WELLESNET MESSAGE BOARD

According to the autobiography of Roger Hill (Welles' Todd School teacher), THE DEEP ran into financial difficulties because of the boat Welles had rented from the Yugoslavian government. Welles was unable to complete filming in Yugoslavia, so it would be completed off the coast of Florida. Because of the unusual shape of the boat however, Welles was unable to find another one like it, so he decided to build a replica of it at considerable expense (Whether this was actually done or not is unclear). Apparently Hill directed parts of a climactic underwater knife fight, so the fact that Welles was willing to farm out the directing chores to others suggests that he may have spread himself out too thin with other commitments.

Just saw the opening of Bogdanovich's "The Mystery of Natalie Wood," and just like Brooks Otterlake, he's clearly borrowing from Welles...

The film opens, like OSOTW with the drowing death of Natalie Wood, and then goes back to Wood's beginning... and also like OSOTW, it uses film clips, still photos, and of course, is a Hollywood story... so now maybe PB can get down to work on finishing OSOTW, liked he promised Orson he'd do, if something ever happened to him...

Aren't there lots of films that begin with the death of the main character and then flashback to start at the beginning? Is it fair to attribute this idea to Welles? Certainly, it didn't originate with The Other Side of the Wind. Heck, Welles used the same structure for Citizen Kane and Othello.

Sunset Blvd. also begins with the death of the main character and then flashes back.

I've read elsewhere about a rough cut of this film existing. Has anyone seen it? I'm wondering if anyone has a copy of the workprint that currently exists (I'd love to trade for it, if it does indeed exist). I know this is a long shot, but it can't hurt to ask.

The Munich Film Museum is working on a restoration using a work print.
The negative was apparently destroyed.
I have seen some of the footage at a showing at Harvard in 2008.
I posted my observations at http://www.wellesnet.com/?p=302

I mentioned this elsewhere on the site, but I've been able to see the full 2-hour rough cut and it left me disappointed. This is not to disparage any of the work that Mr. Droessler has done, but there was little on film that made me think Welles was onto anything more than a bland made-for-TV movie. Keep in mind that the rough cut's 2-hour running time incorporates numerous repetitions of shots and scenes as Welles was experimenting with alternate editing choices. Removing all of the duplication and the film would probably run a half-hour shorter. The overall performances and direction felt very pedestrian to me, although Welles' choice to perform his own role in a comic manner seemed like it had potential. While the rough cut is invaluable as a glimpse into how Orson Welles approached the editing of a film, I can't imagine anything close to a "finished" version could be accomplished given how little audio exists; I'm thinking only about 25 - 30% of the film had any audio at all and most of that was less-than-successful post-sync dubbing (Welles trying to imitate Laurence Harvey leaves a lot to be desired).

The trailer that Welles completed was pretty good and I wish he had the money and resources to work on this film more.

Thanks to both of you. Roger, how did you manage to see an entire rough cut of the film? Was it screened publicly? I'd like to see this at some point, but who knows if that will ever happen.

In 1976 Welles told Charles Higham that he did not want THE DEEP to come out before TOSOTW because WIND was more the kind of grand film statement that he wanted to begin his comeback with, whereas DEEP was a simple genre picture. But after the negative of WIND fell in the hands of the Ayatollah, one would think he would wanted to have gotten SOMETHING out. It really is unfathomable how Welles, a man who Chris Welles Feder said "lived for his work", could allow an entire film project (two if you count DON QUIXOTE) to go to a complete waste. In FILMING THE TRIAL, Welles says the only two films he did not complete were QUIXOTE and WIND, which suggests that THE DEEP was finished. What happened to that finished film? Was it trashed? I think it's likely that Welles felt the film simply did not measure up to his standards. If that's the case, too bad. From our point of view, bad Welles is better then no Welles.

Jay wrote:Thanks to both of you. Roger, how did you manage to see an entire rough cut of the film? Was it screened publicly? I'd like to see this at some point, but who knows if that will ever happen.

Roger and I both saw the rough cut at the Locarno Film Festival several years ago, and I would echo Roger's statements that it's pretty forgettable and too hampered by technical issues to ever come out in any truly complete form. There is a tendency to expect all this missing footage from Welles to be hidden gems just waiting to be revealed, but a lot of his post-1960s work (for me, at least) is pretty disappointing and depressing to watch (F for Fake and a couple other things notwithstanding).

Yes, I've heard more then one person say, after viewing the WIND footage (specifically the 1999 Graver/Kodar rough cut), that it caused them to wonder about Welles's state of mind. Most of his post-1960's work involved Oja Kodar, and keeping her happy was probably one of the prime objectives of that work. I haven't seen enough of it myself though, to really make a judgement.

Wish I could remember where, but I seem to recall Keith Baxter, Welles's Prince Hal in FALSTAFF saying he had seen a completed version of THE DEEP. Even if it was true, it doesn't mean it still exists.

The big climatic scene is missing from THE DEEP (Welles asked his mentor Skipper Hill to try and shoot some "second unit" shots for this scene in Florida sometime in the 70s, but Welles didn't like the footage), but most of the rest of the film seems to be "there" even if very little of it has usable audio. As assembled, it is simply not recognizable as a Welles film. If you were not told that Welles directed it, you would think it was helmed by some journeyman TV-movie director. There are moments where the direction and editing are competent, but nothing one would call skilled.