I can't speak to Orson Welles personal motivations, but after having watched both the movies he directed and the movies he starred in, it seems like he was just unnaturally gifted. I come away especially impressed with his acting. It seems like he could act in his sleep. And I mean that. Some movies, it seems like he was barely trying and it legitimately did not matter, he was still the most compelling part of a movie.
The popular perception of Welles was that he was a wunderkind who ultimately blew his potential by being unreliable and never quite having enough money to make his projects happen. A lot of his older movies were reevaluated later and praised as classics, but they weren't at the time.
Citizen Kane, immediately a flop, was received as the best movie of all time within two decades. And every movie he made after Kane was compared to Kane, and the reception of the vast majority of his movies suffered for it. Modern critics have responded to the mostly lukewarm receptions of the time by praising some of his movies as classics.
I compared Orson Welles to another artist at the top of his game in one of my Welles marathon posts, and I'll do it again here. But fair warning: if you're not a fan of hip hop, you might find this jarring and not understand my comparison.
Orson Welles is Nas. I can already hear you groaning. Both were impossibly young prodigies who produced their best work first. Nas was 17 and 18 when he recorded Ilmmatic. Welles was 25 when he did Citizen Kane. Both have their subsequent works compared to their first work, which caused their later works to be under-appreciated for their time. Later appraisal of those works have elevated those works to masterpieces.
It's not a perfect comparison. Illmatic was nearly immediately recognized as the best while Citizen Kane was not. Nas has not had the equivalent of Welles struggling to make movies after Citizen Kane, or anything close to it. And to say the least, hip hop did not evolve like film did, making Illmatic sound boring in comparison (I don't find Citizen Kane boring, but it's a popular criticism nowadays)
In any case, the movies that more or less hold up from Welles catalogue are The Magnificent Ambersons, made immediately after Citizen Kane; The Stranger, made immediately after World War II, The Trial, and Chimes at Midnight. And Citizen Kane of course. Which is why I think modern critics overcompensate by calling too many of Welles movies classics.
But I'm aware my opinion of Touch of Evil is not with the hivemind. I almost can't speak to either Macbeth or Othello, where I completely acknowledge my opinion of both is influenced by the fact that I find Shakespeare movies difficult to like. Didn't stop me from liking Chimes at Midnight. And I stand by the fact that Othello does not stand the test of time, thanks to shoddy sound and what certain critics call "bronzeface" which still leaves me with a queasy stomach watching.
Both The Lady from Shanghai and Touch of Evil, to me, suffer from style over subtance. Really cool shots, story makes no sense. Even reviews, such as Roger Ebert, who love the movie, say that the story makes no sense. And his only truly bad film that he directed was Confidential Report, or Mr. Arkadin, which mainly suffers from some truly bad acting from the lead (not Welles.)
And like I said, as strange as it may sound, I come away most impressed by his acting. Well most impressed isn't how I would define it. Most surprised maybe. A lot of acting from around his time period simply doesn't hold up. And no matter the movie surrounding him, he is always good, even when he's seemingly not on his 'A' game.
I will continue with my director marathon in 2021. I'm going to leave my next director in suspense, but just know, I already know who I'm covering. It may be a bit before I start though. I like to get a head start on the posts before I actually release to them to the public, because I may very well be unable to watch the movies at a two-a-week pace every week and a head start eases that burden.
But in the meantime, I am going to be posting my favorite posts of 2020 next week on my twitter. That will be followed with a ranking of my favorite movies of 2019, yes 2019. Took me a long time to get through that list, and I'm probably going to post my favorite movies of 2020 pretty late in 2021 too (though ideally before December). Then it's the week of my favorite shows of 2020. And then, well, then I'll probably figure some random movies I want to write about until I have a few marathon posts written and then I'll start the marathon.
I'm excited, and I hope you'll like my next director pick.
Note: If you're interested in reading my thoughts on specific Welles movies, I have a link inserted onto the names of the movies mentioned above. So just click the movie and it should take you to a new page. And of the movies not mentioned above, I'll post the rest below.
A Man for All Seasons, Waterloo, and Catch 22 were all covered in one post here.
No comments:
Post a Comment