Chimes at Midnight (1965)

Sir John Falstaff (Orson Welles) carouses with Prince Hal (Keith Baxter) and several unscrupulous characters, often in the bawdy house of Mistress Quickly (Margaret Rutherford), much to the displeasure of King Henry IV (John Gielgud). However a civil war and the king’s failing health will change the prince and his relationship with Falstaff.

The idea is brilliant: knitting together the Falstaff material from Henry IV Parts 1 & 2, with bits from Henry V, The Merry Wives of Windsor, and Richard II, and using only Shakespeare’s lines except for the narration from Holinshed’s Chronicles. Falstaff is the most memorable (and popular) character from the Henry IV plays, so why not tell his story? In 1965, the now corpulent Welles was an obvious choice for the lead, and with his cinematic eye and command of language, him being director and “writer” (knitter of lines) is nearly as fitting. And the film does look beautiful.

But this is Welles, whose refusal to compromise left all his works compromised. In Chimes At Midnight that meant he didn’t have the money to finish the film properly, or shoot it all at once, or with all English speaking actors. He picked up shots when he could, often with imperfect doubles and had to adjust the framing to hide imperfections. He dubbed many of the voices himself. All of which weakens the film from what might have been, but turn out to be minor flaws.

But there’s a major flaw. The choices of what to keep and what to cut left the fellowship moments of Henry IV Part 1 out, so we never see the camaraderie amongst the gang. There’s no friendship, and certainly no love. Falstaff doesn’t even seem fond of Hal, and Hal is only contemptuous of Falstaff. Yes, that needs to be there, but there needs to be some bond between these characters. Falstaff suffers for it, but Hal suffers more, becoming completely unlikable. The “jokes” they play on each other seem like little fun, and that’s the point as Hal grows away from Falstaff to become a king in spirit, but he had to be close to move away. Hal seems cruel and obnoxious instead of young and foolish. It made me care little about Falstaff, and wish Hotspur had run Hal through.

And the cutting isn’t severer enough in other places. This is Falstaff’s story, and we should have kept with him. I like the scenes with Hotspur, but except for the final duel, have nothing to do with Falstaff. Likewise, most of what goes on at the castle is outside of Falstaff’s world.

There’s enough good here, mainly in art design and line readings, to make this worth watching, but it should have been better.