The choreography--and there's no other word for it--in this scene is astounding. The car with the ticking bomb starts out, then the camera picks up Vargas and his wife and the car passes them, but then they catch up with it, while various other persons and vehicles weave between them and around them. All the while you're thinking, it's going to blow up with them right next to it, only the car passes them again and at just the right moment it explodes. Brilliant cinema.
this is considered by many movie critics as the longest opening scene ever shot without the use of cutting in cinematic history!!!! but i was watching the commentary of for the '98 re-edited version of this classic yesterday night and one the actors said in the commentary that when Orson Welles performed the opening scene for the movie, a friend (i think) of Welles said that Welles was "showing off" when he did that sequence!!! i think that statement made by that person at the time was.....
I know that I am a sinner and need Your forgiveness. I believe that You died on the cross for my sins and rose from the grave to give me life. I know You are the only way to God. So now I want to quit disobeying You and start living for You. Please forgive me, change my life and show me how to know You. In Jesus' name. Amen.
@FetaCheese222 There are two versions of the opening credits. This one is the one Orson Welles thought worked better, without the opening credits or music. The original version had both.
I saw this on TV in 1972, when a program I was watching ended and this started. Of course this opening made me want to watch the rest of it.
There have been 3 versions: the original release (which I saw on TV), the 2nd with some footage restored, and then this 3rd which was closest to what Welles wanted.
Some will disagree strongly, but I actually like the studio version of this beginning WITH the credits, and the Mancini theme song - which is used again later in the murder in the hotel.
@hebneh I like the Universal cut as well, as much as I love Welles. I think it works. His version was probably the best, but the studio cut works very well. A superb film. Welles, even when they fucked with him, still produced some of the best cinema!
This is exactly what Hitchcock said about "the ticking bomb" - 5 minutes of people just talking followed by an explosion is a shocking but ultimately weak pay-off, show the ticking bomb first and suddenly that long, innocuous conversation about coffee and gossip becomes rivetting.
Try to watch the rest of the movie, it isn't that good. The cinematography is amazing, camera work is awesome, but dialogue (especially from the main woman) is boring.
Perfectly timed. You see the person set the timer for 3:00 minutes, then you watch the car drive and stop for 2 minutes and 59 seconds then you hear the explosion.
Dropping the burning car (given the bomb was in the back, not under) was careless of the director, but it's a very minor detail overall. What's important was the intense build-up - despite you knowing what must happen. That takes a genius.
@2206411411 I agree with you on all parts, though I think the issue arrising from the car was the fact it was most likely some stock footage they used. There probably wasn't too much in the way of exploding car footage so he had to make due with what he could get
This is not "Welles' original version." It was created after his death, based on a Welles memo that wasn't followed. IMO the real original version - with the credits and the Mancini music - is much better.
A movie is a collaborative work and one memo from the director is not as important as what actually gets released to theatres. This version is just not as good as the version with the credits and the studio was right to do it that way.
This is so much fun to watch, thank you for posting it. I have one question, though. The "continuous" part of the shot seems to end at the "Do you realize I haven't kissed you in over an hour" line. The jump to the explosion doesn't flow with the rest of the scene. Is that right, or is it just my eyes?
I suppose that if I told you that I was an ambitious 20 year old with a love for cinematography who intends to top this and "The Player" intro that you would all think I was crazy?
Then I guess I'm insane. Look for a film called "Angels of Death" in the next ten years.
BTW I'm not trying to say I'm any better than Welles. I admire this very much and to be honest, I'm not even a pro, just getting started. BUT I'm smart, creative, and passionate. I intend to build upon such greatness in my work.
@tidaking816 You've got some great ambition there, kid. Tell you what - drop by my studio in Hollywood sometime and I'll let you work on a few films. You sound like you've got some potential. *takes a puff at his cigar*
Sorry if I came across as arrogant, I was just meaning to say that I take inspiration from the best and will attempt to implement that in my own films.
And that not all of my generation is obsessed with AVATARing up movies. Granted, CG is a tool, and I'm not saying it is taboo, but I'm a fan of practical effects. I say the best CG is on the level of Ridley Scott's Black Hawk Down. Why? Because I had no idea they used CG until I watched the featurettes.
@tidaking816 The thing about practical effects is that they never really get outdated. Take for example "Back to the Future." While there were SOME computer effects, the majority are models and camera tricks. "The Wizard of Oz" is another fine example.
