I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

Orson Welles thought his version of The Magnificent Ambersons could had eclipsed Citizen Kane. What we have is a condensed film edited by RKO pictures who got rid off the negatives.The film has an interesting opening by Joseph Cotten which is also the engine of this film, change through the years and how it affects one small town. Cotten's Eugene Morgan becomes wealthy over time because of the automobile.The wealthy Ambersons become poorer due to bad investments, spoilt George Minafer (Tim Holt) behaves badly to those around him thinking his family inheritance will always be there.However despite gaining wealth Eugene Morgan never manages to spark his relationship with George's mother the widowed Isabel Amberson mainly due to George sabotaging the relationship.Welles as director is still experimenting with the art of film, the way scenes are shots, even the closing credits are narrated. The film is rather pacy due to the interference by the film studio.

What's the date of this story ? Does it cover at least about 20 or 25 years ? Obviously post-dates Victoria most of the time but evidently pre-dates WWI. It feels like it, but then it's meant to be. Heavily dated, I mean.Reading Tim Holt's biography, it seems like his Minafer role was an odd one for him, since he apparently used to play cowboys. His character was so oedipal, unpleasantly rude and offensive it made the entire film intensely difficult to like in any way at all. The other characters were not exactly appealing either, since they provided no opposition. Wimps, in fact. Perhaps that's what was wrong with the whole set-up: no good guys. Feeble men, weepy females.The acting was good in spots, and some of the photography was quite creative, in a Wellesian sort of way. But if you haven't seen this I don't think you've missed much. Is the book read at all these days ? Tarkington's world is lost, they say. Succumbed to the automobile, the agent of Master Minafer's comeuppance.

This Orson Welles film was supposedly hacked to death with cuts but still has the Welles stamp on this still watchable but somewhat dated story. I like the deep focus and close-up shots that are also a part of Welles' classic Citizen Kane. The idea that inherited wealth breeds apathy and smugness is not new and George Amberson Minafer is a perfect example of a young man gone bad far too soon. In the role of George is Tim Holt who has wealth, good looks and status but is essentially a lad who resists change and lacks ambition. While this character does ring true, I found the one dimensional performance hollow and unconvincing. George does get his "comeuppance" but it seems like a morality lesson. Joseph Cotten is a reliable and strong presence on the screen and in his role as the suitor to George's mother, he plays a gentlemanly yet strong character, a more than worthy opponent to the spoiled boy who wants his mother to submit to his will. Cotten is a self-made man who champions the automobile, an invention that George cannot abide. Cotten's daughter is a youthful Anne Baxter, who has no difficulty spurning George's overtures of affection. Her role is limited but well performed. The best performance is delivered by Agnes Moorehead as George's sister, who displays much greater range than the other actors. All in all, not a bad movie but not a particularly interesting movie. Perhaps an audience in the the early 1940's would react more positively to the lesson.

One of the greatest films ever made, period, end of story. Other reviewers have explained the odd "contract" issues that Welles had which compelled him to take on projects he might otherwise have not. Who cares? Seriously. From the first frame to the last, this is the some the best entertainment Hollywood ever delivered. It is a story about where we (collectively) come from. It is a story about unrequited love. It is a story about what happens when the future meets the past. It is a story about what happens when we spoil our children instead of raising them. And, best of all, it puts in context the expression "whippersnapper" -- which I grew up listening to, but could never place. I explained in other reviews that Welles came from radio, it was his first love, and so did Cotten. The two did amazing work together. (One of the secrets of a Welles film was that you could watch it with the picture off and sound only, and it would STILL tell the story). Wow. What a film.