I don't fully understand the underlined above about tax reserve, production companies vs, Holding companies and about how "all expenses were just for Orson", but I'd like to get a better grasp of it, so I might look into it myself. There do seem to have been at least three production companies created by Welles that I'm aware of: ROPAMA (based in Switzerland), AVENEL (based in Lichtenstein), and OLPAL (named after Oja). Pretty confusing stuff, but worth finding out more about.From MYSTERIES OF THE DEEP:
"Welles’s tax situation was heating up in 1975, partly because of inflation but also because of his prolonged filmmaking activities in the U.S. and Europe. This especially affected productions produced by Ropama, Welles’s company under which The Deep was produced. “I think the prime advantage in the past,” wrote Cronshaw in May 1975, “was that I could prove to the IRS that it [Ropama] was not a holding Company and did have a value as an international Company in production. I do not know if such conditions would be applicable if it was recorded that all expenses were just for Orson. . . . What Bruschwig was saying for a tax reserve was if it was decided to disband Ropama tomorrow, the Dividend Tax due on 1973 and for 1974 would become payable immediately and therefore they would have to keep that reserve.”330
The director’s long-standing friendships were also on the line. Though Cronshaw was paid in part between 1972 and 1974, Welles et al. still owed him upwards of $31,500,331 not counting 10,510 Swiss francs Cronshaw paid on Welles’s Other Wind company Avenel’s behalf.332 He wrote in November 1975:
This means for me to keep adding another year to my life at the end of which I will be left without a career and the possibility of being in a Bankruptcy Court simply to be left on the hook for Orson’s convenience. I hope you can appreciate that it is not just a question of working things out with Oya and Orson. It is a question of my future and also re-starting all over a career at an age where not many people want a 41 year old executive. It is going from a point of compassion and kindness to a point of survival.333
Things eventually recovered for all parties involved. In 1984, Welles made a short film for an ill Cronshaw where he recited the recollections of Charles Lindbergh and praised Cronshaw for being a fellow maverick. (Indeed, said maverick collected most of the material on this crazy production!)
However, this recovery meant that Ropama – and The Deep – had to go."
***Elwyn57:
"The quote at the end of the film, "This is for you, Bill", is more likely to have been for Bill Rogers, the husband of (Welles's longtime London secretary) Mrs Rogers, whose christian name, IIRC, was Jane. Bill Cronshaw was indeed OW's London agent, but was not dying of AIDS at that time (1984). Nor was he married to Mrs Rogers.
Bill Cronshaw died from AIDS some 10 years later in Sydney.
He owned a section of Coates Castle in West Sussex, and the Rogers' also had a section of the same property. Bill Rogers was some years older than his wife, and...I believe he died of natural causes in 1984...well into his nineties. OW was an occasional visitor to Coates Castle and would have known Bill Rogers quite well."
They’d have to colorize it too… and clean it… and then there’s the issue of dubbing Welles’s voice which Oja Kodar wouldn’t want (and with good reason).Le Chiffre wrote:That would be great, even if they had to redub it with all new voices.
They were companies for Welles’s independent productions, under view from the IRS due to issues Welles had with the tax authorities going back to the ‘40s.I don't fully understand the underlined above about tax reserve, production companies vs, Holding companies and about how "all expenses were just for Orson", but I'd like to get a better grasp of it, so I might look into it myself. There do seem to have been at least three production companies created by Welles that I'm aware of: ROPAMA (based in Switzerland), AVENEL (based in Lichtenstein), and OLPAL (named after Oja). Pretty confusing stuff, but worth finding out more about.
Graver and Rausch say it was for Cronshaw (p. 110 of Making Movies with Orson Welles:There does also seem to be some confusion about which "Bill" Welles made THE SPIRIT OF CHARLES LINDBERGH for.
I don’t think I’ve come across anyone named Bill Rogers before. Given Graver’s testimony and the fact that Cronshaw was heavily involved in Welles’s affairs, I’d say it was for him.The Spirit of Charles Lindbergh was a very short film we shot in 1984 that Orson had made as a gift. We simply shot it in one take, which lasted three minutes. … We then transferred this to videotape, and Orson gave it to his good friend and accountant Bill Cronshaw. Bill lived in London and he’d spent a great deal of time with us on location. … Orson had never intended for it to be anything other than a sort of get well card for a friend that was ill.
OK, I'll buy that, although it does seem a strange coincidence that Welles's cat starts crying - as if on cue - just before he delivers what seems (in tone) more like a farewell message than a get well message.There does also seem to be some confusion about which "Bill" Welles made THE SPIRIT OF CHARLES LINDBERGH for.
Graver and Rausch say it was for Cronshaw (p. 110 of Making Movies with Orson Welles:
Yes, from the AROUND THE WORLD production, supposedly. I know Joseph McBride expressed skepticism about the severity of those tax issues in WHATEVER HAPPENED TO ORSON WELLES?, and thinks Welles's main problems at that time were more HUAC-related. But as you cite in the article, his tax problems were very real in the 70s, whether related to the 40s or not. I'd like to find out more about why the IRS decided Ropama was a holding company when it clearly had THE DEEP in production. Maybe because the film was taking too long to finish, but as I understand it, a holding company is created by a parent corporation in order to buy stock in its subsidiaries to gain control over them. I don't see how that applies to Ropama.They were companies for Welles’s independent productions, under view from the IRS due to issues Welles had with the tax authorities going back to the ‘40s.
Honestly, it sounds like you’re reading a very uncharitable interpretation into it. The entire point of my article was that Welles wasn’t the seedy person he’s often made out to be, and the cat cries right before the camera rolls. We only see Welles calming it. Hardly seems like a cue to me…Le Chiffre wrote: OK, I'll buy that, although it does seem a strange coincidence that Welles's cat starts crying - as if on cue - just before he delivers what seems (in tone) more like a farewell message than a get well message.
It was a combination of factors that resulted in the IRS’s scrutiny, including the “Begatting of the President” album. I find it very hard to believe that Nixon wouldn’t have been incensed at that and want to resurrect Welles’s old issues with his taxes and the HUAC.Yes, from the AROUND THE WORLD production, supposedly. I know Joseph McBride expressed skepticism about the severity of those tax issues in WHATEVER HAPPENED TO ORSON WELLES?, and thinks Welles's main problems at that time were more HUAC-related. But as you cite in the article, his tax problems were very real in the 70s, whether related to the 40s or not. I'd like to find out more about why the IRS decided Ropama was a holding company when it clearly had THE DEEP in production. Maybe because the film was taking too long to finish, but as I understand it, a holding company is created by a parent corporation in order to buy stock in its subsidiaries to gain control over them. I don't see how that applies to Ropama.
The man had 1776 censored…Le Chiffre wrote:I find it hard to believe that a sitting U.S. president with a controversial war on his hands would have given the slightest shite about a comedy record, especially one that pokes fun of many different political figures besides him. But then, Nixon was legendary for his touchiness and paranoia, so who knows?
Terribly well-acted by Jeanne Moreau? How could he tell if she hadn't dubbed her part?Welles once remarked, “We just ran out of money. The picture actually had a beginning and an end, but it’s too poor. It shows its poverty, and it looks like a TV movie, I think, but it’s terribly well-acted by Jeanne Moreau and by everybody. And I think I’m very funny in it, I think it’s the funniest part I’ve ever played.”