Chimes at Midnight (Orson Welles, 1965)

[criterion10]

On the other hand, the sound track was so murky, coupled with the Shakespearian dialogue and the accents, that 65% of the time I couldn't follow a single word being said. When people are using words and phrasing you’re not as familiar with, muffling the sounds makes figuring out what they're saying nearly impossible, where a more familiar use of English would have made the task bit easier. At least it gives you some templates or frames of reference.

Made the whole thing a desperate chore to watch, and I ended with no real enjoyment from the movie. I can’t help but wish for a DVD as well.

I caught a film print that screened tonight at the Harvard Film Archive and had the exact same problem. I originally attributed it to the low quality of the print itself (full of dirt, scratches, specks, hisses, crackles, pops, etc.), the Shakespearean dialogue, Welles mumbling most of his lines, and my own, sometimes poor, hearing. Though a quick glance around online seems to render this somewhat common among viewers.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I genuinely found it impossible to understand what was being said, no matter how hard I tried. I eventually gave up and just focused on the visuals, which admittedly contain Welles' usual great eye for framing. And the film's famous battle sequence is indeed rather well done.

This is a film I'd like to see again at some point in a restored print and with English subtitles.

EDIT: Just spot-checking the version uploaded to YouTube, the sound is significantly better. Still poor, but definitely better. Truth is, I probably should have walked out after realizing how bad the sound was.

Any idea if Macbeth or Othello have similar sound issues? Was considering seeing those when screening later this week.

[Drucker]

Macbeth has great audio. Catching the restoration of Othello tomorrow. Are you sure it was a print? The copy of this film I'm seeing Monday is a brand new restoration.

[Roger Ryan]

As a general rule, Welles' European productions tended to suffer poor soundtracks since his already low budgets were running pretty thin by the time he got to post-production dubbing. MACBETH, even though it was made through Republic Studios, has a fine soundtrack in keeping with the rest of his Hollywood work. OTHELLO, the restored version anyway, probably has the worst overall soundtrack in terms of intelligible dialogue since the restorers were working with damaged elements - this is especially frustrating since Welles' initial Cannes edit of the film still exists and has a much more robust and intelligible soundtrack. I've not found the soundtrack to CHIMES to be too troublesome; albeit the two times I saw the film screened, the prints were in excellent shape. I imagine the restoration done by Filmoteca Española would present this film in the best possible manner.

[criterion10]

Macbeth has great audio. Catching the restoration of Othello tomorrow. Are you sure it was a print? The copy of this film I'm seeing Monday is a brand new restoration.

It was definitely a 35mm print, and not a very good one. Harvard has an extensive library of film prints, and my guess is that this was all they had immediate access to. But, they will be showing the new restorations of both Macbeth and Othello (on DCP's).

OTHELLO, the restored version anyway, probably has the worst overall soundtrack in terms of intelligible dialogue since the restorers were working with damaged elements - this is especially frustrating since Welles' initial Cannes edit of the film still exists and has a much more robust and intelligible soundtrack.

*Great.* I might have to skip out on the Othello screening then, if it isn't so good.

[Roger Ryan]

OTHELLO, the restored version anyway, probably has the worst overall soundtrack in terms of intelligible dialogue since the restorers were working with damaged elements - this is especially frustrating since Welles' initial Cannes edit of the film still exists and has a much more robust and intelligible soundtrack.

*Great.* I might have to skip out on the Othello screening then, if it isn't so good.

...but the film looks fantastic, so...

[hearthesilence]

I was actually going to see this at Film Forum and theoretically could have made the Monday screening despite the weather, but now I have to bail on the Sunday screening. Really, really disappointed about that, but it's not a choice I can make in this case.

If anyone is going or went to Monday's screening, please let me now about this restoration, I'm curious as to how it sounds and how it looks.

I'm wondering if this was the same digital "restoration" that screened in Europe several years ago, which one poster here from Scotland said was disappointing, complaining about a soft image.

FWIW, here's what Joseph McBride said to I think Wellesnet about this DCP print:

[Film Forum programmer Bruce Goldstein] expects this revival of Chimes to be one of the major events of the retrospective. He obtained what is said to be a newly restored print from the Filmoteca Española...I actually don't think it needs restoration; I don't mind a little being out of synch, and it has a magnificent soundtrack. So I hope the restoration is what I first saw in 1967 when I watched it three times in a row on one night at a Chicago theater...

[Drucker]

For what it's worth, this looks to be a youtube rip of the Mr. Bongo DVD.

Is it this restoration, though, which talks about a Stereo/remixed soundtrack.

I couldn't make it Monday, as the trains stopped running out of NYC. This looks like it'll be the one film I'll miss.

