BRIGHT LIGHTS 55 TOSTW Interview

[Jeff Wilson]

This has all been going on for years and years and years. There are fragile egos and money at work here, and one false move could put the whole thing back at square one. I was initially optimistic about something happening with the footage, but that has largely evaporated. I'll believe it when I see it.

[rizibo]

I think it's different this time for two reasons. The first is that Graver, before he died, edited the film and it must be easier to sell the film now. The other reason is Graver also states it will be released in this interview in Australia. http://www.afc.gov.au/newsandevents/afc ... e_297.aspx

With the film edited and Bogdanovich, McBride and Graver saying it will be released, I'm optomistic.

[Roger Ryan]

I think it's different this time for two reasons. The first is that Graver, before he died, edited the film and it must be easier to sell the film now. The other reason is Graver also states it will be released in this interview in Australia. http://www.afc.gov.au/newsandevents/afc ... e_297.aspx

With the film edited and Bogdanovich, McBride and Graver saying it will be released, I'm optomistic.

The "edited" version that exists is still a very rough cut that was put together in the late 90s prior to when Showtime expressed initial interest in it. The project fell through at that time and I don't believe any further editing work has been done on the film in the last ten years (apart from the Munich Film Museum's presentation of "Scenes From TOSOTW"). If the project is "green-lit" and funded in the near future, there will still be a lot of work needed in order to put the film together in releasable form. As McBride states in his book, the parties involved all have different ideas for how the footage should be assembled which would not make for a very harmonious editing process. There is also additional footage that needs to be shot for continuity purposes (Jake Hannaford's climatic car crash, for example). With little commercial appeal, and the possibility that the project could be viewed as an artistic failure, the parties involved have to realize that this effort should be attempted to honor the work of Welles and for no other reason.

[rizibo]

You're right, the editing occured in 1998 and is still missing the car crash scene (although Graver says in the Australian interview that everything has been shot) and other scenes have to be added from the negative according to McBride. I guess the rough cut is not something new causing the release. The interesting thing is that Bogdanovich, McBride and Graver state something will happen between now and June. With all of them stating this and even McBride not refuting this in the Bright Lights interview it seems like the legal and creative disagreements may be coming to an end. This could pave the way to the final post production work for this movie. I feel the movie might have some commercial success and this is based on the success of the restored Touch of Evil. If people are willing to come and see the restored Touch of Evil, I am sure more will come to see a Welles movie that they have never seen before like The Other Side of the Wind. Hopefully there will be commercial success for The Other Side of the Wind so Don Quixote and other work will also be restored.

[Store Hadji]

I thought this footnote from the article bore repeating:

A Showtime deal to finish and release the film was looking in great shape at the end of the 1990s. The owners of the movie — Welles’ partner and co-writer Oja Kodar and the Iranian investor Medhi Boushehri — had reached an agreement; Joseph McBride was in place as producer, along with Rick Schmidlin; and Peter Bogdanovich and Welles’ cameraman, Gary Graver, were going to collaborate in the editing and post-production. But then, as a source intimately involved in the deal back then puts it to me, “Welles' daughter Beatrice stopped it. She basically goes around trying to get money or block projects, claiming that she has ownership rights of one kind or another. The thing is, Welles explicitly left The Other Side of the Wind to Oja in his will, so it seems that Beatrice has no legal rights to do anything with this film. But y'know, when studios or companies are hassled like that, they often back away. If Showtime is still interested, I guess the idea is that Beatrice will have to be pacified in some way. On some films she's been paid off, y'know. When Universal did that superb revised version of Touch of Evil, based on Welles' memo, she actually complained to Universal that they were 'tampering with Daddy's vision.' And of course, the irony is, they were untampering with the tampering that had been done to Daddy's vision back in 1958. But she managed to block that video release for a while, and I think Universal wound up finally paying her some money and then she went away.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------

I think she's confused the concept of 'Daddy' with 'Sugar-Daddy.'

[rizibo]

I think she's confused the concept of 'Daddy' with 'Sugar-Daddy.'

Beatrice Welles should change her name to Bea Wellepaid. But seriously, if Beatrice Welles is threatening to sue if The Other Side of the Wind is released without her consent then Oja Kodar should call her bluff. Beatrice Welles would have no case in court and Oja Kodar would prevail. I think it is cheaper to fight her in court than to pay her 1 million dollars. It would be quicker to get the film released by fighting her in court than this negotiation process which Bogdanovich states has been going on for six years.

[Store Hadji]

If I recall correctly from the recent McBride book, Beatrice loses all rights to her inheritance if she challenges anything Orson left to Oja, which should include Other Side of the Wind.

Yeah, definitely call her bluff, I say.

