Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Catangro After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Melanie Bouvet The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Abegail Noëlle While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

GManfred Prior to becoming a multimillionaire, the title character was the leader of an infamous gang in pre-WWII Poland. He hires an opportunist-drifter who breaks into his house to find out about his past, saying he has amnesia and can't remember anything, not even his real name.Sound intriguing? You bet. An interesting story? well, semi-interesting. It's festooned with plot holes and poor continuity, sorely in need of an editor. Plus, the main character represents what may be the worst casting job in the long history of Motion Pictures. His name is Robert Arden. Ever hear of him? Thought not. He was, in a word, dreadful. No subtlety, no nuance and wrecked this picture almost singlehandedly.Everybody wants to give Orson Welles and his genius their due. I think that is the main reason for many reviewers overrating this picture, and some of his genius is on display here, in fits and starts. Too often, however, his genius manifests itself in brief outbursts of megalomania as he postures and glowers before the camera in one of his too-frequent close-ups.The supporting cast ranges from excellent to superb, led by Akim Tamiroff and Katina Paxinou, both of whom had too brief appearances before the camera. As I said, there are flashes of brilliance, but not enough to pull this film up to a respectable rating. This is a seriously flawed movie.

dromasca One of the big problems of Orson Welles career as a director is to have made Citizen Kane so early. After having made what was almost immediately recognized as a masterpiece and one of the best movies in the history of cinema, all other films that came later where compared to that very high threshold.'Confidential Report' does not come dangerously close, but yet is a film that brings back a lot of memories of Kane, first by having Welles himself cast as the principal mystery and evil character of the film. It is unfortunately that the second main character in the film was not chosen to be an actor to match Welles. Robert Arden is far from being a memorable face or actor, and it is rather the other supporting characters that look much more interesting on screen. What we get beyond is one of the first international intrigue films in a genre that will make the James Bond series adored by crowds later, but filmed in an exquisite style by Welles and set in the post-war Europe and Mexico. Almost every scene is filmed from surprising angles, and is worth being enjoyed as a piece of art by itself. Does this look mannerist, maybe? Does it bother the viewer who just wants to enjoy an action film? I do not think so. Is it beautiful? Yes, it is beautiful in a cinematographic way, and this is what counts in my opinion.

Mike P Even the inherent beauty of an Orson Welles film and an interesting story can't overcome bad editing, terrible pacing, sub par acting and an awful dub. The problems start early on when you notice that, what do you know, the dialogue just doesn't really match the lip movements. They're always a bit ahead or a bit behind or just plain off. This is no mere technical gripe--the constant distraction ruined any chance of immersiveness that's so important to Welles' visual style, constantly reminding me that this is "just a movie." A further problem, which is kind of hard to explain in text, is that the lines are not read like dialogue for a movie. Instead, they're read just like a radio show--like there's nothing to pay attention to except whatever the characters are saying. This combined with the frenetic editing results in most of the film being an endless barrage of spoken narration and dialogue with nary a break between lines. It sounds like the actors are trying to get through the script as quickly as humanly possible, and thus the nice acting of many characters is lost because it all sounds so staged. Finally, the acting of two of the leads, Robert Arden and Paula Mori (including whoever dubbed her voice), is terrible. Their characters are supposed to provide a lot of the film's emotion, but they have no chemistry or charisma. Orson Welles himself does a nice job, but constantly seems to be overacting because he's matched against such wooden and cloying performances.The only reason one would watch this, except for being a Welles completist, is for some very beautiful camera-work, but even that is only on display in bursts here and there. And the story, while having a lot of potential, is told in such a haphazard way that it cannot be said to have been realized to any degree. The last quarter of the film in particular includes some actions by both Arkadin and Van Stratten that seem maddeningly incomprehensible, as well as a five-minute-long segment consisting almost entirely of a minor character repeatedly asking for goose liver.I would recommend watching The Lady From Shanghai instead of this for a film with similar themes that works despite even more pronounced attempts by the studio to butcher Welles' work.

emwolf There's just something about Orson Welles behind a camera (as well as in front). I saw this movie years ago on a public television station. The print was pathetic, however you could still pick out the extreme angles, deep focus, layered soundtrack and quirky characters that are the Wellesian touch.I recently purchased the Criterion set and was absolutely delighted. The back story of just about any Welles movie is generally at least as exciting as the movie itself, and this one is a doozy.I was watching one of the versions with my wife last year and she asked what year it was made. I think that Welles was perpetually about 50 years ahead of the curve. This is why his movies have a tremendous audience and respect now.