Citizen Kane in Retrospect

[CHATTER] WE'RE EXTREMELY FORTUNATE TO GATHER ONCE AGAIN A VERY DISTINGUISHED PANEL. A SMALL PANEL, BUT NO LESS DISTINGUISHED FOR IT, TO DISCUSS THIS FAMED MOVIE. I'M PLEASED, VERY PLEASED TO WELCOME MY COLLEAGUE AND FRIEND LEO BRAUDY, A SUPERB SCHOLAR OF AMERICAN POPULAR CULTURE, LITERATURE, BRITISH CULTURE AND LITERATURE, JUST AN ALL-AROUND WONDERFUL AND PROVOCATIVE THINKER AND AN EXTRAORDINARILY DECENT COLLEAGUE AS WELL. I'M GRATEFUL TO LEO FOR JOINING US HERE. AS WELL, THE NOTED AND ESTEEMED FILM HISTORIAN DAVID THOMSON. THESE TWO GENTLEMEN NOT ONLY KNOW ONE ANOTHER, BUT THEY CERTAINLY KNOW THIS FILM. AND WE'VE ASKED THEM TO DISCUSS THIS FILM IN A KIND OF RETROSPECTIVE VIEW, AND WE'VE GIVEN THEM A GREAT DEAL OF LATITUDE, AS IS APPROPRIATE, TO GIVE FULL CREDENCE AND FULL EXPANSION TO THEIR OWN EXPERTISE. SO WE'VE ASKED THEM TO CHAT ABOUT THIS MOVIE. I'M GOING TO START WITH THIS BRIEF CLIP, AND THEN FOLLOWING THEIR DISCUSSION WITH ONE ANOTHER, WE WILL, IN KEEPING WITH OUR PRACTICE HERE THIS WEEKEND, DRAW THE AUDIENCE IN AS WELL FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. SO WITH THAT, PLEASE JOIN ME IN WELCOMING LEO BRAUDY AND DAVID THOMSON. [APPLAUSE] WALL STREET BACKS COPPER SWINDLE! COPPER ROBBERS INDICTED! GALLEONS OF SPAIN OFF JERSEY COAST! IS THAT REALLY YOUR IDEA OF HOW TO RUN A NEWSPAPER? I DON'T KNOW HOW TO RUN A NEWSPAPER, MR. THATCHER. I JUST TRY EVERYTHING I CAN THINK OF. CHARLES, YOU KNOW PERFECTLY WELL THERE'S NOT THE SLIGHTEST PROOF OF THIS--ARMADAS OFF THE JERSEY COAST? HELLO, MR. BERNSTEIN. EXCUSE ME, MR. KANE-- CAN YOU PROVE IT ISN'T? THIS JUST CAME IN. MR. BERNSTEIN, I'D LIKE YOU TO MEET MR. THATCHER. I'LL JUST BORROW ANOTHER CIGAR. HOW DO YOU DO, MR. THATCHER? LELAND? THATCHER, MY EX-GUARDIAN. WE HAVE NO SECRETS FROM OUR READERS, MR. BERNSTEIN. MR. THATCHER IS ONE OF OUR MOST DEVOTED READERS. HE KNOWS WHAT'S WRONG WITH EVERY COPY OF THE "INQUIRER" SINCE I TOOK OVER. READ THE CABLE. "GIRLS DELIGHTFUL IN CUBA, STOP. COULD SEND YOU PROSE POEMS ABOUT SCENERY BUT DON'T FEEL RIGHT SPENDING YOUR MONEY, STOP. THERE IS NO WAR IN CUBA. SIGNED, WHEELER." ANY ANSWER? YES. DEAR, WHEELER, YOU PROVIDE THE PROSE POEMS, I'LL PROVIDE THE WAR. THAT'S FINE, MR. KANE. YES, I RATHER LIKE IT MYSELF. SEND IT RIGHT AWAY. RIGHT AWAY. CHARLES, I CAME TO SEE YOU ABOUT THIS CAMPAIGN OF YOURS. THE "INQUIRER'S" CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE PUBLIC TRANSIT COMPANY. MR. THATCHER, DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING WE COULD USE AGAINST THEM? >> STILL THE COLLEGE BOY, AREN'T YOU? OH, NO, MR. THATCHER. I WAS EXPELLED FROM COLLEGE. A LOT OF COLLEGES. YOU REMEMBER. I REMEMBER. CHARLES, I THINK I SHOULD REMIND YOU OF A FACT THAT YOU SEEM TO HAVE FORGOTTEN. YES? THAT YOU ARE, YOURSELF, ONE OF THE LARGEST INDIVIDUAL STOCKHOLDERS IN THE PUBLIC TRANSIT COMPANY! THE TROUBLE IS, YOU DON'T REALIZE YOU'RE TALKING TO TWO PEOPLE. AS CHARLES FOSTER KANE, WHO OWNS 82,364 SHARES OF PUBLIC TRANSIT--PREFERRED-- YOU SEE, I DO HAVE A GENERAL IDEA OF MY HOLDINGS--I SYMPATHIZE WITH YOU. CHARLES FOSTER KANE IS A SCOUNDREL, HIS PAPER SHOULD BE RUN OUT OF TOWN. A COMMITTEE SHOULD BE FORMED TO BOYCOTT HIM. YOU MAY, IF YOU CAN FORM SUCH A COMMITTEE, PUT ME DOWN FOR A CONTRIBUTION OF $1,000. MY TIME IS TOO VALUABLE FOR ME TO BE WASTING-- ON THE OTHER HAND, I AM THE PUBLISHER OF THE "INQUIRER." AS SUCH, IT'S MY DUTY--AND I'LL LET YOU IN ON A LITTLE SECRET. IT'S ALSO MY PLEASURE TO SEE TO IT THAT DECENT, HARD-WORKING PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY AREN'T ROBBED BLIND BY A PACK OF MONEY-MAD PIRATES JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T ANYBODY TO LOOK AFTER THEIR INTERESTS! I'LL LET YOU IN ON ANOTHER LITTLE SECRET, MR. THATCHER. I THINK I'M THE MAN TO DO IT. YOU SEE, I HAVE MONEY AND PROPERTY. IF I DON'T LOOK AFTER THE INTERESTS OF THE UNDERPRIVILEGED, MAYBE SOMEBODY ELSE WILL. MAYBE SOMEBODY WITHOUT ANY MONEY OR PROPERTY-- YES, YES, YES-- AND THAT WOULD BE TOO BAD. MONEY AND PROPERTY. WELL, I HAPPENED TO SEE YOUR FINANCIAL STATEMENT TODAY, CHARLES. OH, DID YOU? TELL ME, HONESTLY, MY BOY, DON'T YOU THINK IT'S RATHER UNWISE TO CONTINUE THIS PHILANTHROPIC ENTERPRISE, THIS "INQUIRER," THAT'S COSTING YOU A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR? YOU'RE RIGHT, MR. THATCHER. I DID LOSE A MILLION DOLLARS LAST YEAR. I EXPECT TO LOSE A MILLION DOLLARS THIS YEAR. I EXPECT TO LOSE A MILLION DOLLARS NEXT YEAR. YOU KNOW, MR. THATCHER, AT THE RATE OF A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR, I'LL HAVE TO CLOSE THIS PLACE IN... 60 YEARS. [MUSIC PLAYING] WE WANTED TO SHOW THAT CLIP, CERTAINLY IN TERMS OF THE SUBJECT, GOING BACK A LITTLE BIT. THE SUBJECT OF THE CONFERENCE, THE IDEA OF THE MOGUL, THE IDEA OF THE MONEYMAN. BUT ALSO, I THINK THIS CLIP REMINDS US AS WELL OF SOMETHING ABOUT "KANE" THAT'S OFTEN FORGOTTEN, THAT IS, THE COMIC SIDE OF "KANE," THE SNAPPY DIALOGUE, THE KIND OF ARCHNESS THERE, AND ALSO THE IDEALISM OF THE FIGURE OF KANE WHEN HE CERTAINLY, WHEN HE STARTS OUT IN THE BUSINESS. SO I THOUGHT THAT, DAVID AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW WE MIGHT START TODAY, OUR CONVERSATION, AND ONE THING JUST IN TERMS OF WHAT WE HAVE HEARD ALREADY IN THE COURSE OF THE CONFERENCE, IS TO ASK THE QUESTION WHETHER "KANE" IS REALLY THE BEGINNING OF WHAT COMES LATER, THIS GREAT INNOVATION THAT CHANGES MOVIE-MAKING, OR IS IT THE GRAND FINALE OF WHAT HAD HAPPENED ALREADY THERE. WHAT'S YOUR--WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT, DAVID? WELL, IT'S BOTH. AND MORE THAN THAT, EVEN, I THINK, BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT AS TIME GOES BY, AND WE NOW LIVE WITH A GENERATION OF INDEPENDENT FILMMAKERS, AND WE'RE VERY PLEASED TO HAVE INDEPENDENT FILMMAKERS. AND WE LOOK BACK AND WE SEE, WELL, OF COURSE ORSON WELLES WAS AN INDEPENDENT FILMMAKER. AND HE DIDN'T CALL HIMSELF THAT, BUT--IN OTHER WORDS, WELLES FORESAW A GREAT DEAL OF FILM HISTORY, JUST AS I THINK HE INTUITIVELY KNEW A GREAT DEAL ABOUT THE PAST. HE CLEARLY, AT THIS TIME IN HIS CAREER, HE KNEW MORE ABOUT THEATER. AND I THINK THAT PROBABLY HE'D BEEN MORE INFLUENCED BY PHOTOGRAPHS HE HAD SEEN OF GERMAN PLAYS IN THE 1920s THAN GERMAN MOVIES. THERE WAS A REFERENCE BEFORE LUNCH TO THE WHOLE SORT OF "CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI" TYPE OF STYLE. VERY, VERY ALIEN TO AMERICAN AUDIENCES WITH THEIR SENSE OF REALISM, BUT INCREASINGLY, IN THE HISTORY OF FILM, PLAYS A VERY BIG PART. AND BY THE TIME OF FILM NOIR, HAS BECOME NEARLY AN ORTHODOXY. AND WELLES KNEW HIS THEATER, HIS GERMAN THEATER. HE'D SEEN--WE DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW MANY MOVIES ORSON WELLES HAD SEEN... IN PART, I THINK, BECAUSE ORSON WELLES TOLD SO MANY STORIES ABOUT HIMSELF AND WHAT HE HAD DONE, THAT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO FIT THEM ALL TOGETHER IN WHAT HERE WAS ABOUT 23 1/2 YEARS. YOU KNOW, HE IS SUCH A MERCURIAL FIGURE, AND HE'S VERY DIFFICULT TO PIN DOWN, BUT-- THE OTHER THING IS, OF COURSE, THIS IS--THIS IS ALL OF A SUDDEN 12 OR SO YEARS AFTER SOUND--IT'S THE IMPACT OF RADIO ON FILMS. IT'S AS IF--IF ONE'S EARS WERE OPENED. WE ALL TALK ABOUT HOW "KANE" TAUGHT PEOPLE TO SEE FILMS IN A DIFFERENT WAY. BUT, GOD, IT TAUGHT THEM TO LISTEN, TOO. OVERLAPPING DIALOGUE IN THAT SCENE WE JUST SAW. AND JUST--SOUND EFFECTS IN THE MOST REMARKABLE WAY. WELL, THAT'S PART OF THAT EXPRESSIONIST HERITAGE, TOO. AND THERE'S CERTAINLY SOME DIRECTORS WORKING IN HOLLYWOOD AT THE SAME TIME OR BEFORE LIKE FRITZ LANG OR LUBITSCH, LET'S SAY, WHO HAD THAT AESTHETIC THAT HE COULD HAVE DRAWN ON. NO QUESTION. NO QUESTION. BUT, OF COURSE, THE OTHER THING THAT ORSON DID THAT OUTRAGED THE TOWN WAS THAT HE, I THINK, CLEARLY MANIPULATED HIS EARLY CAREER. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A MAN IN HIS EARLY TWENTIES, SO THAT HE WOULD GET A CONTRACT OFFER FROM HOLLYWOOD THAT MADE EVERYBODY IN THE BUSINESS WHO'D BEEN PAYING THEIR DUES FOR YEARS GO FRANTIC, BECAUSE HE'D GOT, NOT EXACTLY CARTE BLANCHE, WHICH IT'S BEEN CALLED SOMETIMES, BUT HE GOT THE BEST DEAL ANYONE HAD EVER HAD TILL THAT TIME, BARRING PERHAPS CHAPLIN, WHO MADE HIS OWN TERMS. HE GOT FREEDOM TO CHOOSE HIS SUBJECT MATTER, TO CAST IT. HE HAD FINAL CUT, WHICH, OF COURSE, IN THE END WAS CRUCIAL TO HOW HE SAVED THE FILM. RIGHT. AND, OF COURSE, THERE WERE TWO PROJECTS THAT WENT BELLY-UP BEFORE HE EVEN GOT TO "KANE." I DON'T THINK HE--I THINK WHEN HE ARRIVED OUT HERE, HE WAS SO EXCITED TO BE HERE, BECAUSE I THINK HE'D SET HIS HEART ON COMING TO HOLLYWOOD FOR A LONG TIME, THAT HE LITERALLY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT HE WANTED TO DO. AND THERE'S THIS MOST EMBARRASSING PERIOD FOR HIM, OF OVER A YEAR, REALLY, WHERE HE'S FUSSING AROUND WITH DIFFERENT SCRIPTS AND DIFFERENT SUBJECTS. "HEART OF DARKNESS" WAS ONE OF THEM... BEFORE THEY SETTLED ON THE IDEA OF THE LIFE OF A FAMOUS PERSON AND WENT FROM THERE. YOU REMEMBER THE OTHER FAMOUS PEOPLE... THEY THOUGHT OF DOING-- WHO WERE SOME OF THEM? WELL, DILLINGER WAS ONE OF THEM, AND AIMEE SEMPLE McPHERSON WAS THE OTHER. AND, BUT OF COURSE-- I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN WELLES AS-- WELLES AS AIMEE WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY INTERESTING, WOULDN'T HE? YEAH. YEAH. HE COULD HAVE DONE IT. YEAH, YEAH. BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS ABOUT THE FILM, AND THAT SCENE IS AS GOOD A MEASURE OF IT AS ANY, IS IT CATCHES THAT QUALITY HE HAD OF BEING ABLE TO CHARM YOU AND YET MAKE YOU SEE THAT HE MIGHT BE A FAKE AT THE SAME TIME. DO YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN BY THAT? YEAH. WELL, THERE'S CERT--THAT, THAT KIND OF INSIDIOUS CHARM, THAT DANGEROUS CHARM OF SOME SORT, AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF HIS CHARACTER. AND IT SEEMS ALSO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE THAT FED INTO KANE, A KIND OF PREOCCUPATION, ALMOST, OF FILMS IN THE LATE '30s. I MEAN, WITH THE FIGURES OF HITLER AND MUSSOLINI BEHIND IT, THE CHARMING MEGALOMANIAC. ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. AND YOU KNOW, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A WONDERFUL LINE THERE THAT IS DELIVERED SO FAST THAT IT FLOATS BY, BUT HE SAYS, APPROXIMATELY, THE ONLY PERSON WHO CAN LOOK AFTER THE POOR AND THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO MONEY IS SOMEONE AS RICH AS I AM. WELL, YOU KNOW, WHAT AN INCREDIBLE STATEMENT ON THE '30s THAT IS AND ABOUT WEALTH IN AMERICAN POLITICS. AND, OF COURSE, WELLES WAS NOT A MAN OF WEALTH HIMSELF. HE HAD, YOU KNOW, NOT QUITE HUMBLE ORIGINS, BECAUSE NOTHING ABOUT HIM WAS HUMBLE. BUT HE CERTAINLY WAS NOT BORN WITH A SILVER SPOON IN HIS MOUTH. HE WAS NOT BORN WITH A SILVER MINE. HE WAS BORN WITH THIS AMAZING ABILITY TO PERSUADE PEOPLE TO DO WHAT HE WANTED TO DO. WELL, HE ALMOST SEEMS LIKE SOMEBODY WHO BRANDED HIMSELF AS A GENIUS BEFORE HE EVEN DID ANYTHING THAT COULD BE COUNTED AS THE WORK OF A GENIUS. WELL, I THINK IT'S TRUE. AND YOU KNOW, HE WOULD--THE STORY IS, THERE'S NO ONE REALLY ALIVE NOW WHO CAN CONFIRM IT, BUT THE STORY IS THAT REGULARLY AT SCHOOL THAT HE WENT TO A PRETTY EXPERIMENTAL SCHOOL, HE WOULD TAKE CLASSES OVER FROM THE TEACHERS. AND NOBODY KNOWS WHETHER HE HAD REALLY READ STUFF OR WHETHER HE HAD SIMPLY ACQUIRED THE ABILITY TO CON YOU INTO THINKING HE READ STUFF. [LAUGHTER] BUT LATE IN HIS LIFE, PEOPLE SAID THAT IF HE WAS AT A DINNER PARTY, HE TOTALLY MONOPOLIZED, BECAUSE WHATEVER SUBJECT CAME UP, HE KNEW EVERYTHING ABOUT IT. AND AS I SAY, IF YOU LOOK AT HIS BIOGRAPHY, YOU CANNOT SEE WHERE THE TIME WAS THAT HE COULD HAVE GAINED THIS KNOWLEDGE. IT WAS THE POWER OF SPEECH. AND I THINK THE FILM CATCHES THE WAY HE SPOKE WONDERFULLY WELL. WELL, THERE'S A KIND OF AMBIVALENCE, TOO, CERTAINLY AN AMBIVALENCE IN WELLES TOWARDS THIS KIND OF FIGURE THAT, THE KANE FIGURE, THE PERSON WHO CAN DO ALL THESE CHARMING THINGS, WHO CAN DOMINATE DINNER PARTIES. AT THE SAME TIME THAT THERE'S THE SENSE THAT THIS PERSON MIGHT ACTUALLY BE EMPTY INSIDE, THAT IT IS ALL BRANDING, THAT IT IS ALL SHELL SOMEHOW. WELL, YOU REMEMBER IN THE NEWSREEL SECTION--I THINK IT'S IN THE NEWSREEL SECTION, PERHAPS IT'S A BIT LATER-- THERE'S A SORT OF MONTAGE OF HIS CAREER RUNNING FOR OFFICE, AND ONE MAN SAYS HE IS NOTHING BUT A FASCIST. AND THEN SOMEONE SAYS NO, HE'S A COMMUNIST. AND HE ANSWERS THAT BY USING WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL TITLE OF THE FILM, "I AM NOTHING MORE OR LESS THAN AN AMERICAN." AND I THINK FOR WELLES THE IDEA THAT EVERY POLITICAL STRAIN WAS JUMBLED TOGETHER SOMEHOW, AND IT WAS IN PERFORMANCE THE CHARACTER CAME OUT, I THINK HE BELIEVED THAT. WELL, CHARACTER COMES OUT, BUT IT'S ALSO--ALL SO OFTEN IT'S A CHARACTER WEARING A MASK. YES. IT'S CHARACTER IN SOME KIND OF DISGUISE, SOME KIND OF IMPERSONATION. YES. YEAH. SO MANY PEOPLE I'VE TALKED TO WHO HAD WORKED WITH HIM OVER THE YEARS SAID THAT HE WAS ABSOLUTELY MONSTROUSLY INFURIATING. HE WENT INTO WORK, AND YOU REALIZED YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK ALL NIGHT BECAUSE OF HIS PRIVATE LIFE. AND YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOMETHING THAT WAS ABSURD IN TERMS OF YOUR WORK COMMITMENT. YOU WERE GETTING NOTHING FOR IT, AND YOU WERE READY TO WALK OUT. AND HE CAME UP TO YOU, AND HE GAVE YOU THREE OR FOUR WORDS, AND YOU WERE CHARMED. AND YOU STAYED. AND YOU SEE IT EXACTLY THERE, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT ABILITY TO KNOW WHO HE'S TALKING TO AND HOW TO GET THEM, WHAT TO SAY TO THEM. WELL, SOMEHOW, BUT ALSO I THINK, I THINK ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS ABOUT THE FILM AND THE WAY THE CHARACTER IS PRESENTED IN THE FILM, THAT THERE'S AN INTERNAL MISTRUST OF HIS OWN CHARM, YOU KNOW, AS WELL. A SENSE IN WHICH HE KNOWS HE'S PUTTING IT ON SOMEHOW. AND HE KNOWS THAT HE CAN MANIPULATE PEOPLE AND GET ALL THESE THINGS DONE, AS HE'S SMILING HERE AT THATCHER AT THE END. "I'LL BE BROKE IN 60 YEARS." AND, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS AT LUNCH AND HOW BIZARRE IT IS IN TERMS OF TODAY'S MUSEUM WORLD, THAT THIS FILM, THIS LIFE OF THE GREAT MAN ENDS WITH HIS COLLECTION OF STUFF BEING BURNED. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, MUSEUM CURATORS, THEY REALLY MUST GO CRAZY TO SEE THAT. [LAUGHTER] AND YET, I THINK IT SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT WELLES. I THINK WELLES HAD NO FAITH IN THE FUTURE OR POSTERITY. HE THOUGHT THAT THERE MIGHT BE NOTHING IN THERE, AT THE END. WELL, THIS IS CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE--ONE OF THE BASIC QUESTIONS THAT ALWAYS COMES UP, IS WHAT RELATIONSHIP DOES KANE ACTUALLY HAVE TO HEARST AND HIS LIFE, AND CERTAINLY THE IDEA OF COLLECTING THERE IS A PRETTY OBVIOUS ONE. OF COURSE, HEARST DIDN'T BURN WHAT HE COLLECTED THERE, BUT SOMEHOW KANE HAS TO. WELL, PARTLY BECAUSE YOU FEEL KANE HAS NEVER REALLY STOPPED TO LOOK AT WHAT HE'S COLLECTING, AND I THOUGHT THAT EVERYTHING WE HEARD BEFORE LUNCH TODAY WAS WONDERFULLY DEMONSTRATIVE OF THE FACT THAT HEARST HAD REAL TASTE, AND HE HAD LOVE OF THESE OBJECTS. UM...IT'S ALMOST AS IF IN THE COLLECTION THAT KANE HAS BUILT UP OVER THE YEARS, THERE'S ONLY ONE THING THERE HE LOVES, WE THINK, WHICH WILL COME OUT IN THE END, AND WHICH IS DESTROYED IN FRONT OF YOUR EYES, AS IF TO SAY, HERE'S THE EMBLEM, TAKE A GOOD QUICK LOOK AT IT, BECAUSE BOOM, IT'S GONE. WELL, I MEAN, WE SHOULD GET TO THAT, TOO. YEAH, YEAH. BUT MAYBE PUT IT OFF A LITTLE BIT, SINCE IT IS THE ANSWER, SO WE SHOULD WAIT TILL THE END-- YEAH, YEAH. OR IT SEEMS, IT PRESENTS ITSELF IN SOME WAY AS THE ANSWER, AS THE, YOU KNOW, THE FINAL PIECE OF THE JIGSAW PUZZLE THAT SUSAN KEEPS MAKING AND TRYING TO CREATE ALL THE TIME. I WANTED TO GO BACK TO WHAT YOU WERE SAYING ABOUT WELLES BEING AN INDEPENDENT, THERE, AND I GUESS THE PARADOX OF TRYING TO BE AN INDEPENDENT WITHIN A STUDIO SYSTEM. YEAH. AND WITHIN A SITUATION IN WHICH EVERYTHING IS SUPPOSED TO BE CONTROLLED BY SOME OVERARCHING AUTHORITY, TO BE THE YOUNG MAN, THE YOUNG GENIUS WHO CAN SOMEHOW THUMB YOUR NOSE AT THAT AND CREATE SOMETHING THAT THE SYSTEM WILL HAVE TO APPROVE. IT'S EXTRAORDINARY. AND, YOU KNOW, SOME OF YOU MAY KNOW 23-YEAR-OLDS, AND REALLY... THAT'S WHAT HE WAS WHEN HE DID "THE WAR OF THE WORLDS," HE WAS 23. AND I'M CONVINCED THAT THAT WHOLE THING WAS TO GET HOLLYWOOD INVITATIONS. I THINK HE WORKED IT OUT IN HIS HEAD. IT WAS AN OUTRAGE. IT WAS A WAY OF BYPASSING EVERY SORT OF CONVENTIONAL WAY OF BEING ASKED TO MAKE A FILM. AND, OF COURSE, HE WAS THEN ASKED TO MAKE A FILM ON TERMS THAT WERE, AS WE SAID, THE MOST LUXURIOUS ANYONE HAD HAD. NOT IN TERMS OF MONEY, BUT HE WAS NEVER INTERESTED IN MONEY. HE WAS NOT AN EXTRAVAGANT DIRECTOR IN THROWING MONEY AROUND. HE WANTED--I THINK HE GENUINELY WANTED THE OPPORTUNITY. AND R.K.O. SAID THAT HE COULD COME AND DO WHAT HE LIKED. AND YOU KNOW, IT--WE WERE LISTENING TO STUFF EARLIER ON TODAY ABOUT HOW HEARST WAS VERY CLOSE TO LOUIS B. MAYER. AND WHEN IT WAS REALIZED WHAT "KANE" WAS, LOUIS B. MAYER WENT TO R.K.O.-- MAYER WOULD HAVE BEEN THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE FILM INDUSTRY, I THINK--AND OFFERED TO BUY THE NEGATIVE OUTRIGHT TO PROTECT HEARST. TO PROTECT HEARST'S FEELINGS. AND GIVE THEM CREDIT, R.K.O. SAID NO. WE ARE BACKING A HUNCH WITH THIS GUY. EVERYTHING WE'VE DONE WITH HIM IS OUT OF THE ORDINARY. EVERY OPPORTUNITY AND FREEDOM WE'VE GIVEN HIM IS UNUSUAL. WE'RE GOING TO BACK IT. A THE WHO BACKED IT LOST HIS JOB SHORTLY AFTER "KANE" WAS OPENED, BUT WE MIGHT HAVE LOST "KANE" THEN. I MEAN, THE INDUSTRY WAS CONSTRUCTED IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT COULD JUST HAVE BANDED TOGETHER AND BURNED EVERYTHING OF THE FILM. WELL, I MEAN, IT WAS STILL LOST IN ANOTHER WAY. IN FACT, I DON'T THINK IT SHOWED IN ANY CHAIN AT ALL. I THINK IT WAS ALL INDEPENDENT THEATERS. NO CHAIN WOULD SHOW IT. IT'S AN EXTRAORDINARY STORY, ISN'T IT? BECAUSE THE FILM ACTUALLY GOT QUITE GOOD REVIEWS. I MEAN, PEOPLE TEND TO FORGET THAT NOW. BUT THERE WERE QUITE A FEW PEOPLE IMPRESSED--JORGE LUIS BORGES, IN BUENOS AIRES, SAW IT AND THIS FITS IN WITH WHAT YOU SAY, "IT IS A LABYRINTH WITHOUT A CENTER." A PERFECT BIT OF FILM CRITICISM. BUT THE HEARST POWER MADE IT TOUGH FOR THE FILM, CERTAINLY. AND THE FILM WAS NOT A POPULAR SUCCESS, AND IT VANISHED, AS ALL OLD FILMS DID IN THOSE DAYS. AN OLD FILM JUST WENT AWAY. THEY WEREN'T BROUGHT BACK VERY MUCH. IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO CATCH UP WITH THEM. AND IT WASN'T REALLY UNTIL AROUND 1960, I THINK, THAT THE FILM GOT REDISCOVERED. GOT REDISCOVERED. ALSO, I MEAN, WITH THE OTHER THING WAS, BECAUSE OF THE WAR, THAT, IN FACT, HOLLYWOOD FILMS WEREN'T BEING SHOWN IN EUROPE-- ABSOLUTELY. AT ALL, AND SO, IN FACT, YOU KNOW, THE GREAT LOVE OF WELLES, THAT TRUFFAUT AND GODARD REALLY, AND THE NEW-WAVE FILMMAKERS HAD, THEY DIDN'T SEE THE FILMS UNTIL THE LATE '40s OR MUCH LATER. MUCH, MUCH LATER. NO. AND BY 1943, WELLES HAD VIRTUALLY BEEN THROWN OUT OF HOLLYWOOD. HE WAS A--HE WAS A TABOO FIGURE, YOU KNOW. EVERYONE HAD COTTONED ONTO THE FACT THAT HE WOULDN'T TAKE ORDERS, HE WOULDN'T TAKE ADVICE OR INSTRUCTION, AND THEY HAD VIRTUALLY SAID, WELL, GO AND MAKE YOUR OWN WAY... WHICH HE DID. BUT HE NEVER AGAIN MADE AN INDUSTRY FILM. BUT I THINK IT'S REMARKABLE, BECAUSE "KANE" IS AN INDUSTRY FILM. IT WAS MADE WITH STUDIO SETS, STUDIO CRAFTSMEN, ALL THOSE THINGS, BUT IT'S A TOTALLY INDEPENDENT FILM. AND HE MANAGED TO MAKE IT SO THAT, UM, THE STUDIO DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHAT IT WAS AND THE DAY WHEN THE FIRST FEW PEOPLE STARTED TO SEE ENOUGH OF THE FILM TO REALIZE THAT THERE WAS A CLEAR REFERENCE TO HEARST IN IT, THAT DIDN'T COME UNTIL WAY INTO THE POST-PRODUCTION. THEY KEPT THAT A SECRET. AND I THINK, WASN'T ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT HAPPENED ACTUALLY HEDDA HOPPER HAD WRITTEN A VERY POSITIVE ARTICLE ABOUT IT, AND THEN LOUELLA PARSONS, WHO WROTE FOR HEARST, WENT IN AND SAW IT. AND PART OF, SO, NOT ONLY FEELING THAT IT WAS AN ATTACK ON HEARST, BUT ALSO FEELING THIS WAS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR HER TO BEAT HEDDA HOPPER. THAT'S RIGHT. BUT HOW FAR DO YOU THINK IT IS ABOUT HEARST? MMM, IT'S UNCLEAR. SOMETIMES I THINK IT'S MORE ABOUT WELLES THAN ABOUT HEARST, THAT IS, THE EARLY LIFE OF KANE. IT'S MUCH MORE REMINISCENT OF SOME THINGS ABOUT--SOME KIND OF EXAGGERATED, ROMANTICIZED THINGS--ABOUT WELLES' EARLY LIFE. I THINK SO, TOO. THAN IT IS ABOUT HEARST. YEAH, YEAH. LATER IN LIFE, WELLES SAID HE WAS VERY CONTRITE ABOUT MARION DAVIES, THAT HE MUST HAVE HURT HER. I DON'T KNOW THAT HE FELT CONTRITE. HE SAID HE WAS CONTRITE. [LAUGHTER] I DON'T THINK HE HAD DEEP FEELINGS IN THAT WAY. BUT AT THE TIME HE MADE THE FILM, I THINK HE WOULD HAVE OFFENDED ANYONE JUST BY SECOND NATURE, ALMOST. HE WAS--HE WAS--HE WAS A PRETTY COLD KID, I THINK, IN A FUNNY WAY. WITH THAT KIND OF DRIVE. YEAH. BUT I, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THINKING ABOUT IT, IN SOME WAYS THE FIGURE OF KANE IS MUCH MORE LIKE McCORMICK FROM THE "CHICAGO TRIBUNE" THAN IT IS ABOUT HEARST, AND CERTAINLY WELLES HAD BEEN IN CHICAGO, KNEW THAT WHOLE MILIEU. HE KNEW THE OLD WAR STORIES, YEAH, YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. AND WHEN I LISTENED TO DOROTHY COMINGORE, I THINK OF JEAN HARLOW MUCH MORE THAN MARION DAVIES. YES, YES. AND I THINK THAT EVEN THEN, ORSON WAS FASCINATED BY HOWARD HUGHES. I THINK THAT SOMEONE LIKE THAT WAS IN HIS MIND A LITTLE AT THE SAME TIME. BUT I AGREE WITH YOU. I THINK THAT--I THINK THAT THE KEY POINT OF REFERENCE IN THE SCREENWRITING WAS ORSON, AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S VERY INTERESTING. JUST BEFORE THEY REALLY STARTED TO DO THE SCRIPT, ORSON AND JOHN HOUSEMAN HAD THEIR HUGE ROW. AND HOUSEMAN HAD BEEN HIS CO-HEAD OF THE MERCURY THEATER AND WAS VERY, VERY CLOSE TO HIM. AND AT THAT POINT HOUSEMAN WAS OUT. HE AND WELLES COULDN'T SEE EACH OTHER. AND HERMAN MANKIEWICZ WAS DOING THE SCRIPT, AND HE REALLY DID THE SCRIPT, NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. AND THEY SENT HIM UP TO A RANCH IN ANTELOPE VALLEY, AND WELLES SAID, WE'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE HE DOESN'T DRINK. WHO COULD WE SEND TO LOOK AFTER HIM? AND THEY SENT HOUSEMAN, WHO KNEW EVERY STORY ABOUT ORSON THERE WAS. AND I THINK WHEN THEY WERE UP THERE, HOUSEMAN WAS TELLING MANKIEWICZ LITTLE ORSON STORIES ALL THE TIME, WHICH WERE FEEDING INTO THE SCRIPT IN AN INTERESTING WAY. THAT'S INTERESTING. YEAH, THAT'S CERTAINLY--AND HOUSEMAN WAS FEELING QUITE VENGEFUL AT THIS MOMENT. YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, AND, OF COURSE, THEY KNEW THAT ORSON WAS GOING TO PLAY THE PART. AND I--I SORT OF AGREE WITH PAULINE KAEL, I THINK THAT WHEN HE'S PLAYING THE YOUNG KANE, IT'S ABOUT THE BEST ACTING HE EVER DID. HE'S JUST MAGNETIC IN THE FILM, I THINK. AND SO ATTRACTIVE. YEAH, YEAH. OF COURSE, MANKIEWICZ HAD BEEN TO SAN SIMEON, HAD BEEN A FREQUENT GUEST AT SAN SIMEON, AND SO HE KNEW THAT MILIEU, SO THE COLLECTING SIDE, THE GRANDIOSE SIDE OF KANE-- HE WAS THE ONE WHO REALLY DID MORE BETRAYAL. YEAH. YEAH. YEAH. HE DID MORE BETRAYAL, BUT HE WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO GOT AN ACADEMY AWARD. WELL, HE AND ORSON-- THEY SHARED IT-- THEY SHARED IT. THE ACADEMY AWARD, THE EMMY AWARD, THE FILM CRITIC-- IT'S SORT OF LIKE-- YEAH, YEAH. MOST OF THE TIME PEOPLE EXPLAIN THIS. WELL, HE WAS AN OLD HOLLYWOOD HAND, SO HE WAS FORGIVEN IN SOME WAY FOR HAVING THAT-- A FASCINATING FIGURE, BECAUSE HE WAS THE OLDER BROTHER OF JOSEPH MANKIEWICZ, WHO DID "ALL ABOUT EVE" AND A LOT OF VERY SUCCESSFUL FILMS. HE WAS AN ALCOHOLIC. YOU KNOW THE GREAT STORY? THIS MAY EITHER HAVE BEEN A BANQUET IN SAN SIMEON--LET'S SAY IT WAS A BANQUET IN SAN SIMEON. HE WAS AT THE BANQUET-- SET THE SCENE-- AND HE WAS EXTREMELY ILL, AND HE VOMITED OUT ON THE TABLE, ONE OF THESE LONG TABLES. AND HE TURNED TO THE HOST AND SAID, "DON'T WORRY. THE WHITE WINE CAME UP WITH THE FISH." [LAUGHTER] VERY FUNNY MAN. YOU REFERRED--WE SORT OF PASSED OVER QUITE QUICKLY THE INFLUENCE OF THEATER AND RADIO ON THE FILM. AND CERTAINLY THE SOUND IS QUITE EXTRAORDINARY IN THE FILM. I MEAN, WELL, IF YOU REMEMBER ONE SOUND IN THE FILM, YOU CERTAINLY REMEMBER THAT COCKATOO-- YES. THAT STARTS THAT SCENE. YES. YES. BUT SOUND--I SUPPOSE YOU CAN SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WITH, UH, WITH GREGG TOLAND DOING WITH THIS DEEP-FOCUS CINEMATOGRAPHY, THERE'S ALSO A KIND OF DEEP-FOCUS SOUND HERE. DEFINITELY. I MEAN, USUALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT WYLER, WHAT TOLAND DID FOR WYLER, OR FOR JOHN FORD WHEN HE'S DOING DEEP FOCUS, THERE YOU--THERE'S NO DIALOGUE IN THOSE SCENES. YEAH. BUT WELLES IS SOMEHOW TRYING TO DO BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. TRYING TO DO EVERYTHING AT THE SAME TIME. AND FREQUENTLY IN THE FILM, YOU, THE--THE LOCUS OF THE SOUNDTRACK, IF YOU PAUSE TO THINK ABOUT IT, IT ISN'T OUT IN THE ROOM. IT ISN'T OUT IN THE SPACE PEOPLE ARE SHARING. IT'S ALMOST INSIDE SOMEONE'S HEAD. I HAD A--I TALKED ONCE WITH WALTER MURCH ABOUT THIS, THE GREAT SOUND DESIGNER IN FILMS OF THE MOMENT, AND HE IS FASCINATED BY GIVING EVERY SCENE A SOUND LOCUS, THAT TELLS YOU ALMOST WHERE THE SCENE'S COMING FROM. AND HE SAYS THAT WELLES STARTED THAT. AND IT'S A RADIO THING, I THINK. IT'S THE QUESTION OF HOW CLOSE YOU ARE TO THE MIC, AND WHAT THE BALANCE OF SOUND EFFECTS IS, AND, YOU KNOW, WELLES HAD DONE RADIO 12 HOURS A DAY FOR 3 OR 4 YEARS BEFORE THIS, AND LEARNED A LOT. HE CLEARLY--THROWN OUT OF COLLEGES, NEVER EVEN GOT TO COLLEGES. I MEAN, HIS EDUCATION ENDED AT ABOUT 15. BUT--BUT HE LEARNED ON THE JOB IN A REMARKABLE WAY I THINK, AND SOUND WAS ONE OF THOSE THINGS, YEAH. AND THE WAY, I THINK, AND THIS ALSO GOES BACK TO WHAT, YOU KNOW, WE WERE SAYING ABOUT THE EXPRESSIONIST SIDE THERE, THAT YOU KNOW THAT THE SOUND COULD BE, AS YOU SAY, IN SOMEONE'S HEAD, IT COULD BE-- IN FACT, THE WHOLE SCENE COULD BE HAPPENING INSIDE OF SOMEONE'S HEAD. THAT'S RIGHT, THAT'S RIGHT. YES. THERE'S NOT--I MEAN, THERE'S A REALISTIC SIDE, BUT IT'S VERY THIN, COMPARED TO THIS KIND OF STRANGER, MORE-- AND A LIGHT LED TO THAT, BECAUSE YOU SEE SOMETHING, AND IT LOOKS WONDERFULLY REALISTIC, AND THEN THERE'S SOMETHING WAY OFF IN THE BACKGROUND, EQUALLY REALISTIC, BUT ACTUALLY THEY'RE JOINED BY DARKNESS, AND NOTHING IN BETWEEN. BECAUSE IN A MOVIE, IF IT'S DARK, YOU DON'T NEED A SET THERE. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY "KANE" WAS NOT A TERRIBLY EXPENSIVE FILM, BECAUSE THEY USED LIGHT TO CONCEAL LACK OF SETS. BUT IT SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT ARCHITECTURE, TOO. BECAUSE YOU KNOW, IT GETS STRETCHED OUT BY THE WIDE ANGLE LENSES, AND IT'S BEYOND REALISM SOMETIMES. IT'S MEGALOMANIA PUT ON THE SCREEN, ALMOST, I THINK. MEGALOMANIA, EVEN IN THOSE SCENES WHEN HE'S A SMALLER FIGURE COMPARED TO PEOPLE IN THE FOREGROUND, TOO. I MEAN, I'M THINKING OF THE SCENE WHERE SUSAN'S DOING HER JIGSAW PUZZLE AND HE COMES IN WAY IN THE BACKGROUND AT XANADU. YEAH. AND, YOU KNOW, BUT YOU CAN HEAR HIS VOICE. HE'S FAR AWAY, BUT YOU CAN HEAR HIS VOICE, BLARING AT HER, SO THERE'S A KIND OF WEIRD RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WHAT YOU SEE VISUALLY AND WHAT YOU HEAR ON THE TRACK. YEAH. BUT YOU SAID "AMBIVALENCE," AND I THINK THAT'S TRUE. BECAUSE I THINK THAT, I THINK AT THE SAME TIME WELLES HAD A-- AN ABILITY TO SEE THAT POWER IN HUMAN BEINGS WAS ABSURD, LUNATIC, DANGEROUS. AND YET, AS AN ACTOR PLAYING POWER, HE LOVED IT. LOVED DOING THOSE SPEECHES, YOU KNOW, WHERE HIS VOICE, YOU KNOW, "I WILL SPEAK TO THE PEOPLE," OR "I WILL SPEAK FOR GALLO WINE," YOU KNOW. [LAUGHTER] AND IT'S THE SAME--IT'S A HORRIBLE REMINDER LATE IN HIS LIFE, THAT HE'S USING THE SAME TONE OF VOICE FOR THE RIGHTS OF THE MAN, DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES, AND GALLO WINE. [LAUGHTER] "WE WILL SELL NO WINE BEFORE ITS TIME." BEFORE ITS TIME. YEAH. DID YOU HEAR THAT TAPE OF THE--OF THE OUTTAPES--THE OUTTAKES OF THAT? AMAZING. TELL THEM ABOUT IT. WELL, NO. IT'S A--IT'S A TAPE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING AROUND THE MAKING OF THAT COMMERCIAL, AND HIS OBJECTIONS TO IT, AND HOW STUPID IT IS TO SAY THESE THINGS, AND THEN HE KIND OF COMES IN WITH THAT VOICE--BUT THAT EMPTINESS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I THINK IT'S-- HE IS SO AWARE OF HIS OWN ABILITY TO PUT ON, HIS OWN ABILITY TO CHARM, HIS OWN ABILITY TO CAPTURE PEOPLE'S IMAGINATIONS, THAT HE SEES THE MANIPULATION IN IT. AND THAT'S, IN A CERTAIN SENSE, WHAT--WHAT "KANE" IS ABOUT. THE ABILITY TO MANIPULATE, AND THE EMPTINESS, THE VOID THAT THAT ABILITY COMES FROM. YEAH. IS--IS ROSEBUD THE ANSWER TO HIS LIFE? OR IS IT JUST A MOCKERY OF ALL ANSWERS? YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN BY THAT? WELL, THAT'S--I MEAN, WE START OUT WITH THE--I KEEP THINKING MARCH OF TIME--I MEAN, WHATEVER HE CALLS IT IN THE FILM, THERE. "NEWS ON THE MARCH?" "NEWS ON THE MARCH." RIGHT. THAT DOCUMENTARY WHICH PURPORTS TO TELL YOU, HERE ARE ALL THE DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THE MAN. WE WILL PUT HIM TOGETHER SOMEHOW AND THEN THE REPORTER IS SENT OUT TO FIND THE MISSING CLUE, THE THING THAT WILL MAKE EVERYTHING COHERE SOMEHOW-- YEAH. AND DECIDES THAT, IN FACT, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE. YOU CANNOT. HOW COULD--HOW COULD ONE WORD EXPLAIN A MAN'S LIFE, AS THEY SAY? YEAH. YEAH. WELL, I MEAN, IT'S ALSO, I THINK IN THAT WAY, AN INTRIGUING TAKE ON WHAT WAS STILL IN PROCESS AT THAT POINT, HOLLYWOOD FREUDIANISM AND THIS