THE TRIAL–4K restoration viewed at Film Forum in New York City
The backstory is both fabulous and Wellesian:
“You can make any movie you want Orson from this list of 82 public domain works, and I will not interfere.”
"I’ll do “The Trial.”
“The Trial” turns out not to be in the pubic domain. Alexander Salkind purchases the rights.
Salkind raises money, and shooting beings in Zagreb. Filming switches to Paris, where sets are to be built at the Bois du Boulogne studios–sets which will gradually disappear as the film’s narrative progresses. It turns out that it is the funding that disappears (and not gradually), and so no sets are built. Welles sees two moons in the night sky, which turn out to be two of the faces of the (abandoned) Gare D’Orsay’s clocktower. Inspiration hits, and Welles has his new location.
Welles films and edits his movie, and it is released as he intends (one of eight to be afforded that privilege). THE TRIAL opens to confusion in the United States, and to acclaim in France.
One last thing: no one bothers to copyright the movie.
Even among Wellesians, THE TRIAL is the least loved of his films, with Joseph McBride declaring that it is “hard to watch” and an “ultimate failure,” and Jonathan Rosenbaum saying that the film is “his creepiest and most disturbing work.”
Welles himself told Peter Bogdanovich that “. . . it’s the most autobiographical movie that I’ve ever made, the only one that’s really close to me. And just because it doesn’t speak in a Middle Western accent doesn’t mean a damn thing. It’s much closer to my own feelings about everything than any other picture I’ve ever made.”
Enter the 4K restoration. For years, THE TRIAL was available only in subpar prints. The original negative was discovered in 1995 in a New York office building, so we had, at last, the complete film. But now with this restoration, we have the film in superb condition. Edmond Richard’s black-and-white cinematography is revealed in its full richness and nuance. Welles’ loved the expressiveness of b&w filmmaking, and, with THE TRIAL, reaches the pinnacle of his explorations of and experiments with it. Interestingly, one of the reasons for such deep blacks and whites was so that the negative could withstand any deterioration it might undergo as it wended its way through Yugoslav customs–proof that not all artistic choices are grounded in aesthetics first and foremost.
I have loved THE TRIAL since I first saw more than 40 years ago. I remember thinking: “Welles did it. He gave K a reason to feel guilty. He made him gay!” At the time, I did not know Anthony Perkins was gay himself, or that homosexuality and its discontents/fears hovered at the edge of many of Welles’ films. Back then I felt that Welles had fixed Kafka–transformed an amorphous dread into something real, palpable, and (most importantly for me) understandable–something that could be contested. And contest his fate Perkin’s Joseph K. certainly does–refusing to “die like a dog,” thereby forcing his executioner’s to do the job.
Besides the revelation of Richard’s cinematography, this screening highlighted for me how brilliantly edited the film is. Welles always believed in the importance of editing, and later works such as CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT (especially the Battle of Shrewsbury); F FOR FAKE; and THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND are marvels of what can be accomplished with editing. But with THE TRIAL, I find that camerawork and editing work hand-in-hand in the most sophisticated way in Welles’ career. The editing is creative without being showy. In other Welles films, editing magic is needed to a) camouflage the fact that actor x was not available to shoot the reverse shot or b) allow the film to be assembled from various sources (with some elements not having been shot by Welles).
In both instances, I am sometimes thrown out of the movie as I marvel at the inventiveness; with THE TRIAL, the inventiveness draws me deeper into the mystery/beauty of the work. Welles was in command–mighty command–of footage of his own devising, and that command–not needing to cover-up deficiencies–allowed his creativity/imagination to be unconstrained rather than (partially) compensatory/reactive.
I was mesmerized by the film world of THE TRIAL once again, admiring the craft, but such admiration never distracted from the emotional and intellectual pull of the work. The performances are wonderful, with Perkins the best he ever was–carrying the film on his elegant, tall, and lanky frame (so different from Kafka’s weasel-like K).
Welles is also terrific as the Advocate (a role he envisioned for Jackie Gleason, who did not want to travel to Europe). Sans fake nose or heavy make-up, behind which he had often hidden, Hastler is Welles raw/naked–in command and powerful, but with a subterranean hint that he too knows he is part of a system larger than he is, which could demote/kneecap him at any moment (as Hollywood had done to Welles so often in the past, and would do again in the future).
If THE TRIAL happens to play near you, try to see it, since the visuals must been experienced on a screen for the greatest appreciation. Otherwise, a region-free 4K Blu-ray has been released, and I think I read that the film is streaming in Europe on Amazon. I hope most would agree that Welles is in cinema heaven. THE TRIAL is the film that punched his ticket.