Support NeoGAF

[Ninja Scooter]

for all the talk this movie gets, i have never seen it. I don't even have any idea WTF its about. All i remember is in one of my art classes we talked about the cinematography for a bit because its supposed to be all revolutionary. So, is it actually worth watching? And will knowing that Rosebud is a sled (whatever the fuck that means) ruin the experience?

 

[Gek54]

No and No.

A kid is given away to some wealthy guy to raise becuase his parents think it would be better for him. The kid ends up creating an empire of wealth and he becomes a monster, runs his wife off and then on his death bed he cries Rose Bud which was the name of his sled he was playing with before he was shown the wealthy currupting life.

 

[Mason]

It was revolutionary for its time. Especially with its use of mattes and specific camera angles and transitions.

In my personal opinion, it really doesn't hold up today. I found it to be quite boring.

 

[Shompola]

I have seen it. It is an ok movie and I can understand why it is so groundbreaking in the movie history. It sure isn't the best movie every created or any nonsense like that. But yes it was a pioneer.

 

[Scrow]

because a lot of the techniques which made this film famous are now common place in all movies today, watching it now isn't all that impressive. The story is interesting enough to sit through the whole thing, but it isn't something I'd watch a second time.

 

[Chony]

I got bored halfway through. I will watch it again when I am more mature (possibly never).

 

[Ninja Scooter]

looks like i'll be renting Anacondas instead! SUC ON IT ORSEN WELLS!

 

[swoon]

what an awful thread.

i've watched it a bunch, been through two shot by shot anaylsis. it realyl is worthy of every bit of hype it gets, not just for its time, but for the progression of film as a whole

 

[Ninja Scooter]

what an awful thread.

Well poo on you, good sir.

 

[Syckx]

I had to watch in a film class, and I really didn't care for it but the reason why would be that it has become a cliche. It's about this man who was adopted by a rich man from his poor family (Think Monty Burns's origin in the Simpsons) and pines for Rosebud, which is revealed to be a sled he had as a child that was left behind. The movie is a recap of his life, and if I remember correctly, he was a studio owner around the time that voice was being added to film. I only recall bits and pieces.

 

[Silkworm]

I got the Citizen Kane DVD probably over a year ago but I haven't watched it yet :-( Same deal with Lawrence of Arabia. At least I watched Doctor Zhivago, which was a great movie IMHO. Maybe I'll finally sit down and watch Citizen Kane this coming weekend.

 

[Scrow]

what an awful thread.

i've watched it a bunch, been through two shot by shot anaylsis. it realyl is worthy of every bit of hype it gets, not just for its time, but for the progression of film as a whole

meh

i bet the shot by shot analysis speaks about a bunch of hidden meaning and philosophical babble in the way every shot was composed and the importance it had to the story, but I doubt the director intended even half of the meanings that people conjure up.

 

[explodet]

If it counts, I've seen every Simpsons episode with a reference to Citizen Kane in it.
That pretty much makes up the whole movie.

 

[border]

It's a great movie, though if you are the type of person that would even consider watching Anacondas then I can't really recommend it. The story is solid, it moves along at a pretty good clip, and it's interesting the away the story of a man's life is told.

but I doubt the director intended even half of the meanings that people conjure up.

The nice thing about art is that it conjures up a multitude of meanings and interpretations. You miss the point and waste a shitload of time if you sit around harping about whether or not an artist "intended" a particular effect.

 

[olimario]

Citizen Kane is worth watching just to see what was possible at the time. Orson Welles does a damned fine job in the flick, too. It is pretty drawn out, but I enjoyed it.
Everything said about the cinematography is dead on. We're talking shots and fades that you didn't even see in the 60s and 70s hardly.

 

[swoon]

meh

i bet the shot by shot analysis speaks about a bunch of hidden meaning and philosophical babble in the way every shot was composed and the importance it had to the story, but I doubt the director intended even half of the meanings that people conjure up.

that's not what goes on really.

 

[White Man]

but I doubt the director intended even half of the meanings that people conjure up.

