Roger Ryan's Magnificent Ambersons reconstruction

[mteal]

Thanks much, Tony. I think you're right; the moving cut-out figures in the older version were cute, but too distracting. Roger's version actually does not have cut-out figures or storyboards, but has some very nicely done composite photos instead. If you can get a copy or have one already, that would be the best one to show to a class.

[Roger Ryan]

Well, there are a few cut-out figures moving about in mine! At the time (nearly 20 years ago) it seemed like a logical way to imply a character or characters exit from a scene that would then carry on with further dialogue from the remaining characters. It was not an elegant solution and, as Tony can attest (if, in fact, it was my reconstruction that was shown to his class), the cut-out figures can produce unwanted laughs and/or take the viewer out of the experience (what is it about AMBERSONS and unwanted laughs?!). Fortunately, in a way, AMBERSONS is not a film which depends on a lot of screen action, so a lot can be done with stills that remain still.

All the same, I've only done the reconstruction once and will not do it again unless it can be done properly (and any future version will not include moving cut-out figures). I don't want to take credit for Mike's fine effort. In many ways, his reconstruction is a more academic, accurate approach; mine simply wanted to be entertaining which resulted in more liberties being taken for better or worse.

[tonyw]

Thoughts on part 2. It was a good idea to have Lucy's voice-over apologizing to George rather than show her since it is HIS fantasy. Also, as with the case of all these restorations, they focus our minds on elements in the background that were once prominent. Here the telegraph poles in the background of Lucy and George's buggy ride after showing automobile smoke again enveloping George returns us again to Welles's original vision.

[mteal]

Interesting observation, Tony. Glad you liked the end of the 1st porch scene. I did it that way because I couldn't figure out how to do a "phantom" Lucy. I think Jaime may have tried to do one, but it got lost amongst the many VHS tapes and DVD-r's we exchanged, before I could use it, and then Jaime dropped out of the project to concentrate on a reconstruction of THE STRANGER. Anyway, a descriptive subtitle does the job OK.

Roger, your use of moving cutouts was subtle enough that I forgot that you had used them. What I was thinking of was mine and Jaime's 2008 draft, where Jaime's cutouts were nice to look at, but not in keeping with - as you said - a more academic approach that I wanted (although I wound up taking plenty of liberties too). Here's a 5-minute cross-section of Jaime's cutouts:

Link no longer operative

[tonyw]

Roger has often mentioned his motivations for his reconstruction and we should be very grateful to him as well as Jaimie in what he called his "Dinosaur" version. However, I much preferred the use of stills, captions, and storyboard to replace the scene that appeared in the theatrical version and used by Roger. Since Roger was working on a very professional level and aiming at a type of flow that would capture the audience his decision was understandable. However, as time and technology improve, I believe more reconstructions will appear. We should be grateful to Roger and Jaimie, as well as Mike for continuing this process. I's so looking forward to downloading the final part tomorrow and commenting on it.

[mteal]

Thanks Tony, any feedback is most welcome. I left in one of the studio's redone scenes in the 4th part (Fanny at the boiler), which I kind of regret doing now. I'll probably change that if I ever do another draft of the TMA project. I’d like to do at least one more sometime, and maybe even one of Welles’s proposed “shorter cut”, that Robert Carringer details in his Ambersons book. Problem is, the three year warranty on my iMac is up now, and I’m paranoid that the machine won’t sustain another beating like the one I gave it to produce this draft, largely flawed as it is. Just about everything that could go wrong did, making it monstrously time-consuming, and I sometimes wondered if someone up there wasn’t trying to prevent me from producing even a semi-watchable draft (was it Welles or Wise?). iMovie is an amazing software tool, but it gobbles up your harddrive very quickly unless you’re really well organized, which I’m not. My working method is more like a garageband version of Welles’s in his independent years: try this, try that, and see where it leads. I agree that stills can be expressive in many ways, and another thing I’d like to wait for is the opportunity to use the additional Ambersons stills at the University of Michigan Welles archive that Roger alerted me too. Hopefully that can happen before too long, but until then, this edition will have to do. With the economy still struggling, a new iMac is definitely not in my budget. I think you're right though, that as technology improves, others will try their hand at it in different ways as well, and Roger, Jaime and I have already shown that it can be done with enough enthusiasm (and time). I was already impressed with the job done by the college kids and their boardinghouse video.

[Roger Ryan]

...I left in one of the studio's redone scenes in the 4th part (Fanny at the boiler), which I kind of regret doing now. I'll probably change that if I ever do another draft of the TMA project...

I've never had a moment's regret over retaining the Moss (?) re-shot first half of the "Fanny at the boiler" scene. The difference in the scripted lines between Welles' original and the re-shoot is so minimal that I don't think I could ever justify removing some of Moorehead's actual performance in an attempt to gain greater "authenticity". I suppose it's just a matter of perspective, but I think Moorehead is superb in the re-shot footage even as she was being asked to tone down the hysterics.