[hearthesilence]

Good lord, the one involving Dawson? I think I posted about that same exact restoration project years ago, way back on this board's earlier incarnation. I remember when they screened that same benefit in Chicago (which I didn't see - I had yet to move to the city), and I remember Michael Wilmington discussing in the Tribune how it was a work-in-progress. Amazing how it's taken them so long to do an audio restoration. Sad to miss it, it certainly sounds promising (and no re-recording like Othello, just remixing pre-existing elements, correct?)

[criterion10]

OTHELLO, the restored version anyway, probably has the worst overall soundtrack in terms of intelligible dialogue since the restorers were working with damaged elements - this is especially frustrating since Welles' initial Cannes edit of the film still exists and has a much more robust and intelligible soundtrack.

*Great.* I might have to skip out on the Othello screening then, if it isn't so good.

...but the film looks fantastic, so...

Well, I ended up going, and yes, the film does indeed look fantastic. Othello is definitely one of Welles' richest films on a visual level. The camera angles, the lighting.. all to die for. Really stunning, especially on the big screen.

I can definitely see why some have criticized the sound though. For one, the score, at times, feels like a modern, 90s redux of what would have been composed when the film was initially released. And some of the dialogue is indeed hard to understand. though nowhere near as bad as Chimes at Midnight. (Iago's dialogue in particular was difficult to make out.)

I really do hope that Criterion can release one of the alternate versions of Othello that is presumably closer to Welles' vision. It seems as the two main preceding versions (i.e. Cannes cut and American cut) render this "Beatrice" restoration unnecessary.

[hearthesilence]

I was under the impression that for Dawson, the main motivation behind the Othello restoration was the over-modulation on the score and the bits of dialogue that fell out of synch. I can understand how those would get under his skin - the score was poorly recorded, there's no way that would've been acceptable for a commercially released classical recording - but re-recording rarely works out well, even with vintage equipment. Re-synching dialogue isn't a questionable choice though - just look at the Touch of Evil restoration, it's an unqualified, hands down improvement.

[Roger Ryan]

I was under the impression that for Dawson, the main motivation behind the Othello restoration was the over-modulation on the score and the bits of dialogue that fell out of synch. I can understand how those would get under his skin - the score was poorly recorded, there's no way that would've been acceptable for a commercially released classical recording...

This may very well have been the case with the elements that Mr. Dawson was working with for the restoration, but the original score as heard in the "Cannes" edit I saw screened ten years ago was not over-modulated. I think Welles reworking the soundtrack for the U.S. version resulted in some compromising sound issues that have, more or less, continued through this latest restoration release. I was pleased, however, that the score was presented in mono when I saw the film this past November - that helped make the 90s re-recording blend a little better with the rest of the soundtrack.

Good lord, the one involving Dawson? I think I posted about that same exact restoration project years ago, way back on this board's earlier incarnation. I remember when they screened that same benefit in Chicago (which I didn't see - I had yet to move to the city), and I remember Michael Wilmington discussing in the Tribune how it was a work-in-progress. Amazing how it's taken them so long to do an audio restoration. Sad to miss it, it certainly sounds promising (and no re-recording like Othello, just remixing pre-existing elements, correct?)

I believe the Dawson restoration was put on hold back in the 90s when the dispute over who owned the rights flared up again. You are correct that the restoration attempt was primarily to clean up the audio and provide better dialogue synchronization (there were also a few attempts at creating a more dynamic spatial relationship between dialogue and sound effects). Welles himself was reportedly dismayed that the first reel of CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT had a synchronization problem when it was first released in theaters, so I see nothing wrong with attempting to correct that for a new restoration. I saw two reels of the Dawson restoration about eight years ago (they were integrated with the film as a whole for comparison purposes) and, frankly, it was difficult to notice much difference between the existing reels and the restored reels.

The version of CHIMES that is making the rounds this year is reportedly a new restoration provided by Filmoteca Española and is not related to the Dawson restoration.

[hearthesilence]

Turns out, Beatrice Welles is doing a Skype Q&A for Film Forum's screening on Sunday night. Has she ever made public appearances before (if a Skype interview could be called that)?

Also, apparently this DCP restoration was screened in Australia in May of last year. (scroll down for info)

[John Edmond]

It was. I caught it. It looks beautiful and no problem leaped out at me, but I hadn't seen Chimes for a decade. Maybe lower contrast than I expected.

[hearthesilence]

Nice! How was the sound?

FWIW, I looked at that YouTube link Drucker posted (thanks!), and there are a few spots in the ADR with synch issues, but in general it sounds like it was cleaned up. The giveaway was a few spots where there was rumbling present - no high-end hiss or surface noise, but the low or mid-range rumble is still present. I take it the noise was too difficult to wipe clean. (Ever listen to CD's of old 78 transfers that have been mostly NoNoised? It's almost similar to that - most of the track will be clean but you hear that rumble of surface noise pop up.)

[Drucker]

A new 4k restoration of Chimes will be playing at Film Forum in early January. Hopefully this looks better than the restoration that played last year (with reel change circles and a very grey look!) and will be the basis for a home video release.