Reviews (499)

What else is left to say?
This is the greatest American film ever made, as entertaining as it is revolutionary.

When it was made, Orson Welles tackled a seemingly simple topic, a reflection back on a dead man's search for love and happiness in his life, and made a film that's epic in scope, gorgeous in its visual execution, brilliantly written, incredibly acted.

All in all, it's inspiring to filmmakers looking for a great debut film from a new director. "Citizen Kane" also works for regular moviegoers just looking for a good drama.

Using interviews with all his closest friends and colleagues, Welles uses flashback to create a portrait of the life of millionaire media magnate Charles Foster Kane. Kane was, in conflicting accounts of those who knew him, a man of great character and potential or a wealthy, cold, manipulative scoundrel.

What, if anything, can be learned about the man from his last word? What does "Rosebud" mean?

The answer makes for good mystery, and it leads the viewer to ask key questions about what defines our lives and gives them meaning.

This film is fantastic, one that should be watched once a year to help you keep perspective on life.

One of the Best.
Even after sixty years, CITIZEN KANE remains as one of the greatest movies of all time. Though it is true that some are bored by the movie because it's "just a boring black-and-white movie with no action", those who hold that opinion are in the minority. KANE is often held as the pinnacle of filmmaking by movie buffs not just because of the advances the movie made in film production, but also because it set the standard that all filmmakers wish to reach: the total director's vision; a movie made with total control and no studio intervention. With that said, what does KANE hold for the average film-goer? The movie has an excellent script (it won an Oscar), great acting, and a haunting score. The story, though loosely based on the life of William Randolph Hearst, is an old one: powerful man starts out promising and full of ideals, becomes consumed by greed and looses his vision, and ends up loosing it all (anyone read MacBeth or ALL THE KING'S MEN?). Overall, a deeply penetrating and thinking movie that film buffs usually love and that most everyone else will at least enjoy if they don't mind a strong drama filmed in black and white.

AFI got this one right
Can you imagine what the perception of RKO was at the time they made this decision? Let's see, how about we give complete control of a major film to a twenty five year old radio voice with zero film experience (whose claim to fame was scaring the life out of the public with a fake story about aliens landing on earth) and even better, let him staff the movie with actors who have little to no screen experience. On top of that, we'll let it become one of the most controversial pictures of its time because it mirrors the life of one of the biggest names in America today. Why, it may never be able to be released because of the lawsuits-- Great idea!

I have just described Citizen Kane. All of the above is true, which makes the fact that it is possibly the greatest film in American Film History even more amazing. Everything is perfect. The script (which Welles co-wrote), the actors (all relative unknowns except Welles and Joseph Cotton), the special effects (listen to Roger Ebert's Commentary on this special edition for details) and finally, the makeup-- You won't believe how great a job they do making 25 year old Welles look 60.

As for the story, it's done in a most interesting fashion. Charles Foster Kane (Welles) dies at the very beginning of the movie and utters his famous last word "Rosebud". A reporter is given the task of finding out just what that one word meant. So he goes and interviews all the people who knew Kane to try to learn the meaning of the word. In the process, we are shown Kane through the eyes of those who knew him. We never see Kane through his own eyes, always what his former associates saw.

This is interesting, because Kane is a tragic figure as seen by just about everyone. He is unhappy and lonely. We as an audience eventually learn the meaning of Rosebud. I have read reviews that complain that the movie is about this one thing (I won't reveal what it is). But long before we learn the identity of Rosebud, the film has made its point. What is the point? My opinion is that the film shows us basically the worthlessness and despair of materialism. Loving "stuff" or money will ultimately lead to unhappiness.

By the way, this movie almost was never seen. The man I spoke of at the beginning of the review is William Randolph Hearst, former newspaper magnate. He saw too much of himself in the film and sued to squash it. Fortunately he lost. The second disc in the set is a two hour documentary on this topic. It is also excellent and well worth a viewing.

One last thing. Although this movie has been ranked on the AFI list as number one American movie of all time, it did NOT win Best Picture in 1941. That film? "How Green was my Valley"

Review of Review
The best review of Citizen Kane - perhaps of any film - I've ever read is the one titled "Narrative and Eye Disconnect" posted by "A viewer from Richmond, VA USA" on March 21, 2004. I recommend searching through Amazon's reviews to find it, then watching Citizen Kane and re-reading that review. Even though the reviewer gives Kane just one star, s/he writes with great insight into the movie and cinema in general, and has enhanced my appreciation of Citizen Kane exponentially. Thank you, "Viewer from Richmond," whoever you are!

Works on the basic levels as well as artistically
So many of the films that critics unanimously pick as the greatest of all time are overrated, confusing, ponderous, overly symbolic art pieces that leave viewers scratching their heads. The collective reaction is, "What in the hell was the director smoking?" Arty camera work and tons of symbolism and metaphors can never take the place of good acting, solid direction and, most importantly, a good script.

Much has been made of Citizen Kane's technical brilliance -- Welles' use of overlapping conversations, Gregg Toland's deep focus photography, set design that incorporates ceilings, etc. However, none of this would really mean anything if the film didn't have a great story and screenplay. Citizen Kane may be a triumph in filmmaking technique, but it is also a deeply engrossing story with characters we can relate to and sympathize with. Welles' Kane is a selfish, unhappy, overly controlling dictator who has everything and yet still manages to make himself more and more unhappy. Most of us know the feeling of not appreciating someone or something good in our lives until he/she/it is gone. We see the promise and idealism in Kane's early life, like him and believe, as Joseph Cotten's Jed Leland does, that Kane is a great man who can do so much good in society. As Kane's life progresses, however, he becomes more and more bitter, alienates everyone who cares about him and dies alone, longing for the simplicity of his early life before he became wealthy. When Kane, as an old man, loses control when his second wife Susan Alexander (Dorothy Comingore) leaves him, we can't help but feel for him -- even though most or all of his unhappiness is his fault. That the audience feels such empathy for such a flawed character is Citizen Kane's greatest triumph and is the true basis for Kane's reputation as one of the greatest films of all time. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Orson Welles's 1948 Macbeth is an expressionist masterpiece about a doomed man of ordinary ambition who believes an evil prophecy that he will become king. As depicted by Welles, the title character is not a warrior king or a conscience-stricken, poetic soul on a par with Hamlet; rather, he is a facile, superstitious man consigned to fate even as the character does not trust fate. For her part, Lady Macbeth (Jeanette Nolan) is merely obsessed with the unimpeded exercise of her will to power, viewing her husband's life as a tale told by an idiot. Welles has also created some new scenes here, conflating several characters into a "Holy Father" (Alan Napier) while eliciting strong supporting turns from Dan O'Herlihy (Macduff) and Roddy McDowall (Malcolm). Though the technically poor soundtrack and the occasional indecipherable Scottish brogue make the film seem a trifle compromised at times, each moment feels preternaturally alive. --Kevin Mulhall ... Read more

Reviews (22)

A Fair and Foul Shakespearean Rendition
Any film directed by Orson Welles is engrossing and worth the time. MACBETH is no exception. For those of you familiar with the 1971 Roman Polanski version, Welles brought to the screen a darker, more nightmarish world than Polanski could envision. The lighting is stark and the shadows ominous. Macbeth's madness increasingly pervades the atmosphere of the entire film, making the viewer unwilling to view this film with the lights out. The restored version presents Welles's original conception; the actors speak their lines with authentic Scottish burrs (Welles was forced to redo the soundtrack by the studio brass). A fascinating journey and imaginative interpretation of Shakespeare, Welles's MACBETH remains a major additon to American cinema and reveals the classical literary talents of one of the US's greatest visual artists. END

Orson Welles And Shakespeare At Their Best
Without a doubt Orson Welles is the perfect American compliment for William Shakespeare. Superbly directed and acted on a melancholy stage in haunting black and white, the poetic license with Shakespeare's Macbeth can be forgiven because of the intensity and brilliance with which this play is performed. There is a great supporting cast which includes Roddy McDowall that as in all ensemble productions draw the viewer into the play not as a witness - bystander but as a performer in concert with the actors. Welles of course was a genius, being one of those rare performers - entertainers who made the audience beg for more! I wish he had produced versions of Hamlet, Othello, King Lear and other Shakespeare plays. Even if you already own a good version of Macbeth, you must have this version! Welles set the standard by which all others are measured.

