A small group of films exists to prove that art can sometimes survive and succeed under the most adverse of circumstances. These movies were conceived with the best of intentions and the fond expectation that each might become a genuine timeless masterpiece. However, along the creative road to production, these films came face-to-face with such unpleasant realities as small-minded and uninspired financial backers, cowardly studio executives, corrupt and compromised writers and pedestrian editors. What had first started as a plan to achieve a true work of art incidental to a journey toward anticipated critical (and hopefully commercial) success eventually emerged in an often truncated and mutilated form as something very different. Yet under the right set of circumstances, this generally destructive process could sometimes produce a genuine work of art in spite of itself.
Among examples of such films, these are perhaps the most famous: Orson Welles's The Magnificent Ambersons (1942), John Huston's The Red Badge of Courage (1951), Orson Welles's Touch of Evil (1958) and Elaine May's A New Leaf (1970). How did these movies eventually become celebrated notwithstanding the damage they had to endure before being seen by a live audience? Possibly, their success can be explained by fact that they began life at a high artistic level, and had the good fortune to eventually emerge with enough of that greatness still able to be recognized by a discerning audience.
Why is it that Two Weeks in Another Town (TWIAT)---which suffered many production indignities similar to the films just cited---was less successful in achieving its own cinematic stardom? There are probably many reasons to explain its downward trajectory, but the most obvious one is that even in its original uncut form---TWIAT was a somewhat weak melodrama involving a generally unlikable and uninteresting group of people who were engaged in activities that often were just unable to compel our attention. Hollywood movies about movie-making only seem to work when we tend to care about the characters and their story. See, e.g. The Bad and the Beautiful (1952), Sunset Boulevard (1950) and A Star Is Born (1937). The "magic" of these films is just not present in TWIAT and it is quite challenging to create in the first place.
TWIAT had a lot going for it---mainly a strong cast and a highly successful director. But in the end "the play's the thing," and without a compelling story and group of characters, a movie like TWIAT cannot easily survive the significant editing issues that marked its troubled history. After recently viewing TWIAT, I appreciate all the more the unique accomplishments realized by the other mentioned Hollywood films about Hollywood---and the considerable difficulty that it took to make these films succeed as cinematic art.
Among examples of such films, these are perhaps the most famous: Orson Welles's The Magnificent Ambersons (1942), John Huston's The Red Badge of Courage (1951), Orson Welles's Touch of Evil (1958) and Elaine May's A New Leaf (1970). How did these movies eventually become celebrated notwithstanding the damage they had to endure before being seen by a live audience? Possibly, their success can be explained by fact that they began life at a high artistic level, and had the good fortune to eventually emerge with enough of that greatness still able to be recognized by a discerning audience.
Why is it that Two Weeks in Another Town (TWIAT)---which suffered many production indignities similar to the films just cited---was less successful in achieving its own cinematic stardom? There are probably many reasons to explain its downward trajectory, but the most obvious one is that even in its original uncut form---TWIAT was a somewhat weak melodrama involving a generally unlikable and uninteresting group of people who were engaged in activities that often were just unable to compel our attention. Hollywood movies about movie-making only seem to work when we tend to care about the characters and their story. See, e.g. The Bad and the Beautiful (1952), Sunset Boulevard (1950) and A Star Is Born (1937). The "magic" of these films is just not present in TWIAT and it is quite challenging to create in the first place.
TWIAT had a lot going for it---mainly a strong cast and a highly successful director. But in the end "the play's the thing," and without a compelling story and group of characters, a movie like TWIAT cannot easily survive the significant editing issues that marked its troubled history. After recently viewing TWIAT, I appreciate all the more the unique accomplishments realized by the other mentioned Hollywood films about Hollywood---and the considerable difficulty that it took to make these films succeed as cinematic art.