Henry Saw: Me and Orson Welles

Not...bad


Me and Orson Wells, the new film by Richard Linklater (the director behind Dazed and Confused, Before Sunrise/Sunset, and The School of Rock) is a minor movie but which entertains for its 114 minute running time.

The film tells the story of an 18 year old high school senior named Richard (High School Musical's Zac Efron) who wants to become a New York theater actor. One day, while walking around Manhattan's theater district, Richard meets the Mercury Theatre company players including Joseph Cotten, John Houseman, and Orson Welles (Christian McKay). Richard is able to convince Welles to cast him in a small part in Welles' soon to be opened production of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. What follows for Richard is a whirlwind week in which he finds his first love, learns about women from Joseph Cotton, and everything else he needs to know about the entertainment business from Orson Welles.



The main reason to see this film is McKay's performance as Orson Welles. McKay gives the best performance of Welles I've ever seen on screen. He's better than Liev Schreiber in RKO-281, Angus Macfadyen in Cradle Will Rock, Vincent D'Onofrio in Ed Wood (with Maurice LaMarche doing the voice), etc. Saying that he's just the best "Welles" of all time isn't going far enough. McKay is really strong here in capturing a man who knows what a creative genius he is, and arrogant about it, while still showing a clear love for what he's doing and some of those around him.

There's a scene in Citizen Kane where Kane is talking to his step-father about how much money his newspaper is losing and Kane says, "You're right, I did lose a million dollars last year. I expect to lose a million dollars this year. I expect to lose a million dollars next year. You know, Mr. Thatcher, at the rate of a million dollars a year, I'll have to close this place in... 60 years." Welles gives a devilish smile on the last line and I have a feeling McKay must have watched that scene on repeat because he nails that look throughout the film.

Which is not to say that McKay is doing an imitation (though of course there's some of that). He adds nuance and idiosyncrasies to the part, which help it feel very real, while also playing it larger than life, as is appropriate for Welles. Unlike Ray or Capote, which featured acting that I thought was more imitation than performance, it helps that Welles is a supporting character in this film. When it does feel like McKay is playing it too over the top, we can understand it as how Welles is seen through our protagonist's eyes, and how we see Welles today.



Speaking of our main character...Efron isn't bad in the film. He's not very good, and he's acted off the screen by McKay and Claire Danes, but he has the right amount of callowness and enthusiasm for the part. Danes, who is always boring but good, stands out here in a well written part. I also enjoyed James Tupper's Joe Cotten as he plays him as both a cad and a decent person all in one.

Linklater does a solid job of evoking the time and place. Everything looks a little clean and new, but again, that could be because we are seeing the world through Richard's excited eyes. Linklater doesn't overreach his grasp and stays focused on the main plot. Also, at the end, he knows when to leave Welles behind (though he gets a great final line) and focus on wrapping up the story of our main character.



I don't strongly recommend the film, it's not essential viewing unless you are a big fan of 1930's theater or Welles himself, but I won't knock the film either. It's perfectly pleasant, moves at a quick pace, and features a great supporting role. I know Christian McKay doesn't quite deserve to win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor (That's Christoph Waltz' to win) but McKay should definitely be in the running.

Grade: B

Best Scene: When Welles explodes at a stage hand...


P.S. Sorry I have to include some footage of my favorite version of Orson Welles of all time. From The Critic: