User reviews

If you are a fan of film making and film makers then this documentary certainly has the right subject matter. There are elements of this which reminded me of Lost In La Mancha, another documentary about a doomed project where the maverick director tried their best to drag the film to life. But if you are looking for insight in to the mind and passion of Orson Wells, then be prepared to wade through over an indulgent stylised presentation. It somehow finds a half-way house between a typical talking heads documentary and a pure voiceover (like Senna), and it doesn't really work, you don't really have an idea of who is talking. The extensive use of footage from different sources is just a distraction to the narrative that is being told by voiceovers The biggest misstep is Alan Cummings, I have no idea what he's purpose was. He did not feature enough to be a narrator, he did not have any kind of associate with anyone involved in The Other Side of The Wind, it was just pointless.

The best film about the making of "The Other Side of the Wind" (2018) is "The Other Side of the Wind," but this companion piece "They'll Love Me When I'm Dead" is an interesting documentary, too, about the making of a film that was already about its own making. Orson Welles's picture concerns a film unfinished at the time of the director's death, leaving behind a slough of footage for his friends and admirers to assemble into a finished product, which is what has been distributed by Netflix after all these decades. Two films in one, the outer one, from the cameras of documentary filmmakers, already contains a considerable amount of analysis of the meaning of the film within and its director, too. In this respect, it's a wonder there's much ground left to cover in "They'll Love Me When I'm Dead." Welles's film is so multi-layered, though, and so much footage was left out of the ultimate release (reportedly, cutting near 100 hours down to about two), that even this documentary about it allows for multiple and contradictory interpretations and, yet, doesn't even cover much of what also must be a compelling story of what's happened to the film since the death of Welles.

Some of the stuff from the talking heads here is irrelevant (e.g. Welles's reported fondness for Fudgsicals) and armchair psychology, but there's enough information about the production of "The Other Side of the Wind," with clips not used in the release print edited in here, as well as looks at some of Welles's other pictures to make this documentary worthwhile. I think the end clip of Welles wishing that everyone would see his film is especially apt given its final distribution by Netflix, which as the most-popular online movie streaming service offers the best hope of fulfilling that wish. And, Welles's film may be the best thing Netflix has yet distributed. It's a fitting end for a film, too, that is partly about the death of classical Hollywood and the rise of a New Hollywood that admires an auteur of the prior generation and which features then-new forms of motion-picture making and viewing--TV, 16 and 8mm cameras and the drive-in theatre--technologies and platforms that themselves have since been largely or, at least, partially superseded by computers, digital technology, smart phones and streaming.

"The Other Side of The Wind" was Orson Welles last attempt at filmmaking before his death. It is a true testament to the genius of the greatest director of our generation, and is a shame that the movie will never be seen because the only movies that are made now are corporate projects, and art is not optional, and is even disregarded in the name of greed.

Orson Welles, as most people know, could not get financing for his movies later on in his life. Why? The reason is because film studios have become corporate machines, making money rather than making art. Since the days of Star Wars and Jaws, film studios have been much more concerned with the idea of box office receipts than with the idea of presenting filmmakers as artisans. These days, news papers are obsessed with the box office of a film even more than the plot.

Welles, in his later years, was against all the paper pushers and money launderers that populate the film industry. Unfortunately, he also had to pander to them to get funding. So he went into a depression and made some terrible choices, relegating himself into a characterture of his former self, appearing in ridiculous films, TV commercials, and started on a downhill slide that culminated in making some absolute disasters in order to try to accumulate any kind of investments.

At one point, he attempted to communicate this in a film called "The Other Side of the Wind" in which the main character, a Director, coming to terms with his 70th birthday, is confronted by a younger version of himself in the form of another Boy Wonder who makes commercial films which are successful money makers. The two characters are played by the legendary John Huston as the older man and Peter Bogdanovich as the Wunderkind. At the time the film was being shot, Huston was most like the real character of Welles himself, and Bogdanovich was a hybrid of all the successful Lucases and Spielbergs of the world.

In addition, the story of "Wind" also includes a playful 70's type of Avant Guarde film, one that would easily have fit in with the "Easy Rider" and "Zabriskie Point" genre of films which represented the alternative film industry. The story then zigzags back and forth between the "real" story of the Director and the "fantasy" story of the trippy film, with Welles' Muse, the gorgeous Oja Kodar as the lead girl, traipsing thru endless psychedelic environments, followed by a mute boy, and culminating in a fantasy sex scene while being driven by another actor in a car in a rainstorm-- a scene as erotic as possible in the era of free love and experimentation.

However, the documentary is more complex, and captures the essence of Welles' philosophy of life in which he is constantly at odds with the business of filmmaking throughout his entire life.

The saddest part of the story is when Welles, who was dependent on Peter Bogdanovich at one point, betrays his friend by saying negative things about him on a talk show. One wonders what was his motive in doing so -- was Welles being subconsciously self-destructive? Was he jealous of Peter's ability to make financially successful films? There is even a part in the shooting of "Wind" where he casts a 19-year-old girl as the pawn between the two Directors, and one is immediately reminded of Bogdanovich's obsession with Cybil Sheppard, who was also 19 when she was cast as the actress in "Last Picture Show."

In fact, so much of "Wind" is a reflection of Welles' life, that it is almost another attempt at telling the story of "8 1/2", which captures Fellini's trials and tribulations while making a film that also would never be released. Welles is subconsciously telling us the story of his life, all the while denying that this was his intention.

Clearly another reviewer and I disagree in our assessment of this film. I did find "The Other Side of the Wind" worthwhile, but I have mixed feelings about this skewed portrayal of this masterful filmmaker. Having said that, some of the old film clips were well-chosen.

On a logistical level, this film is not what one would expect... most all of the friends and colleagues become talking heads who are not individually identified, until the rolling credits, where a slew of names are lined up. That said, Peter B is easily recognized, and a few others' identities are inferred by their comments. When Oja speaks, you are left to imagine what she looks like nowadays... I presume that she insisted that her sound bites would not include visuals.

What disappointed me the most were the cynical snipes made about the approach and demeanor of Welles, from several people closely associated with him. Some of their barbed comments served to discount the great complexity of this man. I wonder if these folks had enough nerve to frankly state their views in front of his face while he was alive? One celebrity commented on his demanding preference for a particular snack food. On the surface, the remark said more about her.

It strikes me as ironic that one clip shows Welles speaking on the essential value of editing, yet this film has chosen to slice things up into brief sound bites. As a result, the tone of the interviewees resemble a bitter pill, as if to say: while we might recognize the genius of this man, the viewer would do well to witness his significant deficiencies.

There are cherry-picked clips which try to convince the viewer about Welles impulse to control the details. Newsflash: many great artists fall prey to obsessiveness. We see Welles give a specific note to Norman Foster on his delivery. Foster transformed the line in-a-flash, and it was vastly improved. If this film intended to cast a shadow on the esteemed artful nuances which Welles strove for, then it failed.

Each viewer will have a different take on this film. As for me, the approach and tone of this film left me feeling defensive, and a bit sad.

The title obviously makes the point that some artists only get recognized after they die. And it is true that many artists had issues. Welles on the other hand was highly regarded. Actually this documentary makes the point that he and his masterpiece Citizen Kane were loved - so much that he could never live up to it. Or rather none of the movies he did after that.

Now that are issues that some people would love to have. On the other hand, someone like Hitchcock made many good movies and he never fell into that trap. But back to this: Many of his peers talk about him and there is a big amount of the time dedicated to the last movie Welles never actually finished. He shot it for so many years, but never seemed satisfied. From what I have seen so far, it might have been ahead of its time back then - obviously the cut of The other side of the wind that is now available to watch via stream is not the one Welles would have released. Still it is the footage he shot, so more on that on the other page. This documentary is quite revealing when it comes to Welles character - with enough footage of him, but also a lot of people who were close to him, talking about their experience ... Essential in a way

An American documentary; A story about the making of Orson Welles's film 'The Other Side of the Wind'. The film provides a good insight into an artist's mindset and a window into the creative process of a film auteur. It fascinates because it mirrors Welles's own life and how he struggled to make good on his swan song. The interviews bring to the fore the genius of Welles and what was described about his mind as "a hall of mirrors."

Stunning and required viewing that illustrates the trials of Wind so well, shows the humanity and heartbreak so powerfully that it's good enough to have existed even without the now "finished" version of Wind. Loved it!

Orson Welles's final movie, The Other Side of the Wind, started filming in 1970 but by the time of his death in 1985 had not been released. It was finally released by Netflix in 2018. This documentary details the making of the movie and the problems Welles had in completing and releasing it.

Good documentary. Details well the making of The Other Side of the Wind, and the difficulties and controversies surrounding it. Also shows, albeit too briefly, Welles's career to that point and, in more detail, why his star had fallen.

However, like the movie, it is a bit muddled. The narrative isn't very smooth and there is concentration on immaterial details at the expense of the bigger picture.

This documentary details the up & downs Orson Welles went through getting financing for many of his projects particularly his last, The Other Side of the Wind. Welles, who became a wunderkind after his major breakthrough Citizen Kane, never got the same treatment or respect for the remainder of his life, always securing backing for his films in fits & starts (he'd occasionally had shooting projects languishing for years at a time as he'd take acting jobs or towards the end of his life becoming a pitch person for wine & board games solely to secure necessary completion funds) which ultimately would add to his stature as being a problematic visionary (a sad episode occurs when he tries to get money to finish his film during his own AFI awards ceremony). More of a story of what could've been, this depressing account leaves one fuming at the film community for abandoning this gargantuan talent & not giving him his due.

What is the problem with modern documentaries? This could be such a fascinating subject but it jumps all over the place with scenes and sound. Hard to keep track of what's what and who's who. No proper narrative. A waste of great footage.

No matter how brilliant a perosn can be, they will never be like Orson Welles. This movie makes you understand the real genius of Orson, a person born to be a revolutionary. This work is extremely entertaining and qualitative. I LOVED IT.

I've seen Citizen Kane a few times over the decades, and loved it more each time. I also recall first becoming aware of Orson Welles as he was being reduced by the 1970s tabloids into a caricature of overindulgence. So I really enjoyed this documentary for filling in the details of Welles' professional trials and tribulations.

Anyone who loves movies, and certainly anyone involved in moviemaking, will gain valuable lessons and insights from this doc. There is the inside look about the culture of Hollywood as well.

But it's really a tale of the intersection of extreme talent and unhealthy psychology. In retrospect, it's both clear and amazing that Welles has more than enough money to complete the movie "The Other Side of the Wind", but his lack of discipline and focus causes him to run out of money and never finish his experimental opus. The cause of that lack of discipline and the implicit disregard he had for others lives - the Rich Little tale is a perfect example - are hinted at but never conclusively defined. Just as well -- ambiguity creates fascination, so Welles remains as fascinating as ever.

The "cute" usage of available feature and personal film scenes, often totally out of context, is inexcusable in a documentary. If the director wanted a spoken word by Welles in this thing, it was grabbed from whatever decade is available. In addition, much "general stock footage" is seen for "atmosphere." Sometimes almost randomly. Just awful. I watched this after "The Other Side of the Wind," which makes it really irritating. There are some amazing docs out there.

And Alan Cumming is just too precious.

Portrays Orson much more like the cultured, humble, self-knowing artist he may have been. It's a fantastical tale, woven well, using lots of different kinds of footage and surrounding trivia that builds a tremendously rich and entertaining tableau. Here it's interesting to see Orson being lambasted for basically making pictures the way Terence Malick does now. And it's a real shame that The Other Side of the Wind wasn't made.

Fascinating. Even the failures of Orson Welles his direction carreer are fascinating.

One hour and a half talking about a movie that never got finished. Can that be interesting? Heck YES. Certainly if the subject is none other than THE legendary mister ORSON WELLES.

What I didnt know was that many other movies that Orson Welles had started in the past, never got finished either, creating the myth that this director conciously (OR unconciously) was sabotaging his own pictures, out of fear that they wouldnt be as good as his earliest BRILLIANT EARTHSHATTERING work!

What a man. What a heart. What a wisdom. How interesting to hear Orson Welles talk about ANYTHING really. I have seen several interviews with Orson Welles and when he speaks (and also when he doesnt) he is just one big, happy MAGNET of CHARISMA and mystery and wisdom.

Absolutely recommended watch for any Orson Welles fans. For those who have never heard of him (INCREDIBLE) I would sure like you to get acquainted with one of the, if not, THE BEST director, who has ever walked this earth....

Thank you for reading my 1900 th review on Imdb...

This is a real artistic type of documentary, the kind I could easily turn off at any minute, but I stuck with this one to the end. Why? I guess because there were quite a few funny comments in it. Plus, I knew little about Orson Welles, so it was interesting to learn something about his life.

A regular type of documentary would have suited me better, but this one did give me a pretty clear picture of him. The only really aggravating thing about it is how often the title of the movie he was making was mentioned. I thought I'd scream if I heard "The Other Side Of The Wind" spoken one more time!

In the spirit of MTV documentaries, another work of exploitation to fit some time slot between two higher rated shows. The footage is drenched in noise from others. And the overall quality if below the rock band histories made by MTV in the early 1990s.