Reviews & Ratings for
The Magnificent Ambersons More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 9:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]

Index

87 reviews in total

---

76 out of 80 people found the following review useful:
Welles' slicing look at the downfall of a careless family parallels the film's treatment in 1942..., 20 May 1999

Author: Donald J. Lamb from Philadelphia, PA

People may initially be thrown by the title MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS. Some may consider it a stuffy period piece before seeing it if they know only of the novel. Don't make this mistake if you have not witnessed this cinematic milestone. The title, of course, is caustic and refers to the 19th century family sarcastically. Who else but the great Orson Welles could follow up a masterwork like CITIZEN KANE with such a cynical and important drama. The "magnificence of the Ambersons" is neither grand, nor respectable. It is tragic and doomed, epitomized by young "Georgie" (played by Tim Holt), whose main ambition in life is to be a yachtsmen. He is buried under the lore of his family name and he is headed towards his well-deserved "comeuppance".

The film itself, like many of Welles' great pictures, was absolutely butchered by the studio (RKO Pictures) and destroyed the credibility of the young auteur. In many ways, the mess surrounding the film's release, the tragedy and loss of the Ambersons, and the theme of modern technology "taking over" all come together to leave all parties disappointed. Disapproving moviegoers miscalculated the message, led the studio to make the cuts behind Welles' back, and placed a lot of artists in some bad situations. (For an excellent account of this truly remarkable story behind the film, read Joseph McBride's bio "Orson Welles") 50 minutes of film were burned, however, the 88 minutes left for us to see contain some incredible, even revolutionary moments.

Joseph Cotten plays his consummate "2nd place" character, a man unable to have his real true love. (See THE THIRD MAN, NIAGARA) He is in love with an "Amberson" (probably the only righteous family member played by Dolores Costello) but loses out to a more "respectable" man. The essential themes of industrialism and change that will ruin the Amberson family stem from Cotten's position as an inventor. He has created the horseless carriage, or automobile, however primitive, which is continuously trashed by the hateful "Georgie". Cotten's invention is part of the growth and change that many families of the late 19th century may have ignored, only to have their lives passed over and fortunes lost. Plot elements aside, this central theme is the powerful backbone that leads to the inevitable destruction of the narrow-minded Tim Holt.

The latter aspects come across on screen so memorably because of Orson Welles' continued experimentation with film. Incredible b & w photography, at first a hazy glow depicting the early prime years of the Ambersons, then a stark, dark force portraying shame and sadness, is amazing to see. Overlapping dialogue is used even better here than in KANE and Welles' narration is so omniscient and on the mark, relaying the town's thoughts on this once grand family. Long tracking shots throughout the constantly changing town go unnoticed unless seen a couple of times. When you realize the passage of time through these devices, you will be in awe.

Again, there is tragedy in both the film itself and its shoddy release and treatment in 1942. If only Welles stayed in America at the time and protected THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS from the long arm of the near-sighted studio system, he may have had #'s 1 and 2 on the AFI's list of 100 Greatest American films.

---

49 out of 51 people found the following review useful:
Magnificent is right, 29 July 1999
Author: Jaime N. Christley (j_christley@hotmail.com) from NAS Whidbey Island, WA

I think I'd give just about anything to see a restored version of this film, like "Touch of Evil."

Its reputation is quite justified, however, and the top critics of today have generally agreed that it's one of Welles' best efforts as director. Some have even said that, scene for scene, it's a better film than "Citizen Kane."

The opening montage, set to Welles' narration, is as good as anything of its kind that's been done before or after -- brilliantly, and I hate to use that word because it's so often overused, it achieves two things: 1) it sets up the dramatic side of the story, with Eugene's fawning for and losing the affections of Isabel, and 2) putting us in a specific, historical time and place. The story of George Minafer's downfall parallels the changing times of America during that time, as well as American aristocracy.

Then there's Agnes Moorehead, who does the most amazing work as Fanny Minafer, George's aunt. She's a pressure cooker to begin with, but when the Ambersons hit rock-bottom she lets go, in a torrential, hysterical performance that's still getting praise today.

"The Magnificent Ambersons" also carries an equally dramatic story of Hollywood's assault on artistic expression; almost everyone knows that RKO seized the film and cut it to pieces while Welles was out doing his documentary "It's All True." Today there's other ways for great directors (Kubrick, Altman) to dodge the system, but film stock and equipment in those days could only be procured from big studios, and for the remainder of Welles' career his genius would only be seen fleetingly (his adaptations of Shakespeare, Kafka's "The Trial"). It's a story as tragic as George Minafer's.