It's nice to see that some things don't change - we're still buying and using virtually the same kind of wind-up kitchen timer to boil our ramen as Welles' mad bomber used in his infernal device.
Seriously, that entire scene is awe-inspiring and flows so smoothly...chock-full of details to feast one's eyes on. Very cool.
The best secuence of cinema history. It will be hard to exceed it. Simply billiant, the work of a genius. You maybe don't like Welles films, but anybody could say that he were great.
One of the greatest single takes in movie history. Welles = God, here. Welles original version here, without the distracting titles, and soundtrack overlay, is pure, uncorrupted brillance. No tricks, CGI, or fakery.
One of the greatest single takes in movie history. Welles = God, here. Welles original version here, without the distracting titles, and soundtrack overlay, is pure, uncorrupted brillance.
Most brilliant single tracking shot ever. Welles = God. The digital re-master to the Welles' original version (lacking the intrusive titles and non-source movie score) is perfection.
Actually i'm pretty sure Welles would have definitely used CGI. Kubrick's lifetime assistant said he would with out a doubt be all of cgi, Scorsese uses it, Fincher uses it, Polanski uses it, Coen brothers use it, Spielberg uses, cgi just a tool and is only tacky when a bad director uses it or a good one uses it for the wrong purpose.
I like how all you bitch and hate on cgi, when 3/4 of don't even know, understand, or can't even make anything that compares to neither avatar, nor this.
I believe the border cop at the end of the shot kept forgetting his lines and they had to redo the whole shot over! - that from an interview with Welles himself.
The only thing that would have made this film better would be if they were to have gotten someone actually Mexican looking, but you know how studios were back then, they just wanted stars. Anthony Quinn would have done well, or Cesar Romero hehe. One of the best opening shots 5/5
You're absolutely right. On the other hand, if not for Charlton Heston, Orsen Welles would not have had the opportunity to direct this film. It was pretty much at Heston's insistence that Welles took over the film after the original director was dumped. Sometimes, you gotta' take what you can get. In this particular case, we got a cinematic classic.
I bet the Roland Emmerich remake is going to be so much better. I mean they could maybe blow up 10 cars instead of one, and get some hard core cgi, it will make so much money!
What a terrific movie. When it was initially released in 1958, the studio made the ignorant decision to place the film's credits over this sequence. When the movie was re-mastered and re-released in the 90's, wiser people opted not to do this.
this is actually called a tracking shot... even though a crane would have been used... crane shots are officially stationary. Bird's eye view shots are only shots that view directly below, not in an angle. everything else is high angles and dutch angles... predominately at 0:42
This crane shot is pretty amazing. The atonement scene which I think some are talking about below is a steadicam shot. Quite a difference there; the atonement scene doesnt lift off the ground. Here you get those great birds-eye views of the scene. Different techniques.
That atonement shot is amazing. Do you know they only did that take three times. Good thing since the cameraman operating it feel down after the third time because of the exhaustion.
After the first shot the rest of the movie is pretty disappointing. Except the character Welles plays. Especially the last scene is terribly scripted for a an Orson Welles film.
@ChuntiChuntaro -- too bad the rest of the film doesn't match this. btw, if CGI existed in his day, Welles would have used it. Nothing wrong with technology, just weak/lazy directing.
@pbl1 Yes. But my point was "Look at what Welles pulled off WITHOUT CGI." I wasn't knocking CG. I'm sure,if he were around today, he would totally use CG and push it to the limits as well. Just like Leonardo would be a photoshop Ace,and Shakespeare would have a blog and use a laptop notebook. Had CG been around, Walt Disney would have made Snow White in CG.
@Silverwire100 No, Orson Welles would have used CGI. Take another look at "Citizen Kane" and pay attention. There are tons of special effects shots in that movie, especailly for a personal drama made in 1941. It might help to watch it with Roger Ebert's DVD commentary. Through clever editing and special effects shots Welles is able to create, say, a large crowd scene more or less out of thin air.
Welles used special effect shots that were done by hand. He was a lifelong practicing magician on the side and was of the "slight of hand" school of illusion. I think he would have considered the use of CGI as "cheating". There are no risks involved with CGI. Welles thrived on risk-taking and loved the threat of danger.
@Silverwire100 I think Orson Welles would have used every cinematic trick available to him if he felt it served his purpose. He would have done it masterfully though!
