Showing posts with label Orson Welles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Orson Welles. Show all posts

Monday, July 20, 2015

The Third Man: Restored and Resurrected



**Spoiler Alert**

Director: Carol Reed/Starring: Joseph Cotten, Orson Welles, Alida Valli and Trevor Howard

Carol Reed's masterwork The Third Man returns to the big screen for a summer sojourn in select theaters; fully restored and ever stunning to behold. Time hasn't marred its beauty nor dulled its sharp edges. Reed's superlative camera work, Robert Krasker's gorgeous cinematography and Anton Karas' score, which is fascinatingly idiosyncratic and just plain odd are also intact and have been preserved for posterity. But the cast is no less exceptional and are as memorable as the myriad images that are forever scorched in my mind. But of course an assemblage of talent would be only that if not for Graham Greene's exquisite screenplay, which is as extraordinary (in my opinion) as any of his novels.

The re-release of The Third Man, in the middle of the summer corporation-cinema season, seems wildly incongruous but thank goodness it has arrived. Nothing I've seen this summer at the multiplex (and little at the art-houses) is fit to share screen-time with Reed's film, but then again, little else could.

It seems needless to synopsize the film, since the story is familiar to cinephiles and more casual movie-goers so I'll try to be concise.

The story takes place immediately after the close of World War II. As Europe is being temporarily zoned by the allies, the city of Vienna is also subject to post-war balkanization. Rubble-strewn streets are hardly uncommon, as is the brisk black market, where much contraband changes hands undetected.

Into this milieu comes American pulp-western novelist Holly Martins (Joseph Cotten); broke and in need of work promised to him by an enterprising friend of his in Vienna; one Harry Lime. After Martins arrives, he learns his friend has been killed in a traffic accident though accounts of the tragedy disturbingly contradict one another. An officer for the British sector, Major Calloway (Trevor Howard), bears some disturbing news about Lime, of which Martins is unprepared to hear. Though Martins is saddened by his friend's death, Calloway is hardly so. He explains to Martins that Lime was a black marketeer; wanted by all the allied governing bodies for selling diluted penicillin.

Martins, naive and unconvinced that his friend could be capable of what Calloway accuses him of, conducts his own investigation into the "accident." Learning of a mysterious third man who was present at the time of Lime's death, Martins pursues his investigation, much to the impatience and annoyance of Calloway, who would like nothing more than to see the American writer on a plane home.

Martins meets someone else affected by Lime's death; an actress named Anna Schmidt (Alida Valli); an erstwhile lover of the black marketeer, who remains haunted by his death. As Martins uncovers and discovers more about his friend, he falls in love with Anna, though her indifference hardly dissuades him.

As Martins frays every last nerve of Calloway's, a fortuitous encounter during a dark, Viennese evening reveals Lime's presence in a doorway as it suddenly becomes bathed in light. Lime's impish grin is a prelude to his flight from Martins, who desperately chases his friend through the moody and shadowy streets. Lime manages to elude his friend; virtually disappearing into thin air.

When Calloway and the authorities learn that Lime is still alive, a manhunt commences through Viennese sewers--an impressive sequence in the film.

The 1940s' more or less began with Casablanca; an iconic film set just before World War II and ended with The Third Man; a film about the war's aftermath that is every bit as powerful (though not as highly esteemed in the public's estimation) as Michael Curtiz's film. I'll always prefer Reed's film to Casblanca's more romanticized nature. Curtiz's film ultimately ends in self-less heroism, while Reed's ends with the death of character who was anything but a war hero. Blaine and Lime could be the same character in parallel universes, who view the war differently. For one it is something unpleasant but inevitable and something to be won by self-sacrifice while the other sees war and conflict as indispensable catalysts for progress and achievement--and something to be exploited.

Reed's film is chock full of quirks. The zither music that dominates the score will forever be a bone of contention among film score enthusiasts. What would possess a director to commission such highly eccentric music for a film that seems to demand a darker score with orchestral arrangements? In spite of Reed's unorthodox approach, I've always felt the score worked.

There are very few shots in the film that aren't cockeyed. In most every shot, the floor seems to be tilted, as if the occupants and furniture might slide off the screen. Many of said compositions are also shot from the perspective of the floor. The effect creates a sense of imbalance; as if the war robbed the world of its sense of order. And of course there is Lime himself. Everything we need to know about Lime and his cynical opportunism is summarized in the now famous Coo-Coo Clock speech, which was conceived and written by Welles himself. What is slightly disturbing about said speech is that it actually makes sense and may contain more truths about humanity and the world than we--or Martins--may care to admit.