---

47 out of 53 people found the following review useful:
What might have been..., 19 April 1999

Author: Joseph Harder from warren michigan

The fate of this almost magnificent film must rank as one of the greatest tragedies in the history of the cinema. viewing it in its present state is like looking at the Venus Di Milo, or at a beautiful Greek vase that has been shattered. One can only admire the fragments...and what gorgeous fragments they are: Major Ambersons heartbreaking meditation by the fireplace,the quarrel between Eugene Morgan and Georgie about the Automobile, Isabel's death, Agnes Moorehead's magnificent performance, the splendor of the Amberson mansion, and the ballroom scene. Perhaps someday, some powerful computer might be able to reconstruct the missing footage from stills and from Welles script...perhaps. Until that almost impossible moment, one can only envy the handful of men and women who were able to see it whole, and to understand what they were seeing.

---

44 out of 53 people found the following review useful:
The Most Beautful American Movie Ever Made, 26 February 2005

Author: David (Handlinghandel) from NY, NY

If one could have a single wish regarding movie history, surely it would be the rediscovery of the nearly one hour cut out of what seem to be all existing prints of this! Even with the tampering, it is a gorgeous movie. To me, it is superior to "Citizen Kane." Wells himself was partially at fault for its being butchered: Had he stayed in the United States and not pursued a new, eventually unfulfilled dream, he surely could have fought RKO.

The narration by Welles at the beginning is like the dream storytelling of any child or young person. The words so beautiful, the tones so calm and mellifluous! And the final credits, in which he reads the crew and then the cast, are astonishingly moving.

In between is a touching story that is acted and filmed with rare integrity. Dolores Costello is a haunting presence. Agnes Moorhead, as the Neurotic aunt, gives a performance rarely equaled in movie history.

Stanley Cortez was cinematographer for three great movies (and many other fine ones): "The Magnificent Ambersons," "Night of the Hunter," and "The Naked Kiss." Each relies strongly on its look and Cortez created three very different, memorable canvases.

One fan hope against hope that the lost footage turns up in someone's basement, unlikely as that is. Even so, once seen this movie is never forgotten.

---

24 out of 26 people found the following review useful:
A marvellous portrait of a by-gone era, 12 March 2002

Author: nqure from North Wales, UK

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

As most reviewers have stated, Welles' film suffered at the hands of studio interference and it is to the film's credit that, despite such butchery, it still remains a marvellous piece of entertainment.

The emotional story revolves around family relationships, about love denied, unrequited or made to suffer. It is also a social portrait of the failure of one family to come to terms with progress (symbolised by the motor car in the film).

Tim Holt is excellent as George Minafer and I think we are meant to view him ambivalently: he is both a loveable ne'er do well as well as a spoiled egotist who puts his emotions/feelings before everyone else's. Agnes Moorehead deservedly won praise for her portrait of the plain Aunt Fanny. Her final disintegration (blackly comic when George thinks she's scalding herself at a hot boiler only to be told that there's no water due to their reduced circumstances) mirrors the descent of the Ambersons into obscurity and genteel poverty. The only memory of their faded glory is in the names they give to the new roads leading to the suburbs.

As with ‘Citizen Kane', wealth does not always protect people from unhappiness. And it's interesting to note how the Amberson's huge mansion, once the social centre of town with its balls & serenades, becomes an empty derelict monument to a by-gone age.

In a sense, the whole film is ambivalent. You can't stop progress as Eugene (Joseph Cotton) states in the dramatic scene where he & George clash over motor cars, but Gene is also aware that things might not necessarily change for the better. Life will become faster etc. After George receives his comeuppance, I quite liked the symbolic irony of him falling victim to a car accident.

Finally, it would be nice if production companies could have the courage of their convictions and actually left capable, intelligent directors to make films without interfering with their vision. Prod companies are still obsessed with preview viewings and initial reactions to films. Yes, sometimes a film might need altering, and most studios want a decent return on their investment but it would be good if they could keep faith even if a film receives an initially hostile reaction. Many great works of art have been initially misunderstood; and great films, like great art, stand the test of time.

---

22 out of 25 people found the following review useful:
Irony in the ending, 15 April 2004
Author: dave-302 from New Jersey

This is a wonderful film, one of great pathos and sensitivity. Orson Welles was drawn to Tarkington's novel because Tarkington had been a friend of Welles' father and Welles identified strongly with the story, seeing something of his own family's history there.

Whether it is better than Kane is a fun question for film clubs to debate (I did once but I don't now), but it is interesting to note that while Orson Welles was particularly bitter that RKO re-shot his ending to make it more appealing to audiences, if you read the novel you will see that it is the novel's ending that RKO tacked on. Welles' ending was of his own invention and would have given the film a completely different tone.

So it is ironic that Welles always seemed to claim that RKO had destroyed the integrity of the novel's story when they only preserved it, if rather poorly in execution.

---

14 out of 16 people found the following review useful:
A treasury of characters, 18 January 1999
Author: duncmoll from Texas

If you think Citizen Kane is wonderful, then, if you haven't already seen it, find a copy of "Ambersons" as soon as you can. To me, "Ambersons" surpasses "Kane" in complexity and perhaps richness of characters. The story of the long-term results of love deferred, unrequited love, and long-suffering love, are even more interesting with Welles' direction using overlaid dialogue and odd camera angles. My favorite part is when old Major Amberson speaks to the camera and it becomes apparent he's lost his mind. Chilling. The Ambersons captures a time more than a century ago in America when passions were suppressed and civility masked a boiling interior. This film was edited severely, I've read. This is another mystery, because the remaining footage is superb. We can only wonder what the original "Ambersons" might have been.

---

18 out of 24 people found the following review useful:
Marvellous work, but sadly suffers from limited time, 11 March 2003
Author: BritishFilms1 from Scotland

This is the tale of a well-known and respected American family - "The Magnificent Ambersons" and their rise and fall. The movie is not bad at all, there are some superlative performances from stars and character players alike. However, it is a sad fact that this, Orson Wells second masterpiece, suffered from the scissors in the cutting room. Being an RKO/Mercury Theatre production, executives reduced the picture from a much-required 135 minutes to a satisfactory, but a speedy 88 minutes, therefore, not giving satisfactory time for the viewer to understand the masterpiece fully.

Now, for my review of the players. Joseph Cotten gives an irregular performance as the romantic lead, silent star Dolores Costello is very much underused, as is then very young Anne Baxter, who would could onto bigger stardom in the next decade. Stealing the acting honors throughout the production are Tim Holt with his superb portrayal of the spoiled brat heir-to-the-throne, so to speak and Agnes Moorehead as his Auntie, who put their plan into action to sabotage a relationship between the widowed Isbabelle Amberson and charmer Eugene Morgan.

Overall, lives up to it's expectations of success, but suffers due to limited screen time and a very confusing plot for audiences of our generation.

7/10

---

13 out of 16 people found the following review useful:
Excellent Cast, Characters, Setting, & Story, 10 July 2001
Author: Snow Leopard from Ohio

With an excellent cast, interesting characters and setting, and a thought-provoking story, dramatic cinema does not get much better than "The Magnificent Ambersons". No one will ever know what it would have been like if Orson Welles' original version had been allowed to stand as it was, but what is left is still extremely good despite the missing portions.

The story of the leading residents in a turn-of-the-century town combines some interesting themes. The snobbishness of the Ambersons, and its effects on their lives and others' lives, is illustrated alongside the ways that increasing industrialization is changing everyone's lives. The period setting is also quite interesting in its own right, and very nicely done. The characters are all convincing and well-defined, and are matched nicely with fine performers who bring them to life convincingly. Welles regulars Joseph Cotten and Agnes Moorehead are especially good.

The only real disappointment in the movie is that, due to all the cuts made against Welles' wishes, there are times when it is obvious that a scene or information is missing, since characters at times refer to events that are not quite familiar to the audience. It is fortunate that the acting and writing are good enough to help us fill in the blanks to some degree, but it is really too bad that we can never see the whole picture.

As it stands, this is a fine film filled with good scenes and memorable characters, and a movie that will be much appreciated by fans of classic cinema.

---

8 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Magnificent (Lost) Masterpiece. (minor spoilers), 24 July 2004

Author: pjapproved from Bergen, Norway

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is by far one of the best films ever made. Or at least, it could have been. This drama adapted by Welles, from Booth Tarkington's novel about a troubled family at the turn of the 20th century, contains great characters, set-decoration and cinematography. By watching it I'm both stunned and sad at the same time thinking about what this movie could have been, if it hadn't been taken out of Welles' hands. Re-cutting and re-shooting this film is probably the greatest mistake a studio has ever done. The remaining pieces ( 88min. out of approx 145min.) still has a great punch to them. Welles' clever camera-setups and powerful direction, matches his previous film, Kane, in every way. The conflict within the family are explored by great dialog and acting by it's cast. Don't miss this one. ps. sorry, my English is not that good......

---

---

Page 1 of 9:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com summary	Ratings
Awards	External reviews	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user reviews	Your vote history