The whole film is a marvel of cinematography. Orson Welles' camera work SURPASSES what we have today in terms of creatively, unique vision, and foundation in substance.
His shadowplay is poetic and mirrors the themes of the film.
@ChuntiChuntaro I totally agrre but lets just dont be against CGI they are great movies out there that wouldnt be able to stand without the effects (computer generated or not) Stanley"s Cubrick 2001: Space Odyssey or the newer Inception from Christopher Nolan are some examples. Effects was allways part of the cinemas magic Old or new school. Its how you use them that defines a movie not the very presence of them.
@ParanormalEnities I'm not against CG. Not at all, I just wish CG was used to support story more and enhance the overall film. It seems CG tends to call attention to itself way too much and it kind of kills the movie experience, at least for me. Look at Avatar. Beautiful, but in a sense way too chaotic. On a side note I think it ripped off the animated film Fern Gully the last Rain forest story big time!
The story I read is that it took all night to set up; then the border guard actor was so nervous by the time the camera moved into position for his first line ("You folks American citizens?") that he kept blowing his dialog. They got a perfect take just as the sun was coming up; you can see the sky getting light in the distance. If they'd had to reset for another take, the sun would've ruined it, which would have meant starting again the next night. "Cut!' cried Welles, to cheers all around!
I just saw the film tonight. It's not a terribly great movie, though it has absolutely fantastic actors.
I got halfway through the opening shot and I knew straight away that it was special. You're cringing the whole time, waiting for the bomb to go off. The length of it without cuts just builds the tension up and up and up.
But by god, the assistant director must have had a hell of a time sorting out all the extras. What a shot.
I started watching this movie half way through and could not figure out it was a modern or old movie, the cinematography and camera shots were so ahead of their time. I can't believe it was made in 1958..
simply amazing :D
MySweetSeoul 6 days ago
The amount of deep space created by this huge long shot is fantastic, love all the different perspectives we get to see as a viewer.
MediaDobson 3 weeks ago
I'm not sure if anyone has already referenced it, but Robert Altman's 5 min continuous opening shot in The Player was his loving tribute to this!
Footvox 3 weeks ago
One of the best.
flemishguy 3 weeks ago
We need just one second of this secuence on the current cinema. Please Orson, grant them just a single millisecond!!
Paolom86 1 month ago
Imagine how difficult it probably was to get this opening shot perfectly. Pretty impressive.
GoongalaGoongala 1 month ago
If anybody likes the movie Halloween (1978) the opening of that film was inspired by this shot!
Stlcards789 1 month ago
any one here because they read cosmic trigger part 3?
cosmicking1987 1 month ago
OUTSTANDING! as perfect as a Fred Astaire routine !
popboy0 2 months ago
The choreography--and there's no other word for it--in this scene is astounding. The car with the ticking bomb starts out, then the camera picks up Vargas and his wife and the car passes them, but then they catch up with it, while various other persons and vehicles weave between them and around them. All the while you're thinking, it's going to blow up with them right next to it, only the car passes them again and at just the right moment it explodes. Brilliant cinema.
etomlins4 2 months ago
wow.
keyfeatures 2 months ago
people don't understand how hard is to do a scene like this even in our days, this is marvelous!!!
axel2935 2 months ago
Superb!
bertxo 2 months ago
This is cool.
MDthornton83 2 months ago
OMG this is so cool :O!!! Orson Welles is a genius!!!
karinkamikakirari6 3 months ago
the greatest single shot ever.
D1Zard 3 months ago
.....(continued) not only a gross understatement but very rude!!!
TheMostAwesomeMan242 4 months ago
this is considered by many movie critics as the longest opening scene ever shot without the use of cutting in cinematic history!!!! but i was watching the commentary of for the '98 re-edited version of this classic yesterday night and one the actors said in the commentary that when Orson Welles performed the opening scene for the movie, a friend (i think) of Welles said that Welles was "showing off" when he did that sequence!!! i think that statement made by that person at the time was.....
TheMostAwesomeMan242 4 months ago 2
@bass109
fuck you, and piss off. Thats even worse than those husketeers 8D
chinookking97 5 months ago
What an awesome opening sequence.
lorddio99 5 months ago 6
* Cinema
filmfreakbuff 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
one of the reasons why i so love cinima
filmfreakbuff 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Get.",Your~,"IPOD',.Here',~
ＷＷＷ.ＩＰＯＤＦＯＲＮＯＴＨＩＮＧ.ＴＫ
Copy.'~And,,.Paste.''
wastefulphilosoIy 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i just cant get into this movie
yellow6100 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Husky sent me, I was hoping for the Judas Priest song :(
Zonarius 7 months ago
@Zonarius i was thinking the exact same thing. Long live the metal gods.
cowboysrock95 7 months ago
huskey!
platburken 7 months ago
Husky!
