Me and Orson Welles

This is the first Linklater directed film I’ve seen, and I must say I enjoyed it through and through probably because of Christian McKay’s Orson Welles who managed to overcome the mostly weak and terminally cute acting of nevertheless very likeable Zac Efron’s Richard Samuels. What an ego Welles had, and a nasty difficult one at that, but he had genius and boy could he put together a show for all time, one that stared fascism in the face with its very look and force. Great irony there, that maybe it takes one to know one. Anyway, it was great seeing Welles and Houseman playing off of each other, along with the budding actors George Coulouris, Norman Lloyd and Joseph Cotten learning the craft and coming to the fore. The character of Coulouris, in fact, playing Antony to Welles’ Brutus, made a nice brilliant and human contrast to Welles’ egoistic bombast; and it was evident that the two needed each other in a beautiful way that made great art, going on to make Citizen Kane together. And in the end, the film itself was a showcase of a “show” in the best old Hollywood tradition, where everyone comes out OK and optimistic for the life of their dreams in spite of all the ups and downs of a very great and flawed ego at play. Highly recommended for a nostalgic or historical run through a fine rehearsal of “history” on so many levels: Shakespeare’s and Plutarch’s ancient Rome, the looming threat of fascism on the world stage of the 1930’s, and the Mercury Theater of actors led by a great visionary who clearly had the virtues of his flaws and the flaws of his virtues and never bowed to any force but that vision which turned to art somehow makes it all seem worthwhile. Welles obviously understood that “lean and hungry look” to the bone.

Coulouris and Welles:

I really, really wanted to like this. I’ve always been fascinated by the genius of Orson Welles. Unfortunately it was a swing and miss for me. McKay was almost eerie in his portrayal, nailing Welles all the way down to the inflections of his voice. For that alone the film was worth seeing. But, Zac Efron’s Richard Samuels, as jonquil points out, was weak and ineffective. It didn’t help that he was provided with a simply awful script. A goodly portion of the dialogue was forced and lines that I assume were meant to be clever fell flat. Claire Danes couldn’t save the material either, though she was nice to look at, as usual. It’s a shame the movie didn’t have a better script because the story is terrific. James Tupper as Joseph Cotton was good, too. A dead ringer. But all the film made me want to do was take The Third Man down off my shelf and watch it again to see the originals in all their glory. I think, in fact, I will do just that.

Yeah, it makes me want to see some Orson Welles’ films again, too.

Have you seen “Cradle Will Rock”? The whole ambience and pointed anti-fascism of Welles’ Caesar reminded me so much of that movie.

Sorry to say I’ve never seen it, but I’m adding it to my queue.

Great, I hope you’ll post on it after you’ve seen it. I really liked it when I first saw it, and I’ll watch it again as well.