Arden's acting


I don't mean to offend anyone, but Robert Arden's performance in Mr.Arkadin is just about the worst acting job this side of an athlete (i.e. Shaquille O'Neal)trying to act. It really is terrible. Does anyone else agree?

reply

I very much agree. He's awful. Had Welles hired a different actor, the film would be much superior. Think of someone like Joseph Cotten in the role. Or better yet, Robert Mitchum. Now THAT would've been a great film. Not that it's all that bad as it is, barring Arden. In fact, I'd go so far as to say he's just about the only thing wrong with the film. But man...Robert Mitchum...

reply

Add my vote in favor of placing Robert Arden to the short list for all-time bad performances. How could a "great" director accept a performance like that from his leading man?

reply

Yeah, it was pretty lousy.

"Keep Ted Turner and his goddamned Crayolas away from my movie."--Welles


reply

Arden would be uncompelling if NOT in shots framed by Orson and NOT speaking lines written by Orson--to say he was bad in Arkadin I think is a bit much. In fact Arden allows you to look around at everything else going on instead of watching him, and there's often a lot going on. And the scenes when its just him and Orson (among others) work quite well because he compliments and sometimes heightens their stylized, cartoonish qualities.

reply

in the old dvd where the film looks like it was shot on video and filmed during a hurricane it was hard to tell whether his acting was good or bad, but i am going to have to watch the newly restored dvd and then i'll get back to you... i do think he resembled the burnt guy in beetlejuice who offers alec baldwin a cigarette in the waiting room... "Trying to cut down myself"

reply

check out my post on whom i think Arden looks like (a cross between a few famous celebs)...

as for as his acting...

well, first off...

Mitchum would not have done this film... Mitchum did big budget films and Orson Welles was, at this point, reduced to being an independant (one of the first) filmmakers... I don't think Mitchum would have hopped back and forth dealing with Welle's fickle schedules to make this film, this film that had hardly any budget... It'd be like a guy making films for film festivals wanting Tom Cruise... won't happen...

Welles had said something like "I started out on top and worked to the bottom"... By this time, he was at the very bottom...

I think Mr Arden was the best he could get...

I agree, his acting is bad but almost every line is dubbed... It's dubbed by Arden but when you dub things it seems overacted, because when you dub your voice over a scene, it's just not the same... I think if the actor were able to not have to dub his voice, it'd seem more natural...

The way it came across was way over the top... It was like seeing William Shatner in film noir or something...

reply

Nobody on this thread has stated, in any critical way, what is wrong with Arden's performance. The dubbing is detrimental to the presentation of his character, but that is something beyond Arden's control. Welles created his character - Van Stratten - and wrote his dialogue and, of course, directed Arden in every scene in the film (in the Criterion set, you can see takes of Orson directing Arden, of screen; fascinating stuff for Welles buffs) so we must take this into consideration. Van Stratten is supposed to loosely represent the classic 'brash American' in Europe, out of his depth, clueless to the social decorum and post-war problems. In his films, Welles' American characters are often presented slyly as criticisms of America and Americans, in a broad sense, but not without affection and good humour. Throughout most of the story, we don't feel much sympathy for Van Stratten, but towards the end, this begins to change. At first, I didn't particularly like Van Stratten, but on reflection and repeat viewing, I have begun to see that he is deserving of sympathy and a some respect; he's pretty resourceful, strong willed and he has some decent lines. Arden's acting is all it should be for the role: brash; arrogant; ignorant; confused; laconic; strident. His drawl is a little bothersome, but that's a trifling criticism. He wasn't an especially good actor, but he got the job done. Physically and in attitude, he reminds me somewhat of the great Edmond O'Brien, who would have been brilliant in the role, had Welles considered him and he been available. Nevertheless, I feel that Arden is good in a difficult role, in a pretty complex, though not complicated narrative.

Mr. Arkadin overall, is a flawed film, but has ideas and stylistic touches that only a master filmmaker like Welles have dreamed up and that he pulled them off for all too see is quite an achievement. Seeing the Corinth, Confidential Report and Comprehensive versions all in high-quality transfers, coupled with the Rosenbaum/Naremore commentary was quite an experience and altered my thoughts on the film considerably for the better.


Thanks for reading.


"We forfeit three-fourths of ourselves in order to be like other people." - Arthur Schopenhauer

reply

Were we supposed to like him? Wasn't the point of the ending that he was such a lousy person that he made Arkadin hate himself and eventually life itself?

Some smart, some don't.

reply

Thank you for the only true critical review so far. I saw the film for the first time today on TCM, and I was bored in the beginning. Bored, yet felt compelled to watch. Once Van Stratten met Arkadian the movie took off. Van Stratten was an unlikeable character, but as you pointed out he was out of his league, and he was madly in love. I personally didn't like the ending as I felt Raina should not have did as asked against her father without knowing why. Of the actors people listed as having rather seen played the part, I think you're right about Edmond O'Brien, but in fairness Arden did a decent job.

reply

According to his imdb bio, Robert Arden was born in England. It is an example of an Englishman "trying" to come accross as an American, and not being able to pull it off.

In the last few years, there indeed HAVE been Englishmen who can play an American convincingly (Tom Wilkinson comes to mind.)

reply

Welles should've played him. All other characters, too.

Some smart, some don't.

reply

^that pretty much explain how bad he was. I didn't know he was English. His voice sounded like a parody of a big city American accent.

reply

I just watched Mr. Arkadin again last night. I got the Criterion DVD the day after it came out, and have viewed it four times now. I've only watched the Comprehensive Version, because I want to see as much Orson Welles as possible.

Personally, I didn't think Arden's performance was really that bad. My first impression was as such, but on repeated viewings, I see that he does do some very good things. Something to acknowledge is that Arden was acting in scenes with Orson Welles, and Orson Welles immersed very deeply in a character. Even if you put a better/more accomplished actor in Arden's shoes (someone mentioned Robert Mitchum, who I think would be a poor casting choice for this film, he's too cunning an individual for Guy Van Stratten), they are going to look pale in comparison to Welles' brilliant portrayal of Gregory Arkadin.

That said, I believe, though I could be wrong, this was one of Arden's first film performances, so let's cut him a little slack. And for me, his performance didn't take me out of the film or really serve as a detriment, as some other poor performances tend to do. Also, I think the worst performance in this film was Paolo Mori as Raina; she seemed to be almost asleep the whole time, and I thought it was interesting that Welles never really let the camera linger on her face for an extended period of time. I never really got a full sense of her character, or why Van Stratten was attracted to her.

Mr. Arkadin is still a brilliant film, visually. The structure, though, doesn't seem to work some of the time, but overall it does okay. Welles, as I said, is amazing as Gregory Arkadin.

reply

[deleted]

Orson Welles' ham job makes me think he should have called in for work at the local butchery. I cannot say who was worse.

reply

Never occurred to me so no, I don´t agree. He´s not very good, exactly, but still more or less passable, even though the somewhat bizarrely dashing character with his lisp is vaguely annoying throughout.



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

Yes, it was.

reply