Welles material in The Guardian

[Jeff Wilson]

The Guardian (UK) has a series of articles on Welles, related to both Peter Conrad's forthcoming book and the Welles retrospective at the National Film Theater. The Conrad book doesn't look promising, based on the piece he writes for the paper, and the chronology of Welles' life has some remarkable errors. But see for yourself...the other articles can be accessed from the bottom of the Conrad piece, including an interesting piece on Beatrice's penchant for suing people, another David Thomson piece, and an article about how Welles has helped put down woman directors by a bitter female writer.

Conrad article

[Lance Morrison]

thanks for those articles....the one about Welles and female directors was ummmm interesting....can't say I agree with it at all, and it IS unfair to blame Welles even though she doesnt think so

[Glenn Anders]

Dear Jeff: The Conrad article is representative of an extraordinary reshaping of Welles' reputation, which has been going on since at least THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS. To recite the events of Welles' life, as Conrad does, and cast them, one and all, in the ugliest light is below contempt, I think. And this is the man who is about to produce a book in which he relates Welles' roles and works to the man himself?

You are right. It doesn't seem promising.

On the other hand, Thomson's pitch for a film about the young manhood of Orson Welles looks very promising indeed. I know that many here hate Thomson, but my take on him is that he made Welles his hero in Cinema at an early age (around 1955). That hero-worship shaped his life as a film critic, and it must have been painful for him to see Welles' desperate, courageous decline.

His summing up of Welles and his career, I think, rises more from regret and pity (for himself and Welles) than from a snide anti-humanism like that displayed by Conrad.

The film Thomson half-seriously proposes might well cast Welles as a tragic genius rather than a pathetic, self-indulgent failure, which seems to be the general historical drift of biographical assessments of Welles these days.

B. Ruby Rich's thesis and discussion, of course, are simply absurd. Welles seems to have worked well with women, lots of lesbian women at that, and many of his works point up his hatred of, and disdain for, male chauvinism in all its forms. To suggest that women lack their former power in Hollywood, real or imagined, because of Welles is plain crazy!

Actually, Welles' defense of his life and Art is contained in those situations and lines (which Conrad distorts for own purposes) in TOUCH OF EVIL ("What does it matter what you say about a man?) and F FOR FAKE (What does it matter as long as we go on singing"); much more accurate an assessment to Welles as protagonist than Conrad's moralistic conclusions.

And alas, I'm afraid the Beatrice Welles' flap over the right to show CITIZEN KANE at the London retrospective is one more case of people losing money and being inconvenienced by an association with Orson Welles, though posthumous, and like a number of other such incidents when he was still alive, beyond his control.

Thank you for bringing this material to our attention, Jeff.

Glenn

[Lance Morrison]

Welles had great respect for women throughout his life both in personal and artistic ways, and indeed I think the parts in his films for women are interesting. Him an Oja had such a great connection...and of course his favourite author was Karen Blixen.....She acts like it's Orson's attitude and not his ability that makes people think he's great, and tries to compare all these modern directors to him, when they do not compare at all. and I like how the women she refers to in the article says "Citizen Kane is only one film." Yep. Ambersons, Othello, Touch of Evil, Chimes, etc....those each are one film too......and I can't stand that she actually gave critic pauline's obscene accusations seriously...

After reading the Conrad article, I can't believe how it supports many of the same old misconceptions...sigh!

[Noel Shane]

Two letters published in The Guardian today on their Orson Welles coverage, the most important being that from the National Film Theatre regarding the KANE confusion (with an addition note about CHIMES):

Citizen Kane

The National Film Theatre has received confirmation from the BBC that it is the UK's current distributor of Citizen Kane and received its authorisation for the forthcoming screenings as part of our Orson Welles retrospective (One of our classics is missing, G2, August 29). We are delighted to have resolved this problem.

We are also pleased that the rights issues surrounding another Welles classic, Chimes at Midnight, which has been unavailable to cinema audiences for many years, is nearing resolution through the courts.

Hopefully this film will be available again in the not too distant future.

Brian Robinson
NFT press officer


Orson and the Women

To blame Orson Welles for the shameful lack of opportunities for women in Hollywood is idiotic (Orson Welles special, G2, September 29). When Welles started there was one woman director in Hollywood. Not long after Kane we had another, the great Ida Lupino, so his immediate effect does not seem to have hurt. Welles personally encouraged Jeanne Moreau to direct, so his personal influence was benign.

The best claim that could be made for Welles's influence is that he broadened the range of subjects and styles available to Hollywood filmmakers, an effect that could only benefit budding female film-makers.

David Cairns
Edinburgh


http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,3604,1033797,00.html

[Jeff Wilson]

Interesting about Chimes; I wonder if that only applies to the UK, regarding a legal resolution?

[Lance Morrison]

great to hear about chimes.....and also that was a good response by David Cairns....I didn't know really how Orson felt about Jeanne, even though they worked together a few times, I'm personally pretty crazy about her...

[Peter Tonguette]

Rich's thesis is laughable to begin with, but even more so when one reflects on the profound way Welles invited women (specifically Oja) to collaborate on his late films. And Oja not only went on to make films herself, but she even directed bits of "The Other Side of the Wind"!

Peter

[Jeff Wilson]

Two reviews of Conrad's book, from The Telegraph (UK):

Review 1

Review 2

[Lance Morrison]

Interesting that the first review mentions Eisenstein; yesterday I saw in 'USA Today' a letter someone had written in telling how they thought the recently deceased German director Leni Riefenstahl was the greatest female artist in history....which is in itself questionable......but it had one paragraph where it said "She was a master of her medium with no equal; certainly her works were as good as if not better than anything by Orson Welles or Sergei Eisenstein"

[Glenn Anders]

Jeff: The Conrad who wrote the article with which we started does not seem like the author being reviewed in the Telegraph, does he

Tantalizing.

I might note that the first reviewer's gibe that Welles was "reduced to working in "The Muppet Movie" is not so valid as he thinks. After all, Welles gave Jim Henson an early start, as he did so many brilliant artists over 50 years.

Lance: I think a case can be made that Leni Riefenstahl (through Albert Speer, perhaps) was an influence on Welles. He was always interested in the use of space and light to show power and emotional relationships. Riefenstahl's staging of the Nazi Party Rally was bound to impress him, and I believe that Welles acknowledged the use of searchlights in a devilish circle of light (suggested to Riefenstahl and Hitler by Speer, I understand) was incorporated in his modern dress production of Julius Caesar.

I don't think that TRIUMPH THE WILL, however, except in terms of technique and influence, is comparable to CITIZEN KANE or Eisenstein's BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN and STRIKE.

In any case, the publicity and comparisons in Britain and Europe are bound to spill over into America, perhaps loosen some money for those Welles' restorations we want.

Glenn