IDEA, LET'S SAY IN HITCHCOCK'S "SPELLBOUND," A FEW YEARS LATER THAT, IN FACT, YOU CAN UNDERSTAND SOMEONE PSYCHOLOGICALLY. AND THERE IS--THERE ARE ALL THESE GESTURES IN PSYCHOLOGY INDICATING THAT HE HAS A PSYCHOLOGY. IN FACT, IT COMES ALMOST TO NOTHING BY THE END. >> ABSOLUTELY. AND YOU KNOW THE GREAT STORY OF THE--THE FROG AND THE SCORPION, UH, WHICH, A VERY QUICK VERSION IS, THERE'S A FROG AND A SCORPION ON A RIVER'S BANK, AND THE SCORPION SAYS TO THE FROG, "FROGGY, WILL YOU TAKE ME ACROSS THE RIVER ON YOUR BACK?" THE FROG SAYS, "NO, OF COURSE NOT. I WOULDN'T DO THAT, BECAUSE SCORPIONS STING FROGS." AND THE SCORPION SAYS, "BUT-- BUT IF I WERE TO STING YOU AND I WAS ON YOUR BACK, YOU WOULD DROWN IN THE RIVER, AND I WOULD DROWN IN THE RIVER." THE FROG THINKS ABOUT THAT, AND THINKS, WELL, THAT SEEMS REASONABLE. SO HE TAKES THE SCORPION ON HIS BACK AND HE GOES ACROSS THE RIVER, AND TWO-THIRDS OF THE WAY ACROSS THE RIVER, FEELS A TERRIBLE PAIN IN HIS BACK AND HE KNOWS THAT HE'S BEEN STUNG. AND HE TURNS AND HE LOOKS BACK UP AT THE SCORPION AND HE SAYS, "SCORPION, WHY DID YOU--WHY DID YOU DO THAT? WHY DID YOU DO THAT? I'M GOING TO DIE, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO DIE." AND THE SCORPION SAYS, "I KNOW. IT'S MY CHARACTER." FATAL FLAW. AND THAT STORY IS TOLD IN A FILM CALLED "MR. ARKADIN." AND AFTER THE STORY, THE ARKADIN CHARACTER, PLAYED BY GUESS WHO, SAYS, "LET'S DRINK TO CHARACTER." [LAUGHTER] AND "ARKADIN" ALSO IS BOOK ENDED BY AN IMAGE OF A PLANE FLYING ABOVE THE EARTH, WITH NOBODY IN IT. WITH NOBODY IN IT. I MEAN, WHAT--ANOTHER IMAGE OF THAT KIND OF POWER. DO YOU REMEMBER WHY, OR AT LEAST HOW IT'S DONE? HIS DAUGHTER, WHO'S DOWN ON THE GROUND, WITHIN RADIO CONTACT WITH THE PLANE, SAYS, "FATHER, I KNOW YOUR SECRET." AT WHICH POINT HE DISAPPEARS. YOU KNOW, THAT'S A-- YEAH. ANOTHER EMPTINESS. YEAH. NOW, LET'S TALK A LITTLE MORE ABOUT--ABOUT WELLES' ACHIEVEMENTS. AND ONE OF THE THINGS, WHEN HE WAS TALKING TO PETER BOGDONAVICH, HE SAID THAT, "PEOPLE CALL ME AN INNOVATOR," BUT, HE SAYS, I REALLY ONLY WANT TO BE REMEMBERED FOR TWO THINGS, THAT HE FELT HE WAS A REAL INNOVATOR IN. ONE WAS, HE WAS THE PERSON WHO TOOK THE GELS OFF OF LIGHTS IN THEATER, AND HAD THAT HARSH LIGHT, WHICH IS AN INTERESTING-- INTERESTING THING TO THINK ABOUT, BECAUSE, IN FACT, WHEN GREGG TOLAND CAME UP TO HIM AND WANTED TO BE THE CINEMATOGRAPHER FOR "KANE," WANTED TO WORK WITH HIM ON WHATEVER, WHATEVER PROJECT. HE SAID, IT'S BECAUSE HE SAID, "HOW DO YOU DO THOSE THINGS IN THEATER? WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THEATER LIGHTING?" AND AT THAT TIME THE DIRECTOR WAS, TO A GREAT EXTENT, RESPONSIBLE. SO IT WAS SOMETHING ABOUT THAT NEW SENSE OF LIGHTING. NOW THE OTHER THING THAT HE SAID HE WAS AN INNOVATOR IN WAS NARRATION AND RADIO. CERTAINLY THERE WERE HOSTS, AND PEOPLE LIKE THAT BEFORE, BUT HE CLAIMED, AT LEAST, TO BE THE ONE WHO ELABORATED THE ABILITY OF THE NARRATOR IN RADIO TO LINK ALL THESE DISPARATE EVENTS, TO TELL THE STORY. >> AND REALLY UNTIL THE END OF HIS TIME, HE WOULD DO THAT ON FILM. WHEN NARRATIVE VOICES HAD GONE WAY OUT OF FASHION, HE WOULD USE THEM. AND IN "AMBERSONS," THERE'S AN ABSOLUTELY HEARTBREAKING MOMENT WHERE GEORGIE WALKS HOME THROUGH THE CITY, AND YOU HAVE WELLES' OWN VOICE READING WHAT I GUESS IS BOOTH TALKING TO THIS NARRATIVE, ABOUT HOW THE CITY HAD CHANGED, AND EVERYTHING, AND ABOUT HOW THE WORLD WAS CHANGING. YEAH, HE--HE LOVED NARRATIVE. HE JUST, JUST LOVED IT. I THINK THOSE--I THINK WHEN HE WAS, WHEN HE WAS HIRED TO PLAY THE SHADOW, THE SHADOW HAD--THE CHARACTER HAD EXISTED ALREADY, BUT THE CHARACTER HAD BASICALLY ONLY INTRODUCED THE STORY, AND THEN CAME IN AT THE END. HE MADE THE CHARACTER A CHARACTER IN THE STORY AS WELL. HE WOULD--HE WOULD BUILD UP HIS OWN PART TO SUCH A DEGREE, TO SUCH A DEGREE. WHEN HE WENT OUT TO EAT IN THOSE DAYS, HE WOULD--HE WOULD REGULARLY ORDER DOUBLE MENUS. HE WAS SO HUNGRY, HE WAS GOING ON ENERGY AND BENZEDRINE. AND I DO THINK THAT HE SORT OF BURNED HIMSELF OUT IN HIS TWENTIES, IN A WAY. HE NEVER HAD QUITE THE SAME ENERGY AGAIN. WELL, ANOTHER THING HE SAYS REMINDED ME--ANOTHER THING THAT HE SAID TO BOGDONAVICH WAS, THAT BOGDONAVICH WAS TALKING ABOUT THE MAKEUP IN "KANE," AND, OF COURSE, WE SAW HOW BEAUTIFUL HE LOOKS, AND YOUNG, IN THIS CLIP HERE. AND WELLES ACTUALLY SAID THAT HE HAD AS MUCH MAKEUP ON WHEN HE WAS YOUNG IN THE MOVIE AS HE DID WHEN HE WAS OLD. WHEN HE WAS OLD. YOU KNOW, HOW HIS NECK WAS PULLED BACK AND EVERYTHING WAS PULLED TOGETHER. YEAH. YEAH. BECAUSE HE SAID HE WAS QUITE HEAVY FROM-- WELL, HE WAS, ALTHOUGH, OF COURSE, THERE WAS A THOUGHT WHEN HE BEGAN IN MOVIES, THAT HE WOULD, COULD BE A MATINEE IDOL, A SORT OF TYRONE POWER-LIKE FIGURE. EVEN IN A FILM LIKE "JANE EYRE," THEY WERE TRYING TO BUILD ON THAT, BUT HE GOT TOO BIG, TOO FAST, AND OVERCAME IT. NOW, THERE IS NO VOICE-OVER NARRATOR IN "KANE," IN THAT WAY, THERE IS NOBODY PULLING THE STORY TOGETHER, AND THAT SEEMS TO BE ALMOST THE POINT, THAT THERE IS NO--NO CENTRAL CONSCIOUSNESS, NO AUTHORITY, NOBODY WHO REALLY KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. WELL, EXCEPT THE "NEWS ON THE MARCH" HAS THE VOICE. MM-HMM. THE BEGINNING, AND, YOU KNOW, THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION WE GET IN THE BEGINNING IS TREMENDOUSLY HELPFUL TO FOLLOWING THE FILM, I THINK. ALTHOUGH EVEN NOW I WOULD ARGUE THAT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR A NOVICE TO SEE THAT FILM FIRST TIME AND GET IT. AND CLEARLY IN 1941, THERE WAS NO WAY THE AUDIENCE COULD HAVE GOT THAT FILM, I THINK. IT WAS TOO DIFFICULT, DON'T YOU THINK THAT? THERE ARE TOO MANY THINGS HAPPENING, IT'S TRUE. BUT THAT'S ALSO A RADIO THING, ISN'T IT? I MEAN, THAT IS THE IDEA THAT, OF THE WAY RADIO, AND THIS MIGHT BE ANOTHER CONNECTION BETWEEN RADIO AND THE FILM, RADIO CREATES LITTLE EPISODIC BITS, DIFFERENT VOICES, AND PULLS THEM TOGETHER. AND YOU CAN CUT FASTER ON RADIO THAN ON FILM. CUT FASTER. I MEAN, HE'S TRYING TO CUT IN A RADIO WAY. HE REALLY IS. HOW MANY OF THESE SCENES LAST FOR MORE THAN-- YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF MINUTES? YEAH, REALLY. IT'S A LOT OF SMALL, SHORT SCENES-- OH, YEAH. YEAH. SO IT'S A KIND OF-- OH, YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. IT'S KIND OF AN EPISODIC AESTHETIC, AND ALSO, ANOTHER ASPECT OF RADIO, WHICH IS THAT BECAUSE IT'S A SERIAL FORM, IT NEVER WANTS TO END. IDEALLY, THE SHOW SHOULD GO ON FOREVER-- UH--HUH. WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, IN TOTAL CONTRADICTION TO THE HOLLYWOOD FORM, TO THE KIND OF ARISTOTELIAN THREE ACTS AND WHATEVER-- WHATEVER THEY ARE WORKING ON. PUT YOURSELF IN WELLES' POSITION. WHEN WELLES CAME TO HOLLYWOOD, AT THE END OF THE PERIOD THIS CONFERENCE IS TALKING ABOUT, DO YOU THINK IT WAS HIS OPINION THAT HOLLYWOOD HAD BEEN A GOOD THING OR NOT? WHAT DO YOU THINK HE WOULD HAVE FELT ABOUT IT? OR DID HE FEEL THERE HAD TO BE A NEW KIND OF FILM? NO, I THINK HE THOUGHT HE WAS BRINGING SOMETHING THAT WAS NEW. SO IF HE WAS BRINGING IT, IT HAD TO BE. IT HAD TO BE. BUT I THINK, WHAT WE STARTED WITH, THOUGH, WAS, THAT IS, THERE'S AN INTERESTING, NOW, ALMOST DIALECTIC BETWEEN WHAT HE OWES TO THE PAST, WHAT HE OWES TO PRIOR FILMS AND PRIOR FILMMAKING, AND THIS SENSE OF NEWNESS, WHAT HE'S BRINGING-- WHAT HE'S BRINGING FROM THEATER IN TERMS OF A MORE EXPRESSIONIST LIGHTING, A MORE SUBJECTIVE POINT OF VIEW IN FILM, AND WHAT HE'S BRINGING FROM RADIO IN TERMS OF THIS KIND OF EPISODIC NARRATIVE, AND A NEW WAY OF TELLING A STORY. YES. NOT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S-- PEOPLE ALWAYS TALK ABOUT THE, "THE POWER AND THE GLORY," THE 1933 FILM. THE PRESTON STURGES ONE-- THE PRESTON--RIGHT, WRITTEN BY PRESTON STURGES, WHICH, IF--IF YOU DON'T KNOW THIS, IT'S ALSO ABOUT A GREAT MAN, THE PAST OF A GREAT MAN AS SEEN THROUGH THE EYES OF OTHER PEOPLE. NOW, WELLES CLAIMS HE NEVER SAW THAT FILM, AND IN FACT, IT'S MORE CONVENTIONAL. A LOT MORE CONVENTIONAL-- MUCH MORE. THAN "KANE." BUT THEY DID START OUT THINKING IN SOME KIND OF WHAT WE WOULD CALL A "RASHOMON" WAY, THAT "KANE" WOULD BE PERCEIVED FROM THESE DIFFERENT ANGLES. AND ACTUALLY, IF YOU, AGAIN, IN THIS CLIP, I THINK YOU SAW SOME EXAMPLES OF IT, AND THERE ARE PLENTY THROUGHOUT THE FILM, SO OFTEN, THE WAY THE FRAME IS SET UP IN THE FILM, THERE'S SOMEONE ON THE SIDE. THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEBODY ON THE SIDE--NOT ALWAYS, BUT, SOMEBODY ON THE SIDE, LOOKING. AND WELLES IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FRAME, AND SOMEONE ON THE SIDE IS LOOKING AT HIM, FREQUENTLY LELAND. YES. WHOSE POINT OF VIEW SEEMS TO BE THE ONLY--THE ONLY MORAL COMPASS, TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE IS-- AND SKEPTICAL. AND SKEPTICAL, ONE, THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE IS ONE IN THE FILM. SO YOU, VISUALLY, AT LEAST, YOU HAVE THAT "RASHOMON" SENSE OF THINGS THAT WE NEVER GET TO KNOW KANE, WE ONLY GET TO KNOW WHAT OTHER PEOPLE THINK OF KANE. AND INDEED, IT'S--IT'S PART OF A RATIONALE FOR BEING VERY SUSPICIOUS ABOUT POWERFUL PEOPLE. AND IN THAT WAY, YOU CAN SEE WELLES HAVING LIVED THROUGH THE '30s AND SEEING A LOT OF POWERFUL FIGURES SORT OF RISE AND FALL, AND--AND--AND HIM HAVING VERY GOOD REASON FOR ADVISING SUSPICION. BUT THEN, PERSONALLY, ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS, HE BECAME A REALLY DEVOTED ROOSEVELT FOLLOWER. HE WORKED ON ROOSEVELT'S SPEECHES, HE KNEW ROOSEVELT WELL, HE WAS VERY CLOSE TO HIM. AND I THINK DEFINITELY WAS FLIRTING WITH THE IDEA OF A POLITICAL CAREER FOR HIMSELF. AND HE WROTE--WHEN ROOSEVELT DIED, HE WROTE A RADIO EULOGY THAT IS QUITE BEAUTIFUL. AND BESOTTED WITH THE POWERFUL MAN. NO LONGER SKEPTICAL AT ALL. AND AGAIN, I THINK IT'S--YOU ARE TALKING TO TWO MEN. MM-HMM. AS HE SAYS-- AS HE SAYS IN THAT CLIP. AND HE KNEW THERE WAS THAT SPLIT IN HIMSELF. WELL, AND THAT KIND OF AMBIVALENCE, TOO. THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, THE BAD DICTATE--THE BAD DICTATOR VERSUS THE GOOD, THE GOOD FATHER, THE GOOD PATERNAL FIGURE. THAT'S RIGHT, THAT'S RIGHT. THE ONE WHO COULD REALLY MAKE GOOD THINGS HAPPEN VERSUS BAD THINGS. YEAH. I MEAN, IT WASN'T A SKEPTICISM ABOUT THAT TOTALITAR--THAT AUTHORITARIAN FIGURE, SO MUCH AS CERTAIN TYPES OF AUTHORITARIANS. TYPES. YEAH. THAT IS HIS OWN AUTHORITARIANISM OR ROOSEVELT'S WOULD HAVE BEEN FINE. YEAH. YEAH. COMPARED TO--TO MUSSOLINI, OR HER--OR KANE, OR WHOEVER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. YEAH. YEAH, HE DOES SEEM DIVIDED IN THAT WAY. LET'S SAY, AND THIS MIGHT BE A MOMENT TO TALK ABOUT HIS LATER ROLES, THOUGH, TOO. I MEAN, THERE'S--SOMETIMES I LOOK AT KANE AND I THINK, THIS IS REALLY WHAT WELLES HAS DONE IN "KANE," IS WRITE HIS OWN PERSPECTIVE AUTOBIOGRAPHY. YEAH. AND WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO HIM, IN A SENSE, IN THE YEARS TO COME. WELL, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, HE SAYS IN "KANE," LOOK, THE PUBLIC TURNED AWAY FROM ME, THE WORLD TURNED AWAY FROM ME, I BECAME AN INCREASINGLY ISOLATED ECCENTRIC FIGURE, PUTTING ON WEIGHT, LIVING IN WHEELCHAIRS, MYSTERIOUS, BUT STILL WITH SOME POWER--I--THAT'S WHAT YOU GET IN '41. AND YOU CAN LOOK AT IT FROM '85 BACKWARDS. HE DIED IN '85, AND HE WAS A BIT LIKE THAT. I MEAN, IT--HE, UNTIL THE END, IT WAS--IT WAS EXTRAORDINARILY PLAYACTING. VERY LATE IN HIS LIFE, WHEN HE WAS DESPERATELY TRYING TO GET WORK AS AN ACTOR, AND THE WORD HAD GONE AROUND TOWN THAT HE WAS SO HUGE YOU COULDN'T PHOTOGRAPH HIM, IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, IT WAS INDECENT. HE WOULD GO TO HAVE LUNCH AT A PLACE MANY PEOPLE HERE WILL REMEMBER, MA MAISON, AND HE WOULD FLAMBOYANTLY GO INTO MA MAISON AND HAVE STEAMED FISH, AS IF TO SAY, LOOK, ORSON'S ON TRACK. HE WOULD THEN GO HOME, AND YOU KNOW FROM WHAT I'VE TOLD YOU ALREADY, HAVE A SECOND LUNCH, WHICH HIS EGO NEEDED, YOU KNOW. YEAH. SORT OF REMINISCENT OF BRANDO, IN A SENSE. WELL, I THINK THE TWO WERE VERY ALIKE IN A LOT OF WAYS, YEAH. YEAH. I THINK WELLES WAS A LOT, LOT SHARPER THAN BRANDO, A LOT MORE INTELLIGENT. BUT I THINK IN TERMS OF THEIR NEUROSES, VERY ALIKE. YEAH. WELL, AND--AND, THE ASPECT OF BRANDO THAT SEEMS TO ME REMINISCENT OF SOME OF THE THINGS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT WITH WELLES, AND WITH KANE FOR THAT MATTER, IS THIS SENSE OF FRAUDULENCE. YES. NOW, BRANDO HAD SUCH CONTEMPT FOR HIS OWN GIFTS-- WHAT HE WAS DOING-- WHAT HE COULD DO-- AND FOR HOW GOOD HE WAS AT IT-- YEAH. NOW, LOOK. UH... EVERY 10 YEARS, "SIGHT AND SOUND," THE BRITISH FILM MAGAZINE, YOU KNOW THIS, VOTES ON THE 10 BEST FILMS OF ALL TIME. THEY ASK CRITICS AND FILMMAKERS. AND EVER SINCE 1962, EVERY 10 YEARS, "KANE" IS THE BEST, THE BEST, THE BEST, THE BEST. THE FILM IS NOW 65 YEARS OLD, NEARLY. RIGHT? I GUESS. YEAH. MORE THAT THAT, I DON'T KNOW. IS IT GOING TO BE THE BEST NEXT TIME? WHAT DOES IT MEAN ABOUT THE CINEMA, THAT THIS OLD, OLD FILM NOW IS ALWAYS VOTED THE BEST? DID AMERICAN FILMS STOP? WELL, ACTUALLY, ANOTHER ONE THAT COMES UP AS THE BEST IN THAT IS "RULES OF THE GAME," WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT OLDER, EVEN. EVEN OLDER, YEAH. YES. YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. I MEAN, THERE'S CERTAIN KINDS OF BENCHMARKS. WHAT IS IT ABOUT KANE? I MEAN--TWO QUESTIONS. WHAT IS IT ABOUT KANE THAT KEEPS IT UP THERE, AND THEN THE QUESTION YOU JUST ASKED, WILL IT STAY UP THERE? WILL PEOPLE, I WOULD JUST THINK, YOU KNOW, WE WERE ALL READING THESE SCARE ARTICLES ABOUT THE ENDS OF NEWSPAPERS, YOU KNOW, THE PRINT MEDIUM IS OVER WITH THERE. I MEAN, WILL THIS BE A MUSEUM PIECE? WILL PEOPLE LOOK BACK, NOW, WHAT WAS A NEWSPAPER, AND, ANYWAY, WHAT WAS A NEWSPAPER PUBLISHER? THIS WHOLE IDEA-- WHAT DID THEY DO ON NEWSPAPERS? WHAT DID THEY DO ON THESE NEWSPAPERS? YEAH. I MEAN, EVEN IN "KANE," WHEN WE LOOK AT "KANE," WHEN WE LOOK AT THE NEWSPAPER IN "KANE," I MEAN, IT SEEMS 19th CENTURY ALREADY. YEAH. THE ROOM. DICKENSIAN. VERY DICKENSIAN, ISN'T IT? ISN'T IT? VERY DICKENSIAN. MAKEUP, THE FRONT PAGE-- IT ALREADY SEEMS ARCHAIC-- YES. YES. IN "KANE," LET ALONE NOW. YES. AND, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE USING FILM, REAL FILM STOCK WHEN THEY MADE THIS FILM. MM-HMM. YOU REMEMBER FILM STOCK? RIGHT, ACTUALLY. ACTUAL STOCK. RIGHT. YEAH, YEAH. WELL, WILL IT STAY? I DON'T, I MEAN, THIS--WHAT'S THE LEGACY? LET'S--LET'S APPROACH IT THAT WAY. WHAT IS WELLES' LEGACY FROM THIS FILM, OR FROM HIS CAREER? WELL, THERE WAS A GENERATION, I WOULD SAY, NEARLY ALL OVER THE WORLD, AND THEY'RE THE PEOPLE WHO CAME INTO MAKING FILMS AROUND 1960, FOR WHOM THIS WAS THE SEMINAL EXPERIENCE. AND THEY PROBABLY SAW THE FILM WHEN THEY WERE VERY IMPRESSIONABLE TEENAGERS, GOT THEM AT JUST THE RIGHT MOMENT, AND IT WAS--IT WAS OFFERED TO THEM AS ALMOST A LOST FILM. SOMETHING VERY ROMANTIC ABOUT IT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT WAS, THIS IS A FILM THAT HAD BEEN ABANDONED BY ITS OWN TIME. BUT LOOK, IT'S GREAT, ISN'T IT? AND ALSO, BECAUSE SOMETHING WE'VE NOT TOUCHED ON, MAYBE. IN 1940, IN HOLLYWOOD, DIRECTORS MIGHT HAVE HAD A LOT OF AMBITION, THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN VERY VAINGLORIOUS, BUT THEY DIDN'T TALK ABOUT IT. THEY DIDN'T SAY, THIS IS MY FILM. THEY WOULD SAY, THIS IS THE FILM THE COMPANY'S MAKING, AND I'M DIRECTING IT. WELLES WAS FLAT-OUT PERSONALLY ASSERTIVE AND ARROGANT. THIS IS MY FILM. THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS HE OFFENDED SO MANY PEOPLE, I THINK. BUT, OF COURSE, BY TODAY, THIS IS FALLING IN LINE PERFECTLY WITH THE, I THINK, VERY SUSPECT WISDOM, ORTHODOXY, THAT FILM IS AN ART, AND THE DIRECTOR'S THE ARTIST. I STILL THINK IT'S A VERY QUESTIONABLE ATTITUDE, PARTICULARLY IN AMERICA, WHERE THE MAKING OF FILMS IS SO MUCH DRIVEN BY THE MONEY. WELL, AND CERTAINLY, THAT SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE, THAT GENERATION YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, LIKE TRUFFAUT AND GODARD THAT WE MENTIONED, AND THAT, YOU KNOW, WHO WOULD PUSH THE AUTEUR THEORY AND THE IDEA THAT THE DIRECTOR WAS THE MAIN CREATIVE FORCE IN THE FILM, ALMOST AS IF THEY WERE TAKING DICTATION FROM KANE--FROM WELLES, AND KANE IN THAT WAY. AND I THINK THAT, I MEAN, THAT'S CERTAINLY A STRONG PART OF THE LEGACY, TOO. THAT IS, AND ALSO I THINK IT'S-- IT'S KIND OF HARD TO DISENTANGLE FROM WELLES' OWN CAREER IN THAT WAY. I MEAN, HERE HE'S THE ROMANTIC ARTIST, YOU KNOW. HE'S DONE THIS ALL ON HIS OWN, AND THEN HE HAS THIS CAREER WHICH HAS SOME, SOME GREAT HIGH POINTS TO IT, BUT REALLY NOTHING TO MATCH THAT, I MEAN, AND UNLIKE KEATS AND SHELLEY, HE DIDN'T DIE YOUNG, HE JUST KIND OF HUNG ON AND KEPT TRYING TO GET NEW PROJECTS GOING, AND ACTING, AND JUST KIND OF PUTTING MONEY TOGETHER-- WITH GREAT COURAGE, I THINK. MM-HMM. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I THINK THAT THERE'VE BEEN MANY DIFFERENT DEPICTIONS OF WELLES AS HE GREW OLDER, BUT THAT THE PERSISTENCE WITH WHICH HE TRIED TO DO THINGS, AND INTERESTING THINGS, LIKE "F FOR FAKE." QUITE NEARLY AND, I THINK, A VERY, VERY, UNUSUAL ESSAY-LIKE FILM, AND YET, HE'S A MAN WHO, THE AFTERNOON OF HIS LAST DAY ON EARTH WAS DOING CONJURING TRICKS ON "THE MERV GRIFFIN SHOW." AND PROBABLY HAVING A BALL, BECAUSE HE LOVED CONJURING TRICKS. HE LOVED BEING A MAGICIAN AND IT WAS A BIG PART OF HIM. AND PULLING, WELL, AND PULLING THESE PROJECTS OUT OF A HAT. THAT'S RIGHT. AS WELL. THAT'S RIGHT. AT THE SAME TIME. YEAH. YEAH. AND MAKING THINGS DISAPPEAR. BUT LOOK AT THE CHARACTERS, THOUGH. LET'S SAY IN HIS OWN FILMS, THE CHARACTERS THAT HE, THAT HE PLAYED. I MEAN, HE WOULD PLAY, YOU KNOW, MacBETH, OTHELLO, DON QUIXOTE-- FALSTAFF. FALSTAFF. I THINK HE'S THE GREAT, A GREAT INTERPRETER, YEAH. AND HANK QUINLAN-- HANK QUINLAN. I MEAN, AGAIN, THESE KIND OF LARGER THAN LIFE FIGURES THAT SOMEHOW IMPLODE AT A CERTAIN POINT. AND WHEN HE MADE "TOUCH OF EVIL," HE WAS ALREADY A HUGE MAN, AND HE CAME ALONG AND HE SAID, I'M GOING TO MAKE THE GUY ABOUT TWICE AS FAT AS I AM. YOU KNOW, HE PUSHED IT, TO MAKE HIMSELF AS UGLY AS HE COULD POSSIBLY MANAGE. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS--THERE WAS ANOTHER FILM, 1957, THAT THE STUDIO SYSTEM SORT OF SAID, WHAT DO WE DO WITH THIS? HE, IN A WAY HE REPEATED THE "KANE" ACT. AND YET, HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY OF THE POWER BY THE TIME OF "TOUCH OF EVIL." MM-HMM. WELL, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THINKING OF "TOUCH OF EVIL," AND "KANE," AND SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT HE DID, I MEAN, IN NONE OF THE FILMS, I THINK, THAT HE DID AFTER "KANE," IS THERE THIS MUCH ATTENTION TO WHAT'S IN EVERY SINGLE FRAME. RIGHT. THIS MUCH VISUAL INTEREST. I MEAN, THERE'S SOME WONDERFUL THINGS, I MEAN, THAT WONDERFUL TRACKING SHOT AT THE BEGINNING OF "TOUCH OF EVIL," OR THE SCENE IN THE BATHHOUSE AND A FELLOW THAT HE MADE UP ENTIRELY, THAT ARE GREAT. BUT THERE'S NOT THAT KIND OF OSTENTATIOUSNESS THAT "KANE" HAS, ABOUT, WE'RE REALLY DOING SOMETHING TRICKY HERE EVERY SINGLE SECOND. I HAVE--I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. IT JUST OCCURRED TO ME, AND I THINK THIS CONFERENCE DESERVES THE QUESTION. IN THE END, WILL HEARST OR WELLES BE THE MORE IMPORTANT AMERICAN? IT'S A GOOD QUESTION FOR THIS CONFERENCE, DEFINITELY. WELL, CERTAINLY HEARST HAS BEEN OCCLUDED TO A GREAT EXTENT, BY WELLES AND BY KANE. YEAH. VOLUME, PLEASE. TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, HEARST HAS BEEN OCCLUDED TO A GREAT EXTENT BY WELLES AND BY KANE. JUST IN THE WAY MARION DAVIES HAS BEEN NEARLY LOST UNDER SUSAN ALEXANDER KANE. YEAH. YEAH, YEAH. AND, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, HEARST-- HEARST SEEMS TO ME A RELATIVELY SIMPLE PERSON, BUT I MAY SAY THAT JUST BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH, COMPARED WITH THE COMPLEXITIES WE SEE IN KANE, AND WELLES--WELLES SEEMS TO ME TO INTRODUCE A VERY AMERICAN IDEA, THE--NOT INTRODUCE IT, BUT TO PLAY UPON IT IN A VERY BIG WAY, THE--THE FAKE AS A HERO. AND I THINK HE WAS CONCERNED WITH THAT HIMSELF. I THINK IT HAUNTED HIM AS AN IDEA. THAT'S CERTAINLY, CERTAINLY AN ISSUE, LET'S SAY. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, TO GET BACK TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT WHO WILL LAST THE LONGEST OR WHETHER THEY'LL LAST IN DIFFERENT WAYS. YEAH. I MEAN, BACK INTO THE 19th CENTURY, I MEAN, WHO TOM SAWYER IS. THERE'S THE, YOU KNOW, THE FAKE AS HERO. YEAH. I MEAN, THERE'S--THAT'S A CONSTANT, THE KIND OF THE-- LIKE THE FRONTIER BULLSHITTER, I MEAN-- YEAH. THERE'S A KIND--THAT'S A CONSTANT FIGURE IN AMERICAN LITERATURE, THAT KANE MIGHT IN SOME WAYS BE CONSIDERED A DESCENDANT OF. YEAH. YEAH. AND I DO THINK THAT "KANE" IS VERY, VERY PREDICTIVE ON AMERICAN POLITICAL LIFE. I MEAN, I THINK IT'S REMARKABLE TO LOOK AT IT AND TO SEE HOW MUCH OF WHAT WE'VE COME TO ACCEPT IN POLITICS, THAT FILM RECOGNIZES THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POLITICS AND APPLAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHICH HE UNDERLINES SO BEAUTIFULLY. WE UNDERSTAND THAT NOW IN A VERY CYNICAL WAY, I THINK. WELL, SO MUCH OF "KANE" IS ABOUT PERFORMANCE IN THAT WAY, AND I THINK ONE OF THE WONDERFUL, ONE OF THE WONDERFUL THINGS THAT--THAT WELLES DOES IN IT, IS REALLY TO ERASE ANY DISTINCTIONS, LET'S SAY, BETWEEN HIGH ART AND POPULAR CULTURE, TO BRING IN THEATER, TO BRING IN RADIO, TO BRING IN, TO BRING IN THE MUSIC HALL, TO DO BLACKOUT SKITS, ALMOST-- ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. AND I THINK HE'D HAVE--I THINK HE'D HAVE LOVED YOU FOR SAYING THAT, BECAUSE I THINK HE--I THINK HE HAD THAT SLIGHTLY ROMANTIC SENSE OF SHAKESPEAREAN THEATER AS BEING A MOMENT WHEN ART COULD BE SEEN BY ALL LEVELS AND ENJOY IT. WHETHER THAT WAS REALLY TRUE, I DON'T KNOW. BUT HE BELIEVED THAT, I THINK. WELL, I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER ASPECT OF HIS LEGACY THAT WE HAVEN'T QUITE TOUCHED ON. WE'VE MENTIONED SOME OF HIS SHAKESPEAREAN FILMS, BUT CERTAINLY THE IDEA THAT HE WOULD SPEND SO MUCH TIME WITH SHAKESPEARE. YEAH. AND, YOU KNOW, THE WORK THAT HE DID WITH OLIVIER, I MEAN, AGAIN. YEAH. IT'S A KIND OF-- ALMOST AS A--I'D SAY A COMPETITION WITH OLIVIER AS TO WHO WAS THE GREATER SHAKESPEAREAN. YES. IN THAT WAY. YEAH. YEAH. AND SHAKESPEARE AS SOMEBODY, AS A FIGURE THAT THE MOVIES COULD DRAW UPON. BECAUSE THE MOVIES HAD THAT SAME KIND OF DOUBLE OR TRIPLE OR WHATEVER, IMPULSE TOWARDS-- TOWARDS ART AND TOWARDS COMMERCE, AND TOWARDS THE ELITE AUDIENCE, AND TOWARDS THE POPULAR AUDIENCE, ALL AT THE SAME TIME. YEAH. AND ALSO, AT THE END OF HIS LIFE, WE REFERRED TO IT EARLIER, WHEN HE DID THESE COMMERCIALS. OLIVIER DID COMMERCIALS, TOO, BUT THEY WERE--THEY WERE ONLY COMMERCIALS RELEASED IN JAPAN. BECAUSE HE WAS AFRAID TO HAVE HIS ENGLISH-SPEAKING AUDIENCE RECOGNIZE HIS VOICE ON COMMERCIALS. ORSON SAID, NO, LET THEM PLAY, WHERE I'M PLAYING, AND HE MUST HAVE KNOWN HOW MUCH PEOPLE WERE GOING TO SNEER AT HIM AND LAUGH AS HIM FOR THAT. AND YET, IT'S AS IF HE HAS PERCEIVED THAT THE VOICE OF ADVERTISING IS A VOICE OUT THERE ON THE RADIO, AS VALUABLE, OR AT LEAST AS PRESENT, AS OTHER VOICES, AND YOU CAN'T DENY IT. YOU CAN'T JUST SORT OF SHOVE IT ASIDE. RIGHT. YOU CAN'T JUST ARTIFICIALLY SAY-- NO. THIS IS ART AND HERE, AND THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE OVER THERE. THAT'S RIGHT. IF I CAN GET YOU TO DRINK CRAPPY WINE, I MAY BE AN ARTIST. OR A CONJURER, AT THE VERY LEAST. OR A CON MAN. [LAUGHTER] WELL, THIS SEEMS LIKE A GOOD MOMENT TO TURN TO THE AUDIENCE, AND--IF I CAN SEE THE AUDIENCE, THE LIGHT IS SO BRIGHT. CAN WE BRING THE HOUSE LIGHT UP A BIT? YEAH. IS THAT POSSIBLE? GREAT. THAT'S BETTER, YEAH. GREAT. YEAH? A QUESTION ABOUT A-- IS THAT MIC ON? LIFT IT UP. YEAH, LIFT--YEAH. I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT... I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT SHAKESPEARE. [INDISTINCT] WE CAN'T HEAR HER. THE QUESTION'S ABOUT MacBETH, ABOUT WELLES' "MacBETH." IT'S ABOUT WELLES' "MacBETH." IT'S STILL NOT ON. I DON'T THINK. HELLO? FINE, THAT'S GOOD. WELLES' "MacBETH," I READ ABOUT IT ON THE FEDERAL THEATER PROJECT, SO THEN I WAS WONDERING. IT SOUNDED LIKE IT WAS REALLY ONE OF THE BEST PRODUCTIONS OF "MacBETH," AND THEY SET IT IN HAITI, WITH AN ALL-BLACK CAST-- THAT'S NOT THE FILM. NOT THE FILM, NO. HE MADE A "MacBETH" FILM LATER, BUT THAT, YEAH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FEDERAL THEATER-- THE FEDERAL THEATER PROJECT, YEAH. HAS ANYONE EVER DID ANYTHING ELSE WITH THAT? HAS ANYONE EVER DONE THAT AGAIN? HE WAS ONE OF THE FIRST PEOPLE TO ACTUALLY DO THAT. HE DID IT WITH "JULIUS CAESAR," AND HE DID IT WITH "MacBETH," THAT IS, TO CONTEMPORIZE THEM, TO BRING THEM UP-TO-DATE, YOU KNOW, TO CREATE A NEW SETTING FOR THEM, WHICH EVERYBODY DOES NOW. IT'S ANOTHER ASPECT OF THE KIND OF PIONEERING LEGACY OF HIS. YEAH. YEAH. OK. HIS DISCIPLES--PETER BOGDONAVICH, AND THE ONES THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR "ROCK THE CRADLE," WHICH WAS ABOUT THE W.P.A., ALSO "THE CAT'S MEOW," WHERE THEY PORTRAYED HEARST IN SUCH AN UNFLATTERING ROLE. NOW, DO YOU FEEL THAT THAT IS FAIR? IF "KANE" WAS CLOSER TO THE TRUTH, BUT THE YOUNG IMPRESSIONABLES WHO SAW IT IN THE '60s HAVE TAKEN IT TO AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT LEVEL, TO WHERE THEY HAVE, AS IN "ROCK THE CRADLE," THAT MARION DAVIES IS ACTUALLY TALLER THAN HEARST, AND THAT PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THAT THERE WAS A DIFFERENT IN SIZE, BUT IT WASN'T THAT. AND THAT ESPECIALLY WITH THE PORTRAYAL OF KILLING ANIMALS IN THE--"THE CAT'S MEOW." NOW, TO BRING THAT HATRED FORWARD--NOW, GRANTED, THAT THERE WASN'T A PERFECTION TO HEARST, NOR WAS THE ARROGANCE OF ORSON WELLES, ACCORDING TO HEDDA HOPPER, IN HER WRITINGS, THAT SHE'S THE ONE THAT TOLD HEARST TO HAVE THE LAWYERS LOOK AT THIS, AND SHE WAS AT THE CASTLE ON A REGULAR BASIS. DO YOU THINK THAT'S FAIR? ESPECIALLY WITH PETER BOGDONAVICH, WHO HAS AN ACTUAL HATRED IN HIS EYES WHEN YOU MENTION, THE W--MGM WANTING TO BUY THE FILM AND THAT, OF COURSE, HE SAID NO, AS FAR AS THAT GOES. IS IT FAIR TO BRING THE HATRED FORWARD? WELL, HATRED IS YOUR TERM. "THE CAT'S MEOW" WAS MADE, WHAT, FIVE YEARS AGO? YES. A LONG TIME AFTER THE DEATH OF ORSON WELLES, A LONG TIME AFTER THE DEATH OF HEARST, AT A TIME WHEN MR. BOGDONAVICH, WHO I THINK HAD LATELY GONE BANKRUPT FOR THE SECOND TIME IN HIS LIFE. I THINK IT TELLS YOU PERHAPS MORE ABOUT THE MAN WHO MADE IT THAN ANYTHING ELSE. I DON'T THINK, I REALLY DON'T BUY THE NOTION THAT WELLES HATED HEARST. I THINK HE TREATED HIM BADLY, I THINK THAT AT THE TIME HE MADE THE FILM, HE WAS NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN THAT, THAT WAS NOT OF CONCERN IN HIS MIND. YOU CAN SAY, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN. THAT'S UP TO YOU. I DON'T THINK IT WAS OF CONCERN. I SIMPLY DON'T SEE THAT THERE IS AN ONGOING FEUD BY THE FOLLOWERS OF WELLES AGAINST HEARST. AND I DON'T THINK "THE CAT'S MEOW" IS A FAIR EXAMPLE OF IT, EITHER. BUT OF THE LAST FOUR MOVIES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE, THEY ALL TREAT HIM AS SOME TYPE OF UNFLATTERING CHARACTER. IN EVERY SINGLE MOVIE THAT'S COME OUT SINCE THEN. AND THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT THE HISTORY OF "KANE" HAD AN EFFECT UPON THAT, BECAUSE YOUNG PEOPLE WILL RALLY TO THE CAUSE OF A FILM IF IT'S BEING PURSUED BY RICH AND POWERFUL PEOPLE, WITHOUT KNOWING THE FULL DETAILS. I THINK-- BUT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, DAVID NASAW'S BOOK CAME OUT, WHAT, I DON'T KNOW--FIVE OR SIX YEARS AGO? PRETTY GOOD BOOK, I THOUGHT. IT SEEMED TO ME THAT IT WAS A VERY FAIR BOOK, AND THAT IT TOLD THE HEARST STORY ACCURATELY AND I THINK THAT THERE HAVE BEEN AMENDS MADE THERE. I JUST DON'T SEE THERE BEING A BODY OF PEOPLE OUT TO GET HEARST. WELL, I THINK ALSO, ANOTHER THING IS JUST ABOUT TIME, AS WELL. THAT, IN FACT, JUST TALKING ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WHO A REAL HISTORICAL FIGURE IS, AND WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THAT PERSON'S PRESENCE IN WORKS OF FICTION, AND WHEN THEY'RE CLOSER IN TIME, THEN THERE'S MORE HOSTILITY, THERE'S MORE ANGER, THERE'S MORE EMOTION ABOUT IT, AFTER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, IT'S ON TWO TRACKS, ALMOST. THERE'S THIS FICTIONAL TRACK, HOW THIS PERSON HAS BEEN TREATED IN FILMS OR NOVELS OR WHATEVER IT IS, AND THEN THERE IS A HISTORICAL TRACK THAT HISTORIANS, THIS IS WHAT THE PERSON WAS REALLY LIKE, AND, UNFORTUNATELY, THE SAME--THAT, THOSE TWO CHARACTERS HAVE THE SAME NAME, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN ANOTHER 50 YEARS, JUST BACK TO DAVID'S QUESTION ABOUT WHO WILL BE REMEMBERED MORE, HEARST OR WELLES, THEY'LL BOTH BE REMEMBERED, BUT IN THEIR SEPARATE SPHERES. YEAH. I THINK THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE OF THAT. I MEAN, HEARST, I THINK, UM... HEARST IS THE VICTIM OF WELLES THE ANECDOTALIST. WELLES TOLD A STORY ABOUT WHEN KANE WAS OPENING IN SAN FRANCISCO. IN ONE OF THE HOTELS, HE GETS INTO THE ELEVATOR AND THERE IS HEARST IN THE ELEVATOR. AND ORSON OFFERS HIM A TICKET TO SEE THE FILM AND HEARST IS LEFT SPEECHLESS. THAT'S ORSON'S STORY. [LAUGHTER] I WROTE A BOOK ON WELLES, I'VE BEEN THROUGH HIS STORIES, IT WOULD NOT SURPRISE ME IF IT NEVER HAPPENED. [LAUGHTER] I HEARD IT DIFFERENT. THAT IT WAS AN IGNORING MOMENT. YOU KNOW, HEARST WAS A QUIETER MAN THAN WELLES IN A CERTAIN WAY. HEARST HAD THE VOICE OF THE WORLD, IN A CERTAIN SENSE, WITH HIS NEWSPAPERS, BUT PUT THE TWO MEN IN AN ELEVATOR AND WELLES COULD HAVE OUTTALKED HIM, PROBABLY. AND THAT'S THE THING THAT'S HARD TO GET OVER. PUT TWO PEOPLE ON TELEVISION FOR 60 SECONDS AND IF ONE PERSON HAS THE AUDIENCE ROARING WITH LAUGHTER, WHILE THE OTHER IS GOING PPTT-PPTT-PPTT-PPTT... HISTORY WILL LOOK AT THAT 60 SECONDS FOR 60 YEARS AND SAY, THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED BETWEEN THOSE TWO MEN. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE TRUTH. WELL, I THINK A LOT--TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE'S ANY TRUTH IN THAT ANECDOTE, IT'S CERTAINLY THAT WELLES BELIEVED THAT HE COULD HAVE CHARMED HEARST. THAT'S WHAT HE SAID. YES. HE TOOK THE--HE TOOK THE NEWSREEL TO SHOW IT TO HENRY LUCE. YES. YES. WENT TO HIM AND SAID, YOU KNOW, HERE. HERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS MAKING FUN OF YOUR "MARCH OF TIME," BUT YOU STILL SHOULD LOVE IT, BECAUSE I DID IT. YES. THANK YOU. OK. JUST A QUESTION FOR BOTH OF YOU ABOUT WELLES AS A CRAFTSMAN PERFORMER. HIS WORK ETHIC. WAS HE KNOWN, AND THINKING ABOUT THOSE EARLY YEARS, DURING THE "KANE" PERIOD, DID HE SHOW UP ON THE SET KNOWING HIS LINES, WAS HE HARD TO WORK WITH, WAS HE READY TO GO, DID HE WASTE TIME OR REQUIRE EXTENSIVE RE-SHOOTS BECAUSE HE WAS ERRATIC? I JUST WONDERED IF YOU COULD COMMENT ON THAT. WELL, DAVID KNOWS THE DETAILS OF THIS BETTER THAN I, BUT I--I WOULD SAY THAT, I MEAN, TO ME, JUST TO START THAT OFF, WELLES OFTEN REMINDS ME OF THOSE CONSTRUCTION PEOPLE THAT YOU HIRE, WHO COME IN AND, YOU SAY, LOOK, I'M GOING TO REDO THE GARAGE, AND THEY SAY, LOOK, HERE'S ALL THESE GREAT THINGS WE'RE GOING TO DO. WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THIS AROUND, WE'RE GOING TO--AND THEY START THE WORK, THEY'RE FANTASTIC, THEY'RE DOING A BEAUTIFUL JOB. TWO-THIRDS OF THE WAY THROUGH, THEY'RE BORED, AND THEY'RE ONTO THE NEXT JOB. THAT IS, THERE'S A VISIONARY SIDE, A VISIONARY INCOMPLETENESS ABOUT IT, AND IN A CERTAIN SENSE, "KANE" IS THE MOST COMPLETE. WELL, "KANE" AND "TOUCH OF EVIL" I THINK ARE THE MOST COMPLETE IN THAT WAY. YEAH, I WOULD GIVE TWO ANSWERS. THE FIRST ONE IS, I CAN POINT TO THE PERIOD OF SEVERAL YEARS IN HIS LIFE. IT'S THE YEARS JUST BEFORE "KANE" IS MADE, WHEN HE QUITE LITERALLY--IF YOU COUNT ACTIVE PRIVATE LIFE AS A JOB--WAS WORKING 20 HOURS A DAY. AND IN THAT PERIOD, HE WAS ALWAYS THERE AND HE WAS ALWAYS WORD PERFECT, AND MORE THAN WORD PERFECT, HE WAS COMING OUT WITH GREAT LINES FOR OTHER PEOPLE. BUT I--I THINK, LEO'S DEAD RIGHT, THAT LATER ON, SOMETHING LIKE BOREDOM AFFLICTED HIM, AND I THINK HE'S THE KIND OF MAN WHO WOULD HAVE SAID, WELL, SORRY, MR. BRAUDY, BUT I'VE GOT ANOTHER JOB, AND MR. BRAUDY SAYS, BUT MY GARAGE IS A JAPANESE TEA GARDEN. SURPRISE! EXACTLY. AND THAT'S WHY YOU HOLD BACK 30% OF THE FEE. THAT'S RIGHT, THAT'S RIGHT, YES. YES. JUST WANTED TO DO A QUICK ANECDOTE AND FOLLOW UP WITH A QUESTION. MANY YEARS AGO IN NEW YORK, I HAD A CHANCE TO MAKE THE ACQUAINTANCE OF LYNWOOD DUNN, THE SPECIAL EFFECTS ARTIST FOR WHOM THE THEATER WAS NAMED FOR. AND IN THE CONVERSATION, SOMEONE ASKED HIM, THEY SAID, YOU WORKED WITH SO MANY FILMMAKERS GOING BACK TO "KING KONG," YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU WERE AN APPRENTICE, HE SAYS, DID YOU EVER--THE WORD "GENIUS" IS THROWN AROUND SO MUCH. DID YOU EVER MEET A REAL GENIUS? AND HE SAID, "ORSON WELLES." AND HE SAID THAT WHEN HE STARTED ON--ON "CITIZEN KANE," DUNN SAID, I HAD TO EXPLAIN TO HIM WHAT AN OPTICAL PRINTER WAS, BECAUSE HE'D NEVER SEEN ONE. AND HE SAYS, WELL, WE CAN TAKE A FILMSTRIP OF A--OF AN ANCIENT ROMAN CITY AND A PERSON, AND I CAN PUT YOU IN THE ANCIENT ROMAN TOY CITY. AND HE SAYS, BY THE END OF THE DAY, WELLES WAS SUGGESTING SHOTS THAT HE NEVER THOUGHT OF AND HAD NOT ONLY MASTERED IT BUT WAS COMING UP WITH IDEAS, LIKE THE ONE OF GOING THROUGH THE NEON SIGN WHEN THEY GO THROUGH, YOU KNOW, THE WINDOW. AND DUNN GOES, YOU CAN'T DO THAT. AND HE SAYS, YES, YOU CAN. YOU CAN DO IT, YOU KNOW, LIKE THIS. AND, JUST, A QUESTION. I JUST WANT TO KNOW, WHAT DID YOU THINK OF THAT HBO THING, "RKO 281?" THE ONE WITH LIEV SCHREIBER PLAYING WELLES AND ABOUT THE STORY OF THE MAKING OF THE FILM. >> I DIDN'T SEE IT. >> WELL, PLAYING ORSON WELLES IS VERY HARD, AND I DID NOT-- THAT DID NOT WORK FOR ME BECAUSE SCHREIBER, I FELT, WAS TOO CONTAINED. THE BEST WELLES PERFORMANCE I KNOW IS--IT'S SORT OF ONE SCENE. IT'S IN "ED WOOD." [LAUGHTER] IT'S VINCENT D'ONOFRIO DOES IT, AND TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. I THINK HE REALLY GOT ORSON IN IT, IN THAT ONE SCENE. BUT IT, YOU KNOW, FOR ONE SCENE, IT'S EASIER TO PLAY THAN FOR A WHOLE FILM. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. IN 1979 WHEN JEAN RENOIR DIED, ORSON WELLES DID THE OBITUARY FOR THE "L.A. TIMES." IT WAS, IT WAS VERY MOVING, AND VERY LOVELY, AND IT SAID, REALLY IN A WAY, HE SAID IT WAS AS IF HE WAS WRITING ABOUT HIS OWN SELF IN THAT OBITUARY. I THINK--HAVE YOU, DO YOU KNOW THE-- I'VE READ IT. I DON'T KNOW-- YES. IT'S WONDERFUL. WHAT PART OF IT, WHAT PART OF IT PARTICULARLY? I MEAN, THE WHOLE WAY HE DESCRIBES RENOIR, AND WHICH, YOU KNOW, HE LOVED "THE GRAND ILLUSION." YEAH. YEAH. BUT HERE'S--THIS IS THE COMMENT. I SOLD THAT RESTAURANT, MA MAISON, IN 1985. AND I WAS IN THERE DURING ESCROW, AND HE WAS THERE. AND HE WAS, HE SAID, "YOU KNOW, YOUNG LADY--" I WASN'T A YOUNG LADY, BUT ANYWAY, HE SAID, "YOU KNOW, YOUNG LADY," HE SAID, "I'M VERY UNHAPPY," HE SAID, "THAT YOU SOLD THIS RESTAURANT." I SAID TO HIM, "I'M SO SORRY." AND THEN HE DIED TWO MONTHS LATER AND I ALWAYS FELT IT WAS SORT OF MY FAULT. [LAUGHTER] GREAT. NO MORE TAKE-OUT FROM MA MAISON. YES? HI. I'M LOWERING THIS, AND I'M IN THE WHITE BOX. ANYWAY, YOU BOTH WERE SAYING, AND AS WE ALL KNOW THAT SINCE '62, "CITIZEN KANE" IS ALWAYS VOTED THE BEST FILM, OR ONE OF THE BEST, AND, I DON'T KNOW, UP THERE WITH "CASABLANCA," OR WHATEVER. BUT, CONSIDERING THAT, AND CONSIDERING ALL THE HOLLYWOOD HOOPLA AND ADVERTISING ABOUT FILMS, I USUALLY IGNORE IT. BUT THE ONE LAST YEAR THAT REALLY ANNOYED ME, AND I WAS WONDERING HOW BOTH OF YOU FELT ABOUT IT, I GUESS IT WAS THE ARROGANCE OF THEM TO COMPARE "THERE WILL BE BLOOD" TO "CITIZEN KANE." IT REALLY BOTHERED ME, STRONGLY ENOUGH TO WRITE TO THE "L.A. TIMES" AND I GOT MY COMMENT PUBLISHED, AND THEY CALLED IT "THERE WILL BE CRUD." BUT ANYWAY, UH... DID THAT BOTHER YOU? IT WAS ONE I REALLY FELT I COULDN'T IGNORE. HOW DID YOU FEEL ABOUT IT? WELL, I LIKED "THERE WILL BE BLOOD." AND I JUST THOUGHT THEY WERE COMPARING IT, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE ER--THE PIONEERS OF EARLY CALIFORNIA AND THE KIND OF, THAT, THE KIND OF CHARACTER, THE KIND OF EGO THAT-- YEAH, THERE WERE SOME PARALLELS. THAT WAS NECESSARY TO CREATE THIS WORLD AND THE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS IN "KANE," TOO. I MEAN, THE KIND OF EMPTINESS AT-- THE VOID. EMOTIONAL EMPTINESS-- AT THE END. AT THE END. SO, IT DIDN'T BOTHER ME. OK. AND YOU, SIR? WELL, I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT YOU WRITE LETTERS TO THE PAPER AND GET THEM PUBLISHED. NOT OFTEN, BUT IT MOVED ME TO DO IT. WELL, NO, BUT DO IT, AND-- BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU, LIVING IN THIS CITY, AND IF HOLLYWOOD PUBLICITY IS A SUBJECT THAT VEXES YOU, YOU MUST WRITE A LOT OF LETTERS. [LAUGHTER] I DON'T, BUT I'LL WRITE SOME MORE. THANK YOU BOTH. THANKS. THIS IS IN RELATIONSHIP TO SOME OF THE EARLIER COMMENTS ABOUT THE WELLES VERSUS HEARST FEUD. I TEACH U.S. HISTORY, AND ABOUT EVERY SEMESTER I GET AN E-MAIL FROM A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT WHICH IS ASKING ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS RIGHT OR WRONG FOR TRUMAN TO DROP THE ATOMIC BOMB. AND MY STANDARD ANSWER IS, THAT'S REALLY MORE OF A QUESTION FOR AN ETHICIST, RATHER THAN AN HISTORIAN, AND THAT REALLY TRUMAN DID NOT NECESSARILY MAKE THAT DECISION OUT OF A VACUUM. THERE WERE TREMENDOUS POLITICAL PRESSURES FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT, FROM THE MILITARY, AND DIFFERENT DIVISIONS WITHIN THE MILITARY THAT GO INTO THAT DECISION. AND CERTAINLY THE DECISION TO TRY TO BLOCK "CITIZEN KANE'S" RELEASE BY HEARST AND THE OTHER STUDIOS ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE TRYING TO DO WHAT THEY PROBABLY THINK IS HEARST'S, YOU KNOW, GENERAL DESIRE. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE'S REALLY SORT OF PURSED THROUGH THE HISTORY TO SEE HOW PERSONALLY INVOLVED HEARST WAS INVOLVED IN THAT OR NOT. I'M NOT PARTICULARLY SURE. BUT I AM INTERESTED IN TO WHAT EXTENT YOU MIGHT THINK THAT THE LEGEND OF THE TWO, THIS CONFLICT BETWEEN THESE TWO GIANTS OF CREATIVITY AND INDUSTRY, HAS LED TO KEEP THE LEGEND AND THE LEGACY OF THIS MOVIE ALIVE. WELL, I THINK IT'S HARD TO DISENTANGLE THOSE ELEMENTS FROM THE QUALITIES OF THE MOVIE. I MEAN, THE MOVIE HAS TREMENDOUS AESTHETIC QUALITIES, AND IT, AS WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING, HAS TREMENDOUS VISUAL AND SOUND. I MEAN, THE WHOLE--THE WHOLE PACKAGE THERE. BUT I THINK ALSO, YOU'RE RIGHT. THAT IS, THE--THE INABILITY OF THE FACT THAT IT SEEMS TO BE IN GREAT PART ABOUT A LIVING PERSON BY ANOTHER LIVING PERSON WHO HAD A CAREER THAT RESONATED WITH SOME OF THE THEMES OF THE FILM. THAT CREATED A FIGURE, A ROMANTIC FIGURE OF THE ARTIST, YOU KNOW, FIGHTING AGAINST PEOPLE TRYING TO QUASH HIS CREATIVITY, A KIND OF MYTH THAT COULD BE PICKED UP BY LATER, LATER FILMMAKERS OR ARTISTS OF ANY SORT, YOU KNOW, TO VALIDATE THEIR OWN STRUGGLES. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE ALL PART OF THE PACKAGE THERE, AND IN A SENSE, YOU KNOW, BACK TO DAVID'S QUESTION ABOUT HOW LONG THE FILM WOULD LAST, IT HAS SO MANY OF THOSE ELEMENTS. THINGS THAT LAST, IT SEEMS TO ME, CAN BE INTERPRETED IN A MULTITUDE OF WAYS THERE. IF IT WERE JUST A FILM IN ITSELF, IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T LAST IN THE SAME WAY. BUT BECAUSE IT HAS ALL THESE OTHER RESONANCES AND IS OPEN TO CONFLICT AND DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION FROM A VARIETY OF POINTS OF VIEW, IT'LL HAVE THAT LASTING POWER. BOTH OF YOU SAID THAT YOU THOUGHT THERE WERE STRIKING SIMILARITIES BETWEEN MARLON BRANDO AND ORSON WELLES. CAN YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ON THAT? AND ONE OF YOU SAID THAT YOU THOUGHT ORSON WELLES WAS SMARTER THAN MARLON BRANDO. WHICH OF YOU SAID THAT? I SAID THAT. AND, AND WHY? LET ME ADD, WHICH DO YOU THINK WAS A BETTER ACTOR? [LAUGHTER] NO, QUITE CLEARLY, ONE WAS BETTER THAN THE OTHER. NO, NO, NO, VERY DIFFERENT STYLES, I WOULD SAY. I THINK THAT IF YOU TAKE THE BRANDO-- FIRST SIX MOVIES-- OF THE GREAT--YEAH, FIRST SIX MOVIES, OK, YEAH, AND "STREETCAR" ON STAGE, WHICH I DIDN'T SEE, OBVIOUSLY. BUT I THINK THAT THAT MAN WAS A BETTER ACTOR THAN WELLES COULD EVER HAVE BEEN. BUT I AGREE VERY MUCH WITH LEO, THAT I THINK SOMETHING HAPPENED TO BRANDO WHEREBY HE CAME NEITHER TO TRUST NOR LIKE HIS OWN TALENT, AND I THINK THAT HAD HAPPENED TO WELLES AS AN ACTOR EARLIER, SO THAT THEY BOTH REACHED A POINT WHERE THEY FELT THEY WERE BOGUS. IN TERMS OF INTELLIGENCE, WELL, THERE ARE SO MANY WAYS YOU CAN MEASURE THAT. IN TERMS OF HOW MUCH SOMEBODY KNOWS ABOUT THE WORLD HISTORY, AND WORLD LITERATURE AND RELIGIONS, I THINK WELLES WAS FAR AHEAD. AND I SAY THAT FROM A CLOSE STUDY OF WELLES, AND FROM HAVING HEARD A GOOD MANY TAPES OF BRANDO JUST TALKING. I THINK WELLES KNEW MORE THAN BRANDO. I THINK IN TERMS OF DEALING WITH PEOPLE, GETTING THEM TO DO WHAT YOU WANT, MANIPULATING PEOPLE, BRANDO WAS PRETTY GOOD. YEAH, THEY BOTH WERE. YEAH. LEO, ARE YOU THE ONE THAT WROTE "ON THE WATERFRONT?" YEAH. YEAH. I HAVE NOT READ THAT BOOK, BUT I'D LIKE TO. I MEAN, YOU WROTE THAT BECAUSE-- BECAUSE I LIKED THE MOVIE. IS IT A GREAT MOVIE? IT'S A GREAT MOVIE, AND I WOULD JUST-- ANY BETTER? HMM? ANY BETTER, DO YOU THINK? ANY BETTER THAN "CITIZEN KANE?" OR BETTER THAN WHAT? WELL, YOU KNOW, IT'S HARD TO COMPARE. NO, I MEAN, YES. THE BEST MOVIE--THIS WHOLE WEEK, IT'S BEEN A THREAD THROUGH OUR DISCUSSION, THIS WHOLE IDEA OF THE BEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME--AND I THINK, WHICH IS A KIND OF FALLACIOUS WAY OF LOOKING AT IT, BUT I WOULD ADD TO WHAT DAVID SAID ABOUT BRANDO. I THINK BRANDO, ALMOST FROM THE START, BELIEVED HIS ABILITY WAS BOGUS, AND THE INTERESTING PART OF IT IS, TO ME, IS THAT BRANDO WAS ESSENTIALLY A REALISTIC ACTOR. I MEAN, AN ACTOR WHO WAS TRYING TO PRESENT A SEMBLANCE OF REALITY, TO INVEST THE CHARACTER WITH A PSYCHOLOGY, WITH A DEPTH, WITH, WITH AN INNER LIFE. BUT HE, EVEN SO, HE FELT THAT HIS ABILITY TO DO THAT WAS FRAUDULENT IN SOME SENSE, PERHAPS BECAUSE IT WAS TOO EASY FOR HIM TO DO, YOU KNOW, AND MISTRUSTING THE THINGS THAT YOU DO EASILY. WELLES WAS A MORE, IN QUOTATION MARKS, "THEATRICAL" ACTOR. HE WAS SOMEBODY WHO, WHO WAS AN IMPRESARIO, A MAGICIAN. HE COULD PUT IT ON, YOU KNOW. HE LIKED COSTUMES, HE LIKED THINGS. NOW, BRANDO IN SOME SENSE BECOMES WELLES, I THINK, IN HIS LATER CAREER. THAT IS, HE TAKES CERTAIN KINDS OF TRICKS THAT WELLES DOES. ALMOST ALL OF BRANDO'S LATER PERFORMANCES ARE EXAGGERATED IN THAT SENSE. HE'S TRYING TO--HE'S TRYING TO BE THAT KIND OF THEATRICAL CHARACTER. HE, YOU KNOW, HE CREATES A NEW NOSE FOR EVERY PART, THINGS LIKE THAT. SO I MEAN, THERE'S AN INTERESTING INTERSECTION BETWEEN THE TWO. BUT, I MEAN, IT'S PART OF HIS OWN PSYCHOLOGY, AND THAT--THAT THIS DESIRE TO--THIS ABILITY TO REVEAL HIMSELF AND TO HATE HIS ABILITY TO DO IT--BRANDO, I MEAN--AT THE SAME TIME. WELLES, TO ME, SEEMS TO BE ALWAYS MUCH MORE HIDDEN AS A PERFORMER THAN BRANDO DOES. THAT'S A TERRIFIC ANALYSIS. THANKS YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT WHO IN THE NEXT 50 YEARS WILL BE REMEMBERED MORE, WELLES OR HEARST. AND I COME FROM A WALL STREET BACKGROUND. AND ONE OF MY MENTORS SAID TO ME WHEN I WAS ABOUT 22, 23, DON'T YOU EVER GO TO HOLLYWOOD. THAT'S NOT--YOU DON'T THINK ABOUT THE MONEY THAT'S MADE THERE, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT REAL MONEY TO US. IT'S PLAY. SO, IN THINKING ABOUT HEARST, AND HE CERTAINLY SET AN EXAMPLE OF BEING NOT JUST A MOGUL, BUT PROBABLY A PRIME EXAMPLE OF A MULTIMEDIA MOGUL. I THINK WHEN HE--HE WASN'T CONCERNED ABOUT WHO HE WAS GOING TO REMEMBER, BECAUSE HE LED BY THE EXAMPLES THAT HE SET AND THE THINGS THAT HE CREATED. HE WAS A COLLECTOR, AND THE THINGS THAT HE COLLECTED WAS A REFLECTION OF--HERE'S MY CONCERN ABOUT HISTORY. AND AS WE LOOK AHEAD, BECAUSE I MADE A STATEMENT YESTERDAY ABOUT MAKING THOSE CONNECTIONS, I THINK THAT IN HIS SETTING AN EXAMPLE IN WHAT HE LEFT BEHIND FOR HIS FAMILY TO CARRY ON, THOSE BRIDGES WERE BUILT, SO THAT'LL GO ON. SO IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE "ME" AS OPPOSED TO CREATING AND INSTILLING A VALUE THAT WILL BE CARRIED ON, SO THAT'S A-- A LEGACY. A LEGACY, SO THAT'S ONE. AND THIS HEARST VERSUS WELLES THING, SOMEONE SAID TO ME, WELL, HEARST WAS A VISIONARY ON A GLOBAL SCALE. HE THOUGHT OF THE WORLD AS HIS STAGE, BY HIS HOLDINGS AND THE THINGS THAT HE DEVELOPED AROUND THE WORLD, AND THAT ULTIMATELY ENSUED BECAUSE OF WHAT HE STARTED MORE THAN A HUNDRED YEARS AGO. AND WELLES, WHILE HE WAS A VISIONARY ON THE STAGE, HE DIDN'T THINK GLOBALLY. HE THOUGHT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE STAGE, AND WHAT CAN COME, AND HOW PEOPLE REACT TO WHAT'S GOING ON, ON THE STAGE OR ON THE SCREEN. SO THERE'S KIND OF A DIFFERENTIAL, BUT BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, TO ME, IT'S--IT'S LIKE, I DON'T THINK EVEN THROUGH ALL THE CONFLICT EARLY ON, THAT WENT ON AND WAS CREATED OUT OF THE SENSATIONALIZATION OF WHAT WAS GOING ON BETWEEN WELLES AND HEARST, THAT HEARST CARED ABOUT IT. TO ME, BECAUSE HE WAS ALREADY AT A POINT, HE--FIRST OF ALL, HE WAS A LOT OLDER, BUT TWO, IT WAS MORE OF, HE ALREADY HAD SOMETHING THAT HE KNEW WAS GOING TO PROBABLY GO ON LONGER THAN--THAN WELLES. WELL, IF HEARST DIDN'T CARE, I THINK HE WOULD HAVE BEEN A MUCH SHREWDER PLAYER OF THE GAME. IF HE HAD NOT OPPOSED "CITIZEN KANE," IF HE HAD SAID, "EVERYONE'S ENTITLED TO THEIR SAY," I THINK THAT HE DARKENED HIS REPUTATION BY ALLOWING HIS SERVANTS TO BLACKEN AND TRACK THE FILM DOWN. AND IF HE DIDN'T CARE, AS YOU SUGGEST, THEN I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SMART THING FOR HIM TO DO, TO JUST TURN THE OTHER CHEEK. WELL, ALSO, POWERFUL PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO TELL OTHER PEOPLE TO DO THINGS. PEOPLE WILL DO THEM. THAT'S TRUE. NEVERTHELESS, AND, YOU KNOW, WHO WILL RID ME OF THIS MEDDLESOME PRIEST? YOU KNOW. [LAUGHTER] I WOULD SAY ONE OTHER THING. I THINK THERE ARE--THERE ARE COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD WHERE ORSON WELLES, HIS IMAGE, WOULD BE RECOGNIZED WHERE THE NAME "HEARST" IS STILL NOT KNOWN. I THINK WE ONLY HAVE TIME FOR ONE MORE QUESTION. A SHORT QUESTION. ALL RIGHT. TWO MORE. OK. I TORE UP HERE. WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT WELLES AND HIS DEPICTION OF HEARST, I STARTED THINKING ABOUT MARION DAVIES, BECAUSE I HAD SEEN SOME OF HER EARLY FILMS, AND I THINK SHE'S A VERY SOLID COMEDIENNE, AND I THINK THAT THAT PORTRAYAL OF HER IS, I MEAN, SUSAN ALEXANDER KANE IS NOT ONLY TALENT-FREE, SHE'S ALSO SHALLOW, PETULANT, SHE'S AWFUL. AND I JUST THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, WELLES CAME FROM THE THEATER. YOU'D THINK HE'D HAVE SOME SYMPATHY FOR ACTRESSES. I MEAN, WHAT WAS THAT HOSTILITY? I MEAN, THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE A HORRIBLE PORTRAIT OF MARION DAVIES. WELL, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS SOME TALKING IN THE PANEL THIS MORNING, OF COURSE, ABOUT THE REALITY OF MARION DAVIES. AND THAT, BUT TO ME, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT AGAIN, IS, HE'S NOT, I MEAN, WE'RE CAUGHT IN THIS, IS THIS SUPPOSED TO BE MARION DAVIES, OR IS THIS SOMETHING ELSE? IS THIS SUPPOSED TO BE HEARST, OR IS IT SOME KIND OF CONSTRUCTION HERE THAT'S DIFFERENT? AND AS I WAS SAYING BEFORE, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT DOROTHY COMINGORE SOUNDS TO ME A LOT MORE LIKE JEAN HARLOW IN THIS THAN SHE DOES IN, LIKE, MARION DAVIES. [INAUDIBLE QUESTION] HMM? [INAUDIBLE QUESTION] OK. ALSO, I WOULD JUST STRESS ONE THING THAT WAS SAID THIS MORNING, AND I CAN'T QUITE REMEMBER WHO SAID IT, SO I WON'T ATTEMPT TO CLAIM IT, BUT, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HURT MARION DAVIES' MOVIE CAREER MORE THAN HEARST. AND THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS A GREAT SADNESS, BECAUSE SHE WAS VERY, VERY FUNNY, AND CHAPLIN'S GREAT THING WITH HER WAS, BE FUNNY, YOU CAN DO IT. AND NOT A LOT OF WOMEN COULD BE FUNNY IN THOSE DAYS, AND SO... WELL, ALSO, AND IF YOU'VE NEVER HAD A CHANCE TO SEE "SHOW PEOPLE," YOU SHOULD SEE, IT'S WONDERFUL, SHE'S SO TERRIFIC IN IT. JUST DAZZLING. YES? JUST A QUESTION. WHY WAS HEARST CALLED THE "KENOSHA KID" IN HOLLYWOOD? NO, WELLES WAS. WELLES WAS. I MEAN, WELLES, I'M SORRY. BECAUSE HE WAS BORN IN KENOSHA, WISCONSIN. HE WAS BORN IN KENOSHA, WISCONSIN. THAT'S RIGHT. I KNEW THE ANSWER TO MY OWN QUESTION. [LAUGHTER] I WAS BORN TWO BLOCKS AWAY FROM HIM IN KENOSHA, WISCONSIN, SO... DO YOU KNOW, DO YOU KNOW WHICH NOVEL THE "KENOSHA KID" IS A CHARACTER IN? DOES ANYONE KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION? "GRAVITY'S RAINBOW," VERY GOOD. AND THAT'S WHERE I FIRST ENCOUNTERED IT, WHEN I WAS READING "GRAVITY'S RAINBOW." WELL, IT'S INTERESTING HOW MUCH, ACTUALLY, SINCE "GRAVITY'S RAINBOW" HAS COME UP, WE HAVE A FINAL, HOW MUCH PYNCHON IS INFLUENCED BY "CITIZEN KANE" AND BY THE IDEA OF THE STUDIO AND THAT THE PARANOIA AND THE EXPRESSIONISM. I MEAN, THE WHOLE THING. I MEAN, AND ALSO, JUST TO, "THE CRYING OF LOT 49," THE CHARACTER OF PIERCE INVERARITY IS LIKE A KANE FIGURE. I MEAN, THAT FIGURE, MAILER, IN "THE AMERICAN--" BARNEY OSWALD KELLY IN "AMERICAN DREAM." YEAH. YEAH. THAT KIND OF DYNAMIC FIGURE ALSO HAS A GREAT INFLUENCE IN AMERICAN FICTION THERE. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE]