Robert Wise R.I.P.

[Nate Dorward]

Well, the evil thing about the Gabler Ulysses was that it was prompted largely by the Joyce estate's attempt to produce a version of the text different enough to be freshly copyrighted, & that the Gabler edition at one point completely displaced the 1922 text (which was permitted to fall out of print). But unless I'm mistaken, the reedited Touch of Evil didn't proceed from dubious motives, at least has a grounding in Welle's own list of demanded changes to the film, & both the original & reedited versions are still available.

What can I say, I like flawed masterpieces. People always talk about the opening tracking shot, but I find the most impressive thing is that weird swooping back & forth in the rooms of the house as the cops descend on it & the evidence gets planted in the bathroom.

Getting back to Wise the thing that always strikes me as odd is that The Day the Earth Stood Still is described sometimes as "pacifist", which is a strange way to describe a film which ends with the citizens of Earth being handed an ultimatum: shape up or we'll waste you.

[Kalo]

I'll have to check on this, but I think that the new version of Touch of Evil HAS pretty much supplanted the original edit. And the re-edit was based on a Welles memo, much as the Gabler Ulysses was based on various Joyce drafts. Both are legit, insofar as they are clearly accounted to be speculative alternate versions.

btw, In current editions, the Gabler is no longer billed as " The Corrected Text" but as the Gabler Edition.

[Michael Fitzgerald]

A quick browse at Amazon shows that VHS has several options, but DVD is ONLY the re-constructed version, not the traditional one.

Mike

[Kalo]

A quick browse at Amazon shows that VHS has several options, but DVD is ONLY the re-constructed version, not the traditional one.

Mike

←

THAT'S what I'm talking 'bout.

Thanks, Mike.

Should we start a pool to bet on when the "reverted" edition comes to DVD?

Of course, in a few years, the way things are going, we'll all be able to do our own edits.

(Hmmm. What about Robert Mitchum in the Heston part? Even Ricardo Montalban would be an improvement...)

[ghost of miles]

Among his many fine films one that I always liked was ' Somebody Up There Likes Me' with the young Paul Newman. The blueprint for all other rags to riches boxer makes good sagas including ,of course, ' Rocky'.

←

James Dean was slated to star in that when he died... it was one of several roles that Newman inherited from him. (He also beat out Newman for the part of Cal in EAST OF EDEN.)

[ghost of miles]

I just finished reading THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS, and ironically enough, it sounds as if the original film version somewhat altered the ending. The book ends in George's hospital room, on a note of reconciliation and hope. By focusing on Fanny's plight instead, Welles somewhat darkened Tarkington's conclusion. I think we may have the original script for the film here in the library--there's a ton of Welles material deposited in the Lilly collection (including part of his proposed treatment for Ellington's JUMP FOR JOY).

Indiana mystery writer Terence Faherty wrote a book, COME BACK DEAD, which is a fictional speculation about Welles coming to Indiana in 1955 and attempting to re-shoot the film. He had to change names for legal reasons--the film, for instance, is called THE IMPERIAL ANDERSONS.

[Nate Dorward]

No, the Gabler edition's something else again--Gabler's procedures were just indefensible on any grounds at all; the textual scholarship of the edition is completely wacky. If you want a good precis of the whole story Bruce Arnold's The Scandal of Ulysses is a good primer.

I'd agree that DVD editions of re-edited films should really include both the original & "new" versions so the viewer can choose which one he/she likes & compare the two.

[Kalo]

No, the Gabler edition's something else again--Gabler's procedures were just indefensible on any grounds at all; the textual scholarship of the edition is completely wacky.  If you want a good precis of the whole story Bruce Arnold's The Scandal of Ulysses is a good primer.

←

I did read the Arnold a few years back, and you're correct -- these two cases are of very different orders of magnitude.

I'd agree that DVD editions of re-edited films should really include both the original & "new" versions so the viewer can choose which one he/she likes & compare the two.

←

Amen to that.

Edited September 18, 2005 by Kalo

[medjuck]

I hated the sound in the "new" edition of Ambersons. It sound like all the actors were looped. That may have been just in the theater in which I saw it . On the other hand I found the same thing in The English Patient and Walter Murch did the sound editing/mixing for both.

