Time for another entry in the Oscar Film Journal, here at Enuffa.com!
We're in the 1940s once again, looking at an odd little inclusion in Best Picture lore. Today's subject has been much-discussed and analyzed, and mostly celebrated in spite of its myriad flaws and unforced studio errors that led to its not being the film it should've been. I'm talking about The Magnificent Ambersons.
This was Orson Welles' sophomore directorial effort, and the story behind it is just as intriguing as the movie itself. Welles was famously signed by RKO Pictures after taking the radio and theater worlds by storm in the late 30s, and given creative carte blanche for his debut, the incomparable Citizen Kane. Infamously that film not only went over-budget and over schedule, but its subject matter sparked a major feud with newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst, who used his massive media influence to try and cripple the film's distribution. Kane was heralded as a major cinematic achievement but underwhelmed at the box office, and RKO management no longer trusted Welles with final cut.
For his second film Welles chose to adapt Booth Tarkington's Pulitzer-winning novel The Magnificent Ambersons, a story chronicling the fall of a wealthy family amid the early period of American industrialization. As with Kane, the film went over-budget, further straining Welles' relationship with the studio. Making matters worse, after filming wrapped, Welles' agreed to make a documentary in Brazil for Nelson Rockefeller, thus diverting his attention away from the hands-on editing process. Welles' rough cut polled poorly with test audiences, and RKO savagely trimmed forty minutes from its running time and shot a whole new ending, one with a much more hopeful outcome (which ironically hewed closer to the novel's ending but didn't at all fit the film's dark tone). The new edit not only muddied the film's storytelling but even didn't help its box office; the film failed to recoup its $1 million-plus price tag. It did however earn four Oscar nominations and has gone on to earn a strong reputation.
But is the film any good? Well, yes, it's both a very well-made, visually fascinating film, and a frustrating reminder of what might have been, had Welles been physically present to properly fight for it, and had the studio left it alone.
The performances are all very strong. Frequent Welles collaborator Joseph Cotten stars as Eugene Morgan, an old friend of the Ambersons and an emerging automobile inventor whose modern gadgets symbolize the early 20th century modernization threatening the family fortune. Thanks to new changes in technology and industry, suddenly coming from old money is no longer enough to secure the Ambersons' future. Tim Holt plays the Ambersons' youngest scion George, a spoiled brat of a young man who fancies Morgan's daughter Lucy (Anne Baxter) but despises Morgan himself more; when Morgan begins courting George's mother Isabel after her husband's death, George stands in the way and inadvertently dooms the Ambersons to financial peril. The standout performance though is from another Welles repertory player, Agnes Moorehead, as George's aunt Fanny. Fanny has long carried a torch for Morgan but knows he's only ever loved her sister-in-law, and her relationship with George has always been contentious. When things go south for the family, Fanny and George are forced to take desperate measures to survive. Moorehead earned a Best Supporting Actress nod, rightfully so.
Replacing the iconic Gregg Toland behind the camera for this film was Stanley Cortez, who like Toland made use of intense light and shadows to give the Amberson mansion a gothic, Expressionist feel. Studio cuts unfortunately robbed the film of some of its extended single-take photography (including one four-minute shot reduced to 50 seconds or so), but some examples still remain and are stunning. The mansion itself was a massive, multi-level set built like a real house, but with removeable walls to aid the fluid cinematography. As with most of Welles' films, this one is gorgeous to look at.
Watching Ambersons now I can't help feeling as though I'm watching an unfinished work. The 131-minute rough cut is considered lost for all time, as RKO shortsightedly destroyed the excised footage, and a print sent to Welles in Brazil has yet to surface. I truly wish this film could get the Touch of Evil treatment, as there's enough great stuff here to warrant a full restoration.
There is currently an AI-assisted endeavor underway to reconstruct the lost footage, by an Amazon-financed company called Showrunner. While I'm generally against the use of AI in any artistic capacity and certainly oppose the idea that it could ever supplant actual human creativity, I'm quite interested to see how this project turns out. If it's used purely for academic purposes and put out for free I'd love to see this film presented as Welles intended. Ambersons would no doubt have been a highlight of his remarkable filmography in its original form.
As it stands though, it's still a very engaging film whose third act unfortunately feels rushed and then takes a dramatic right turn to ensure a happier ending.
I give Ambersons ***1/2 out of ****.
No comments:
Post a Comment