Movie Review: The Other Side of the Wind

The Other Side of the Wind **** ½ / *****

Directed by: Orson Welles.

Written by: Oja Kodar & Orson Welles.

Starring: John Huston (Jake Hannaford), Robert Random (John Dale), Peter Bogdanovich (Brooks Otterlake), Susan Strasberg (Julie Rich), Oja Kodar (Actress), Joseph McBride (Pister), Lilli Palmer (Zarah Valeska), Edmond O'Brien (Pat Mullins), Mercedes McCambridge (Maggie Noonan), Cameron Mitchell (Zimmer), Paul Stewart (Matt Costello), Peter Jason (Grover), Tonio Selwart (The Baron), Alan Grossman (Charles Higgam), Geoffrey Land (Max David), Norman Foster (Billy Boyle), Dennis Hopper (Dennis Hopper), Gregory Sierra (Jack Simon), Benny Rubin (Abe Vogel), Dan Tobin (Dr. Burroughs), George Jessel (Himself), Richard Wilson (Dick), Claude Chabrol (Himself), Stéphane Audran (Herself), Henry Jaglom (Himself), Paul Mazursky (Paul).

 

For decades now, Orson Welles’ The Other Side of the Wind has been one of the most infamous “unfinished” films in history – something Welles knew a lot about, since his filmography is riddled with incomplete, unfinished or abandoned projects, many of which exist in some sort of rough form or clips or, well, something else. The Other Side of the Wind is perhaps alone among them though in that at least all the footage existed, there was a partially edited version of the film by Welles himself, and a lot of notes about what he wanted the film to be. And yet, the film has languished in a vault since before Welles’ death in 1985 – held hostage by various legal reasons. Now, at long last, the film exists – and whether it resembles whatever film Welles wanted to make is unknown and unknowable – I think everyone involved should be commended for trying to stick with Welles’ vision for the film, but the mere fact that Welles shot the film over a six-year period – from 1970 to 1976 – makes you wonder if Welles himself had any real idea for what the movie should be. It is also clear from watching the film, that it is a film of great contradictions – a film in love with cinema, that also hates cinema, and a film that comes from a place of deep self-loathing from Welles. He insisted the film wasn’t autobiographical – but no one believed him, nor should they. This is clearly a film about Welles – something that could only have been clearer had John Huston turned down the lead role, because Welles himself admitted that had Huston done that, he would have to play the lead role himself. I’m torn about whether this would have been good or bad for the final film – because on one hand, Huston is wonderful here, and on the other, I would have loved to see Welles himself play the role.

 

So what, precisely, is The Other Side of the Wind? One thing it isn’t, is like anything else Welles had directed before. Welles very clearly was paying attention to how all those younger filmmakers in the late 1960s – and on through the 1970s – had changed cinema, and also had some contradictory thoughts on it. On the surface, the film is split in two – cutting between the 70^th birthday party of the great Jake Hannaford, a towering film director, whose films everyone loved and who is still a legend – but now, has been put out to pasture, not forgotten by the industry really, but no one is paying attention to what he wants to make anymore. He is broke, and working on a new movie – also called The Other Side of the Wind – which is the other part of the movie. The film within the film we see is clearly a take on European art house cinema at the time – mostly clearly an Antonioni film (Zabriskie Point most specifically), but as with everything else in the film, it’s impossible to tell whether Welles hates Antonioni, or loves him – probably both. The visuals in that film within the film are slick, and colorful – it’s almost dialogue free, and contains sexually that borders on the explicit – something Welles had never, ever come close to before. It contrasts with the what takes place at Hannaford’s party, which is presumably a bunch of footage from the various chroniclers and paparazzi at the party – almost all of it handheld, different film stocks, some black and white, some color, all spliced together to tell the story of this bitter, old man, who spits poison at almost everyone around him. Welles fills the film with characters based on then contemporary figures in the film industry – the Pauline Kael stand-in played by Susan Strasberg is obvious, as is the Peter Bogdanovich stand-in, but in that case it may have something to do with the fact that Bogdanovich is playing the character himself.

 

This is clearly a bitter film – an angry film – and Welles had plenty of reason to be angry by this point in his career. He had made Citizen Kane (1941) as his debut, and it was oft-cited at the time as the best film ever made (it still is) – and yet, every directorial effort he had made since Kane involved some sort of sacrifice or compromise – forced studio edits, abandoned projects, etc. Welles was a genius at many times – but playing the Hollywood game wasn’t one of them. Perhaps the casting of Huston was perfect for the film, because Huston was the opposite. Huston was in many ways a genius filmmaker himself – but he was able to bend, but not break, in his dealings with the studios – able to get his films made, even if he also made some films that weren’t exactly stellar. It adds another layer of anger to the film.

 

The Other Side of the Wind is full of contradictions – but thrillingly so. Neither of the film inside The Other Side of the Wind look anything like anything Welles had done before. When you consider how he film and edited the party scenes, you realize that Welles was years ahead of what anyone else was even thinking at that time in terms of that sort of shooting. The scenes in the movie within the movie are daring, beautiful and erotic. Already one of those sequences – where Oja Kodar, credited as Welles’ co-writer on the film, and was also his girlfriend at the time, has sex with the leading man, John Dale (Robert Random) – who in the real life of the film, Hannaford may be obsessed with erotically himself (there is A LOT going on in the film) in a car. That sequences, all wordless, goes on minute after minute, and is erotic, and also makes you very uncomfortable watching – at the same time. I’m not sure even Antonioni could have pulled that sequence off at the height of his powers.

 

Most of the time, when some long lost work by a famous artist is rediscovered and released to the world, it doesn’t really change the way we view that artist. Sadly, sometimes, there is a reason the work was long lost. Here, I’m not sure if The Other Side of the Wind changes the way we will view Welles in future generations – but it does confirm that even to the end, he was ahead of the curve in many ways. Perhaps Welles never wanted to finish the movie – perhaps, had he actually finished it, it would not look anything like this current version. But this version is one that will be discussed and analyzed and dissected for years to come.