Citizen Kane

[The One]

I just watched it for the first time, and it was the most difficult thing I've done all week. I literally had to force myself to sit through it. I've always heard nothing but great reviews of the movie......what did I miss???:confused:

[humanic]

Rosebud is actually the name of his genitalia.

[Kludge]

Citizen Kane sucks. Reviews are positive because he was a creative asshole rebelling against the "establishment" by standards of the day.

[Danke]

I just watched it for the first time, and it was the most difficult thing I've done all week. I literally had to force myself to sit through it. I've always heard nothing but great reviews of the movie......what did I miss???:confused:

You probably viewed the edited version.

[Kludge]

Christ! I remember when the jackass had that ridiculous superimposed bird squawk as a "symbol". It's the "Tuesdays With Morrie" of cinema in terms of quality and why it was received so warmly.

[nodope0695]

From an artistic, and cinemagraphic standpoint, it is a great film. Some of the camara and lighting techniques used in the film set the standard for all cinemantography in future pictures.

If you're a student of film, and appreciate the art involved, you'd like the movie. If you're watching it for the sole purpose of shutting your brain off, then you'll find it boring - the movie requires you to actually THINK.

[The One]

From an artistic, and cinemagraphic standpoint, it is a great film. Some of the camara and lighting techniques used in the film set the standard for all cinemantography in future pictures.

If you're a student of film, and appreciate the art involved, you'd like the movie. If you're watching it for the sole purpose of shutting your brain off, then you'll find it boring - the movie requires you to actually THINK.


I did THINK.......I THINK it sucked ass.

[Zippyjuan]

A lot of the film was actually made from stock footage they purchased.

[Sheepdog11]

The film set many precedents... as for its entertainment value, it obviously seems extremely stale by today's standards. It is still an amazing film.

[TinyMachines]

It at least held my attention, but then again I watch a lot of foreign films with scarce talking. I have patience.

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

I saw it about 6 years ago. I think I remember thinking it was pretty good.

Ill watch it again and report back.

[BuddyRey]

No accounting for taste, I guess.

When I first saw it a few years ago, in my 8th grade History class, I was completely riveted by it. Though I thought it was a masterpiece, I was apparently the only one, as most of the room was asleep by the end.

It's really more of a "mood piece" than most mainstream films, especially when viewed through the eye of a modern moviegoer.

[acptulsa]

The film is about William Randolph Hearst. That line about, "you supply the purple prose (or whatever kind of prose it was), I'll supply the war" was no shit. He so started the Spanish-American war by beating war drums in his many newspapers that some people have wondered if he sabotaged the U.S.S. Maine just to sell the news. The guy was one of the biggest pricks of that robber baron period.

Watch it again, and this time just tell yourself that its all about Rupert Murdoch. You'll get more involved that way.

[Aratus]

wise advice from acptulsa! Hearst reportedly tried to buy up all the prints he could, in order
to quietly muzzle Orson Welles. the film of course exagerates the paper magnate's personal life.
Marion Davies was socially accomplished and witty, rather than simply eye candy and insipid. notice
the pool of talent that he tapped!!! the old dude who is the politico who brings Citizen Kane down played
Lt. Tragg for years opposite Raymond Burr's Perry Mason. Joseph Cotton was one of the few established
talents who joined the cast of the film, nearly everyone else had yet to make their mark in the film industry,
and this includes :rolleyes: Agnes Moorehead of "Bewitched" fame. curiously, the two characters, "Raymond the butler"
and "Thompson the reporter" hint at a plethora of tabloid scandal secrets and the glib, fast journalism of
the HENRY LUCE ERA then wrestling the readership away from the old yellow journalism tabloids...

[The One]

The film is about William Randolph Hearst. That line about, "you supply the purple prose (or whatever kind of prose it was), I'll supply the war" was no shit. He so started the Spanish-American war by beating war drums in his many newspapers that some people have wondered if he sabotaged the U.S.S. Maine just to sell the news. The guy was one of the biggest pricks of that robber baron period.

Watch it again, and this time just tell yourself that its all about Rupert Murdoch. You'll get more involved that way.


I'm familiar with Hearst and his yellow journalism, and I knew the movie was about him. I guess I was expecting the movie to be centered more around his deceptive news practices than it was.....I would have enjoyed that more.

[acptulsa]

I'm familiar with Hearst and his yellow journalism, and I knew the movie was about him. I guess I was expecting the movie to be centered more around his deceptive news practices than it was.....I would have enjoyed that more.

People knew the what about the (or should I say 'that particular') yellow journalism era. I guess Welles thought they'd be more interested in the why. His answer--the guy was a spoiled brat. We have lots of those in charge, these days.

Another thing that might help you appreciate the film is to consider how many things he pioneered that are commonplace today. I have heard, for example, that this was the first film to show a ceiling. Until then, filming was almost always done at studios and the sound stages didn't have ceilings in the sets because that would block the lighting...

Dude cut holes in the floor of RKO studios to put the camera in, just to make Kane look massively tall. I still don't know how they did that one deep focus scene with the slow, crappy film of the day. That movie was a lot of work. And you have to admit, it looks slick.

[georgiaboy]

Kane's popularity and longevity have more to do with it's filming style and technical breakthroughs, as well as it's storytelling structure, than it's actual entertainment value.

Given what came before it, it's an absolute masterpiece. acptulsa pretty much said this, but the camera work, the lighting, shot selection & composition, just about everything cinematically that we take for granted was originated with that film. Before Kane, the film world was not much more than filmed theatre. The concept of film as its own narrative style originated here.

Re-watch, and notice what the camera looks at during each moment of the film, and realize that this was the first time someone thought to tell a story this way using film. It'll blow you away.

[Conza88]

There are better libertarian films.... saw it like a month ago..

:)

[Pete]

Dude cut holes in the floor of RKO studios to put the camera in, just to make Kane look massively tall. I still don't know how they did that one deep focus scene with the slow, crappy film of the day. That movie was a lot of work. And you have to admit, it looks slick.

I have the DVD, which has a lot of info about the production. The deep shots are done with two different cameras, and spliced. IIRC, there are two: one in the office, and one at the convention.

Welles was brilliant. It's too bad that he got blackballed over this one.