"Returning were as tedious as go o'er."
The good news? For his last Hollywood film of the 1940s, Orson Welles delivered a low-budget, inventive, expressionist Shakespeare adaptation that served as a template for his experimental European films. The bad news? Welles perhaps captures the eerie mood of "The Scottish Play" all too well; the film is an unrelentingly dark and often uncomfortable experience. The lugubrious pacing and indifferent acting offer little respite from the play's fatalism.

A little background helps one better appreciate this film. After a string of box office failures (including "The Magnificent Ambersons" and "The Lady from Shanghai"), Welles signed on with Republic Pictures to do a low-budget "Macbeth," hoping that he could popularize Shakespeare on film as he had done on radio and in the theatre. His actors rehearsed the play on tour, and painstakingly pre-recorded their dialogue in Scottish brogues. Welles then shot the film in 23 days, some kind of record for him. Well, you can guess what happened: The studio hated it. They forced Welles to cut 20 minutes from the film, and made the actors re-dub their dialogue with "normal" accents - wasting all that time they spent in pre-production. The film bombed on release and Welles spent the next 10 years working in Europe.

Years later, the original prints were found and released as another "Lost Welles Classic." Unfortunately, time has devalued that label; "Macbeth" doesn't quite meet the standard set by "Othello" or "Touch of Evil," two other films that were restored after Welles' death. While the Scottish accents are a nice touch, the extra running time actually robs the film of some momentum. Welles did wonders with the cheap Republic sets; the film is a masterpiece of expressionist set design. The same can't be said of the costumes, which make Welles look like the Statue of Liberty at one point. Constrained by having to sync their movements to pre-recorded dialogue, the actors deliver wooden performances (only the soliloquies, delivered in voice-over, resonate). Fortunately, the last twenty minutes are visually captivating and offer enough Wellesian moments to make the viewing worthwhile.

If Welles fails to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear - as he would later do with "Othello" and "Chimes of Midnight" - he succeeds in developing an expressionist style that he would later perfect with his bizarro masterpiece "The Trial." "Macbeth" isn't exactly an enjoyable movie experience; indeed, "returning were as tedious as go o'er." But for the Welles aficionado, "Macbeth" provides an essential link between Welles' Hollywood years and the independent style of his European work.

Another Great From the Master
I own this film on VHS and on Laserdisc and I am hoping that it will soon come out on DVD. Certainly there are some technical problems with the production, but it is a 1948 film so some of that can be excused.

Welles vision of MacBeth has the texture and feel of a nightmare. The backdrops are unfinished, muddy charicatures of the objects and places they represent. Scotland is an eerie, nightmarish landscape that is constantly misty and partially unformed. The use of the b&w medium superbly creates a feeling of dread and foreboding in the audience who is drawn ever deeper into the madness of the story. This is vintage Welles, who loved to make the tone, timbre, hue and texture of every part of the movie relate to and support the story he was filming. Certainly the work of a genius.

Most people know the basic story. MacBeth (Which literally means "Son of Life"), is given a prophesy that he will become king of Scotland and tells his wife of the prophesy. Lady MacBeth then uses MacBeth's insecurities to manipulate him into murdering the true king and assuming his throne. Guilt-ridden and paranoid, MacBeth begins a reign of tyranny and sinks into madness. Finally, the English invade and end his reign of terror. MacBeth, who is shown as no more than a pawn in this story, finally gains a measure of grace and dignity when he faces MacDuff in combat. We finally see in death the couragous man MacBeth could have been - indeed was before he allowed his and his wife's greed to corrupt him - MacBeth rises above his fate and becomes master of his own destiny by crying-out the infamous phrase "Lead on MacDuff, and damn the man who first cries hold - enough".

All in all, I have been impressed with this film from the first time I viewed it and I do hope it comes soon to DVD.

A note on the soundtrack - In 1949 the studio refused to release this movie until Welles overdubbed the original Scottish Brogue with more traditional Shakespearian English-accented speech, arguing that the Scottish was unintelligible. I think the most important part of the reconstruction of this film is the return of the original Scottish soundtrack - It adds so much to the grittiness and the darkness of the movie. After two or three viewings, most of the dialog comes clear, so in the first viewing the accent is just a bit of an inconvenience.

Orson Welles was an egomaniac
Yes Orson Welles was one of the most influential filmmakers in the United States, but he was also an egomaniac. Orson takes on William in his adaptation of 'Macbeth'. Orson, do you feel the need to be in EVERY SCENE? I know you think you are a great actor and director, but do you need to put yourself in EVERY SCENE?? ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Citizen Kane is considered by many to be Orson Welles's masterpiece, but more than a few prominent critics have argued that his second film, 1942's The Magnificent Ambersons, is an even greater artistic achievement. It's certainly the source of the most painful injustice of Welles's brief career in Hollywood, having been seized from the director's control, drastically cut from over two hours to merely 88 minutes, and reshot with a different, upbeat ending that Welles vehemently disapproved of. Adapted by Welles from thenovel by Booth Tarkington, it remains a truncated masterpiece, as impressive for what remains as for the even greater film it might have been. The story is set during the late 19th century and follows the rise and fall of the wealthy Amberson family of Indianapolis, Indiana. Central to the drama is George Amberson Minafer (Tim Holt), who is snobbishly to the manor born, and whose petty jealousies and truculent pride compel him to prevent a wealthy inventor (Joseph Cotten) from marrying his widowed mother (Dolores Costello). This in part is the cause of the Ambersons' downfall, and ultimately leads to George's humbling "comeuppance" at the film's dramatic conclusion. It's an absorbing tale of fading traditions and changing times, and it's also a magnificent showcase for Welles's cinematic audacity, famous among film students for its long, fluid shots and ambitious compositions. Responding to the film's drastic cutting and re-editing, Welles justifiably complained that "they destroyed the heart of the film, really." And yet, the director's stamp of genius is evident throughout--the work of a young master (Welles was only 26 when the film was made) that still shines despite its unfortunate fate. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (19)

The Magnificent Magnificent Ambersons
Orson Welles's adaptation of Booth Tarkington's award-willing novel and follow-up to Citizen Kane is a true screen classic. As with Kane, this film contains many wonderful performances by all the leads including Joseph Cotton, Agnes Moorehead, Dolores Costello, and Tim Holt as George Amberson Minafer. Welles continued his experimentation with film technique and you will notice similar camera angles and lighting, to those in Kane. The lighting is something exploited to good affect here, especially in the scenes inside the Amberson mansion. The story is a simple one: Eugene Morgan (Cotton) and Isabel Amberson (Costello) young lovers, who through a somewhat frivolous circumstance end up marrying other people. After they've both raised children, they again find themselves free to begin where they left off in their youth. But Isabel's son (Holt) does not approve of their relationship, in spite of the fact that he is in love with Morgan's daughter, Lucy (Anne Baxter). Set at the turn of the 20th century, the movie has a wonderful feel and texture, which effectively evokes the period. An interesting backdrop is the development of the automobile, with Cotton an early proponent and tycoon, and its effects on not only the American economy, but on the changes it brings to society as well. Morgan, once spurned as a little too common for Isabel returns again to his hometown a successful industrialist. As his fortunes climb, those of the Ambersons fall. As already mentioned, the film is packed with wonderful performances. Agnes Moorehead was nominated for Best Supporting Actress and won the Best Actress award from the New York Film Critics Circle. As the lonely, sorrowful Aunt Fanny, hers is a delicately crafted characterization. Cotton as the auto tycoon Morgan, gives another understated and subtle performance; a young Anne Baxter is lovely as Cotton's daughter Lucy; and Tim Holt, a name all but forgotten today, is magnificent in the pivotal role of George Amberson Minafer. One of the most interesting scenes in the film is the ball at the Amberson mansion. The camera seems to float along with the players seemingly without a break, putting the viewer right in the midst of the cast. A great film, worthy of multiple viewings, The Magnificent Ambersons has earned its place among Hollywood's greatest films.

Brilliant followup to "Kane"
What a travesty it is that as of this writing, Orson Welles' "The Magnificent Ambersons" is not available on DVD, while the far inferior 2002 remake is. Welles' managed to follow up his landmark debut "Citizen Kane" with another masterpiece, despite studio meddling which reduced the film's length by 43 minutes.

Eschewing "Kane's" fragmented structure, "Ambersons" employs a linear narrative to chronicle the rise and fall of the Amberson family, who become an allegory for pre-industrialized America. Though the film undeniably laments the passing of the simpler, 19th century way of life (most effectively in a nostalgic prelude narrated by Welles himself), the conflict between past and progress is complicated by the impudence of George Minafer (Tim Holt), scion of the Ambersons, and the amiability of Joseph Cotten as the inventor whose automobiles contribute to the decline of the Ambersons' magnificence. "Ambersons" is characterized by masterfully choreographed long takes, which allow Welles to extract thematic content from the material through sheer compositional virtuosity. "The Magnificent Ambersons" remains a powerful experience despite the loss of several key scenes; RKO chopped Welles' diamond, but could not obscure its brilliance.

