The Other Side of the Wind (2018) Reviews

• The last film by Orson Welles, finally upon us

  PotassiumMan2018-09-30

  I had the privilege of seeing this at the New York Film Festival. A sense of awe descended upon the audience as soon as the opening credits began. The fact that this film was finally completed and released is a triumph in and of itself. Orson Welles' final film is chaotic and unwieldy, but also very haunting and melancholy. The soundtrack is amazing. There is frankly a sliver of a plot. An aging director attempts to make a comeback as Hollywood has drifted away from his era as he throws a big birthday party in which journalists, critics, admirers and some industry professionals join to celebrate. It soon becomes apparent that reporters are there to ascertain information about more than his work. His new film that is in the works is shown. We get to see an unfinished film within a film that is titled "The Other Side of the Wind", one that is sexually explicit. The late John Huston portrays Jake Hannaford, the director whose approach to filmmaking has earned him a great following and his relationships with the actors he works with makes him a lightning rod of controversy. Huston's sepulchral voice and domineering presence make him flawless in the role as Hannaford. Peter Bogdanovich is well utilized as a younger, successful director whom Hannaford has taken under his wing but whom now Hannaford consults on how to better reach audiences of the new era. This film is not flawless. The experience of seeing this at long last outweighs its drawbacks. There are some parts of this film that drag a bit. But there are also many, many scenes that are just astounding and I'm so happy they were finally brought to the big screen. Although this film is inconsistent in its narrative thrust, it returns very quickly to its busy, slightly manic state. I don't know if Welles deliberately left this unfinished. What I can say is that the editing is superb and provides us with a film that is a lasting testament to Welles and his legacy as a filmmaker. Highly recommended.

  More

• An Orson Welles film that isn't "an Orson Welles film"

  thetick-658482019-02-03

  Here it is, if anybody wants to see it. Were you compelled by the character study of Citizen Kane? Were you thrilled by Touch of Evil? Then get ready for something unlike any of those or unlike anything. This is the mockumentary before Reiner or Guest, the improvisational dramedy before Apatow. The entire point of this movie is that there's no point to this movie. Here is Orson Welles's most talked about movie about talking about a movie. His film about a film within a film. Orson Welles deliberately subverts Orson Welles to make an art film contained within an art film making fun of art films. John Huston plays John Huston playing Orson Welles as Orson Welles. Peter Bogdanovich plays himself as his own ripoff. There's a party celebrating a celebrated filmmaker making a film making fun of filmmakers. Nothing happens. So much happens. We learn everything about a legendary director about whom we learn nothing. This film is a glimpse into the psyche of a filmmaker who wants to make films but has no idea how to keep making films. He wants to be commercially successful without compromising his integrity. He wants to make personal films for an impersonal audience. He wants to make something sexy despite being prudish. This movie isn't really for anyone; this movie is really for everyone. It wasn't until the end of his life that Orson Welles realized the most important story he needed to tell was his own. It's a story whose only concern is that it was told, whether or not you like it. So watch it. Or don't. This movie doesn't care either way. And if this review left you feeling confused, then I gave you an accurate impression of the film.

  More

• film nerds unite!

  ferguson-62018-11-01

  Greetings again from the darkness. Film nerds unite! Most of us who (proudly) wear that label have known that filmmaker Orson Welles left a few unfinished projects when he died in 1985. The most famous - or infamous - of these was THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND. It was to be the comeback film for Mr. Welles, who had slipped from the artistic throne with his run of TV projects, shorts, and unsuccessful features during the 1960's. Known as a perfectionist, and as someone more dedicated to the filmmaking part more than the "finishing" part, Welles filmed scenes for the movie from 1970-1976, and then picked it back up in the early 1980's to begin the editing process ... a process he never finished. Best known for his all-time classics CITIZEN KANE (1941) and TOUCH OF EVIL (1958), Welles left mountains of copious production notes, and almost 100 hours of footage in multiple formats, and in both color and black and white stock, on this project that, even today, might best be described as experimental. Over the past 30 years there have been numerous attempts to raise the money required to finish the film, but all fell short until this one spearheaded by Peter Bogdanovich and Beatrice Welles (Orson's daughter). In what we can only interpret as semi-autobiographical, what we see on screen is the making of a documentary on a legendary director's comeback film (his poke at artsy filmmakers). Clips of the unfinished film are shown throughout, while an industry party plays out, and numerous documentary filmmakers capture the scene from various angles with their always-present cameras. Got that? Don't worry, it takes at least a few minutes as a viewer to get the rhythm and layers of what's unfolding before our eyes. John Huston (himself an industry legend with 2 Oscars and 15 nominations) plays director Jake Hannaford, who is walking the fine line between Hollywood power and has-been. It's his 70th birthday party, and Hannaford is compared to Hemingway (a description that better fit Huston than Welles), silently endures insinuations of his closeted homosexuality, desperately seeks funding to finish his film, and skulks around his own party winding through the hangers-on and those waiting for the final curtain. Hannaford's artsy film within a film, at least the clips we see, feature an inordinate amount of nudity from the leading lady (played by Welles 4th wife and the film's co-writer Oja Kodar), and some ultra-coolness from the lead actor John Dale (played by Robert Random). Part of Hannaford's desperation (both professional and persona) stems from a James Dean-type Dale walking off the set mid-picture. Guests at the party include Peter Bogdanovich as director Brooks Otterlake, a young director once mentored by Hannaford. It's an example of the student becoming the teacher. Susan Strasberg (daughter of famed acting coach Lee Strasberg) plays film critic Juliet Riche, a thinly-veiled portrait of Welles nemesis Pauline Kael. Other familiar faces in the cast include: Lilli Palmer, Mercedes McCambridge (Oscar winner), Edmond O'Brien (Oscar winner), Cameron Mitchell, Paul Stewart (from CITIZEN KANE), Tonio Selwart, Geoffrey Land, Norman Foster, Dennis Hopper (2 Oscar noms), Claude Chabrol, Stafford Repp (Sgt O'Hara from "Batman" series), plus Cameron Crowe (Oscar winner), William Katt, Frank Marshall (5 Oscar noms), Rich Little, Leslie Moonves (recently fired in disgrace CBS President), and Paul Mazursky (5 Oscar noms). It's fascinating to see so many we recognize from more than 40 years ago. Of course, it's Huston, with his face that's made for black and white film, who is the dominating figure (his scenes were filmed prior to his work on CHINATOWN). It's easily viewed as a satire on the film industry, and it's quite a fun, messy-by-design, now retro look at a fragile industry - and the even more fragile people who make movies. Welles' love/hate relationship with the industry takes on an art form. He shows what's good and what's deplorable. Is it an experimental movie commenting on the post-studio world of independent filmmaking, or is it an iconic filmmaker, glory days behind him, in the midst of self-reflection. Perhaps it's both. In addition to Welles' early editing efforts, Oscar winning editor Bob Murawski (THE HURT LOCKER) was brought in to finish up what can now be described as a master class in film editing. It's a wild ride for us film nerds. Are you ready to join us?

  More

• Much More 'F For Fake' than 'Citizen Kane'

  Fiahm2018-11-02

  Look, I was salivating at the thought of seeing this as much as anyone. The idea that there was a final fully shot movie by Orson Welles, that no-one had ever seen, hanging around in film cans for over 30 years is just wonderful. And the title is wonderful too. As long as this wonderful dream *remained* a dream, it could be anything you wanted: you could imagine the most beautiful, mysterious, moving work of art ever. It could be - and could always remain - perfect. But judgment day has marched along and The Other Side Of The Wind has finally been exposed to the inevitable harsh light of day, to scrutiny and evisceration. And the objective results are really not all that pretty. The final product is a shoddy, sloppy, self-indulgent and unattractive 70s student film, with badly staged, badly dubbed and badly acted performances all round, everyone looking rushed and amateurish, like they grabbed 5 minutes of people's time in between shooting a proper film. Only John Huston looks like he's actually IN his role, and even then the way he is filmed diminishes any potentially powerful and memorable moments amidst all the chaos, working continually against the work as a whole. In my dream ALL the film would have looked like the film *within* the film, which are the only moments of beauty, the only moments that actually feel like a real movie anyone would want to go see. Robert Random and Oja Kodar both look very beautiful and otherworldly. As someone in the film says, the magic picture box loves them. I'm very thankful for all the work that went into completing this thing, it has been an amazing and unprecedented and inspirational phenomenon, seeing so many people from all walks of life doing what they could to to make it a reality. But the sad fact is that Orson Welles only directed one truly great film. And this is most decidedly not it.

  More

• Not your father's Orson Welles movie

  pierceborchardt2018-11-13

  This is not a movie for everyone. Orson Welles knows exactly who will enjoy this movie. Those who will enjoy this movie are exactly who Orson Welles wants to connect with, people like him, those who truly love Cinema. The art of this movie is evident. It is wholly original in its progression and cinematography. It captures the essience and mind of surrealist directors especially in the 1970s beautifully. It's a virtual time capsule of a movie. It is unintentionally a period piece, love letter to an era now long dead. Yet, this movie is very intentionally trying to put off a chaotic, disorderly, and untidy attitude. It does so very pleasingly. I love this movie. It is pure cinema.

  More