Orson Welles’ Unlikely Pick for the Century’s Finest Actor

As the silver screen began to assert itself as a serious artistic force, a handful of performers quickly became synonymous with the new medium. Audiences were captivated by the likes of Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton, whose physical comedy, rooted in vaudeville, was transformed by the possibilities of film. Their inventive use of practical effects and visual gags set them apart, ensuring their names would echo through the decades.

With Hollywood’s rapid expansion, a diverse array of talents emerged. Some actors thrived in the silent era, relying on expressive faces to convey emotion, while others experimented with unconventional methods to hone their craft. By the mid-20th century, method acting was all the rage, though not everyone was convinced by its merits. Regardless of approach, the industry produced a steady stream of unforgettable stars—Marlon Brando, Laurence Olivier, Gena Rowlands, Daniel Day-Lewis—each leaving their own distinct impression.

Welles’ Admiration for a Russian Giant

Orson Welles, celebrated for his work both in front of and behind the camera, is often mentioned in the same breath as the greats. Yet, when pressed to name the finest actor of the 20th century, Welles’ answer was anything but predictable. He reserved his highest praise for Feodor Chaliapin, a Russian opera singer and actor whose reputation was built largely on stage rather than in film.

Chaliapin, born in 1873, made a rare foray into cinema with a 1933 adaptation of Don Quixote, but his true passion lay in live performance. He was a close associate of Sergei Rachmaninoff, who helped shape his musical sensibilities. Chaliapin’s commanding presence and vocal prowess saw him tour internationally, earning acclaim for roles such as Boris Godunov and cementing his status as a force to be reckoned with.

“No Contest”: Welles on Chaliapin’s Brilliance

Welles’ admiration for Chaliapin was unequivocal. In conversation with Peter Bogdanovich, he described the Russian as “an actor whose genius was equal to his enormous stature as a personality. And believe me, Peter, that’s really saying something. He was by far the biggest actor of our century.”

“No contest; nobody could make his weight. And what was he onscreen? Just marginally impressive,”

Welles continued, reflecting on his own career,

“Yeah, I’ve been lucky—Lear, Richard III, Falstaff. It doesn’t prove anything. Those parts are too big for any actor—the very biggest never manage to completely fill them. The nearest I’ve ever seen was Chaliapin; nobody came near to him for size, for sheer density.”

For Welles, Chaliapin’s ability to inhabit a role—no matter how daunting—set him apart from all others.

Beyond Hollywood’s Usual Suspects

It’s perhaps telling that Welles, never one to mince words, didn’t opt for a more familiar Hollywood name. His opinions of his contemporaries were often less than flattering. He once dismissed Brando with a particularly biting remark about his neck,

“which is like a huge sausage, a shoe made of flesh”.

Welles’ choice of Chaliapin as the century’s greatest actor speaks volumes about his appreciation for artistry that transcends fame or cinematic convention. For him, true greatness was measured not by popularity, but by the ability to utterly transform on stage, leaving nothing behind.