[AllenLowe]

I believe Wells, ultimately, wasted his own talent - he made so many BAD films after Kane, and he lived through a time when he could very easily by reputation and trend have financed, without problem, an independed film - he was a bit self-destructive, and became, ultimately, a parody of himself, doing card tricks on the Johnny Carson show - more's the pity, since Kane was an absolutely monumental work -

Edited September 19, 2005 by AllenLowe

[BruceH]

did some great work, but should have been shot (or at least tortured) for what he did to the Magnificent Ambersons -

←

C'mon, he was ordered to do that by the studio. If he hadn't, they would have fired Wise and found someone else to do the editing job.

[BruceH]

Wow---91.  He had a helluva run. 

He reminded me almost of an American Carol Reed, another director who was more of a diligent craftsman rather than one who puts a big personal stamp on everything. (In the 60's Reed directed "Oliver!" while Wise did "The Sound of Music.")  I am also one of the people for whom if Wise had just done "" he'd rank high in my personal pantheon.  But there are quite a few other films worthy of note: "The Set Up," "I Want To Live," "The Haunting," ----even the admitedly overlong "Andromeda Strain" has its moments.  Also seems he was one of the few directors from Hollywood's Golden Age that was a genuinely nice guy.  RIP, Mr. Wise.

←

Carol Reed, huh? I don't think Wise ever made anything quite on the level of The Third Man , as I'm sure you'll agree. But much of the success of that film owes to Graham Greene, Joseph Cotton, and Orson Welles, and that zither music. So your point is well taken insofar as Wise's best flicks were those with the best collaborators. So The Set Up, say, owes as much to Robert Ryan's embodiment of the noble palooka and the cinematography as to the direction. And Odds Against Tomorrow benefits from the same actor's strikingly different performance and John Lewis's score. And it mustn't be forgotten that The Day the Earth Stood Still was scored by the superlative Bernard Herrmann, who contributed immeasurably to every film he put his hand to.

Still, I'd compare him more to a professional like Sidney Lumet, who made some very good films as well as some stinkers like The Wiz.

←

My main point was that Wise was NOT an "auteur" director. The comparision with Lumet sounds more apt.

Has anyone made anything quite on the level of The Third Man? I doubt it.

[AllenLowe]

well, all right, not shot or tortured - maybe made to watch The Great Gatsby for eternity-

[Kalo]

well, all right, not shot or tortured - maybe made to watch The Great Gatsby for eternity-

←

that's arguably worse!

[Jazzmoose]

Indiana mystery writer Terence Faherty wrote a book, COME BACK DEAD, which is a fictional speculation about Welles coming to Indiana in 1955 and attempting to re-shoot the film.  He had to change names for legal reasons--the film, for instance, is called THE IMPERIAL ANDERSONS.

←

Better than "The Aristocrats" I suppose...

[Kalo]

I prefer "The Debonaires"...

[Kalo]

did some great work, but should have been shot (or at least tortured) for what he did to the Magnificent Ambersons -

←

C'mon, he was ordered to do that by the studio. If he hadn't, they would have fired Wise and found someone else to do the editing job.

←

So he was "just following orders"?

The Eichmann of the editing suite....

[Michael Fitzgerald]

Godwin's Law triumphs again!

Mike

[Kalo]

Hey Mike,

I'd never heard of Godwin's Law until now ( I just Googled it).

In this case, I was just goofing on my good friend BruceH (I've known him for over 20 years now). Thus the .

[BruceH]

Hey Mike,

I'd never heard of Godwin's Law until now ( I just Googled it).

In this case, I was just goofing on my good friend BruceH (I've known him for over 20 years now). Thus the  .

←

Barenga!

[BruceH]

did some great work, but should have been shot (or at least tortured) for what he did to the Magnificent Ambersons -

←

C'mon, he was ordered to do that by the studio. If he hadn't, they would have fired Wise and found someone else to do the editing job.

←

So he was "just following orders"?

The Eichmann of the editing suite....

←

I find that illogical and offensive. A bit of rhetorical overeach, perhaps?

[BruceH]

Hey Mike,

I'd never heard of Godwin's Law until now ( I just Googled it).

In this case, I was just goofing on my good friend BruceH (I've known him for over 20 years now). Thus the  .

←

That makes me feel old. The "over 20 years," not the .