Butchered masterpiece
After making "Citizen Kane," Orson Welles proceded to this equally ambitious film version of a classic American novel about the decline of a wealthy family, using much of the same good cast he used in "Kane" (though not acting in this one himself.) The result was to have been rather long but visually stunning and virtuoso. Unfortunately, the studio got tired of wrangling with Welles and his high budgets and took the film away from him, cut the film's length, and tacked on a ridiculous happy ending. (You can see the very moment the tack-on ending begins, because the footage suddenly becomes visually dull instead of magnificent as it was with Welles behind the camera.) Thus what we have left is flawed, but all that survives of Welles' original vision - and much of it does - is wonderful. See this film for the camera work alone. It is breathtaking.

This is why we watch movies
"Of all sad words of tongue or pen. The saddest are these 'it might have been' " That proverb seems made specifically for this film. Orson Welles' big screen adaptation of the "Magnificent Ambersons" was cut from two hours down to an hour and a half. The excised footage was destroyed so there will be no 'directors cut' of this film.

Lavishly shot, wonderfully directed, and superbly acted this film takes it rightful place as a movie classic. It consistently makes the list of the all time greatest films.

HOWEVER, the loss of 1/3rd of the film shows throughout. It is a masterpiece of design and acting, but I found the plot to be jumpy often skipping over important elements from the novel. The characters (with the notably exception of Agnes Moorhead) never really get a chance to grow and develop or show their inner selves.

The basic plot centers on new money versus old money. The Ambersons are the acknowledged masters of the town and their crown princess Isabelle spurns the advances of Eugene Morgan a young inventor. Twenty years later Morgan, now a rich widower, and his comely daughter return to the town and meet up with the Ambersons. George Amberson Minever scion of the clan falls in love with young Lucy and the elder Morgan begins to renew his courtship of the widowed Isabelle. George objects to the match and places all possible obstacles in the way of the automobile magnet and his mother. As progress moves forward the automobile changes the way of life for everybody and the rich and powerful Ambersons find themselves behind the times and losing both thief fortune and prestige.

This is a classic movie and what is left is well worth seeing over and over again.

How George Orson Welles Got His Comeuppance
"The Magnificent Ambersons" is two stories rolled up into one. I will explain them one at a time.

First of all, it is the story of a late nineteenth century family, the Ambersons. The Ambersons are a large, wealthy, New England family who are held in high esteem in their community. They live in a large, beautiful mansion where they hold balls and invite all the town folk.

Unfortunately, the Ambersons are also very old fashioned and are unable to keep up with the changing times. When Wilbur Minafer dies, it is discovered that he has made some bad investments that has left the Amberson clan bankrupt. Meanwhile, his widow Isabel Amberson begins to see her old flame Eugene whom she had stood up years before. Eugene is in the process of developing a new contraption called an "automobile". Eugene is prospering while the Ambersons are going bankrupt. Also, as one of the Ambersons points out, if automobiles become common and roads are built around their property, then the houses will lose their value. This leads to a wise speech that Eugene gives in response to a rude comment that George makes about Eugene's profession.

Indeed, it's not only financially that the Ambersons have trouble adjusting to. George Amberson Minafer, the son of Isabel, has grown from a spoiled young child to a spoiled young adult. He is the scallion of the Amberson clan and the Isabel's pet son. He is the person that the neighbors keep predicting will one day get "his comeuppance". George does not approve of his mother's relationship with Eugene and is determined to pressure her into breaking things off with him.

"The Magnificent Ambersons" is an affectionate look at a bigone era and a dark look into the changes that the automobile brought to some families at the dawn of the twentieth century. It was adapted from a novel by Booth Tarkington and directed with care and affection by Orson Welles. Welles had previously done a radio play adaptation of the Ambersons with himself in the role of George. As in that play, Welles narrates throughout the film, even signing off at the end. The black and white cinematography is gorgeous, indeed some of the shots bring to mind some of the pictures I've seen of nineteenth century houses. The music score by an uncredited Bernard Herman adds just the right touch.

However it's impossible to watch this film without thinking about the effect it had on Orson Welles. Which brings me to the second part of the story. George Orson Welles was a child prodege who, as he put it, had "genius" whispered into his ear from the time he was born. Starting in the thirties, sixteen-year-old Welles bluffed his way on stage into a Shakespearian production carving out a career as an actor. He also formed the "Mercury Theatre" which produced some highly original stage and radio plays. His radio production of "War of the Worlds" scared people across the country into believing that Martians had invaded Earth. On top of all that, Welles successfully broke into films making "Citizen Kane" for RKO, arguably the greatest film of all time. And this was all before he was twenty-six!

By this point, many of Welles' detractors were just waiting for Welles to get his "comeuppance". They wouldn't have to wait long. While Welles was away shooting a documentary in South America, RKO cut 45 minutes from the Ambersons and added three minutes after the film tested badly at a preview screening composed of rambunctious teenagers. RKO then put a stop to Welles' documentary and released the Ambersons with few previews where it flopped badly. While it's a testament to Welles' talents that a film that was so obviously butchered can still get a five star rating, the lost footage is still one of the ultimate Hollywood tragedies.

As for Welles, he suddenly found himself with an undeserved reputation as an unreliable director and a spendthrift. Welles' career never fully recovered, and although he would manage to cough up enough money to continue his film career, he would never again have the artistic and financial freedom that he had once enjoyed.

Like George Amberson Minafer, George Orson Welles finally got his comeuppance. He got it three times over and brimming. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Filmed as a classical tragedy, Orson Welles's Othello is a tale of passion, jealousy, and murder. Welles used his earnings from several performances to finance the production, which was shot over several years across multiple locations including Italy and Morocco. The footage was well matched photographically, resulting in an artistically brave compression of a great play. In the title role, Welles shows us a man who has fought many wars but still maintains a princely disposition. As Desdemona, Suzanne Cloutier is guileless but strong enough to have wanted and pursued the Moor. In a rare filmed role, Micheál MacLiammóir excels as the diabolical Iago, a master of manipulating appearances and devoid of any motive save pure evil. The financial constraints appear to have ignited an even higher level of creativity within Welles, who never takes the expected angle and directs the film with a vertiginous, exhibitionist energy. This Othello won the prestigious Palme d'Or at Cannes in April 1952. --Kevin Mulhall ... Read more

Reviews (18)

A near-perfect translation of play to film
A must-see for fans of Orson welles and William Shakespeare alike, "Othello" is nearly as impressive and visually brilliant as Welles' masterworks "Citizen Kane" and "Touch of Evil"--maybe more so, considering the director/star shot it bit by bit over several years, jetting back to Hollywood to take acting jobs that helped finance this film and then later assembling it when every shot was finally complete. A Shakespearen expert, Welles superbly pares the source play's text down to the bare bones and uses powerful visual images to communicate the essence of the Moor's tragic story. Aside from fine direction, Welles also turns in an excellent, informed performance. Since many of the bit players weren't available for dubs when the film was near completion, listen for Welles' terrific vocal mimickry "covering" for the missing actors here and there. A fine example of cinematic storytelling, its style and technique surpass the limitations of its threadbare production values.

Put Out Thy Light!
This film blew me away! I always know what I am looking forward to in an Orson Welles film; brilliant camera angles over lapping dialogue and that masterfull voice but I was floored by how well all of those aspects are used in Othello. It's hard to believe it was four years in the making and that the production of this film was marred by unusual circumstances but welles never gave up and the beauty is on screen to marvel at. Welles was a master of Shakespeare since a child so the dialogue flows as if second nature to him and the rest of the seasoned veterans handle it just as well and that is the key to this film. Welles always had pure facial emotion working in his favor and when those huge glowing eyes of his is used in the final scenes as he kills Desdamona its as if headlights of danger are piercing through his face and the dark almost unbearable lighting can't hold back those eyes or the viewers emotions and the soundtrack that damn haunting score never looses it's pacing simply amazing. Finaly Welles' fluxuating girth comes in handy his Othello is so imposing and commanding that u to would fear the repercussions of his hand if you betray him! Just cut out all the lights unplug the phone and watch with amazment at the best adaption of Othello ever made! McLiammour plays Iago with such contempt and an under lying lust for the moor that another level of depth is revealed. The opening is all out dramatic and ever the more shoking and draws you into the story instantly! Welles' reworking of the dialogue and dramatic use of the camera and lighting makes the flick ever so frightening and perverse! Doves flying above in a clear sky, the shores crashing against the waves as Othello is told by Iago of his wife's deceit or the gripping of the knife being shoved into Welles' by himself to redeem himself for the crime he has committed against his love! Shakespeare has never been told with the passsion upon which Welles tells it!