And then there are the performances, which make the movie hum. Cotten is terrific as the wet-behind-the-ears Martin with his child-like innocence, which is slowly eroded by the world's harsh realities. Alida Valli, in the finest role of her career, is perfect in the role of Anna Schmidt. Her dark, lovely features are often disturbed by melancholy, longing and loss. Trevor Howard is quite excellent as Major Calloway, who serves as the film's heavy early on. Calloway has seen his share of brutality and death yet retains some semblance of humanity in his pursuit of Lime, who he is quite right to hate. Welles' Harry Lime is one of the most fascinating criminals in film history. Lime inhabits a moral world of his own design that he justifies with the coldest logic. Where did he go wrong? How did he become such an unconscionable scoundrel? In spite of his crimes, why is it impossible to loathe him? Is his death and not his crimes the real tragedy in the film?

In the end, Martins' joins the hunt for Lime, an act Anna feels is an unforgivable betrayal, in spite of what she knows about her former lover. She remains fiercely loyal to Lime and brooks no compromise on the subject.

The film ends where it began: at Lime's funeral, which suggests the villain's fate was inescapable. Very few film endings are as bleak as Reed's final shot. There is no happy ending for any of the characters; even Calloway, who derives no pleasure or sense of victory from the tragedy. There is much loss and disappointment to go around and it does. In the final scene, as Anna approaches the screen from the distance, she is flanked by trees that have been severely pruned. The sight of nearly branchless, leafless trees lends something to the moribund atmosphere and serves as appropriate metaphor for all the death and despair the war visited on the world.

Much more could be said of Reed's masterpiece. I can't imagine the subject could be exhausted.

I think the film's restoration was a moral and artistic imperative. I'm very grateful that it returned to the screen. I hope every avid film-goer has a chance to see it in a theater and savor its greatness, which remains blissfully undiminished.

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

Magician: The Astonishing Life and Work of Orson Welles



Director: Chuck Workman/Featuring: Orson Welles, Steven Spielberg, Henry Jaglom, Peter Bogdanovich, Martin Scorsese, Charlton Heston, et al.

What has been written and expressed in film about the late great Orson Welles could occupy a storage unit the size of the Empire State Building. It seems every cinephile, myself included, is pretty familiar with Welles' work and his private life, so I pondered Workman's motives for making yet another film about a subject that is all too familiar. But isn't there always more to say, to explore? Can there ever be a definitive statement about someone whose contributions to cinema may stand above all others?

Workman's film is very comprehensive; chock full of archival footage and talking heads. Interviews with Welles himself are generously supplied while film critics and filmmakers like Spielberg, Sidney Pollack, Richard Linklater and Paul Mazursky offer their own appraisals of his work.

What does Workman's film offer that others haven't? I must say I knew little about Welles' early life in Woodstock, Illinois, where he was instantly recognized as a prodigy by the school faculty. Lacking athletic propensity, Welles gravitated to theater and performed in many school productions, including Shakespearean plays, for which he demonstrated a precocious grasp. The photos of a cherubic Welles as a child are fascinating, as are the accounts of former classmates. One classmate remembers him as lacking empathy and caring little for what others thought of him. It is also astonishing to see photos of Welles in school productions; clad in makeup and costume.

Aside from biographical detail about his early childhood, the rest of the film covers what has become common knowledge: his early passion for dramatic radio productions and the infamous War of the Worlds broadcast, his creative transition to film; his ill-fated contract with RKO; who never quite got Welles and who were far from supportive of his vision and his masterpieces Citizen Kane and The Magnificent Ambersons.

Other well-documented material the film addresses is his life-long antagonism toward Hollywood and the film industry; his many loves, including his marriage to Rita Hayworth, his struggles to get films made and completed, his prodigious appetite and his celebrity at home and abroad. Someone in the film, with a nod toward the ironic, mentions the numerous awards he received for his work all through his life yet very few were willing to fund his projects or hire him for their own.

In spite of his persona non grata status, Welles managed to film what many believe to be the best cinematic adaptations of Shakespeare ever, including MacBeth, Falstaff: Chimes at Midnight, and Othello. Interviewees praise his groundbreaking camera work and his uncanny ability to do so much with feeble budgets; financing that sometimes vanished mid-production.

Aborted film projects, due to either budgetary constraints or Welles' fickle tastes, make up most of his filmography but one film that was completed to his tastes and bears his unmistakable creative stamp was the 1958 film Touch of Evil. Welles' directorial role was made possible through the intervention of Charlton Heston but the film was subsequently butchered when studio reactionaries decided to re-shoot some scenes and re-cut the film, thereby denying him another fully-realized effort.

Workman covers Welle's participation in Carol Reed's The Third Man but fails to include the crucial detail about his authorship of the film's famous Cuckoo Clock dialogue.

Facts about of his life; womanizing and living as an itinerant are briefly touched upon.

The final product is something akin to a primer rather than a subject fully explored and examined. There is no shortage of talking heads testifying to his genius, but what exactly makes Citizen Kane the most celebrated film of all time? What visual innovations did Welles' spawn? What sets Welles apart from other directors aesthetically? The film unfortunately offers little or no illumination.

I must say Workman's musical instincts also leave much to be desired. Beautiful pieces like Satie's Gymnopedie and Albinoni's Adagio come off as schmaltzy sentimentality in their clumsy deployment.

Magician left me feeling exhausted rather than energized and eager to revisit the master's films. For the uninitiated, Workman's film might be enlightening, but for Welles enthusiasts and cinephiles alike, it tells us what we already know though it does shed much light on his childhood.

An unreleased Welles' film mentioned in Workman's documentary; the 1985 The Other Side of the Wind, will finally make its way to screens in the Spring. The film will no doubt be highly scrutinized and analyzed and it's sure to cause a kerfuffle. I can't wait to see it myself and as I wait patiently, I'll put aside Workman's well-meaning but flawed film.

Monday, April 28, 2014

Jodorowsky's Dune



Director: Frank Pavich, Interviews with Alejandro Jodorowsky, Michel Seydoux, H.R. Giger

Two words that are a bugbear of history are what if? They tend to haunt the art world too: what if the majority of Sophocles plays weren't consumed in the fire that destroyed the Alexandrian library, or what if Kafka's friend had acceded to the author's wishes that his work never be published posthumously or what if Jimi Hendrix and Miles Davis had collaborated as the two musicians once intended? Fortunately Kafka's friend didn't listen but for the others, we can only imagine.

Jodorowsky's Dune is another massive What If and one that is fascinating to contemplate. Director Frank Pavich explores the history behind Chilean director Alejandro Jodorowsky's ill-fated attempt to bring Frank Herbert's Dune to the screen and what we learn is painful and frustrating.

Jodorowsky, known for surreal fare like El Topo and Holy Mountain, was approached with Dune as a possible film project and though he hadn't read it himself, he immediately gravitated to the idea. Burning with inspiration, Jodorowsky set out to enlist not only the best talent, but those he felt had a spiritual compatibility with his vision. Among the august collaborators were H.R. Giger, special effects whiz Dan O' Bannon, comic illustrator Chris Foss, and the (then) still-ascending Pink Floyd. In casting actors, Jodorowsky was no less ambitious: Salvador Dali, Orson Welles and Mick Jagger.

Rights to the novel were secured, storyboards were drawn up and pre-production commenced. All Jodorowsky needed was a Hollywood budget so meetings with major studios were secured. A $15 million dollar budget--enormous but not obscene by 70s' standards--was proposed. Though studios were impressed with Jodorowsky's adaptation, storyboards and the otherworldly designs, they wouldn't trust a massive undertaking to someone like the Chilean director. Everyone interviewed, critics and those connected to the project, agreed Jodorowsky's film would have been one of the most important and seminal films in history. If that seems like ludicrous hyperbole, consider the evidence the movie provides for how Hollywood borrowed, stole and re-purposed Jodorowsky's production designs and design team. H.R.Giger's designs were seen in Alien and more recently Prometheus, costumes inspired movies like Flash Gordon and elements of the story can be seen reworked in Raiders of the Lost Ark; to name but a few films. Even in storyboard, Jodorowsky's film is breathtaking, as are the costumes and spaceship designs.

Pavich's documentary also brings interesting, anecdotal, pre-production tid-bits to life. We learn Dali wanted to be paid an exorbitant sum just to be known as the highest paid actor in the industry while Orson Welles had to be coaxed with the promise of daily meals prepared by a french restaurant he loved. Jodorowsky had an easier time with Mick Jagger, who actually approached him about being in one of his films.

Film critics discuss Hollywood's aversion to Jodorowsky's project; one posits the theory that the film frightened Hollywood; studio heads aware the film could be revolutionary and usher in sweeping changes to how films looked and were made.

What if becomes If Only, as if only someone in Hollywood would have had the guts and vision to greenlight the project. We're left feeling the frustration Jodorowsky and his collaborators must have endured, especially after learning another production would be made, with David Lynch in the directorial seat. With no ill-will to Lynch, Jodorowsky expresses relief after viewing the 1984 Dune, bearing witness to its awfulness.

That Jodorowsky isn't bitter or doesn't seem to be, is a surprise; knowing what didn't get made was plundered by other filmmakers and other productions, like a new Lamborghini being junked and used for its precious parts.

We'll never know what Jodorowsky's film would have looked like or if it would have lived up to his towering ambitions, but the sheer idea of it seems grander than all the film's it inspired and most films made by the Hollywood system. If only...