I'm less certain about retaining the re-shot scene where Eugene is turned away from seeing Isabel by Fanny, George and Jack. This was clearly an example of changing the text of the scene (softening both George and Fanny), but the performances are still good; in fact, I think Cotten's resigned "alright..." as he walks away is wonderful. All the same, I would replace the scene in any future reconstruction.

I really should have come up with a solution to the bedroom confrontation scene between Isabel and George. The re-shot footage is a weak alternative to how Welles had originally planned this sequence. I regretted that I left it in only a few weeks after working on that section, but since the editing was being done on a linear analog system, I would have had to redo weeks of work in order to go back and change it. Oh well, I now know how to do it right.

[tonyw]

It is difficult to remove the Moss re-shoot of Holt and Moorehead especially since no representation can fully capture the tone of her original performance, especially now we can understand the hysteria dominating her behavior. Also, after watching the recent reconstruction, I'm inclined to prefer your version for several reasons. The "Two Black Crows" number from the Victriola appears to be muted in the latest edition and, if memory serves me correctly, you emphasize the creaking of Fanny's rocking chair. This is really important in terms of Welles's use of sound. Also, the final image of the new version shows skyscrapers in a drawn storyboard. As good as the image appears to emphasize the dominance of urban modernity, I'm doubtful as to whether skyscrapers would have been built in most American cities in the teens. Does not the original script mention Eugene leaving in darkness?

Eugene and Fanny are characters damaged both by the past and an imminent future that will further move them into oblivion like Wilbur and Major Amberson.

However, the new version in this part also has some great plusses. The reference by Jack to Eugene's mansion resembling the Ambersons though the arhitecture of Georgian and the line he speaks to Lucy about relocation when buildings encroach on their home as they did on the Amberson mansions. "You'll stay here. It will be somebody else who will be moving." This clearly shows that Eugene will soon be in the position of the Ambersons as a future relic that will soon by swept away by history.

Overall, Mike, this was a very good reconstruction and I look forward to the time I teach Welles again so I can use both reconstructions in my class that will supplement each other until the next attempt is made.

[Roger Ryan]

Also, the final image of the new version shows skyscrapers in a drawn storyboard. As good as the image appears to emphasize the dominance of urban modernity, I'm doubtful as to whether skyscrapers would have been built in most American cities in the teens. Does not the original script mention Eugene leaving in darkness?

The March 12th, 1942 cutting continuity describes "tall buildings" in the original final shot of AMBERSONS along with visible traffic as Eugene's car leaves the boarding house and turns onto a cross street. Joseph McBride has said that Peter Bogdanovich showed him a frame enlargement of this final matte shot in 1970 (sadly, this image seems to have been lost to the public) and he describes seeing dark smoke wafting through the buildings and an elevated train passing in the background. This corresponds to Welles' own comments to Bogdanovich that an elevated train was heard on the soundtrack during the boarding house scene.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, the wide shot of Carter leaving the Inquirer building at night in KANE is probably close to what the final shot of AMBERSONS looked like in terms of combining a matte painting with live action. The scene in KANE takes place in the early 1890s whereas the finale of AMBERSONS takes place about 20 years later. The first "skyscraper" built in Indianapolis (ostensibly the "midland" town where AMBERSONS takes place) was completed in 1895 and was 13 stories tall. I'm not certain if dramatic license was taken in that final shot, but even six or seven story buildings crowded together would have been relatively accurate. Apparently, Indianapolis elevated their downtown train system in 1915 so even that aspect isn't completely anachronistic.

[tonyw]

Thanks Roger for this clarification. I did not realize the tall buildings were around in the fictional Ambersons town at this time. But, again, that is the speedy progress of modernity that will also engulf Eugene as it has the Ambersons. When Uncle Jack visits Eugene towards the end of the film, his jaket (a smoking jacket) seems to resemble the type worn by Major Amberson.

Again the reconstructions that you and others have worked on certainly turn one again to the film with fresh insights.

[mteal]

You’re probably right about the Boiler scene Roger, but it still might be interesting to see how it would play with a recreated first half. With all the back and forth memos between Welles and RKO that survive, I don’t recall seeing any that deal specifically with that scene. I’d like to read what Welles’s reaction was when he found out they were reshooting part of it, with Moorehead’s consent.

The studio’s scene of Eugene being turned away is probably the best of the reshot scenes, and it’s good to see Sam the Butler get a little more screen time (I don’t believe he was in the original scene). But I think the original had more power of implication because George and Fanny (without Jack) are basically tricking Eugene into going away, by telling him “the doctor said Isabel mustn’t see anyone”, which is a lie.

The reshot George/Isabel confrontation is actually not that bad either (although Roy Webb’s music is icky), and since Welles had requested that this whole section of the story be removed anyway, RKO probably felt they were justified in doing whatever they wanted with it. Their solution didn’t really save that much time, but did soften the Oedipal implications, making the story safer for mainstream audiences, although KING’S ROW, which Glenn recently compared to Ambersons, had Oedipal implications too (reportedly explicit in the book), and became a big hit anyway. It’s interesting that Schaefer was angry about Welles wanting to eliminate the original confrontation scenes. Anyway, I especially wanted to do them after hearing Hermann’s music for them on the Australian Philharmonic’s CD.

Overall, Mike, this was a very good reconstruction and I look forward to the time I teach Welles again so I can use both reconstructions in my class that will supplement each other until the next attempt is made.

I appreciate you showing this version in your class, Tony. But just remember, if any of your students criticize it, flunk them.

The March 12th, 1942 cutting continuity describes "tall buildings" in the original final shot of AMBERSONS along with visible traffic as Eugene's car leaves the boarding house and turns onto a cross street. Joseph McBride has said that Peter Bogdanovich showed him a frame enlargement of this final matte shot in 1970 (sadly, this image seems to have been lost to the public) and he describes seeing dark smoke wafting through the buildings and an elevated train passing in the background. This corresponds to Welles' own comments to Bogdanovich that an elevated train was heard on the soundtrack during the boarding house scene.

That sounds like an amazing image, and was probably fairly expensive to create. Hard to imagine why RKO couldn’t think of some way to use it in the recut version.

[tonyw]

Roger, Your version is shown with respect. When I run Welles in the 400 level class, not many enroll and several drop out since he is so challenging. However, I've had a handful of good students. I had one radical feminist who just wanted to concentrate on that awful TV mini-series. I think she was the one who wrote in an evaluation that I was "the worst instructor" she ever had. I save negative comments from "unhappy customers" for future humorous references, such as "I didn't like this class because the instructor knew more about the subject than I did" !

I know that Jaimie Marzol was impressed that I was teaching Welles rather than some recent whiz-kid so I hope he can return to this site.

As a 300 Core Curriculum class, Welles works much better.

Certainly either before or after Welles's centenary, I will be doing the class again which will benefit, as always, from the insightful feedback and support of members on this site

[Roger Ryan]

You’re probably right about the Boiler scene Roger, but it still might be interesting to see how it would play with a recreated first half. With all the back and forth memos between Welles and RKO that survive, I don’t recall seeing any that deal specifically with that scene. I’d like to read what Welles’s reaction was when he found out they were reshooting part of it, with Moorehead’s consent.

Welles did comment on this in later interviews when he said something to the effect of "the whole measure of the scene would have flayed you, she was that good", meaning he felt the impact of Moorehead's performance was diminished by re-shooting the first half.

That sounds like an amazing image, and was probably fairly expensive to create. Hard to imagine why RKO couldn’t think of some way to use it in the recut version.

There's no logical place to have it in the released version, especially given that the studio wanted a hopeful ending; a final shot showing a city that has "befouled itself" could only be seen as melancholy...similar to the black smoke rising from Xanadu at the end of KANE. While it wouldn't have amounted to much, it might have been nice if Welles had been allowed to re-shoot the ending to AMBERSONS as he did with JOURNEY INTO FEAR upon his return from South America. That hospital corridor scene would have undoubtedly played better under Welles' control and if he added a closing narration noting that the city had "rolled over the Ambersons and buried them under" (like I did ), he could have squeezed in that final matte shot to end the film.

[mteal]

Welles did comment on this in later interviews when he said something to the effect of "the whole measure of the scene would have flayed you, she was that good", meaning he felt the impact of Moorehead's performance was diminished by re-shooting the first half.

Plus the fact that it was originally another of those all-in-one-take scenes that the film was filled with. The original sequence must have been a real virtuoso piece of sustained hysteria on her part, ruined by some boorish young people at the Pomona preview.

a final shot showing a city that has "befouled itself" could only be seen as melancholy...similar to the black smoke rising from Xanadu at the end of KANE.

That reminds me of another subtle change, unrelated to the film's length, that was made by the studio: the elimination of honking horns when Fanny, Jack, and George take the dying Isabel home in the carriage. Similar to the cab driver at the beginning of LADY FROM SHANGHAI, saying "Hey buddy, get that nag out of the way!". I put some car honking sounds from an early 30's film back in the scene.

I had one radical feminist who just wanted to concentrate on that awful TV mini-series.

Hmmmm, was the radical feminist obsessed with the A&E Ambersons becaused she liked it or because she hated it?

[tonyw]

Mike, The honking horns addition was very good.

As for the "radical feminist" I just left it up to here to see this version without saying a word. Her papers in the class were not very good anyway.