Welles' indomitable spirit in the face of penury shines...
THE TRAGEDY OF OTHELLO: THE MOOR OF VENICE/ US/France/Italy/Morocco 1952 (3.5 STARS)

The recent restoration of Othello brings to cinematic space the magic of another masterpiece from Orson Welles. To think that a whole master negative of this film (which won the Best film at Cannes in 1952) was lying abandoned in a New Jersey warehouse, was discovered by accident and is the reason for this print that we now have access to, is enough to send shivers down the spine of any Welles-phile.
• Mise-en-scene: Like with many of his other works involving especially Shakespeare, be prepared for Welles' licenses and personal interpretation of subject matter pertaining to Othello. Yet at the end, we are left with a feeling of deep tragedy and loss for Othello, played by Welles himself, and though we feel that Othello was quite an idiot, we at least feel that he was a very unfortunate idiot at that!
• The problem may have been that the critical scene where Iago poisons Othello's mind and fuels his suspicion is scrappy and left unexplored. This may well have had little to do with Welles' artistic choices, and more with his monetary situation at the time. Welles' penury through his European sojourn is widely known and the passion with which he would invest into his films, every penny earned through moonlighting his booming voice and above-average acting skills is legendary, and should put this in context.
• The figure behavior of Micheál MacLiammóir is utterly convincing as the detestable Iago who is consumed by jealousy and rage at being overlooked as the second-in-command. But the person to steal our hearts is Suzanne Cloutier who portrays the fair-dame Desdemona. She is every bit as dainty as we would have imagined her to be.
• The stripped down set design works wonderfully for the film and even though budgets may have been the driving force, Othello's barren palace is preceded only by the barrenness of his blinding jealousy and irrational actions.
• Cinematography: As we have come to expect, Orson Welles has a unique cinematic language, through which he creates a Wellesian world of skin-burning close ups, dutched crazy world-frames and low angle shots to create a tense atmosphere of foreboding. But there is no better example of exploring and using frame depth than in Othello. Time and again Welles plays with foreground element to reveal psychologically subjective and meta-diagetic moods while cleverly using the depth in the frame to forward the narrative and plot the next progression. The title shots of the film are harrowing in their effect, with the interplay of high-contrast earth and sky contours that at once establish the mood for an intense cinematic experience.
• Sound & Editing: The restored version has a brand-new soundtrack mentored by Welles' daughter, and while it enhances the experience to telling effect, it is irony to note that just the new soundtrack cost much more than what Welles assembled the whole film for. The fact that parts of the film were shot MOS and other parts used ADR is distracting due to the obvious lack of lip-sync, but in the final analysis, we watch Welles with reverence almost as if on a visit to Sunday Mass, paying homage, never once forgetting that were are witness to a filmmaker stripped of resources, devoid of many essential tools, but one with indomitable spirit who refused to be cowed-down. Othello is magical in its story telling and another worthy showcase of the genius of Orson Welles.

Welles' images match the beauty of Shakespeare's language
Considerable controversy has surrounded this 1992 restoration and re-release of Orson Welles' "Othello." First, the film was wrongly labelled a "lost classic" - not technically true, as Welles aficionados will realize. More seriously, the restoration crew (under the aegis of Welles' daughter, Beatrice Welles) re-synced the dialogue and re-recorded the musical score - an abomination to Welles purists. While it would have been preferable to adhere to Welles' vision for the film, such an endeavor becomes extremely difficult when no written record of Welles' intent exists (as it did with his famous 26-page memo to Universal regarding "Touch of Evil"). So it's true that this version lacks a degree of authenticity; but what are the alternatives? Grainy, scratched, poorly synced public domain prints (c.f. "Mr Arkadin" and "The Trial")? Or, worse, no available copy at all (c.f. "Chimes at Midnight")?

Anyway, on to the film. "Othello's" existence helps disprove the charges of profligacy and "fear of completion" that plagued Welles' career after "Citizen Kane." Shot over four years in Morocco and Italy, and financed largely by Welles himself, "Othello" manages to avoid a low-budget look, thanks largely to virtuoso editing that masks the incongruities of time and space. Welles' powers of invention are on full display here, most obviously in the famous Turkish bath scene (an improvised set necessitated by a lack of costumes). Set designer Alexandre Trauner's astute choice of Moroccan and Venetian locations instantly establishes a geographic authenticity; Welles initially expolits them for all their stark beauty before retreating into noirish interiors, underscoring Othello's descent into darkness.

Aside from Michael Macliammoir's chilling Method performance as Iago, the acting in Welles' "Othello" has been criticized as too restrained and modulated for Shakespearean tragedy. Such criticism is largely unwarranted, for this "Othello" is as much for the eyes as the ears: Welles' bold framing and expressionistic camera angles de-theatricalize the play, undermining the need for stage elocution. Indeed, the camera is the true star of this film, as Welles generates images that match the grandeur and eloquence of Shakespeare's language.

Wow!
Great, just great. Yes, some of the music one wonders if Welles would have used, but it is pure Welles. If not updated the missing elements might take away from this work, instead they compliment it. A must own! ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Little-known Welles
This is probably Orson Welles' least-remembered film, though paradoxically it was the only one that achieved any real box office success when it was first released. In backing a Welles project most studios had to wait a decade a two for the cult fans to pick it up and turn a profit. Here Edward G. Robinson is a mysterious investigator on the trail of a Nazi fugitive happily ensconced in a small American town. The interplay between these two wonderful actors drives the whole show, although Robinson reportedly disliked Welles' directorial methods. It's a good effort, without the wild cutting and uninterpretable plots that eventually forced Welles out of commercial moviemaking. ... Read more

Reviews (104)

a film noir masterpiece
While not as highly regarded as Citizen Kane, Touch of Evil is arguably Welles' second greatest film and now it is being presented as the filmmaker had originally intended it to be. Included on the DVD is his 58-page memo to Universal Studios detailing all the changes he wanted to be made to their compromised version of the film.

As it stands now, this is an amazing film with some of the most impressive deep focus photography ever put to screen. The depth of field that Welles creates is astounding.

Touch of Evil is also probably one of the last of classic film noirs produced by Hollywood and was a great way to end this period of the genre.

A lot of people poo-poo the casting of Charlton Heston as a Mexican (?!) government muckty-muck and to be sure that was some really odd bit of casting but he's perfectly cast as the straight-arrow good guy of the film. But he's totally blown off the screen by Welles' corrupt sheriff who simply steals every scene he is in. Janet Leigh, stunning as ever, is also really good as Heston's beleaguered wife.

What I like best about this film is the moody atmosphere that permeates every scene -- even the daylight ones. It draws you into this corrupt, cynical world and never lets go. Essential viewing.

100-Proof Noir
Seedy border town is the setting for this noir classic--justifiably called by a New York Post film critic "The Baroque Cathedral of Film Noir." Orson Welles' entrance as the crass, venal Capt. Quinlan is just one example why this film is a must-see on the big screen--not that this DVD widescreen version is so bad (it's a gem). Quinlan's massive, bloated bulk fills the screen as he climbs out of his car to begin the murder investigation that will soon envelop and taint the film's principal characters--immediately establishing Quinlan as the embodiment of corruption. The breathtaking opening sequence (shot in one take) incorporating the ambient music and sounds of the town's lurid nightlife is a key part of this reedit DVD version, setting right the studio-maimed opening of the original release, which ran opening credits and Henry Mancini's score over this sequence to Welles' fruitless objections, diluting its effectiveness. Respected Mexican police official Miguel "Mike" Vargas (Heston) and his American bride Susan's (Janet Leigh) ("She doesn't look Mexican either," Quinlan sneers) honeymoon is derailed when they become targets first of local crime family boss "Uncle Joe" Grandi (Akim Tamiroff), whose brother is about to be sent to prison because of Vargas, and Grandi's impulsive nephews, and then Quinlan, when Vargas accidentally uncovers the latter's penchant for tampering with crime scenes to ensure a death sentence for the accused--whether guilty or actually innocent. Leigh drips sex and is the perfect pawn for those scheming to wreck her husband's career and their marriage. Joseph Calleia stands out as Pete Menzies, who idolizes Quinlan and painfully must come to terms with his betrayal. Dietricht is enigmatic gypsy Tana (memorable line as she looks over the considerably changed Quinlan and bluntly says: "You're a mess honey.") Mancini score, especially "Tana's Theme" ("Pianola"), is exceptional. One valid complaint about this otherwise beautiful DVD is that the standard version should have been included in addition to the widescreen version for those who have not yet overcome the perception problem of "those black bars." Now for me, widescreen is the best. It is how we see the movie on the big screen. This is how the film was shot, and we see camera angles that are lost when the film has been "reformatted to fit your television screen." Those who put together this DVD should have known better and provided BOTH options--usually standard practice with many DVDs.