[ejp626]

On 9/18/2005 at 1:11 AM, Michael Fitzgerald said:

A quick browse at Amazon shows that VHS has several options, but DVD is ONLY the re-constructed version, not the traditional one.

 

Mike

While I'm sure people that are interested found this out long, long ago (2013 to be exact), there is in fact a "50th Anniversary" 2 DVD set that has the theatrical release, plus something called the "Preview version" plus the "Restored version" (with completely different commentaries on all 3!).  As well as some quite interesting documentaries on the film.  It looks like the main Blu-Ray release from 2018 also has all three versions.  I managed to pick up a copy of the DVD set recently and am debating where to start.  The Preview version does seem to have the most interesting commentaries but I think I am still leaning towards watching the "Restored version" first.

[medjuck]

42 minutes ago, ejp626 said:

While I'm sure people that are interested found this out long, long ago (2013 to be exact), there is in fact a "50th Anniversary" 2 DVD set that has the theatrical release, plus something called the "Preview version" plus the "Restored version" (with completely different commentaries on all 3!).  As well as some quite interesting documentaries on the film.  It looks like the main Blu-Ray release from 2018 also has all three versions.  I managed to pick up a copy of the DVD set recently and am debating where to start.  The Preview version does seem to have the most interesting commentaries but I think I am still leaning towards watching the "Restored version" first.

I once met a post production guy who had spent half his life looking for the original Ambersons footage but eventually thought he had proof that it had all been destroyed.  (Sorry I can't remember more of the details.). But what are the alternate versions?  The only version I see on Amazon is the Criterion.  I was still slightly involved with Criterion when we did the Lazer Disc version and I don't think we could find any other versions.  Would the preview version be Welles' early cut? Do you remember it well? 

OOps I just figured out you're talking about A Touch of Evil. 

re; Robert Wises's participation in the re-editing of the film:  I once saw Bernard Herrmann  give a talk at the at the British Film Institute.  When there were audience questions at the end someone asked him how he could have participated in the recut of Amerbersons.  He responded "We thought it was just a film; we thought we were going to make lots of them."  Given the history of both Welles and Herrmann (who didn't get to work on nearly enough films) it seemed both a poignant and  ironic answer to me. 

Edited January 7, 2021 by medjuck

[ejp626]

13 minutes ago, medjuck said:

I once met a post production guy who had spent half his life looking for the original Ambersons footage but eventually thought he had proof that it had all been destroyed.  (Sorry I can't remember more of the details.). But what are the alternate versions?  The only version I see on Amazon is the Criterion.  I was still slightly involved with Criterion when we did the Lazer Disc version and I don't think we could find any other versions.  Would the preview version be Welles' early cut? Do you remember it well? 

 

I think there was some confusion in the thread.  People were talking about both Ambersons and Touch of Evil (where at the time the Restored version had supplanted the theatrical version).  I was focusing just on Touch of Evil.

This is the 50th Anniversary version - https://www.amazon.com/Touch-Evil-50th-Anniversary/dp/B01M8PP7EV/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=touch+of+evil+50th&qid=1609996760&sr=8-2

This Blu-Ray also has all 3 versions - https://www.amazon.com/Touch-Evil-Blu-ray-Orson-Welles/dp/B07G2D87JH/ref=pd_sbs_74_1/146-4348742-9713367?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B07G2D87JH&pd_rd_r=d21e9e01-9d9f-4465-87bd-c20813c2e60c&pd_rd_w=xChgZ&pd_rd_wg=kPzzY&pf_rd_p=3ec6a47e-bf65-49f8-80f7-0d7c7c7ce2ca&pf_rd_r=29GFN26WNQ744CYP47EB&psc=1&refRID=29GFN26WNQ744CYP47EB

The Preview version was longer than the theatrical release.  It was discovered in 1976.  Some of the extra material was shot by Orson and some by a director the studio brought in for some reshoots after Welles was off the picture, but it is generally closer to what Orson Welles wanted.  Then 20+ years later Rick Schmidlin tried to recut the film according to Welles infamous memo to the studio, using material from both versions (and perhaps additional found footage - you'd have to go through the documentary to get those details).  That is the Restored version.  Apparently the opening shot is quite different (not as much Mancini and no titles to interfere with the extra long shot).  It does sound like the Restored version is in this case much closer to what Welles wanted.  I'll try to at least get through the first few minutes of all versions over the weekend.