ShirosTamagotchi 7 months ago
Omg husky liked this video and I'm a brainless idiot who has to troll here that husky sent me. get a brain people, really... it's getting annoying
TheAAbottom 7 months ago 12
@TheAAbottom how is that trolling? i swear the abomination of the 'troll' is saddening.
pedrolieksmudkips 7 months ago
Ok, so I'm here because of Husky too, but c'mon guys, Orson Welles!! Plenty to talk about other than the reason you were linked here.
thetwentyfourth 7 months ago 10
This has been flagged as spam show
@thetwentyfourth
husky husky husky husky husky...! 8D
Nyamka28 7 months ago
husky husky husky husky? o-o
SkilledLoserFail 7 months ago
HUSKY HUSKY HUSKY
LovelyCooK 7 months ago
HuskyHusky!
Nyamka28 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Husky!
Deadmeat447 7 months ago
Husky!
hasimirfenring1 7 months ago
Husky!
Apolloaded 7 months ago
so bad.....
Naenphus 7 months ago
husky!
danjoelabrenica 7 months ago
husky
dominaters999getsome 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thumbs up huskeeters!
beloo12 7 months ago 202
F to the ail... FAIL.
VoidXz 7 months ago
H TO THE USKY HUSKY HERE
NewYawkCityFTW 7 months ago 8
Husky!!!!!!!!!
SuperJKfried 7 months ago
H to the Usky Husky
BlindRoxas13 7 months ago
Husky!
Bubblewhip341 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dear Lord Jesus,
I know that I am a sinner and need Your forgiveness. I believe that You died on the cross for my sins and rose from the grave to give me life. I know You are the only way to God. So now I want to quit disobeying You and start living for You. Please forgive me, change my life and show me how to know You. In Jesus' name. Amen.
bass109 7 months ago
Oh this is so much better than the studio version.
griffin324 7 months ago
That would be hard to do even with today's films... without the use of friggin CGI of course.
Ubstudios 7 months ago
What is that first song with the blaring horns?
MATCHESMAL0NE 7 months ago
I prefered the original opening scene that had the music by Henri Mancini
johndoe121213 8 months ago
@johndoe121213 What? There's two different versions?
FetaCheese222 8 months ago
@FetaCheese222 There are two versions of the opening credits. This one is the one Orson Welles thought worked better, without the opening credits or music. The original version had both.
griffin324 7 months ago
Roosterteeth brought me here
ajaksbackpac 8 months ago
Mr. Pancho Vargas
Darkah0lic 8 months ago
lol mexican charleton heston
fightinside1 8 months ago
Excellent! Welles was a genius ...
radstainforth 8 months ago 2
youtube.com/user/diversal1
LexiMindphuck 9 months ago
Gosh! this is how you create suspense!!!!
malaikanini 9 months ago 3
A beautiful movie by Orson Welles. My only complaint is that I can't understand Heston because of that thick Mexican accent he's using. LOL.
ericinwisconsin 9 months ago
this clip is talked about on sites on the gas house in venice , and the old lamp post. this is now "sidewalk" cafe area
zamoratoo1 9 months ago
I saw this on TV in 1972, when a program I was watching ended and this started. Of course this opening made me want to watch the rest of it.
There have been 3 versions: the original release (which I saw on TV), the 2nd with some footage restored, and then this 3rd which was closest to what Welles wanted.
Some will disagree strongly, but I actually like the studio version of this beginning WITH the credits, and the Mancini theme song - which is used again later in the murder in the hotel.
hebneh 10 months ago
@hebneh I like the Universal cut as well, as much as I love Welles. I think it works. His version was probably the best, but the studio cut works very well. A superb film. Welles, even when they fucked with him, still produced some of the best cinema!
bartonim 10 months ago
how the hell did he do that?
smeghead777 10 months ago
This is exactly what Hitchcock said about "the ticking bomb" - 5 minutes of people just talking followed by an explosion is a shocking but ultimately weak pay-off, show the ticking bomb first and suddenly that long, innocuous conversation about coffee and gossip becomes rivetting.
