Review of The Magnificent Ambersons (1942) by Ernie P — 30 Mar 2008

Orson Welles had rotten luck with studios. I mean, really bad. I did a look-up on the history of the film (I admit it was on Wikipedia, but it's 3 in the morning so gimme a break), and I read there that about 40 minutes of the original cut of the film had been removed. Being familiar with the work of Welles, I wasn't all that surprised.

What did surprise me, upon reflection, was that "The Magnificent Ambersons" does not suffer in the lease from all these cuts. Hell, it's only Welles second best film after "Citizen Kane". It begins like a humourous examination of upper-class life - a skewering of sorts, but done in a light-hearted fashion. There's a point in the film (that I will not reveal) where the darkness begins to set in, and echoes of "Kane" are all over the place. The ending was a little too much on the happy side, but nothing to get worked up about. "Ambersons" is a surprisingly dark film about a rich family who either refuse to acknowledge or simply ignore the changing world around them. The consequences of their inactions are enormous - they lose everything that they never earned.

The acting is great. Joseph Cotten and Agnes Moorehead return from "Citizen Kane" and both give stellar performances, Moorehead especially. She was one of my favourite parts of "Kane", playing a mother who wants the best for her son even if it means she can no longer be with him. Here, her role is opposite - she is the aunt of the Tim Holt character, and she may be slightly insane. Her meltdown scene is both terrific and tragic.

Speaking of Tim Holt (does he remind anyone of Heath Ledger? Just wondering...), he gives the performance of the film as George Amberson Minaver. George is a spoiled brat rich kid, and is detested by everyone (outside the family) - they all eagerly await his "comeuppance". He eventually gets whats coming to him, but no one is around to see it.

Except us, of course. There's somewhat of a voyeuristic feel to this film - it's like peering into the private lives of the rich and famous from a small window. We get to see all the dirt and the scandal, or at least get hints of such things. And that's what makes "Ambersons" so good - it hints at what it cannot possibly say, such as the possibility of an Oedipal-type relationship between George and his mother and an Electra-type relationship between Lucy and her father. Welles is a master at this sort of sly suggestion, a talent that is even more put to use in his 1957 classic "Touch Of Evil". It's one of many reasons why I like old films in general.

Want some more? "Ambersons" isn't just a family drama, but it's also a comment on progress and the ability of society to adapt to change. There are two main families in the film, Amberson and Morgan. The former are fabulously wealthy throughout most of the film, with the family members basically living off the fortune of the family patriarch. The Morgans (of which one member has desperately tried for years to have a relationship with an Amberson) are self-made, inventors, and clearly living with the times. The Ambersons are depicted as ancient, antique, rigid, unwilling to yield. It is this lack of awareness that leads to their undoing. George is the representation of this rigidity - it becomes clear by the film's end that he has no real clue about how to make his own way. "Ambersons" is about a conflict between these two sets of values, and Welles' use of different shadings of black and white is brilliantly done as a way to show this conflict cinematically.

"The Magnificent Ambersons" most assuredly is a classic film along the lines of "Citizen Kane", and although they have similarities "Ambersons" is more like an unplugged version of "Kane". "Citizen Kane lite", if you will. There's 40 minutes missing, you say? Watch the film again. It's great to have 88 minutes of it. A masterpiece.