Say what you will about Orson Welles, he had a gift for Shakespeare. All his Shakespearean adaptations are at least worth watching. I admit right off -- I tend to prefer Shakespeare on the page to Shakespeare on the stage, and think of the Bard of Avon more as a poet who used theatre as a scaffold on which to build than as a dramatist who wrote poetic dialogue. (Not about to argue with Bardolators here.) Welles didn't so much stage Shakespeare, though, as use his work as his own scaffold--he was, if you like, a collaborator with Shakespeare, as is clearest in Chimes at Midnight. Although not up to Chimes, the Welles/Shakes Othello is very effective. Sometimes, though, it achieves its effects at the expense of the play.
Welles' best inspiration, of many, is the repeated visual motif of spirals and cages. Of course he had to trim the script, and I'd argue with his choices (how much of this is due to lost footage, though?). I think he over-trimmed to make room for his visuals. If you don't already know the plot, it becomes muddy near the end, so I wouldn't recommend this to anyone as his first experience of Othello. The roles of Emilia and Cassio in particular are too severely cut, to the extent that these characters somewhat recede into the scenery; in particular, Welles omits the witty banter about women in II, 1, among Desdemona, Emilia, Cassio, and Iago, which may seem extraneous but is actually vital, in that it sets up Cassio as sympathetic and intelligent, hardly the effete nincompoop Iago initially describes, and also establishes the relationship between Emilia and Iago which makes her willingness to steal the hanky understandable. In Welles' under-explained version, in which we see her stock-still in shadow after Desdemona loses the handkerchief, she comes across initially as just as sinister as Iago himself - utterly wrong. And you may miss other favourite speeches.
I can't argue with any of the cast. MacLiammoir is probably the most convincing Iago I've seen. Desdemona is appropriately beautiful, if oddly passive; the dialogue cuts take much of the spunk out of her. Combined with the cuts to Cassio and Emilia, this becomes a little too much a two-hander between Iago and Othello. Welles is always Welles, like Othello himself, a force of nature who sucks up all the air in any room.
If, like me, you turn on the closed captions for the hearing impaired (I'm not hearing impaired but I use them), be warned. As is true of most captioning, the solecisms are numerous and laughable. Sometimes the word is just wrong: "rocks and hills" = "rocks and tills"; "so expert in his drinking" = "so exquisite in his drinking"; "work upon Desdemona" = "work from Desdemona"; etc. Sometimes the error actually reverses the meaning: "some strange indignity" = "some strange dignity". Some make no sense at all: "portents in my travel's history" = "potency in my travels history"; "he that filches from me" = "he that flinches from me"; etc. Some are just weird or even laughable: "such a fiend as that" (variorum; in my edition, Brabantio says "such a thing as thou")" = "such a fierce bat"! What does that even mean?!? Now, you'd think I'd be used to inept captioning. At least it isn't complete gibberish. But especially given the care that went into the restoration and packaging of the DVD -- and that, excuse me, the script is available! -- there is simply no excuse for this.