Simple but damn effective.
Robwilsonian 10 months ago 2
holy shit that shot was crazy
getlikemc 11 months ago
god, orson welles was so good at everything.
lolsebasstian 11 months ago 3
well customs are pretty tight.
cohenguy12 1 year ago
Try to watch the rest of the movie, it isn't that good. The cinematography is amazing, camera work is awesome, but dialogue (especially from the main woman) is boring.
Ok movie, not a great story but great Directing.
soadpwnsyou 1 year ago
MASTER AT WORK
MrStonecold69 1 year ago
Perfectly timed. You see the person set the timer for 3:00 minutes, then you watch the car drive and stop for 2 minutes and 59 seconds then you hear the explosion.
sylviekell 1 year ago 54
Comment removed
LNKtheWizard 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sylviekell
No you don't!
Set: 0:16
Explosion: 3:28
LNKtheWizard 3 months ago
Absolutely great movie, excellent open scene. I want to see this movie again.
erikpn 1 year ago
Dropping the burning car (given the bomb was in the back, not under) was careless of the director, but it's a very minor detail overall. What's important was the intense build-up - despite you knowing what must happen. That takes a genius.
2206411411 1 year ago
@2206411411 I agree with you on all parts, though I think the issue arrising from the car was the fact it was most likely some stock footage they used. There probably wasn't too much in the way of exploding car footage so he had to make due with what he could get
ConSmith1807 11 months ago
give some Credit to Walter Murich, editor of the Godfather, for helping with this restore.
jojopuppyfish 1 year ago
354 people Can tell a great movie when they see one. =)
TheMunkRocker 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
4 people should be shot
AMOVIEGUY14 1 year ago
Welles was a genius. One of America's great cinematic artists.
Ashiman12 1 year ago
I want cars to explode every time I kiss someone.
thomasml20 1 year ago 4
@thomasml20 Then the world would be the safest place ever XD LOL sorry just kidding!
Payuk 1 year ago
i was on the edge of my seat the whole time ! OMG !!
why arent movies this good anymore ? :(
ScarTownJunkie 1 year ago
Charlton Heston?
trr321321 1 year ago
@trr321321 as a Mexican!
morgantown1 1 year ago
This is what I miss in modern films. Long takes, not that annoying post modern cut cut cut, that you find everywhere now.
MrZkinandBonez 1 year ago
This is not "Welles' original version." It was created after his death, based on a Welles memo that wasn't followed. IMO the real original version - with the credits and the Mancini music - is much better.
A movie is a collaborative work and one memo from the director is not as important as what actually gets released to theatres. This version is just not as good as the version with the credits and the studio was right to do it that way.
egallity 1 year ago
4 people accidently hit the dislike button
DamienM461 1 year ago
This is truly amazing. What is this, like a half mile long tracking shot??
ajspice 1 year ago
God I love Film Noir. If only modern films were made this well.
bannanaboy33 1 year ago
This is so much fun to watch, thank you for posting it. I have one question, though. The "continuous" part of the shot seems to end at the "Do you realize I haven't kissed you in over an hour" line. The jump to the explosion doesn't flow with the rest of the scene. Is that right, or is it just my eyes?
toeingtherubber 1 year ago
@toeingtherubber You are right.
Novak67766 1 year ago
I suppose that if I told you that I was an ambitious 20 year old with a love for cinematography who intends to top this and "The Player" intro that you would all think I was crazy?
Then I guess I'm insane. Look for a film called "Angels of Death" in the next ten years.
BTW I'm not trying to say I'm any better than Welles. I admire this very much and to be honest, I'm not even a pro, just getting started. BUT I'm smart, creative, and passionate. I intend to build upon such greatness in my work.
tidaking816 1 year ago
@tidaking816 You've got some great ambition there, kid. Tell you what - drop by my studio in Hollywood sometime and I'll let you work on a few films. You sound like you've got some potential. *takes a puff at his cigar*
caesiume 1 year ago
@caesiume Satire is a beautiful thing :-)
Sorry if I came across as arrogant, I was just meaning to say that I take inspiration from the best and will attempt to implement that in my own films.