Pulp Fiction
Orson Welles may have made the supposed greatest film in history with "Citizen Kane", but the experience virtually ruined him. Ostracised by Hollywood and the press after his insulting portrayal of William Randolph Hearst, he was relegated to making low budget films.

Touch of Evil was made in 1958; the last film to be directed by Orson Welles. Unexpectedly given the reins of the film, Welles threw away the script for the planned film, and in just two weeks scratched out a script based on a cheapo pulp fiction novel called "Badge of Evil".

The result, as presented now in a restored version (the movie was, like Magnificent Ambersons, butchered by the studio) is quite remarkable.

On the one hand, it is definitely pulp, with an extremely rough-and-ready style, gritty elements (this is the only "pot party" you're likely to see in a "great film" from the studio era!) and a very, very low budget.

On the other hand, it is a masterpiece. I was extremely impressed by the scene in which (*spoiler!*) Hank Quinlan strangles the Hispanic fellow. I have never seen a movie scene shot like this, especially with the surreal effect of the flashing neon, and the slanting camera.
And who can forget the end of the film, where (spoiler!) Hank Quinlan sits in a pile of garbage in a stream, and tries to cleam blood off his hands? Look at Orson's acting in this scene - truly magnificent.

Someone called this the best B film ever made. If you want to see a pulp masterpiece made on the cheap, see Touch of Evil!

You don't have any future , just only past!
This cynical answer given by Tanya (Marlene Dietrich) is obviouslly a clear a reference's pattern shakesperian.
Any other fim noir before or future has been able t tarnish Welles's vivid creatin of a mexican nightmare, or his realization of a set of characters who are so well depicted , resonant , cruel and colrful. This shakesperian giant utilizes his accustomed approach so efficiently that it makes hard for any viewer t be capable to disecrn which moment create the dramatic thrust of the story and the others laded of outrage and fuRY.
A film is really good when the camera becmes an eye in the mind of a poet. Welles made movies as an orchestra conductor.
The opening shot , lasting ver four minutes , show us once more the personal style of Welles in what concerns to the moving camera and the longtake, establishing the premise around whixh the narrative is built. Like the genius he was; he knows to emphasize the dramatical effects without losing his goal.The camera begins with a close up of a time bomb ; then the camera travels up and back , and fllows the car as a constant witeness . This opening shot is widely in all and every masterful of cinema in the world. Notice fr instance, the cinematic fluidity works out as a visual device .
Once more , we must recall the huge influence about the expressionism german permeated the visual style nt only of Welles , but Hitchcock and a a crowd of talented directors alng these three decades of glorious films noir.
If you need any other proof, think in Fritz Lang , wh came from Germany and (coincidentially?) fllowed the road of the film noir.
In these puzzle of corruption and shame Quinlan is shocked due he failed to bring his wife's murderer to justice ,and retaliates by enlisting the help of the racketeer Uncle Joe Grandi .
Once more the film noir works out as an extrardinary expressive device to express the hopelessness, the existential anguish , the shadows of the fate, the shame and distrusts that shapes the behavior of the human being. All this puzzle runs with the timeless tragic atmosphere ; you face the cruelty in Vargas's wife in the motel where she is kidnapped where visual scenes suggests us all the horror , told in theatrical language where the words are useless.
When Quinlan (as Macbeth)decides to visit Tanya about his future , he listen these bitter words wh wrk out as headline in the review.
From all the stanpoints , this is the one of top movies entitled as film noir , because Welles enriched the bitter insights so typical of this genre with shakesperian moods.
Notice for instance that Grandi reminds us to Yago ; obviusly Grandi has a minor stature since he is much vulgar and obscene . and Tanya is linked with Macbeth's witches ; and the nightmares and the demons who live in the cavern - mind of Quinlan reminds us to the decadent power.
A unforgettable masterpiece all the way.!

Restored to Orson Welles wishes. Great nighttime mood film.
Great black & white film noir film with Orson Welles. The opening sequence has the feeling that you are moving with through the night time streets of the California/Mexico border. You might be astonished by the weight of Orson welles as he does not look like himself from the time of Citizen Kane. The film starts with a bride and groom Janet Leigh and Charlton Heston as they walk into the Mexico border town. Orson Welles plays a wrong-doing police chief who wants to follow the couple. Heston is a well-known Narcotics Investigator and his wife trys to inquisitivly get involved in her husband's professional business. Well, when she sticks her nose in too far, she has got a mexican boy and his boss on her trail. While Heston separates from his wife for official business, he advises her to go on to a hotel for sleep. She ends up in this out of the way hotel taken care of by Dennis Weaver. (Janet Leigh would end up in another hotel two years later in PSYCHO [1960]). Heston must square off with Orson Welles. There are two different versions of this film. When Welles was fired as director, Universal Pictures recut the film. After Welles saw the film in 1958, he wrote a 58-page letter to the studio about the way the film should be re-edited and scenes added. In 1998, Universal obliged. This letter was found and a new version of "Touch Of Evil" was made from the original negetive and the film was reconstructed the way Orson Welles had wishes. This new version is longer at 111 minutes. This DVD version is the 111 minute version. The 1958 print is 108 minutes and shorter prints are 95 minutes. Cast also includes: Joseph Calleia, Akim Tamiroff, Valentin De Vargas, Ray Collins, Mort Mills, Victor Millan, Lalo Rios, Michael Sargent, Phil harvey, Joi Lansing, Harry Shannon, Dan White, with special guests Marlene Dietrich and Zsa Zsa Gabor. ... Read more

Description

Master storyteller Orson Welles weaves a wry, often whimsical, documentary about the nature of art to bedazzle and fool us all.With mock intensity, Welles investigates the charming Elmyr de Hory, who makes a lavish living painting fake Picassos and Matisses.Equally captivating is Welles' own trickery and a glimpse behind his public facade. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Fitfully entertaining essay film about art forgery
Long after Orson Welles lost the clout to produce Hollywood feature films, he managed to cobble together this idiosyncratic essay film from documentary footage shot by French filmmaker Francois Reichenbach. Initially, the subjects are master art forger Elmyr de Hory and his would-be biographer Clifford Irving, also author of the infamous Howard Hughes biography. Welles eventually transforms the film into an analysis of the question of authorship: who is truly the "author" of a work of art?

Welles packs the film with guest stars, anecdotes, and witticisms... even a magic trick! It's not perfect: the film changes gears perhaps one too many times, and Welles can't resist including gratuitous shots of his mistress, Oja Kodar. But Welles aficionados will delight in the director's foray into deconstructionist cinema. "F for Fake" lies somewhere between the realms of fact and fiction. Welles the magician conjures up an altogether new form of movie, one that can't be easily classified.

F For Fantastic!
Wow, what a treat for Welles fans. This is a fascinating piece of work. So interesting and the editing is excellent. Wonderful appearances by Orson to tantalise the viewer (love the trick he plays on us at the end). It's a must see. A unique type of documentary film, solely concentrating on two outrageous fakers. From the feel & look of the movie, you can tell that Welles is having the time of his life, and that's good enough for me.

It should get 6 stars, if that were possible
There is no Orson Welles movie, no matter how influential and well regarded, that I love more than this master piece. This is Orson Welles at his best: just chating along in an entertaining, funny, witty, profound way, teaching you so much about himself, about humanity and about Life, as if it was just a walk in the park - he makes it look so easy to be a genius.

If I had to choose the proverbial film I would take with me to a deserted island, this would be the one. This is the guy I want to talk to forever if I'm ever allowed in whatever Paradise he's in now.

This is all anyone needs to love the movies and Orson Welles. It is the one that will convert you into thinking you can't really have one without the other.