In interpreting art, the artist that created the work (and especially his intentions) is just about the least important thing in the equation. Once he's done his job of creating, it's the audience's to interpret.

Like, if I wrote a 350 page novel on sodomy and pet pornography and intended it to be a parable about the raising of Romulus and Remus, but it came out as a disturbing frankenstein story about dog fucking, it would be only the audience's op. . ..say, I just got a GREAT idea for a story.

 

[Duck of Death]

Border said it quite well. It is a well-told story that holds up quite well today. There are a few special effects shots that are obviously dated, but there are also some that most won't even notice (for example, the long shot of Susan Alexander's suicide is actually 2 separate shots).

Citizen Kane is also notable for being a key film in the development of film critic Andre Bazin's theory of "realism" in film. Welles' film and Jean Renoir's The Rules of the Game were highly influential in their use of long takes, camera movement, and depth-staging. They provided a dramatic step forward in the development of film language and technique.

So, if you consider yourself a film fan you should see the film. If you're more of a "I <3 BOOBS AND BOOMS!" type of person, you might want to avoid it.

 

[LakeEarth]

SLED! It's his sled when he was a kid. There. I just saved you two boring boobless hours.

 

[junkwaffle]

I found the majority of this thread seriously disturbing...

and I choose not to waste my time explaining why.

 

[Kuro Madoushi]

SLED! It's his sled when he was a kid. There. I just saved you two boring boobless hours.

What?! You guys even watch the movie? I'd prefer to argue that it was his childhood he was referring to. When he was a child he had real friends, not people who wanted to be with him because he was rich. It wasn't a movie about a guy pining away for a fucking sled.

 

[Tarazet]

In interpreting art, the artist that created the work (and especially his intentions) are just about the least important thing in the equation. Once he's done his job of creating, it's the audience's to interpret.

Like, if I wrote a 350 page novel on sodomy and pet pornography and intended it to be a parable about the raising of Romulus and Remus, but it came out as a disturbing frankenstein story about dog fucking, it would be only the audience's op. . ..say, I just got a GREAT idea for a story.

You're talking out of your ass. It is in sheer technical finesse that Citizen Kane shines, not in any kind of surrealist bullshit like you're insinuating. Across-the-board powerful performances, a story with great dramatic sweep, breathtaking camerawork, and a single beacon-like vision are the things that make Citizen Kane one of the greatest films ever.

 

[border]

Theorists and critics have disregarded "artist's intent" for a long time now....whether or not that is bullshit is up to you, though I don't think it has much of anything to do with the surrealist movement. I tend to sidestep the issue mostly because it wastes a lot of time and I don't really feel like the artist should be the only person to dictate interpretation. Music (your specialty) deals much more in realms of subjectivity and the listener's experience, so this should come more naturally to you than students of art that has a tighter narrative (film, novel, theatre), etc).

 

[shuri]

Citizen Kane, the Matrix of the '40? You be the judge!

 

[Brian Fellows]

I've not seen it and I dont plan to.

 

[Tarazet]

Theorists and critics have disregarded "artist's intent" for a long time now....whether or not that is bullshit is up to you, though I don't think it has much of anything to do with the surrealist movement. I tend to sidestep the issue mostly because it wastes a lot of time and I don't really feel like the artist should be the only person to dictate interpretation. Music (your specialty) deals much more in realms of subjectivity and the listener's experience, so this should come more naturally to you than students of art that has a tighter narrative (film, novel, theatre), etc).

I have no idea how this post was supposed to come off. The multiple levels of meaning are all fine and dandy, but it's the way in which it is presented which makes it work. You need to really question a bad movie or two, question what is plausible and what isn't, what sounds forced, whose acting seems to come from another planet rather than the same community - and it's then that movies like Citizen Kane will impress with their refinement and levels of perfection Hollywood can't even begin to fathom today.

 

[KarishBHR]

No and No.