And that not all of my generation is obsessed with AVATARing up movies. Granted, CG is a tool, and I'm not saying it is taboo, but I'm a fan of practical effects. I say the best CG is on the level of Ridley Scott's Black Hawk Down. Why? Because I had no idea they used CG until I watched the featurettes.
tidaking816 1 year ago
@tidaking816 The thing about practical effects is that they never really get outdated. Take for example "Back to the Future." While there were SOME computer effects, the majority are models and camera tricks. "The Wizard of Oz" is another fine example.
ajspice 1 year ago
@tidaking816 lol your a fucking nerd
TheReclamation14 1 year ago
@TheReclamation14 Fuck yea I am! HaHa
tidaking816 1 year ago
I never tire of this opening scene
helenkgarber 1 year ago
It's nice to see that some things don't change - we're still buying and using virtually the same kind of wind-up kitchen timer to boil our ramen as Welles' mad bomber used in his infernal device.
Seriously, that entire scene is awe-inspiring and flows so smoothly...chock-full of details to feast one's eyes on. Very cool.
landraiderares 1 year ago
Comment removed
BiggTRexx 1 year ago
Any time Mr. Vargas kisses a women, cars explode.
phongbong 1 year ago 90
@phongbong He's the world's most interesting man.
truthissoap 5 months ago
The best secuence of cinema history. It will be hard to exceed it. Simply billiant, the work of a genius. You maybe don't like Welles films, but anybody could say that he were great.
sameri2002 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
One of the greatest single takes in movie history. Welles = God, here. Welles original version here, without the distracting titles, and soundtrack overlay, is pure, uncorrupted brillance. No tricks, CGI, or fakery.
DrRestezi 1 year ago
One of the greatest single takes in movie history. Welles = God, here. Welles original version here, without the distracting titles, and soundtrack overlay, is pure, uncorrupted brillance.
DrRestezi 1 year ago
Most brilliant single tracking shot ever. Welles = God. The digital re-master to the Welles' original version (lacking the intrusive titles and non-source movie score) is perfection.
DrRestezi 1 year ago
That is truly shoot in Venice, California...at the beach...I love it...1:06
UFOSPACE1999 1 year ago
Comment removed
ParanormalEnities 1 year ago
Actually i'm pretty sure Welles would have definitely used CGI. Kubrick's lifetime assistant said he would with out a doubt be all of cgi, Scorsese uses it, Fincher uses it, Polanski uses it, Coen brothers use it, Spielberg uses, cgi just a tool and is only tacky when a bad director uses it or a good one uses it for the wrong purpose.
bobb328 1 year ago
God damn!!! A single shot?? That kind of film making just doesn't exist anymore .
Velzevul666 1 year ago
@Velzevul666 Robert Altman's film The Player..opened with a single shot of 8 minutes...
UFOSPACE1999 1 year ago
@UFOSPACE1999 Snake Eyes had a terrific single shot opening as well.
TedGoranson69 1 year ago
I like how all you bitch and hate on cgi, when 3/4 of don't even know, understand, or can't even make anything that compares to neither avatar, nor this.
holyknight70 1 year ago
I am in awe. And all before CGI, and before video, and before instant video playback on set, and before motion-controlled cameras....incredible.
chrisman737 1 year ago
the sound design is impeccable as well.
jodypolk 1 year ago
This is true suspense! Proving you don't need flashy cut scenes or CGI to get you on the edge of your seat!
TheZooDork 1 year ago
@TheZooDork Indeed. Having the car get stoppped several times is one major key to building the suspense.
rdecredico 1 year ago
and I thought the Boogie Nights was the best opening shot... Touch of Evil takes the cake
brickbusterful 1 year ago
I believe the border cop at the end of the shot kept forgetting his lines and they had to redo the whole shot over! - that from an interview with Welles himself.
dunavuk 1 year ago
Ending = EPIC FAIL XD
Jummi518 1 year ago
anyone know what the song in the background is????
ler0y182 1 year ago
Winward Avenue Venice Beach California befor the City Of Los Angeles Killed Venice. Long Live the Gas House.
