#1 [url]

Mar 7 13 8:12 PM

Suzip -- it never got a distributor, so it was never released to the public (not even in Europe, I don't think)


I've been in email contact with Felix over the past year and he says that he has several films in production now, but which will probably not be released until 2014.  Until then, the last mainstream film he produced was "Edmund" (based on the David Mamet play) which you can find on Netflix or Amazon.  Its a pretty grim film - but then, Mamet is always pretty grim.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

suzip

Junior Member

Posts: 137

#2 [url]

Mar 7 13 11:00 PM

Jules Friend, I've said it before and will say it again - you are a star!!! Is there anything you cannot track down? I am green with envy and almost speechless in total admiration of your undoubted skills. Totally thrilled with Cahiers & with the info about Felix's films.  Many, many thanks. Suzip

Quote    Reply   

#3 [url]

Mar 8 13 4:36 PM

Suzip.  Thanks for the kind words, but I am no where near a star.  I used to be a journalist and find that those research skills come in handy when it comes to digging up all things OW.  As for Felix, I just sent him an email thanking him for Interlude (when it was released on DVD) and he replied that he had no idea Columbia was releasing it.  He had tried to get it released previously to no avail.  So, he was pleased to.  Since then, we've just communicated when new things come up -- such as the recent "Judas" DVD.  But, he does appreciate his father's fan base and is glad that all of us are keeping his memory alive.  


So, I'll be adding more Fahrenheit diaries today -- hate to admit, that now that I am getting the "whole" story (i.e. Truffaut's ideas of the film, etc. -- I can't fault Truffaut that much.  After all, he was the film director and the film was being made on his watch and any failure of the film would land on him (and not the actors).

Quote    Reply   
avatar

suzip

Junior Member

Posts: 137

#4 [url]

Mar 8 13 5:35 PM

Yes, I do realise that Truffaut was sorely tried. I read somewhere that OW was originally cast in the Cusack role and was moved up, so to speak, to accommodate Truffaut, Can this really be true? If so it would explain why OW annoyed Cusack by suggesting how he should play the role. As we all know, OW was nothing if not thorough in his detailed research and study.  More diaries! JF, you rock.

Quote    Reply   

#5 [url]

Mar 8 13 7:40 PM

Suzip.  You're right.  OW was originally set to play the part of the the Captain and was quite shaken when Truffaut asked him to play Montag instead.  He "suddenly started making demands - more money, etc." almost as if he wanted the demands to be so ridiculous, that he would not get the part.  


To OW's credit, Terence Stamp (who was originally supposed to play Montag) turned the role down because he believed that Julie Christie would have too much screen time because she would be playing two roles.  OW, on the other hand, wasn't concerned about this at all.  So, it does say something to his integrity as an actor that he wasn't comparing the minutes of screen time he would have over Julie.  

Quote    Reply   
avatar

suzip

Junior Member

Posts: 137

#6 [url]

Mar 8 13 11:08 PM

I read the following from Truffaut in London by Robert Murphy

Beyond Werner’s nervousness with flamethrowers and Truffaut’s catty remarks, there
was a fundamental conflict over how Montag should be played, particularly in his
relationship with Linda and Clarisse. Truffaut wanted Montag to act in an equally
dispassionate way with both women; Werner thought he should be impatiently
dismissive with Linda and increasingly affectionate towards Clarisse. Truffaut
complained that ‘Oskar’s performance isn’t as “cool” as I would like. Clearly he
doesn’t want to appear less intelligent than Clarisse, although that is the situation.
He always manages to sneak in a couple of unnecessary smiles’ (Truffaut 1966b: 20).
In support of Werner, Christie’s Clarisse bears little resemblance to the wise child of
the book, and it is hard to imagine Newman, Belmondo or Stamp acting in a more
‘cool’ way towards her gauche friendliness. The diary gives a one-sided picture but
there is at least the possibility that Werner was right and the film would have
benefited from Montag being a more human, more emotional character. The real
problem, however, is Clarisse.

I find this exceptionally interesting in that he believes OW to be correct in his understanding of how the role should be approached.

Quote    Reply   

#7 [url]

Mar 9 13 4:19 AM

Suzip.  That was a part of the article I especially liked, because it does - to some extent - vindicate OW's stance on the portrayal of the character, Montag.


In the actual diaries, Truffaut keeps writing about how the movie was "Science Fiction" and because of this, it could not hold by the "traditional" cinematic tropes -- i.e, romance, seduction, etc.  So, it seems as though Truffaut was trying to out-Science-Fiction Bradbury's characterization of Clarisse.  I'm beginning to think it had more to do with Truffaut's own insecurities of tackling a "Sci Fi" film (something he had never done and would never do again) then it had to do with anything else.  I also believe that OW knew which side his film-career bread was buttered on -- as a matinee idol.  It seems only natural that he would want to build on it in this film as with all the others up to then (and which he returned to with great success in "Interlude").  

But, essentially, the gist I get of the Truffaut/OW conflict during filming was what would happen with two brothers squabbling (with OW being the "older" and Truffaut the "younger").

Quote    Reply   
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help