A kid is given away to some wealthy guy to raise becuase his parents think it would be better for him. The kid ends up creating an empire of wealth and he becomes a monster, runs his wife off and then on his death bed he cries Rose Bud which was the name of his sled he was playing with before he was shown the wealthy currupting life.

Why the fuck would u ruin the best movie of all time for this forum, you are a terrible terrible person.

PS. Your tastes suck

PSS. This IS the best movie ever made, if you know anything about film (like cinematography, exc.) you'll greatly appreciate it. But part of the amazingness is the ending, which has already been ruined

 

[KarishBHR]

what an awful thread.

i've watched it a bunch, been through two shot by shot anaylsis. it realyl is worthy of every bit of hype it gets, not just for its time, but for the progression of film as a whole

You my friend, will goto heaven. For you are not ridden with ADD and can watch this classic the whole way through and enjoy it

 

[Dilbert]

Why the fuck would u ruin the best movie of all time for this forum, you are a terrible terrible person.

PS. Your tastes suck

PSS. This IS the best movie ever made, if you know anything about film (like cinematography, exc.) you'll greatly appreciate it. But part of the amazingness is the ending, which has already been ruined

Chill out. He doesn't like the movie...you don't need to flame him.

I'm a big proponent of spoiler warnings in general, but given how old this particular movie is, and the title of the thread, I don't think his comment was out of line.

 

[Triumph]

You're talking out of your ass. It is in sheer technical finesse that Citizen Kane shines, not in any kind of surrealist bullshit like you're insinuating. Across-the-board powerful performances, a story with great dramatic sweep, breathtaking camerawork, and a single beacon-like vision are the things that make Citizen Kane one of the greatest films ever.

Uh, I don't think White Man mentioned Citizen Kane in his post at all. Nope, sure didn't.

It sounded more like to me that he was trying to make a blanket statement about art as a whole, and it's one that I agree with. And I'm a filmmaker!

Note that your views on what makes Citizen Kane shine don't conflict with what White Man was saying at all. The two can go hand in hand.

 

[B'z-chan]

I brought this subject up in my history of film class some years ago. Yes the movie is technically outstanding for its time. But it doesnt hold up. Another movie by Orsen Wells i think really stands the test of time and thats the third man. A great movie. If you cant stand watching Citizen Kane and want a better picture all around, its the one to pick.

I got a B on that speach and everyone hated me for the rest of the term. Oh well, its my opinion.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

I'm not sure why people say it doesn't hold up.

It's a great character piece, it's visually interesting, it's occassionally funny, occasionally touching, sometimes heartwrenching. And that's without all the "groundbreaking" stuff or historically important stuff (which it was, but I can appreciate why some people wouldn't care).

I love this movie. Mainly for how well-acted and written it is.

And no, I'm not a film snob. I love everyting from Kane and Amadeus to the latest blockbuster (and this year has been extremely generous on the popcorn flick front, to be sure).

 

[MacGuffin]

Whoever tells you that Citizen Kane isn't atleast the best American Film ever made, is kidding themselves. For being made in 1939 (distrubted in 41) it is absolutely groundbreaking. Welles pioneered new camera techiniques, special effects (the cheese paper newsreels) and it is really one of the films from the post-sound booth era and early production code era that holds up the best. If you try and watch His Girl Friday (albeit a completely different genre) it is quick paced and all, but the cinematography doesn't hold up and it looks old. Citizen Kane has the look of modern films but it does get a bit long. It is definately worth watching if you are interested in (or despise) William Randolph Hearst as well.

 

[Scrow]

You my friend, will goto heaven. For you are not ridden with ADD and can watch this classic the whole way through and enjoy it

see, i actually liked watching Citizen Kane, however it leaves a bad taste in my mouth because of elitism like this that follows it around

 

[swoon]

I brought this subject up in my history of film class some years ago. Yes the movie is technically outstanding for its time. But it doesnt hold up. Another movie by Orsen Wells i think really stands the test of time and thats the third man. A great movie. If you cant stand watching Citizen Kane and want a better picture all around, its the one to pick.

I got a B on that speach and everyone hated me for the rest of the term. Oh well, its my opinion.

third man is a carol reed film and doesn't feature wells til the last half.

 

[Nemrael]

I've watched it a fair few times - I think it's great, but it's debatable whether it's still the "best movie ever". If you're a film fan you really should check it out as it was revolutionary for its time, and is still very watchable today - it's a classic!

Other Orson Welles films I've enjoyed are Touch of Evil (great film noir starring Charlton Heston) and The Trial (adaptation of the Franz Kafka novel starring Anthony Perkins) - I would recommend both.

 

[Phoenix]

"Rose bud, it was his sled. There, I've saved you 4 long boob-less hours"

 

[Flynn]

Citizen Kane is pretty fucking great.

Nobody's said it, but it was an unauthorized biography of sorts based on the life of William Randolph Hearst, the real-life newspaper magnate.

I feel sorry for people who can't get into movies made before 1977.

 

[soundwave05]

I've seen it.

It's a good film.

If you really can't tolerate "old" movies though, maybe check out The Aviator which is playing now. It's kind of a similar story.

 

[Tarazet]

It sounded more like to me that he was trying to make a blanket statement about art as a whole, and it's one that I agree with. And I'm a filmmaker!

The idea that the artist is not the ultimate authority has its places. Robert Schumann was frequently surprised when others analyzed his music and found unifying devices that he didn't even realize he had used. And audiences don't always put the same importance on works that their authors do: Beethoven thought that his Moonlight Sonata was not one of his better works, yet within his lifetime it became ubiquitous for reasons entirely unrelated to what he set out to do. He thought his Sonata in F-Sharp Major, Op. 78, was a greater work, but it has languished in obscurity since he wrote it.

However, I don't think it applies to the topic of Citizen Kane.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I watched it a few years back, though I probably wouldn't have if it wasn't a semi-mandatory school thing. Glad I did, though. My short review:

September 13, 2002
Citizen Kane
Flawed tycoon makes good. And bad. At least a mark. Great story telling; enjoyed almost more than I thought I could a serious movie thrice my age.

 

[jett]

I liked Citizen Kane more than I thought I would, and I think it's worth watching. Truly revolutionary. I think it holds up well, too.

 

[isamu]

looks like i'll be renting Anacondas instead! SUC ON IT ORSEN WELLS!

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

 

[COCKLES]

Not exactly one of my favourite movies. But a must see if your interested in movies / making them. Chock a block of techniques such as collapsable props (to allow the camera to pass through) minatures, & lens.

From IMDB:-

The audience that watches Kane make his speech is, in fact, a still photo. To give the illusion of movement, hundreds of holes were pricked in with a pin, and lights moved about behind it.

Now that's class!

 

[Rorschach]

looks like i'll be renting Anacondas instead! SUC ON IT ORSEN WELLS!

:lol :lol

 

[Prospero]

Jesus, how could you not like Citizen Kane, even if you're not a fan of the technical aspects of film? It's just a great story, period. Roger Ebert's commentary track on that disc is one of the best ever.

Oh--and knowing the identity of "Rosebud" (as I did the first time I saw the movie) doesn't ruin the film. Supposedly, "Rosebud" was also

Spoiler

William Randolph Hearst's pet name for the clitoris of his mistress, Marion Davies,

and the screeenwriter worked it into the movie as an inside joke. (At least that's what Gore Vidal and one of Orson Welles's biographers say.) Google for "hearst rosebud marion davies" if you want the info.

 

[Foreign Jackass]

Hey. Citizen Kane is one of the best movies ever made, without a doubt. Any self-called movie fan who hasn't seen it is like a music fan who has never listened to The Beatles or a painting fan who's never seen any Renoir.

Go and watch it. It's not something you should say is overrated without even seeing it (like you teenage boys tend to do with everything).

 

[isamu]

Imitation of Life>>>>>>>Citizen Kane

 

[seismologist]

Overrated. There's much better movies you could watch instead like Bian Lian (King of Masks).