A Really Fake Review
Master filmmaker and artist, Orson Welles, takes you on an intriguing trip into the world of the Fake and the Real. Do you really know the difference between what people tell you and what you know to be real? Perhaps enough people have told you the "truth" where it seems there is no doubt as to what is really real, when all along you were given an pseudo-truth when in fact the truth turned out to be comepletely fake and no one knew about it. This idea, essentially is what this film is about. Filmed in a documentary style, mainly focusing on the life of Elmyr de Hory, one of his many "fake" names. Elmyr is a famous artist, except no one knows who he is because he has "faked" other famous artist masterpieces. In which case the "experts" cannot tell one from the other. So much, in fact, that the "experts" have argued emphatically that Elmyr's version is the "real" one. The well known biographer Clifford Irving wrote about Elmyr's life and his "fake" masterpieces. Irving known especially for the biography of the late Howard Hughes. Except one "fact remained in suspicion of Irving's book is how this man comes along and is granted an interview with Mr. Hughes who has been in hiding for the past 20 years. So the argument remained that Irving's biography of Hughes was indeed "faked." Mr. Orson Welles, who appears from time to time is credited as the director did indeed direct some of the film, while he "faked" it other times. Welles known for his "fake" news bulletin of the War of the Worlds also lets the view see one hour of totally "true" documentary of Elmyr, Hughes and Irving. This is nice of Mr. Welles, and if anyone knows about time, they will bear in mind the film runs longer than one hour.

Its not a casual film of entertainment like Welles' other works, some deemed the best in film history by some "experts." No, this film takes some turns of the usual Hollywood style narrative and makes an almost chaotic feast of editing where time seems to have slowed down. The only draw back to the film is the one just mentioned, that it seems entirely too long when in fact its quite shorter than one expects. Another leg Mr. Welles pulls on the viewers to have them presume as much as they want and get something entirely different.

Not for everyone's taste, but certainly for either the Orson Welles fanatic, and for the person who likes to have thier reality challenged. Cutting edge by means of style and presentation of the film, Mr. Welles has certainly done it again. Unfortunately this has dropped into the back shelf of "important" films.

PHEW! TALK ABOUT A MASTERPIECE!
Orson Welles' only color film is THE ULTIMATE PROOF OF 'MISE EN SCENE' HAPPENING AT THE EDITING STAGE. Most of this film was shot by Francois Reichenbach before Welles got involved with it. Reichenbach didn't know what to do with his footage--how to best put it all together--so he asked Welles, whom he greatly admired, to see what he could do. Welles shot some scenes featuring himself to go around the documentary footage, came up with a narrative concept and EDITED everthing. The result? WELLES' PERSONALITY TOOK OVER. This is unmistakably a film that only Orson Welles could make. Welles uses his ingenious narration and every trick known to film editing to weave a philosophical meditation on the nature of truth and lies that has DEEP universal significance, but also particularly applies to the nature of all 'ART-ifice.' It's a very intellectual as well as supremely entertaining film which requires at least 5 viewings to even begin to be appreciated. ... Read more

Reviews (16)

How many Mr. Arkadins are there?
Viewing Orson Welles' film "Mr. Arkadin today is an experience similar to that the characters in his complex films would feel if they were real-mystery, confusion, frustration, fascination. Except for "Citizen Kane" and "The Trial" every one of Welles' movies--every one he completed that is--was taken over by its financial backers and reedited beyond comprehension. "Mr. Arkadin" is one of his most cryptic works not only because it was taken from its creator and reshaped, but because it was apparently reshaped several time by several different people. We don't have only one bastardized version, but several, at least 3. And according to Welles himself as quoted in Peter Bogdonavich's book "This is Orson Welles", none of these was even close to the story he wanted to tell. So "who is Mr. Arkardin?" is as pertinent a question when asked in the context of the film's story as it is when discussing the film itself. I myself have seen two distinct versions. One, a VHS tape of the "European" release of the film, re-titled "Confidential Report", the other this DVD Laserlight release of the later US release edit. Of the two, "Confidential Report" had the better edit and was also transfered from a much better print. This DVD version is certainly priced right, however--cant' beat Welles for under $4!

As for the film itself, in all its incarnations, "Arkadin" is a fascinating failure, obviously patched together on the run on a miniscule budget. The overall plot is intriguing (and begs to be remade from Orson's original script). A famous, mysterious billionaire, claiming amnesia, hires a sleazy golddigging bum to investigate his own past. To give away more would be evil, so I won't. Let's just say there are some clever twists and turns. Unfortunately, the film only works in spurts. There are quite a few masterful scenes, but they are only loosely connected, a s though only half the filming was completed and the movie had to be cobbled together at the last minute from what was on hand, whether it made sense or not. The awkward narration and many clumsy montages used to fill the gaps make this obvious.

Again, however, I must say that for movie lovers, film students, Welles freaks, or anyone else looking for something very different, you can't beat a Welles DVD for the price of a rental!

One of Welles' richest and most underrated fables
We will probably never know exactly what Orson Welles envisioned Mr. Arkadin to be, but even in its present state, it remains a commandable achievement and one of his most underrated films. His storytelling mastery is evident throughout, both in the sound and images. As in Citizen Kane, the main character's life is gradually explored, but this time it's the subject of the inquiry who started it himself; this brings the film in the territory of initiations and psychoanalysis. Seemingly to uncover his own past, Arkadin sends low-profile hood Guy Van Stratten in a complex initiatic quest, one in which the initiated is mostly lured by money and luxury. Like Kane, Arkadin takes shape mainly via other people's testimonies, and he undergoes his own type of initiation: for the very first time, he is stripped of the masks and disguises he always relied on, and he is scared at the perspective of his private self (his Jungian 'number 2' personality) being discovered by the only person he cares for. Fables are scattered throughout the film, and the movie itself is such a tale, Arkadin acting as its grand, imposing Ogre, a character possessing strange and far-reaching powers. His overbearing abilities are illustrated in various ways, notably through the film's rapidly changing settings (a device also used in The Trial). The work's depth can also be measured by this consideration: Mr. Arkadin's universe is a huge maze in which Arkadin himself is Minos, Dedalus and the Minotaur all at once. This dense, rich and dreamlike film has never really received its due.

Extremely good story but terrible picture quality
I bought Orson Welles Citizen Kane and liked it so I decided to watch other Welles movies. I bought Mr. Arkadin because the DVD is cheap and rated high on IMDB. I should have buyed Touch of Evil instead. The quality of the picture is laughable, sometimes there are glitches in the sound during scene changes. Judging by the picture and sound quality I would say that they used equipment from the 30's to shoot and edit the movie and that the print used for that transfer was stored in a refrigerator during 45 years. Welles directing work is good but obviously he had to deal with the poor quality of the European movie industry of the 50's. Sometimes the picture shake, during the opening credits the captions are white on a white or gray background so we can't read everything. The editing is very poor, there are too many scene changes. When I bought this DVD I expected to receive the LaserLight version, instead I got a DVD made by Alpha Video. The case cover is different and there is no supplemental material. He was mastered cheaply on a PC with the SpruceUp DVD Maestro software, that seem to create problems, each time I try to play the disc on my computer the FBI warning message appear and then the disc eject. I didn't notice any audio syncing problems however. This movie is the perfect candidate for a remake. I give **** for the story and * for the overall quality of the movie.

Third-rate Kane knockoff - by the man himself!
This film represents sort of an artistic low point for Welles. Presumably exhausted by his four-year ordeal of producing "Othello" and far removed from his Hollywood glory years, he attempted a comeback with this hodgepodge re-working of the "Citizen Kane" theme. The rich and mysterious Mr. Arkadin hires an investigator to research his past, presumably to keep his secrets away from his enemies. However, everyone interviewed by the private eye mysteriously dies! (This idea was realized more effectively in 1987's "Angel Heart"). Although this film showcases' Welles unique style far better than, say, "The Stranger," its utter lack of production values make the experience somewhat grueling. Welles shoots with a manic energy, but fails to reach the giddy heights of "The Lady from Shanghai" or the visual eloquence of "Othello." Fortunately, Welles gets some entertaining performances from his supporting cast, particularly Michael Redgrave as an effeminate shopkeeper and the ubiquitous Akim Tamiroff ("Touch of Evil's" Uncle Joe Grandi) as the kooky Jacob Zouk.

The Laserlight DVD transfer doesn't help matters. As noted, it's taken from a grainy, choppy, poorly synced public domain print. However, you do get an unintentionally funny Tony Curtis intro, as well as the chance to own a rarely seen Welles film for a budget price.

