IMDb RATING
7.6/10
28K
YOUR RATING
The spoiled young heir to the decaying Amberson fortune comes between his widowed mother and the man she has always loved.The spoiled young heir to the decaying Amberson fortune comes between his widowed mother and the man she has always loved.The spoiled young heir to the decaying Amberson fortune comes between his widowed mother and the man she has always loved.
- Nominated for 4 Oscars
- 8 wins & 4 nominations total
Orson Welles
- Narrator
- (voice)
Edwin August
- Citizen
- (uncredited)
Georgia Backus
- Matron
- (uncredited)
Harry A. Bailey
- Citizen
- (uncredited)
Olive Ball
- Mary - Maid
- (uncredited)
Jack Baxley
- Reverend Smith
- (uncredited)
William Blees
- Young Man at Accident
- (uncredited)
Lyle Clement
- Citizen
- (uncredited)
Bobby Cooper
- George Minafer as a Boy
- (uncredited)
Don Dillaway
- Wilbur Minafer
- (uncredited)
Featured reviews
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.
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.
In many way this is a more brillant film than Kane. Kane was technically advanced, but somewhat distant. This is a much more intimate story. The romance between Eugene and Isabele is one of the most wonderful tales of unrequinted love ever put on film. I especially love the opening sequence which introduces us to the life -styles and habits of the Ambersons. I like the way Wells dwells on their array of evening wear, summer wear etc... He creates a great sense of calmness in a timeless era.
Agnes Moorehead is incredible in the role of Fanny. She has to scream for attension every time, like her character in the film. Tim Holt is great as a young Orson Wells (who was still young at the time). This spoilt brat was I'm sure very similar to Wells, or so he'd have us believe.
Obivously we all know what happened to the final cut. It was, and probably still is the greatest crime in cinema history. Its like painting a moustache on the Mona Lisa. At the end of this version when Eugene and Fanny are walking off into the sunset, and Eugene looks down at Fanny and says that he was "true to his own dear love" (meaning Fanny), its so absurd. Its the worst tacked-on ending I've ever seen. Eugene was never in love with Fanny, it was always Isabele, but Fanny loved Eugene. Hollywood made a joke of it. The Amberson family had finally got their comeuppance only for hollywood to decide it was too grim, and put on an ending that looked like ot came from another movie.
Initally it was such a piece of genius from Wells to film a story about the downfall of a family rather than their or rise to power, to tell the story in reverse.
Its so sad that we can never see the real version. I really feel that we are missing out on what could have been the greatest film ever made.
Agnes Moorehead is incredible in the role of Fanny. She has to scream for attension every time, like her character in the film. Tim Holt is great as a young Orson Wells (who was still young at the time). This spoilt brat was I'm sure very similar to Wells, or so he'd have us believe.
Obivously we all know what happened to the final cut. It was, and probably still is the greatest crime in cinema history. Its like painting a moustache on the Mona Lisa. At the end of this version when Eugene and Fanny are walking off into the sunset, and Eugene looks down at Fanny and says that he was "true to his own dear love" (meaning Fanny), its so absurd. Its the worst tacked-on ending I've ever seen. Eugene was never in love with Fanny, it was always Isabele, but Fanny loved Eugene. Hollywood made a joke of it. The Amberson family had finally got their comeuppance only for hollywood to decide it was too grim, and put on an ending that looked like ot came from another movie.
Initally it was such a piece of genius from Wells to film a story about the downfall of a family rather than their or rise to power, to tell the story in reverse.
Its so sad that we can never see the real version. I really feel that we are missing out on what could have been the greatest film ever made.
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.
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.
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.
The Ambersons are the wealthiest family in Indianapolis. Eugene Morgan (Joseph Cotten) and Isabel Amberson are in love but she marries the dull Wilbur Minafer instead. Their only child George grows up a spoiled arrogant brat. Everybody in town is looking forward to his comeuppance. George falls for Lucy Morgan who is the daughter of Eugene Morgan. Eugene is in the new automobile business which George ridicules and belittles at every chance. George ridicules everybody and their professions while having an aimless outlook himself. After Wilbur's death, Isabel and Eugene rekindle their romance and enrages the petty temper of little George. While the Morgans gain greater and greater success through their automobile, the fortunes of the Ambersons decline.
George is such an annoying petty character that it's hard to base the movie around him. He's really the villain in Eugene and Isabel's lives. Orson Welles is a magnificent filmmaker and everything looks terrific. It's just hard to care about this character. Like the rest of the town, I'm just waiting for his comeuppance and I don't like that feeling. I'd rather have his redemption where he learns generosity. At least, he gets to responsibility but that part is short and the movie rushes to its ending.
George is such an annoying petty character that it's hard to base the movie around him. He's really the villain in Eugene and Isabel's lives. Orson Welles is a magnificent filmmaker and everything looks terrific. It's just hard to care about this character. Like the rest of the town, I'm just waiting for his comeuppance and I don't like that feeling. I'd rather have his redemption where he learns generosity. At least, he gets to responsibility but that part is short and the movie rushes to its ending.
Did you know
- TriviaThe consensus of opinion according to nearly everyone who saw the original conclusion - which included a tour of the decaying Amberson mansion - was that it was much more powerful than the tacked-on "happy" ending.
- GoofsTowards the end of a long tracking shot with George and Lucy in a horse-drawn carriage, a portion of the rear end of a camera car and some sort of filmmaking equipment briefly enter the left side of frame.
- Crazy creditsAll of the credits except the RKO logo, the film's title and the copyright notice are recited orally (by Orson Welles) at the end of the film, not written out onscreen. As Welles recites the names of the production crew, items are seen, such as a motion picture camera when he says "Director of Photography", a pair of hands turning knobs as he says the words "Sound Recording By", etc.
- Alternate versionsFrom "Magnificent Obsession," a Vanity Fair article by David Kamp from April 2000: "On March 11, Robert Wise sent a 132-minute composite print (a print with picture and soundtrack synchronized) to Rio for Orson Welles to review. This is the version that scholars and Wellesophiles consider to be the 'real' Magnificent Ambersons. Curiously enough, the first blow against this version was dealt not by RKO but by Welles himself. Before he'd even received the composite print, he impulsively ordered Wise to cut 22 minutes from the middle of the film, mostly scenes concerning George Minafer's efforts to keep his mother and Eugene apart. Wise complied, and on March 17, 1942, The Magnificent Ambersons, in this form, had its first preview screening, in the Los Angeles suburb of Pomona. Sneak previews are a notoriously unreliable gauge of a film's worth and potential for success, and RKO did The Magnificent Ambersons a particular disservice by previewing it before an audience composed mostly of escapism-hungry teenagers, who had come to see the movie at the top of the bill, The Fleet's In, a feather-light wartime musical starring William Holden and Dorothy Lamour".
- ConnectionsEdited into Histoire(s) du cinéma: Une histoire seule (1989)
- SoundtracksThe Man Who Broke the Bank at Monte Carlo
(1892) (uncredited)
Music and Lyrics by Fred Gilbert
Sung a cappella by Joseph Cotten, Dolores Costello, Anne Baxter,
Tim Holt, Agnes Moorehead and Ray Collins
- How long is The Magnificent Ambersons?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $850,000 (estimated)
- Runtime
- 1h 28m(88 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content