"Citizen Kane"

[Homyrrh]

Upon its arrival in the mail via my newly-purchased Blockbuster movie pass, I plan on finally viewing Orson Welles' "Citizen Kane".

I've heard much criticism and even more praise, and I know AFI threw it at #1 for the 100 best American films ever.

I wanted to gather some opinions going in, but more importantly, any thoughts or suggestions on what to pay attention to.

[amalia1985]

It is one of my favourite movies. Both the acting and the cinematography are superb, Art on an other level. It's only my opinion, though.:) :) :) I cannot be realy objective, because I admire Orson Welles, and the majority of his films.

May I say that I love your avatar and your signature?:) :) :thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

[Homyrrh]

"I have a competition in me; I want no one else to succeed."

I saw it again last night and it might have grown on me to the point of being a favorite over 'No Country...'

Anyhow, I've heard much about the cinematography...yet I remain unenlightened as to why it's so revered (?).

[LadyWentworth]

I actually could take or leave "Citizen Kane". Maybe that stems back to the fact that my brother was always talking about it and watching it all the time. I find it tiresome. The whole "Rosebud" thing is old for me, too.

I think it is a good film. Do I think it deserves the #1 spot? Definitely not. I don't even know if I would place it in the top 10 best films of all-time. There are other films by Welles that were better than this one, in my opinion. My personal preference has always been "The Magnificent Ambersons".

I really couldn't give an opinion on why it is so revered. I think that is because I am one who doesn't revere it. I guess I understand the love with the cinematography, acting, direction, et.c. I still wouldn't make it #1. The story is influenced by the life of newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst, which made it controversial in 1941. At the same time it is telling the story of this fictional man's life. The rise, the fall, the greed of and in his life. As for direction, Welles seemed to take a different approach that hadn't really been used before "Citizen Kane" was made (i.e. focusing on a character in the foreground and background at the same time, among other types of shots). Plus, Welles was only 24 when he made the film. This was not the ordinary work of a man that age. I also consider all of these things while considering when the film was made. I think to consider when a film is made can help to realize what makes people consider a movie a stand out. Now, having said all of this, I can say that I understand why people revere it. Yet, I really don't understand it. I can look at it from the point of view of other's and I guess I understand what they are talking about. But for me, I wouldn't make it a top choice. I don't know if that makes sense, but it is the only way that I can explain it.

Anyway, I can never completely knock a film that Joseph Cotten is in. I love that man!

[amalia1985]

"I have a competition in me; I want no one else to succeed."

I saw it again last night and it might have grown on me to the point of being a favorite over 'No Country...'

Anyhow, I've heard much about the cinematography...yet I remain unenlightened as to why it's so revered (?).

You are right. I've often wondered about it, as well. I would say- without being an expert in cinematography- that if you sit and watch the film, the images, the directing, the overall essence create certain feelings and attitudes in the viewer. That's the best way I can describe it. It's an aura, a feeling that you get. I agree with LadyWentworth, though. No matter how much I like it, I would never place it as No.1. But I think that it is one of the films that someone has to watch.

[Mark F.]

Good film, but of all the Orson Welles films I've seen it would be my least favorite. The Trial is excellence, one of the best films ever made, very true to Kafka's novel. The Magnificent Ambersons, which he made just after Kane is also great, and I think much more interesting. Macbeth and Touch of Evil show other aspect of his directing.

One thing about Welles that I admire most is his screen presence, when he's on screen he immediately makes you watch him, his acting is very intense and powerful, especially in Macbeth and in The Third Man (although he only has a small part in that film).

[AuntShecky]

I think it is a good film. Do I think it deserves the #1 spot? Definitely not. I don't even know if I would place it in the top 10 best films of all-time. There are other films by Welles that were better than this one, in my opinion. My personal preference has always been "The Magnificent Ambersons".


Did you know that Welles wanted to disavow his involved with The Magnificent Ambersons? The studio trashed his
original cut, and completely changed the ending.

[manolia]

The Magnificent Ambersons, which he made just after Kane is also great, and I think much more interesting.

Agreed.

[amalia1985]

Yes, I agree too.

[LadyWentworth]

But I think that it is one of the films that someone has to watch.
I always say that, too. I think there are just those certain films from cinematic history that everyone should watch at least once in their lives. Whether or not you will like them is another story. But I feel that they all deserve a try.


Did you know that Welles wanted to disavow his involved with The Magnificent Ambersons? The studio trashed his
original cut, and completely changed the ending.
Hollywood studios were classic for changing the ending to films. They still are good for that. It was typical in older films to change them to the "happy endings" it seemed.


The Magnificent Ambersons, which he made just after Kane is also great, and I think much more interesting.


Agreed.


Yes, I agree too.
I am glad others feel as I do about "The Magnificent Ambersons". :)

[Mark F.]

The original cut for The Magnificent Ambersons was over 3 hours long, the version released by RKO is excellent, with great pacing. American studios have always made drastic cuts on the films they produce, the big difference is that in those golden years, the 1930's till the 1960's, the producers were cultivated, knew as much about film as most directors, and generally cared about the artistic value of a film. Since Jaws, they've understood just how much money they could make on a film.

[ex ponto]

I don't especially like "C.Kane". And I know that Americans praise it a lot, but I would like to find out is it also appreciated among Europian critics.Anyone knows?

[ex ponto]

ANYONE??!!!:flare:

anyone?:(

[mtpspur]

Count me in as a fan. I came to this one relatively late in life--lates 30s but it made an impression. I tend to be a sucker for the rise and fall of magnetic personalities (and sometimes their redemption). It fascinating to me to watch Kane's marriage fall apart over the period of time and the loss of true love seems quaint now in this age of divorce and get the trophy wife. In a strange way this film seems to be a very moral movie in its depiction. But for the trace of God go I etc. Just saying.

[Prometheus]

Need to see it, actually.

Thanks for reminding me!