TL250Rider 1 year ago
Always been a pioneer! Brilliant shot-style
calciumkid85 1 year ago
Winward Avenue Venice Beach California
Before the City Of Los Angeles Tore most of it down
TL250Rider 1 year ago 2
god of cinema was here
3vk5n 1 year ago 4
The only thing that would have made this film better would be if they were to have gotten someone actually Mexican looking, but you know how studios were back then, they just wanted stars. Anthony Quinn would have done well, or Cesar Romero hehe. One of the best opening shots 5/5
CenobiteVictim 1 year ago
@CenobiteVictim
You're absolutely right. On the other hand, if not for Charlton Heston, Orsen Welles would not have had the opportunity to direct this film. It was pretty much at Heston's insistence that Welles took over the film after the original director was dumped. Sometimes, you gotta' take what you can get. In this particular case, we got a cinematic classic.
sweetcurmudgeon 1 year ago
NOIR MASTERPIECE! Orson Welles was a great filmmaker.
bigtoe512 1 year ago
I bet the Roland Emmerich remake is going to be so much better. I mean they could maybe blow up 10 cars instead of one, and get some hard core cgi, it will make so much money!
DefenceSpeech 1 year ago
Are you saying they are going to remake this movie?
HOMEgrownALIENS 1 year ago
Yes, but the bomber will be a Muslim. Other details are forthcoming .
DefenceSpeech 1 year ago
What a terrific movie. When it was initially released in 1958, the studio made the ignorant decision to place the film's credits over this sequence. When the movie was re-mastered and re-released in the 90's, wiser people opted not to do this.
jkfromcincty 1 year ago
ITS A BOMB
TurtleHurter 1 year ago
@TurtleHurter Next to Kane this is the best movie I have ever seen. There is nothing out there that comes close.
Novak67766 1 year ago
wonderful plan sequence!!!!!!
deadloop 1 year ago
no, it is actually a crane shot, a crane put on a dolly. "crane shots are officially stationary"? certainly not.
osakaimprovisation 1 year ago
Holy smokes. One minute into the film and he's already got you on the edge of your seat.
SudsOrSoda 2 years ago 49
this is actually called a tracking shot... even though a crane would have been used... crane shots are officially stationary. Bird's eye view shots are only shots that view directly below, not in an angle. everything else is high angles and dutch angles... predominately at 0:42
nicholasproductions1 2 years ago
they talk about this scene detail by detail in this book i have called Looking At Movies.
its pretty interesting how much they do
LookLoveShoot 2 years ago
I've read the same book. Definitely an amazing scene, and awesome informative book :P.
Wolfgang717 1 year ago
This crane shot is pretty amazing. The atonement scene which I think some are talking about below is a steadicam shot. Quite a difference there; the atonement scene doesnt lift off the ground. Here you get those great birds-eye views of the scene. Different techniques.
sinescope 2 years ago
All I can say is the timing had better be perfect. If that dynamite went off too early....
000266617 2 years ago
@000266617
its not a reall bomb..
LookLoveShoot 2 years ago
Wells says "They found a woman's shoe. In the shoe was a foot." after the explosion.
000266617 2 years ago
haha
it wasn't a REAL bomb though
tarff26 2 years ago
@tarff26 Not a real bomb? Pity.
000266617 2 years ago
WOW. What a way to start a movie! I couldn't take my eyes off the screen, knowing what was going to happen to that car.
*inspired*
datalal624 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
anyone seen the shot in Atonement that puts this to shame?
SeherCinema 2 years ago
That atonement shot is amazing. Do you know they only did that take three times. Good thing since the cameraman operating it feel down after the third time because of the exhaustion.
DValcou29 2 years ago
A three and a half minute single take... I wonder what Alfonso Cauron thinks of this.
thisisspartacus 2 years ago 4
This movie almost tops Citizen Kane - now that's an accomplishment.
grtas1 2 years ago 5
almost... not quite though...
Orson Welles made too good a movie for his first film, he never could top Citizen Kane...
Nor could anyone else according to the critics and the polls...
It was all downhill from that film...
WhiteStoneChild 2 years ago 2
Somebody on the set of "Kane" looked at Welles and said, "There, but for the grace of God, goes God." And Welles was only 24.
Is there a worse fate than to create your masterwork, and the standard for the entire field, your first time out?
tuxguys 2 years ago
wow!
That was amazing!
jayeshchoudhari 2 years ago 2
The whole shot is three minutes, twenty seconds; amazing.
blofeld39 2 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
After the first shot the rest of the movie is pretty disappointing. Except the character Welles plays. Especially the last scene is terribly scripted for a an Orson Welles film.
RonAlmeida 2 years ago
Absolutely friggin' epic. the coordination, lighting and timing is unmatched.
It's called building suspense!
Look kids! No CGI!
Old School!
Thanks for posting!