Poor quality ruins the experience
I am referring to the Laser Light dvd edition of this film, which promises the best digital transfer of the film. That is great, but they used the worst print anyone could concieve to transfer! I taped this off of television awhile back and decided to buy a dvd version and this is 100 times worse than the version I taped myself on the slowest speed off of late night tv! In reading other reviews it appears that there is a much better VHS version and I would recommend that over this. Do not be fooled like I was with the fine condition of Welles' "The Trial" by Laser Light or the pipe smoking picture packaging of this. This version of Arkardin is a total waste of money. ... Read more

Reviews (34)

ORSON IN TOTALITARIANLAND
With an international cast involving Jeanne Moreau, Romy Schneider, Anthony Perkins, Fernand Ledoux and Michael Lonsdale, Orson Welles gave in 1961 a very personal version of Franz Kafka's THE TRIAL. The labyrinthic and anonymous world Joseph K. is living in has undoubtedly visually inspired Terry Gilliam for BRAZIL Look at Joseph K's office or think of the first scene of THE TRIAL when Anthony Perkins is awaking.

The outside scenes of THE TRIAL have been shot in Zagreb or in the middle of the suburbs of Paris, amidst anonymous buildings. The production design is one of the main characters of the movie and one has a little shock the first time Anthony Perkins is getting up from his bed : his head is nearly touching the ceiling. On the contrary, observe the huge doors of the courtroom that are destined to oppress the poor accused people.

The filmography of Orson Welles being so short, you must have this DVD in your library if you're interested in movies. The DVD presented by Image offers as bonus feature a teaser and a little presentation of the movie. No subtitles at all. Good images but a very poor sound.

An Orson W. DVD.

Quite a treat!
"Say what you like, but THE TRIAL is the best film I ever made!" So says Orson Welles of his 1962, underrated masterpiece THE TRIAL, taken from Franz Kafka's legendary novel of the same name, the story concerns Josef K, (Anthony Perkins in a world class performance) a bank clerk arrested and put on trial for an unspecified crime. The liquid tracking shots and receding perspectives familiar from TOUCH OF EVIL are refined here and more at home with the narrative of THE TRIAL. Welles' editing is also more distinctive and expressive, as K's world begins to reel faster and faster out of control, the editing itself transforms from the long takes in the beginning to more frenzic cutting giving certain scenes an oddly affecting flow. The exteriors are notably different from scene to scene, some Italian, some Yugoslavian, some Parisian, but all effective and creepily disorienting. The casting is also a plus: Romy Schneider as a seducing nurse who jumps on Josef t! he first chance she gets, Jeanne Moreau as a world-weary nighclub stripper with whom Josef is smitten, Orson himself as The Advocate, Akim Tamiroff as his client/slave, and Perkins, in a bit of casting that many people didn't understand, is truly a marvel and a revelation. With every facial expression and movement of his body he paints a portrait of man who on the surface strikes a cutting, heroic stance, but in private is really like all other people in his impatience with uncomfortable circumstances. He avoids the tempting opportunity to provide sympathy to K, as his plight grows more chaotic, his demeanor becomes more testy, and that's as it should be. Critics apparently wanted a nullingly straight rendition from the novel, but Welles, Perkins and the rest of the crew thankfully didn't oblige them. They find the perfect balance between a daring cinematic adaptation without sacrificing the spirit of the novel. While it's not his best, this is better than alot of Welles'! films, . 1. The Magnificent Ambersons 2. Falstaff 3. The ! Trial

Samir Roy END

Guilty!
What is Joseph K guilty of? There are a number of possibilities, none of which I will suggest here. I don't want to be guilty of ruining the fun of figuring that out for yourself. This movie is Welles at his brilliant best. Many great directors seem to have a trio of films that represent their greatest work. With Welles, those three seem to be Citizen Kane, Touch of Evil and The Trial. The Magnificent Ambersons wsa murdered by the studio and an editor sent in to hack together a new ending. But the Welles directed part is so good I guess it has to rank with the above mentioned three. Then there is Othello, ruined by poor funding; but is it a wreck of a movie? I guess it belongs with the above mentioned four. Forgive me, I guess I'm guilty of digressing, as well as assuming that one can pick three of Welles's movies that stand out from his other work. What I can say about The Trial is that Welles had enough money to make his ideas work as they should on screen. When a Welles movie has enough money to cover technical costs the movie is usually great. The Trial is no exception. The Milestone DVD is a little costly; but you get an excellent looking transfer, which is all you really need to make this movie worth owning.

A great adaptation of Kafka's book
The Trial is Orson Welles' adaptation of the Franz Kafka novel of the same name. It follows the story of Josef K., a man who finds himself in a nightmarish version of reality he neither understands, nor can escape from. It begins with Josef K. (played by Anthony Perkins) being awakened by police officers, who refuse to tell him the crime he's accused of. He's placed under arrest, but not taken into custody - they allow him to continue his "normal" life. Instead, he is taken away at bizarre moments to appear in court, which is a distorted mockery of the concept of justice. There is no judge, no jury, no stated charges, no burden of proof, no lawyers, and no one that assumes impartiality or responsibility. When Josef K. asks for a lawyer, he's told it's not necessary, since it's an "informal" questioning. After the "court" appearance, Josef K. goes to enlist "the Advocate" to defend him. The Advocate (played by Orson Welles) is portrayed as a demi-god of legal access and information not available to the common man - to be worshiped and feared at all costs, since without him, they are nothing. However, in the end, Josef K. is sentenced and eventually executed for these elusive crimes.
The Trial is a merging of the existential philosophies of Kafka with the cinematic genius of Welles. Josef K. is not a particularly empathetic character - he's weak, morally flexible, and passively pushed along this nightmare. In either ending, (the book or the film), Josef K. doesn't fight against his fate, or meekly accepts it. It embodies the existentialist view that Josef K.'s nightmare prison is one of his own making, and therefore only he is responsible for its injustices. Welles adds his own perspective in the sense that it reflected the subversive tactics of those in power around the judicial system during that time - a very Marxist perspective in the face of the McCarthy era, where the HUAC had frightening similarities to the nightmare court.
Overall, it's a film with many possible interpretations and meanings - that are neither right nor wrong, but dependent on the audience's own observations. Like most of Welles' and Kafka's work - you can either take it at face value, or as an intellectual piece - either way, it's a well done cinematic accomplishment.

Not much into the " noir " style of film making.
This film is dark in more ways than one. My copy was way dark. Of course it is emotionally dark also. Didn't much like the novel in college & my opinion hasn't improved. It was a pain to sit through it. This subject has so much promise but not with a depressive like Kafka. One of Welles lesser films to be sure. But one extra star for Welles portayal of the advocate, the best thing in this film. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Legend has it that Orson Welles more or less conned studio boss Harry Cohn over the phone into making this movie by grabbing the title from a nearby paperback. In any case, The Lady from Shanghai is one of Welles's most fascinating works, a bizarre tale of an Irish sailor (Welles) who accompanies a beautiful woman (Rita Hayworth) and her handicapped husband (Everett Sloane) on a cruise and becomes involved in a murder plot. But never mind all that (the aforementioned legend also claims that Cohn offered a reward to anyone who could explain the plot to him). The film is really a dream of Welles's driving preoccupations on- and offscreen at the time: the elusiveness of identity, the mystique of things lost, and most of all the director's faltering marriage to Hayworth. In the tradition of male filmmakers who indirectly tell the story of their love affairs with leading ladies, Welles tells his own, photographing Hayworth as a deconstructed star, an obvious cinematic creation, thus reflecting, perhaps, a never-satisfied yearning that leads us back to the mystery of Citizen Kane. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (39)

Fun-filled parody of film noir
An often bewildering parody of film noir in particular and Hollywood conventions in general, Columbia relegated "The Lady from Shanghai" to B-movie status due to objections over Orson Welles' manipulation of soon-to-be-ex-wife Rita Hayworth into a ruthless femme fatale. However, Hayworth's metamorphosis is the most superficial of the caricatures that populate the film, among them Everett Sloane (Bernstein from "Citizen Kane") as a leering, corrupt, crippled lawyer, and show-stealing Glenn Anders as the giddily inscrutable Grisby, whose machinations drive what passes for a plot. Amidst this gallery, Welles' own sublimely ridiculous presence, as a hopelessly idealistic sailor with a phony "Black Irish" accent, becomes the most obvious tip-off that the proceedings are anything but serious fare. Once the comic tone is established, the film lurches forward with manic energy, throwing plausibility to the wind as it careens toward the climax in the expressionistic Crazy House and its Hall of Mirrors. The flattering close-ups of Hayworth (inserted by the studio to "save" the picture) clash marvelously with Welles' vertiginous camera angles, adding to the film's discontinuity and enhancing its satirical nature. My favorite line: "I came to in the crazy house, but for a moment there, I thought it was me who was going crazy!" My advice: forget the plot and enjoy "The Lady from Shanghai" for its many guilty pleasures.

"He who follows his nature,..."
The first time I saw this Welles classic, I didn't get it. Apparently, neither did Paramount Studios head Harry Cohn. Many people have complained that the plot is incoherent. That was my initial impression as well.

However, after watching it again for a second and third time, I am of a different opinion. This film CAN be followed, but not in the conventional way. While the film's twists and turns and double-crosses make little sense story wise, thematically everything falls into place. My appreciation for this film has grown over the years.

Orson Welles plays Michael O'Hara, an Irish drifter and Spanish Civil War veteran who's troubles begin when he falls for an alluring woman by the name of Elsa Bannister (Rita Hayworth). Elsa is married to Arthur Bannister (Everett Sloane), a crippled, sinister old man who happens to be the world's greatest lawyer. Bannister hires Michael to go on a cruise through the Caribbean with him and his neurotic partner George Grisby.

...This entertaining film noir doesn't make a lot of sense story wise. People double-cross each other for no apparent reason. There are many twists and turns that are virtually impossible to follow. Even the title is somewhat misleading, as the film has little to do with Shanghai, apart from the fact that the title character was born there. Like that other film noir classic, "The Big Sleep", "The Lady from Shanghai" is more about style than substance. One must listen to some of the characters' quotes to make sense of what is going on.

They are as follows:

"It is difficult for love to last long, therefore one who loves passionately, is cured of love in the end."

"He who follows his nature, follows his original nature in the end."

There's also a memorable speech that Michael gives about some sharks he once saw and what became of them.

...

"Are you looking for a good paste in the eye?"
No, not Welles' best film. It couldn't be, since "The Lady From Shanghai" was actually a chance for Welles to get back in good with the studio system, a.k.a. the money picture that gets made when they won't let you be an artist. (Too, he saw it as a chance to rebuild the waning relationship he shared with then-wife Rita Hayworth.) However, the problem with Welles is that he excels so much at filmmaking that his worst still runs circles around most other directors' best. At 90 minutes long, this is basically an annotated version of the 2 1/2-hour cut Welles had submitted for release prints. Once again (reiterating Welles' career-long battles with his producers) unapproved editors were cut lose on it. But it's still one of the most gleefully dizzy and fun time machines I've come across. The colorful black-and-white cinematography comes off as disjointed due to the editing. But it's a blessing in disguise. Film noir dictates that shadows rule, both literally and figuratively. The darkness pulls the strings, and "The Lady..." lives up to that. It becomes a whirlwind journey that lands Mike O'Hara between South America and San Francisco's Chinatown, not to mention rendering him (and us) helpless under Hayworth's mesmerizing crooning on the deck of a boat. Yes, and the infamous, unparalleled "showdown" in a funhouse hall-of-mirrors, bringing the thematics of the genre to life as reflections and each spouse's altar ego are shattered into shards one by one. But I also harbor a cheap fascination with the world as it existed long before I was previed to it. '40s and '50s noir have the ability to instantly transplant viewers to forty or fifty years before whatever is presently happening outside their window. By no means the deepest picture released under the Welles filmography, "The Lady From Shanghai" remains a joyous, unabashed rollercoaster through the seediness of negative human nature. Capital escapism.

"I came to in the Crazy Room."
Michael O'Hara "Black Irish" (Orson Welles) is hired by famed criminal lawyer Arthur Bannister to work as a crew member on board his yacht--the Circe--for a trip down to Mexico. O'Hara agrees--he's already got an eyeful of Bannister's extremely attractive wife, Elsa (Rita Hayworth). Then Bannister's sleazy partner, Grisby approaches O'Hara with a strange offer. Grisby offers O'Hara a quick $5,000 if he agrees to "pretend" to kill Grisby. Grisby's hardly credible explanation for this outlandish behaviour is that he wishes to disappear with the insurance money.

The plot of "Shanghai Lady" has more holes than a slab of Swiss cheese. Added to that, Orson Welles has the absolutely worst Irish accent I have ever heard. But the film works ... in some ways. The Bannister's marriage is incongruous at best, and it's easy to slip Rita Hayworth in as the femme fatale who married for money. Some of the minor characters are guilty of extreme over-acting, and Welles doesn't put his heart into the role. However, the scenes in the courtroom and the over-the-top ending make the film worthwhile. The DVD comes with a few extras--including a worthwhile interview with Peter Bogdanovich, Talent Files (bios of Welles and Hayworth), vintage advertising (depictions of numerous posters advertising the film) and four film trailers ("Lady of Shanghai" "The Loves of Carmen" "The Last Hurrah" and "A Man For all Seasons").

"Shanghai Lady" was the victim of the decaying marriage between its two stars--Welles and Hayworth. The final film length was 155 minutes, but the studio slashed it down to 88 minutes. Who knows what the director's cut would look like?--displacedhuman

"Innocent is a big word--Stupid is more like it"
Stupidity--not innocence, not heroism, not any virtue at all--is the major theme of *The Lady from Shanghai*. Therefore, to some viewers this film will appear to be a stupid movie. That's unfortunate, but that's Orson Welles.

Everybody--EVERYBODY--is stupid in *Lady*! The Welles character, Michael O'Hara, admits he is stupid right off the bat. Elsa, played by Rita Hayworth, seems to be the cleverest of them all until the end...when she and her husband Arthur Bannister die together in the Crazy House, her husband gasping at her, "For a clever girl you make a lot of mistakes." Arthur, "the world's greatest lawyer", obviously has brains and knows what's going on through the whole story, but he's so grotesque (practically crawling through his scenes like a daddy longlegs spider) that his intellect is self-defeating: he's just one of the sharks that Welles describes in the beach scene, ravenously devouring himself. And the Grisby character...take one look at this guy and it's hard to believe *Lady* was made in 1946. Grisby's right out of David Lynch, or more like it, David Cronenberg! The judge, the folks in the courtroom...all STUPID and distorted, just like the images in the funhouse mirrors!

Portraying American people in that unflattering light was just not "on" in the early postwar period. No wonder Orson Welles was being watched by the FBI during those years. Even today, many filmgoers expect movies to give them at least one or two heroic characters that they can identify with. Sorry, friends, *Lady* jumps right into your face and right into your space (like the scene with O'Hara and Grisby overlooking the ocean) and blurts drunkenly, "Yer STOO-pid too, FELLAH!"

But why on earth is Orson Welles telling us we're all stupid? That's made very clear. We are blissfully living out our grubby little lives on the brink of self-destruction. "Do you believe the world is gonna end?" asks Grisby of O'Hara in that ocean overlook scene. That's the question Welles tells us we should be asking ourselves. But just as O'Hara was too stupid to ask himself a few simple questions, like "how can Grisby collect the insurance money if he's declared legally dead?", we don't ask ourselves the important questions that overshadow our silly little existences.

A lot of people won't like it. They sure didn't when *Lady* was released in '48.

But I love it! *Lady* was "postmodern" before postmodern was cool (before anybody knew what postmodern was)! It is deliciously self-referential: the scene in the Shanghai Low Chinese theater, with the strange Oriental play being performed onstage, instantly reminds one of all the strange characters and goings-on in the "real" story, the movie itself. But the movie itself is not real either, of course--it too is a play that reflects the bizarre world of human events, OUR world, the world of the moviegoer who seeks meaning in film and theater. House of mirrors! Movies of the '40's were just NOT self-referential, they really tried to create an alternative world that the audience could escape from its troubles into. Almost all movies then, and still most today, do not hold up a mirror to the audience. But *Lady* does. And still today many people aren't going to like what they see. "It's a bright guilty world," sayeth Welles/O'Hara.

The close-ups of Rita Hayworth singing "Please Don't Kiss Me" establish her as THE most beautiful woman to have ever graced the silver screen. Sorry Marilyn, Lana, Bette, and you too Nicole. "Rita Hayworth gave good face" indeed. I'd have paid the price of the whole DVD just to have those few seconds of film. But there's so much more in *Lady* that's worth watching than the lady.

Peter Bogdanovich's interview and commentary is pretty good, though as a Welles/Hayworth fan there was a good deal of stuff I already knew. But some stuff I didn't know, so I appreciated Peter's contribution.

*The Lady From Shanghai* and *Gilda*...movies just don't get any better! ... Read more