WELLESNET MESSAGE BOARD

Scouring the local bookstore I was immediately drawn to the latest issue (Fall/winter 2001) of Guerrilla Filmmaker, thanks to the mischievous mug of mr. O. Welles himself. The magazine -- of which I'd never seen before, but has been publishing for two years now, apparently -- is celebrating whom they call the giant of guerrilla filmmakers. They've got a feature/essay on 'Citizen Kane... At Least it Was His', an interview with Bogdanovich, another feature called 'God How They'll Love Me When I'm Dead', and an old interview with Gregg Toland called 'How I Broke the Rules in Citizen Kane.'
I've only finished the first two subjects, and while they don't add anything to what's already part of our lexicon here at Everything's Welles that Begins With Welles.
Here's a good quote from Bogdanovich:
"(Welles) thought Chimes at Midnight was his best film. He had played it on stage in the 30s, then again in the early 60s, and wanted to play it on the big screen for years. It is probably the best film; it's hard to get a print of it though. The people (with the rights) haven't got a clue (and they're hard to track down; we don't entirely know who owns it). We did a documentary for Showtime. [When we approached the owners to use the footage, they wanted to charge] $35,000 for one minute. Showtime offered to show the film instead, but they turned it down. The owners just wanted the cash. It's barely been seen, and not available on VHS."

Pete goes on to mention the new Citizen Kane dvd, saying "I recorded commentary on DVD which I can't imagine is any good but they liked it."

And best of all, he had this to say about OSOTW: "The movie's quite amazing. I played the second lead. Its been shot, just never finished editing because of the legal problems between the heirs to the film and the money people. People never could agree, but things are moving quicker now. It's closer now than it's ever been. There's an American company that's close to closing the deal."

He notes that Othello is likely the first independent American movie, giving birth to the whole scene and leading to John Cassavetes 10 years later.
Sorry, I haven't written the other two articles, but I was so jammed from seeing this last bit I just had to sit down and share my joy... Maybe 2002 is the year!

Thanks for the heads up on the magazine. As far as Other Side of the Wind, we've heard that "it's close to happening" line before, so I'm hesistant to get optimistic. We'll see what develops. I hope it's true, but I'm not holding my breath.

Re: TOSOTW: I second that.

Sounds an interesting magazine. Bogdanovich's "first independent" point is an interesting one, though there were a lot of independent filmmakers during the silent period, including Griffith, who left Biograph to make THE BIRTH OF A NATION alone. Every film Chaplin made after and including A WOMAN OF PARIS, he produced independently, and released most of them through United Artists. During the 40s there were a lot of independent companies releasing films through the majors, Diana Productions for instance, which was set up by Fritz Lang, Walter Wanger and Joan Bennett. Of course, though they were unusual in content, most the pre-OTHELLO independent films were fairly classical in style, unlike OTHELLO, and most of them had high budgets and guaranteed distribution deals before completion, again unlike OTHELLO, so I see Bogdanovich's point.

That information about the owners of CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT is worrying. If they charge $35, 000 for one minute, how much would they charge for a re-release of the whole film?

Good points, LA. I think the reason many consider Welles the grandfather of independent films is because of his method, especially in the Othello case. The legend and stories of his doing all parts of production, from costumes to painting, even camera work... Add the fact that he financed the film a lot thru his own sweat and blood, fills the romantic visions that today's 'guerrilla filmmaker', who's ready to max out his and his parents' credit cards to get his vision on film. Welles is definitely a modernist who today's youth, thanks to the story of the 25-year-old 'genius' who finds the world's greatest toy at his disposal, then has it tugged out of his hands, its a story that many can relate (or dream to relate) to. But yes, a lot of great filmmakers have gone the lone route, and those should be given equal credit. Welles is a natural figure for hero, sort of a Cervantes-like character who plays out his damned dream despite the machinery and fortune's weight against him. Perhaps this magazine has also done big stories about many of the other independent masters...

I see what you mean, Welles' story is more romantic, as he had more against him than any of the previous independents, some of whom were as well-financed as any major, and Welles' production problems were similar to those of the modern "guerilla filmmaker".

BTW, does that magazine have a website?

Maybe I should check these out before I post them, but Guerrilla Filmmaking lists www.7dazemedia.com
and soon to be
www.gfmonline.com

Thanks, I'll check those out.