ChuntiChuntaro 2 years ago 62
@ChuntiChuntaro -- too bad the rest of the film doesn't match this. btw, if CGI existed in his day, Welles would have used it. Nothing wrong with technology, just weak/lazy directing.
pbl1 1 year ago
@pbl1 Yes. But my point was "Look at what Welles pulled off WITHOUT CGI." I wasn't knocking CG. I'm sure,if he were around today, he would totally use CG and push it to the limits as well. Just like Leonardo would be a photoshop Ace,and Shakespeare would have a blog and use a laptop notebook. Had CG been around, Walt Disney would have made Snow White in CG.
ChuntiChuntaro 1 year ago
@ChuntiChuntaro
Orson Welles would never have used CGI. He was interested in staging people in relation to their surroundings. He experimented on set often.
CGI would also have cheapened his films. CGI is almost always tacky.
Silverwire100 1 year ago
@Silverwire100 No, Orson Welles would have used CGI. Take another look at "Citizen Kane" and pay attention. There are tons of special effects shots in that movie, especailly for a personal drama made in 1941. It might help to watch it with Roger Ebert's DVD commentary. Through clever editing and special effects shots Welles is able to create, say, a large crowd scene more or less out of thin air.
Mrx2848 1 year ago
@Mrx2848
Welles used special effect shots that were done by hand. He was a lifelong practicing magician on the side and was of the "slight of hand" school of illusion. I think he would have considered the use of CGI as "cheating". There are no risks involved with CGI. Welles thrived on risk-taking and loved the threat of danger.
Silverwire100 1 year ago
@Silverwire100 You think, and unless you can read his mind you really don't know what he thinks about cgi.
holyknight70 1 year ago
@Silverwire100 I think Orson Welles would have used every cinematic trick available to him if he felt it served his purpose. He would have done it masterfully though!
ChuntiChuntaro 1 year ago
@pbl1
The whole film is a marvel of cinematography. Orson Welles' camera work SURPASSES what we have today in terms of creatively, unique vision, and foundation in substance.
His shadowplay is poetic and mirrors the themes of the film.
Silverwire100 1 year ago
@pbl1 I agree. Laziness is not a style! LOL
ChuntiChuntaro 1 year ago
@ChuntiChuntaro I totally agrre but lets just dont be against CGI they are great movies out there that wouldnt be able to stand without the effects (computer generated or not) Stanley"s Cubrick 2001: Space Odyssey or the newer Inception from Christopher Nolan are some examples. Effects was allways part of the cinemas magic Old or new school. Its how you use them that defines a movie not the very presence of them.
ParanormalEnities 1 year ago 2
@ParanormalEnities I'm not against CG. Not at all, I just wish CG was used to support story more and enhance the overall film. It seems CG tends to call attention to itself way too much and it kind of kills the movie experience, at least for me. Look at Avatar. Beautiful, but in a sense way too chaotic. On a side note I think it ripped off the animated film Fern Gully the last Rain forest story big time!
ChuntiChuntaro 1 year ago
no kidding! Look, remember when movies didn't NEED the 'ole CGI crutch to be "watchable"?
Ljomi 1 year ago 4
That's a true masterpiece! Amazing opening. I wonder how many days it took to shot this.
ideafixxxer 2 years ago
It took as long as the take is to shoot it. The planning of the shot however, might have taken a while.
NorwegianDirector 2 years ago
The story I read is that it took all night to set up; then the border guard actor was so nervous by the time the camera moved into position for his first line ("You folks American citizens?") that he kept blowing his dialog. They got a perfect take just as the sun was coming up; you can see the sky getting light in the distance. If they'd had to reset for another take, the sun would've ruined it, which would have meant starting again the next night. "Cut!' cried Welles, to cheers all around!
Orsley 2 years ago 3
It took them something like 28 days of practice.
Seriously3000 2 years ago
I just saw the film tonight. It's not a terribly great movie, though it has absolutely fantastic actors.
I got halfway through the opening shot and I knew straight away that it was special. You're cringing the whole time, waiting for the bomb to go off. The length of it without cuts just builds the tension up and up and up.
But by god, the assistant director must have had a hell of a time sorting out all the extras. What a shot.
Just beautiful.
Alpha1Bravo1Charlie1 2 years ago 3
I started watching this movie half way through and could not figure out it was a modern or old movie, the cinematography and camera shots were so ahead of their time. I can't believe it was made in 1958..
Azurju 2 years ago
man there is just so much suspense in that whole sceen
haunch1 2 years ago