by simply viewing the rushes and roughly-edited (by Welles) scenes that have been shown at various festivals and retrospectives.

Or, to save you some time, just watch this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixfgqxjjjC4

Despite the poor picture quality, the cinema scene from Don Quixote, fully-edited by Welles, is the perfect distillation what the film could have been like.

[Le Chiffre]

Apologies Cartergold, but I believe you lost a post because we had to restore the site after a software glitch.

Jess Franco's Quixote is a mess, but it has it's moments, and I'm grateful to have it since it's probably the only Quixote most of us are ever likely to see. It's not really a Welles film per se, even though there's plenty of Welles in it, and I agree with Roger's Reichenbach/F For Fake comparison. Oja Kodar and Gary Graver reportedly created a shorter version of Franco's effort, which might be interesting to see, but in hindsight someone probably should have made some kind of documentary instead.

It's just too bad Welles couldn't have figured out some way to finish the film himself.

[cartergold]

No problem at all, Le Chiffre. It was more of a general response to Roger saying that I think the one clip from Franco's version was enough for me. That dubbing is terrible!

On a slightly unrelated note, while I make another visit to the University of Michigan collections this Friday, I'll be looking at Alessandro Tasca di Cuto's papers. In his collection apparently is a synopsis of a version of Don Quixote by Suzanne Cloutier (Desdemona in Welles' Othello). I know she contributed material to the Franco production, so I'm curious as to what this synopsis entails.

[Le Chiffre]

Sounds very interesting. Let us know what you find.
I believe Mauro Bonanni said in a recent interview that Cloutier was tricked into contributing footage to the Franco production.

[Jay1968]

I would definitely watch Franco's assimilation of the footage if for no other reason than it was material that Welles shot with the hope of creating a very good film. I kind of look at it like an author's incomplete and unedited work given for public consumption posthumously -- something akin to the publication of Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Dolliver Romance. It's the remnants of what could have been a great work of art. With that said, I actually enjoyed watching it. Of course, I'm a huge fan of Welles the storyteller and have little sense of judgement when it comes to analyzing the technical attributes of the film. If you're looking for Citizen Kane or the Magnificent Ambersons and are not a huge fan of Welles, then I suspect you will be disappointed.

[Wellesnet]

The complete Spanish-language version was posted on YouTube

[Terry]

I thought we stopped posting links to copyrighted material. This is public domain now?

[MartynH]

I watched it again last night. I really enjoy parts of it. In fact, it has one of my favorite scenes in a Welles film. It take place around the 60:00 minute mark and sums up, for me, how off the wall it is. It's when Sancho is outside Dulcinea's village and Rocinante and Dapple run past him. I always think 'I wonder how long that took to shoot'

Does anybody know the current situation with this film now Oja has the negative?

[RayKelly]

Does anybody know the current situation with this film now Oja has the negative?

I have received tips, made calls, but there is nothing to report right now.