Tedfoldol
everything you have heard about this movie is true.
Portia Hilton
Blistering performances.
Mathilde the Guild
Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.
Robert Nowall
There's a book just out---"Orson Welles's Last Movie: The Making of 'The Other Side of the Wind,'" by Josh Kapp. This tells the saga of the movie, and Welles, likely as well as anyone can. It's thorough and detailed and interesting, through the shoot and the tangled affairs that have so far prevented its release.But it doesn't mean we'll ever see the movie Welles intended. Even if we get a release of some of it, how could anybody cutting and editing it now be absolutely sure that Welles would have done it that way? Probably it'd look something like Welles intended...but we could never be sure.All I've ever seen of it were the clips that were shown in the broadcast AFI tribute to Welles---the clips Welles allowed to be shown. They looked interesting then; as I recall them they still look interesting. If a release version comes along, some version, will it be worth a look? Sure. Will it represent the movie if Welles had finished it? Maybe...maybe not. But it'd be worth a look.
wuppins
parkerr86302 is correct about Pat McMahon (from Arizona's fabled WALLACE AND LADMO SHOW) having bit parts in the film.I know. I was in the shoot too.I was in three scenes at the Carefree house where the b-day party was filmed. One at the party, one on the roof of the garage with McMahon, and one where the director pulled me aside to shoot a very strange scene on the rocks in the backyard over the pool.I had to arrange a set of dummies on the rocks, look over at where Cameron Mitchell was to stand, and say "OK, Zimmie?" I wonder if they will keep my scene in when the film is released. Should be hoot if it is.
parkerr86302
In his Arizona-published book, THANKS FOR TUNING IN, author Richard Ruelas contends that performers Bill Thompson and Pat McMahon (from Arizona's fabled WALLACE AND LADMO SHOW) have bit parts in the film. Welles had shot his footage in Phoenix. IMDb may want to add them to the cast list.The legal disputes involving Welles' daughter are sad. She seems to be one of those people who wants to own something no one else has or has access to. I've lost hope the issue will ever be resolved, and we likely will never see the footage. I hope I'm wrong. Not only for fans of Orson Welles, but even for fans of John Huston, who was always great in his acting appearances.Huston has an interesting account of the shooting in his 1979 memoirs, AN OPEN BOOK.
tedg
This last, lost film of Orson Welles may never be seen. It may remain as something that we imagine, and so be ever so much better than it probably is. If you haven't seen "F is for Fake," see it and be prepared for some of the most complex plotting and layered editing you will ever see. Yes, I mean ever.This project was worked on in bits and pieces for years. We know a lot about it, how radical it was to be. How seriously Welles took it as a project. We know Oliver Stone thinks it too "experimental."Supposedly, 50 minutes exists in edited form, edited by Welles. Quite apart from the difficulties of assembling the thing (a near impossibility it seems) there are legal problems that forbid it out of hand.But I have seen two scenes from it, supposedly shown by Welles at an AFI tribute, I think for John Huston who is in the thing.One scene is Huston and the obnoxious Bogdonavich surrounded by reporters and being questioned by Oja Kodar, his fake mistress from "fake." It is truly magnificent. A few minutes of tease. The surrounding reporters have dozens of cameras, including some movie cameras. The cuts we see are from those cameras, using all sorts of stock.The second scene is a lovemaking in the front seat of a car. Some nudity. Some also marvelous editing but not so striking, because I think this sequence was shot by Gary Graver and if you have the time to survey his nudie and X-rated movies, you'll see a similar editing style when things get hot.This may be the most interesting movie we never see.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
