Round Four - Welles v Scott

Even at the beginning of this showdown, before having seen any of Orson Welles' movies, I knew that Tony Scott winning was a longshot. We even tried to use his best work and threw out our viewing of Enemy of the State because we didn't think it was a good enough example of Scott's ability. This was my first time seeing Citizen Kane, and even though the end twist had already been revealed to me, it was one of the most enjoyable movie watching experiences I've had. Good luck, Mr. Scott. You're going up against one of the masters.


Citizen Kane

As I said, one of the best times I've had watching a film. I had planned on watching this movie a few times before and have heard that there isn't much point, the film is basically long and boring, and the secret of the end isn't all that exciting. It's also interesting to watch a film that has been parodied and referenced in television and film culture for my entire life; it's like retroactive explanation of a thousand jokes happening in one fell swoop. Maybe I was so impressed by this film because I spent a lot of my childhood watching old black and white movies with my mom and the slow pace of the scenes and early technology weren't something to overcome for me. Actually, almost completely opposite to this reaction, I found myself blown away by the impressive and risky format of the movie story (starting a biopic with a fabricated news reel and then moving into flashbacks through interview without overlying narration) as well as the incredibly prophetic use of technology. Welles, who came from the realm of theater, broke into film direction with this masterpiece in a way that made plain his genius; the revolutionary uses of film exposure, set transitions, and sequences changed film forever. I couldn't believe that this was his first movie and I found myself yearning to have been alive at a time when I could have seen his acting on stage with nothing but distance and air between us. The story was engaging and brilliant, the characters complex and the acting graceful, and the breakthroughs in film technology evident and impressive. This has been one of the movies in this competition that makes the entire enterprise worth undertaking and has just blown me away.

True Romance

I had seen this movie before it showed up in our competition and enjoyed it very much. Despite the intense violence and apparently twisted messages about what love, commitment, and heroism entail, I had loved the bald nature of the characters, the apparent passion and devotion and the willingness for the film to display its own ridiculousness. I've decided that the way I like to interpret the movie is as a critique on Hollywood and the movie industry. In the course of the film, we see each character act out the scripts that have been supplied to them through pop culture (mainly movies). Our lead man kills someone for his new love, the devoted father provokes a mob boss to protect his son, the new wife allows herself to be beaten rather than betray her love, and all the tough guys (body guards, cops, and criminals) refuse to back down. In all of these situations, the easier, more logical option is completely ignored, even though the painful and often deadly results of these "ideal" acts of bravery and love end up doing nothing to prevent the force each character finds themselves up against from getting what they came for.

Touch of Evil

We watched the director's cut of this crime drama, and I can see that Orson Welles had an idea of what kind of message he wanted his movie to make. The story of crime which occurs between and crosses borders is one of corruption and sacrifice, and we see (a much larger) Welles as the main character once more: a cop near the end of his career who has found that treachery often works better than truth in the space between right and wrong, the border between doing what is right for the sake of right and creating a "just" outcome through unjust means. Charlton Heston was entirely distracting throughout the movie as the younger Mexican officer who still perceives the law as justice and has not yet been affected or poisoned by his position on the border. I'm certain they could have chosen from among the very competent Spanish-speaking actors instead of using the overtanned white dude with no attempt at an accent. One controversy that may have caused this choice in actor is the fact that Heston's character was married to a white woman in the film, and while she is bustled around during the conflict between the lawmen, it becomes clear that she has difficultly making sane decisions. Overall the film was interesting and worthwhile, even though at times the choices of the director and studio seemed questionable.

Crimson Tide

As far as submarine dramas go, this one isn't bad. I love Denzel Washington and Gene Hackman and they spark when they meet in this film as ideologically opposed naval officers managing the possible need for nuclear missile use when communication with command is impeded. The film is dramatic and action-filled, and we see the characters clash and disagree as powerful forces with convincing conviction. Viggo Mortensen is brilliant in a supporting role, but this film didn't really do anything new for me. It had suspense and action, politics and moral dilemmas, sweaty dudes and danger, but I found myself bored and disconnected. There are a huge amount of movies with all of these things to choose from, and this one didn't rock my boat at all.


So, I'm sure it's entirely evident (if simply based upon the two names being next to one another in a competition) that Orson Welles beat Tony Scott in this match. Good game, guys. Sorry we didn't get to see Man on Fire, Mr. Scott, it didn't rate as high as Crimson Tide on Rotten Tomatoes. And Mr. Welles, welcome to the ranks of tier two in our honorable director showdown!