Criterion releases Othello on blu-ray

[Wellesnet]

Critics roundup on the new Bluray, which hits stores tomorrow:
http://www.wellesnet.com/critics-roundu ... s-othello/

[Wellesnet]

DVD Talk:
https://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/72468/othello/

[Terry]

The 1951 version now looks and sounds so wonderful that it's become my go-to cut of the film. I always preferred the spoken credits, I thought the cuts Welles made in the first reel for the 1955 version were sloppy, I don't see that redubbing the film to make it more like his subsequent stage performance was in any way an improvement, and while Gudrun Ure has a fine voice, I don't find hers a better Desdemona, but merely different from Suzanne Cloutier's performance (and the complete removal of Cloutier's voice always seemed to me like quite the insult.)

Nice to have two cuts, but I'll stick with the first one. Another glorious Blu-ray for Welles fans.

[nickleschichoney]

I'd rather forget the Simon Callow interview...

[Roger Ryan]

...I suspect Welles was always displeased with the Venice sequence which is why he edited it down for the '55 version. This follows a pattern also found in Journey Into Fear, The Lady From Shanghai, Macbeth, and Mr. Arkadin where Welles would go back and significantly trim expository scenes and add a narration to provide the exposition lost in the cuts. Certainly, external pressure forced this choice with some (most?) of these examples, but Welles did this without pressure* on Othello...

*According to Geoffrey O’Brien's booklet essay, the U.S. distributor requested Welles add an expository narration to Othello to help orientate viewers (I'd not heard this before), so it could be fair to say that some external pressure was responsible for this revision.

[nickleschichoney]

After passive-aggressively going on about how Welles took advantage of Hilton Edwards and Micheal MacLiammoir for 20 damned minutes, Callow says this in his interview:

"Years later, he persuaded Edwards and MacLiammoir to sit down and talk about the experience of making the film [OTHELLO], which he turned into a small documentary -- an essay film -- called FILMING OTHELLO, which was never fully completed."

This is unbelievable in how false it is. The completed documentary is included in the Criterion DVD! It's been available online in low quality since 2013: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fvqeQt8aLnU.

"But from the footage that exists..."

Sigh...

"...it's quite evident that MacLiammoir just wishes he wasn't there."

There are moments where MacLiammoir rests his head on his hands in FILMING OTHELLO, yes, but the conversation is very sprightly as they reminisce, with MacLiammoir eventually saying: "There was never one direction you gave me with which I disagreed personally. Never one single one except 'Take the cloak and go!'" This was a private joke between Welles, Edwards, and MacLiammoir -- and after MacLiammoir says this, they all laugh.

Yeah, that guy seems like he's just suffering the whole time.

"I met MacLiammoir in 1968, not long after FILMING OTHELLO had been made..."

Except for the fact that it was made in 1974-1978...

"He remembered the young Welles with some affection, but he said 'It's just sadly one of those friendships which couldn't be sustained.'"

If he said that, it doesn't mean MacLiammoir hated Welles. But given Callow's other lies/ignorance, I doubt very much that this actually happened.

Equally galling is a moment earlier in the interview, where Callow talks about MacLiammoir's book PUT MONEY IN THY PURSE, about OTHELLO's making:

"It's an account of Welles which is -- I mean, haha! -- devastating in a way, but it's also hugely entertaining, a picture of a man who is prone to a thousand mercurial impulses, who takes to his bed when he's a little bit depressed..."

Because mental issues automatically make someone a raving lunatic.

"...who is moody and explosive and aggressive and brutal... and yet some kind of a genius."

Kind of...

"Welles was not necessarily best-pleased by this. He wrote a preface to the book which is KIND of an endorsement, and then is deeply uncomfortable about it, and I don't think he did like that book at all. He didn't like MacLiammoir's portrait of him as someone who was so brutally insensitive..."

This is galling because Welles gives an endorsement about PUT MONEY IN THY PURSE in FILMING OTHELLO -- a film Callow doesn't even know was completed! Welles calls it "fascinating" and "funny", and calls the title apt for the adventures they all undertook.

[Terry]

Callow does seem to be more a critic of Welles than of Welles' work, and he makes so many factual errors that it rather discredits every statement he makes. Don't let him bother you, nick.

[tonyw]

So he's at it again on disc 3 of the new release? Sad, but with each volume, callow appears to deal more with the achievements than with his anti-Welles attitude that marred THE ROAD TO XANADU. Let us hope that he will remain more objective with his final volume.

[nickleschichoney]

Callow is a great writer, though. He's incredibly vivid and engaging, so... I'll give him that.

...I suspect Welles was always displeased with the Venice sequence which is why he edited it down for the '55 version. This follows a pattern also found in Journey Into Fear, The Lady From Shanghai, Macbeth, and Mr. Arkadin where Welles would go back and significantly trim expository scenes and add a narration to provide the exposition lost in the cuts. Certainly, external pressure forced this choice with some (most?) of these examples, but Welles did this without pressure* on Othello...

*According to Geoffrey O’Brien's booklet essay, the U.S. distributor requested Welles add an expository narration to Othello to help orientate viewers (I'd not heard this before), so it could be fair to say that some external pressure was responsible for this revision.

I love the 1952 version, especially when you put it next to Filming Othello. In the latter film, MacLiammoir and Welles talk about how Iago can have a perfectly natural kind of evil -- but it's evil for its own sake. MacLiammoir compares it to a cat catching a mouse or rabbit. It's incredibly evil behavior, but it's natural nonetheless.

If you watch the credits scene of the 1952 version of Othello, you'll see that accompanying Welles's narration is footage of Venice: footage of the canals, of ships, of buildings, of merrily-drunken people, and of -- cats! And after the shots of the cats, we get a cut to our first shot of Iago, from behind. So, he's like a sly-yet-cute little cat, lurking in the shadows of Venice, searching out to commit evil for its own sake.

