Ed Wood Wednesdays, week 255: Is this the most complete cut of 'Glen or Glenda' (1953) yet?

Austin Wolf-Southern has assembled the jigsaw pieces of Ed Wood's debut film.

Like Blanche DuBois, I have always depended on the kindness of strangers. Well, maybe not always. Actually, when I started writing these articles in July 2013, I was pretty much on my own. I had two books, Rudolph Grey's Nightmare of Ecstasy (1992) and Rob Craig's Ed Wood, Mad Genius (2009), to use for reference, as well as the documentaries Look Back in Angora (1994) and Flying Saucers Over Hollywood (1992). Other than that, I was flying solo. What did I bring to this topic? My own thoughts, my own ideas, my own... personality. I wrote Ed Wood Wednesdays by myself for myself. 

But very early on, people started emailing me. Some wanted to ask questions. Some wanted to make corrections. And still others wanted to share Ed Wood-related things with me—trivia, photos, sometimes even entire books, articles, and films. And then there were those who had Woodian projects of their own and wanted to tell me about them. Some were making music. Some were making films or comics. Several were writing or had already written books about Ed. And they sent much of this material to me to see what I thought of it. And, if I were feeling industrious that particular week, I told them. The main reason this column has lasted over 12 years (with no end in sight) is that my readers have supplied me with so much material.

One such person is comedian and Ed Wood superfan Austin Wolf-Southern. He has embarked on a project that should be of interest to all Woodologists: assembling a "complete cut" of Eddie's debut film, Glen or Glenda (1953). I've long said that this movie is the Rosetta Stone for understanding Ed Wood's entire career—not just his other films but his literary work as well. But, to this day, there is no "definitive" or "authoritative" version of it. Over the years, through various theatrical and home video releases, Glenda has had scenes added to it and subtracted from it. And Austin has taken it upon himself to comb through all this material and assemble it, almost as a Frankenstein monster, into one movie.

Here is an an email he sent me recently:

I hosted a screening a couple months ago of Glen or Glenda, and I wanted to let you know that your Ed Wood Wednesdays column was invaluable to me in gathering research on the film! But more importantly, I learned about the different versions that were out there, and I was inspired to cut together a composite version of the film, using the best quality available for each scene, down to individual frames. So I used all of the HD AGFA edition, and filled out everything that was missing using the DVD version, and a little bit of the VHS. I believe this is now the most complete version that exists, with the exception of a 35mm print I've heard is out there. And I also must mention that I decided to remove the burlesque footage. I know there are some who like it, but it's not Ed Wood's work, and I found that taking it out dramatically improved the flow of the sequence.

I'm not sure yet what to do with this version of the film. But I definitely wanted to share it with you since your Ed Wood writings have been so helpful and inspiring to me, and the screenplay transcription, especially, was an amazing guideline in the editing process.

A pivotal moment from Glenda.

Austin also sent me a link to a blog post he had written about the project. As for how you can see this version of the film yourself, Austin has a Patreon where you can download a copy of this cut for a mere $3. I know for a fact that this project involved many hours of work, so $3 is a pittance.

So what is my reaction to this cut of Glen or Glenda? Longtime Ed Wood fans know that prints of Glenda can vary greatly in terms of image quality, and many editions of the movie are plagued with skips, often due to clumsy censorship. Sometimes, the best-looking prints are also the least complete. That's a major problem with the AGFA cut, for instance. I can honestly say that Austin's cut of the movie uses the clearest, sharpest possible film elements and is gloriously free of skips. It has all the moments I look for in a good Glenda cut, including Dr. Alton's oft-missing "I don't think so" and the end of the foundry sequence.

As for the removal of the burlesque footage, my thoughts are complex. When I first saw Glen or Glenda as a 17-year-old, that footage is part of what fascinated me. Even on my initial viewing, I knew that it did not match the rest of the movie visually, thematically, tonally or in any other way. As such, it contributed to the movie's grab-bag, anything-goes aesthetic. The fact that it "didn't belong" in Glen or Glenda paradoxically meant that it seemed perfectly at home. It's true that Ed Wood did not shoot this footage himself, but neither did he film that famous buffalo stampede. Or those World War II soldiers. Or a bunch of other sequences in the movie. 

But what of Austin's contention that the removal of this material improves the flow of the dream/nightmare sequence? He's right. It does, no question. In the versions of Glen or Glenda that I'm used to, the burlesque footage interrupts the dream sequence for several baffling minutes. In Austin's cut of the film, Glen's dream is one continuous and more-or-less coherent sequence. And, yeah, I'm pretty sure this is how Ed Wood intended it back in 1953. Watch this version of the movie for yourself, and you'll see what I mean.

I don't think there can ever be a "definitive" cut of Glen or Glenda, because you always have to make compromises. Do you include the burlesque footage and interrupt Glen's dream? Or do you cut it out and thus remove one of the strangest and most memorable passages in the film? There's no correct answer to that question. But I can say with some degree of certainty that Ed Wood himself would be flattered by Austin's cut of the movie. And what higher compliment can I pay it than that?

P.S. Whenever I write an article like this, it causes me to watch Glen or Glenda with fresh eyes. As a result, there's usually something that stands out that I'd never really noticed before. This time around, it was a particular extra who appears in at least two scenes. The first time we see him is when Glen (Ed Wood) goes shopping for nightgowns. The customer before him is a tall, thin man with a pencil mustache. This same gentleman later appears during the Alan/Ann sequence near the end of the movie. He's working at the "public locker" where Alan ("Tommy" Haines) has a locker stored. He looks a bit like a malnourished Walt Disney. Can you identify this gentleman?

A mysterious extra appears as two different characters in the movie.