[Kevin Loy]

Unfortunately, the problem is that you can buy "justice" here. Beatrice doesn't need to be legally right, she just needs a better lawyer than Kodar. And if nothing else, business-types tend to get fidgety when it comes to her anyway, since Welles' films outside of Kane are shaky prospects. If it sounds corrupt...well, it is. But that is another matter, and it is unfortunate that any work of art should ever be caught in the cogs of legal wranglings. Art is for people, not for legal depositions (of course, whether the people have any appreciation for art is another matter).

And regarding Welles' deal with Astrophore, while it is true that it shows how much more important the film was than the money itself, I think it was still incredibly careless, since he essentially sold the film down the river the way that he did Ambersons (in a way, at least). I think the results thus far with TOSOTW speaks volumes, unfortunately.

[rizibo]

Unfortunately, the problem is that you can buy "justice" here. Beatrice doesn't need to be legally right, she just needs a better lawyer than Kodar.... If it sounds corrupt...well, it is. But that is another matter, and it is unfortunate that any work of art should ever be caught in the cogs of legal wranglings.

I agree with you. If you have a team of lawyers on your side which are called the "dream team" you could get away with murder. However what Beatrice Welles is doing to the Oja Kodar is only the tip of the iceberg. I read an interview with Johnathan Rosenbaum in which he stated that someone wrote a book called Welles on Welles which was going to be a very good book but it got supressed by Beatrice Welles. (There is a book available now called Orson Welles Interviews but I don't know if this is the same book). I am sure there are other works which have been supressed and this is detrimental to our culture. I heard Martin Scorsese say that Welles has inspired more people to be directors than any other director. Welles has been attributed to making films more modern with Citizen Kane. The Other Side of the Wind may influence many directors to be better. There will never be another Orson Welles but the more information we can get about him and his work , the better the current directors can become. The activity of Beatrice Welles therefore has no benefit to anyone but herself. Once people start standing up to her then we can free all these valuable unreleased works.

[Store Hadji]

One of the books killed was a compilation of the newspaper columns Welles wrote, including the Almanac political columns from the 40's and his juvenile outings Hitting the High Notes and Inklings. After spending years on the project, its author was too upset to even be able to talk about it.

[Michael O'Hara]

That stinks. That's a book I would really like to have been able to read. It's just so frustrating that there are so many obstacles in the way in regards to the release of Orson's work. Sickening.

[tonyw]

:( As others have pointed out on this thread, justice does not always take place in court neither do wills get recognized there despite the supposed cast-iron clauses the deceased may have inserted. A friend who teaches Entertainment Law in St. Louis School of Law, once said to me, "Show me a Will and I can guarantee that any sharp lawyer can get it changed in three minutes flat!"

As much as we think of Peck in TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD and Moriarty and Waterston in LAW AND ORDER, the world of the courtroom is really treachers.

Concerning "Welles on Welles", I can furnish further information. When the book was completed "Busy Bea" confronted the editor with a demand for 95% of the royalties, despite the fact that she had contributed nothing to the project. As a result, the University Press that commissioned the book backed out since it did not want to deal with legal action.

[rizibo]

Kevin and Tony, I appreciate your opinions against using the court system to oppose any interference by Beatrice Welles. What strategy do you guys suggest would be the best way to stop the actions by Beatrice Welles?

[tonyw]

??? Only a very accomplished lawyer could answer this question unless the solution is pay her the money so she will go away and keep quiet. But I doubt it.

[rizibo]

Only a very accomplished lawyer could answer this question...

Suppose Oja Kodar was able to assemble the best attorneys in a legal action against Beatrice Welles over who has the rights to determine the future of The Other Side of the Wind. On what basis could Beatrice Welles win the case? According to McBride, on June 19, 1985, Welles left the "Confirmation of Ownership Right" concerning the unfinished films, which states Welles gave "'an oral agreement that Miss Kodar would have any and all available rights of any kind whatsoever in such projects and that Welles would never obtain or receive any interest in and to such rights.' Projects specified include the The Other Side of the Wind, (11 other unfinished projects are also listed)..." Welles gave away all rights to the unfinished films to Oja Kodar before he died. Beatrice Welles was given $10,000 in Welles' will. According to McBride, Beatrice Welles arguement is "she (BW) is the rightful owner of the film under United States copyright laws which were introduced to protect the moral rights of the author." I am not a lawyer but it seems like Oja Kodar has more legal right to the unfinished films than Beatrice Welles since "Confirmation of Ownership Rights" seems more specific to the property in question as opposed to copyright laws protecting heirs. Beatrice Welles may have a better chance of gaining the rights to the unfinished film by contesting the will than to claim copyright laws as her basis for ownership of TOSOTW. I don't know if there is a statue of limitations for contesting a will and whether time limit has already past. It would be interesting to see what a compent jury would decide if both sides are represented by equally competent attorneys.