And then, when Desdemona and Othello get into a gondola, we finally see Iago's face come into frame, in darkness, superimposed over the waters of the Venetian canals.

Now, Welles -- of course -- has his own wonderful entrances in the movie, but he saved an amazing entrance for Iago, too.

[Roger Ryan]

After watching François Thomas' analysis on the differences between the '52 and '55 versions, I went back and did some scene-by-scene comparisons. First off, the Venice sequence in the '52 edit runs 3 minutes, 3 seconds longer than in the '55 edit (this is counting the credit sequence since, as "nickleschichoney" points out, the visuals under Welles' spoken credits set up the location and characters quite nicely). As weak as Welles might have considered the Venice sequence, the extended version plays considerably better than the abbreviated footage found in the '55 edit - I would even say that the choice of shots preserved in the '55 sequence only makes sense if the viewer is already familiar with the original longer sequence.

What I'm finding perplexing is the assessment (as in the Blu-ray.com review and by others) that the soundtrack to the '55 version is clearer, has a better tonal balance, and, as Thomas suggests was a request by U.S. distributor United Artists, improves the voice synchronization. To me, the opposite is true. By having Desdemona's lines re-dubbed, as well as much of Othello's, Welles' soundtrack for the '55 edit feels uneven. Furthermore, the voice synchronization suffers more noticeably in the '55 version, partly due to Welles changing the dialogue. Note the brief bedroom scene that concludes the Venice sequence: in the '52 edit, Othello exclaims "I have but an hour of love to spend with thee"; the '55 edit changes the line to "Come, Desdemona, I have but an hour of love to spend with thee". Since Welles did not say the words "Come, Desdemona..." during the shoot, the voice synchronization appears off. Why change the line? Certainly the audience knows the woman in Othello's bed is Desdemona, right?

I understand that many prefer Gudrun Ure's line readings as Desdemona and believe Welles improved his line readings for the '55 version, but, for me, the strength of Othello is in the visuals which dominate throughout. One could probably watch the film with the sound turned off and understand every character motivation and change in temperament. While I maintain the original '52 edit is superior, I agree with Thomas' point that, to completely understand Welles' intent, you need to see (and hear) both versions. How wonderful that Criterion has made that easy for us.

[Wellesnet]

Barnes and Noble has begun it's 50% off Criterion sale for this month. Now's the time to pick up the new Othello Bluray, if you haven't allready:
http://criterioncast.com/news/the-novem ... -has-begun

[Le Chiffre]

Joseph McBride on Othello and Welles as an independent filmmaker:
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2017 ... ent-movies

Requiem for the 1992 version:
http://www.wellesnet.com/bidding-farewe ... s-othello/

Picked up the Blu ray yesterday. Terry, you weren't kidding; the presentation here of the 1952 version is maybe as good as I've ever seen the film look or sound. Hopefully we'll have the opportunity to see this edition of '52 on the big screen sometime. As presented here, the '52 does seem more homogenous, so it may indeed have a chance to supplant the 1955 as the preferred version, especially if the info Roger gave us is correct:

According to Geoffrey O’Brien's booklet essay, the U.S. distributor requested Welles add an expository narration to Othello to help orientate viewers (I'd not heard this before), so it could be fair to say that some external pressure was responsible for this revision.

If so, Welles may have seen this as a chance to revamp the whole film as well, using the redone voiceovers, perhaps in a spirit of "Why not?" experimentation. This has interesting implications for not only 1955, but 1992 as well. Might be premature to start singing that requiem.

What a package this is, though. Amazing collection of extras for the most part. FILMING OTHELLO foremost, of course, but Ayanna Thomson's interview was also a real nice surprise. I'm glad they included the Suzanne Cloutier SOUVENIERS program, although it's disappointing visual quality. I think my old VHS actually looks better.

[Roger Ryan]

After passive-aggressively going on about how Welles took advantage of Hilton Edwards and Micheal MacLiammoir for 20 damned minutes, Callow says this in his interview:

"Years later, he persuaded Edwards and MacLiammoir to sit down and talk about the experience of making the film [OTHELLO], which he turned into a small documentary -- an essay film -- called FILMING OTHELLO, which was never fully completed."...

I can only imagine that Callow half-remembered the fact that Welles shot some footage of himself in Venice specifically for inclusion in Filming Othello, footage that may (or may not have been) lost prior to Welles finishing the film. In the end, the absence of this location footage does not appear to have affected Welles' final cut at all - Filming Othello is soundly structured (in classic Welles essay fashion, anyway) and does not feel incomplete in any sense. The only thing that bothers me is the bad match between the footage of Edwards/MacLiammoir and the reverse angle shots of Welles from a couple of years later - if Welles had only shot himself facing screen left, the eye lines would have matched properly! Confronted with the mismatched angles in editing, someone should have recommended flipping all the shots with Edwards/MacLiammoir to preserve the 180° rule.

[nickleschichoney]

I can only imagine that Callow half-remembered the fact that Welles shot some footage of himself in Venice specifically for inclusion in Filming Othello, footage that may (or may not have been) lost prior to Welles finishing the film.

But Callow also says it was made before 1968, which is also false, and says MacLiammoir looks miserable despite his being engaged in the convo and even laughing with Welles and Edwards. And if Callow's claim that it wasn't completed rests on the absence of location shots in the final edit, then he has no idea what a "completed film" even is.

I don't mean to be harsh, but... good God, he's supposed to be writing a definitive biography, no?

[RayKelly]

I don't mean to be harsh, but... good God, he's supposed to be writing a definitive biography, no?

Simon Callow is a great storyteller, but there are more than a few goofs in that featurette.