Citizen Kane: A Cinematic Argument
 

OK...I have to admit, I've never seen this classic film- regarded by some honchos to be the greatest film ever. I did have my chance in high school journalism class when the class was forced to watch it. I, ahem, fell asleep during the movie. (Hey, high school, vaps a lot of energy out of you.)

Anyways, I am thinking of watching it again. But, before I do, I wanted to know what those who have seen it- think of it. Why is it such a great film? Please, share your thoughts and arguments. I'll get a bowl of popcorn.

I would watch the tiny toons version of it.

Rosebud.

Jenson will be here shortly to jack off to this thread.

It's considered great b/c Orson Welles was 24 when he made the goddamned thing. He does a lot of experimental cinematographic techniques like distressing the film stock, and always showing Kane in low angle shots to make him seem larger and more ominous. It's "shot" very well, but in all honesty it doesn't hold up over time.

I've watched this film many, many times, Mr. CosmicPal. It's been in my library forever.

Although it is always only found in the eye of the beholder, the film is awash with symbolism. These connotations and references are established by every means including the storyline, the soundtrack, and the visual representations (including lots of specials which most people rarely notice) used throughout. It can also be viewed and interpreted as allegory.

I think those are some of the reasons that film schools study the film so much. But, I like it because it’s a good story. Basically, the fat guy had plenty of money and creative freedom on this film and he put both to good use.

I hope you enjoy it.

FAX

You have to bring some perspecitve to CK if you are going to appreciate it. If 99% of the movies you've seen were shot in the last 30 years, you're not going to think its anything great. Even more so if you prefer comedies and action movies to dramas. If you've liked Casablanca, some Hitchcock, and a few other movies from that period, you'll probably like CK. To appreciate what an achievement it was, realize that the non-linear approach to telling a story had never been done before, nor the use of specific camera angles to achieve dramatic effect. Read Ebert's review (either before or after) to get additional background on these aspects.

I like Casablanca and Hitchcock, and many other movies from that period, but to Cosmic Pal I say, have a pillow handy, cause I've tried to watch CK several times, and it might well be the greatest nap inducer of all time.

Based on your past experiences I doubt you will give CK another try. But if you do, read some reviews from Film Industry Experts® to get a better idea of what you are looking at. When I go to an art museum, if I just stroll through my evaluation of the paintings is whether I like it or not. If I get one of those self-guided audio tour handsets, I end up enjoying the exibit much more. Similar to watching CK. CK is not a great story, and not for everyone, but worth while if you have an interest in movies as something beyond entertainment and put some effort into it.

The cinematography of the movie is phenomenal... its the first film that was able to focus on the foreground and be able to also focus on the background, I believe.

The angles, the lighting, the mood set in certain scenes... the way they make you look at certain things... very artistic.

Its also about William Shitbag Hearst... and he didnt like the rendition, so he wouldnt put ads for the movie in his newspaper.

OVerall, its a great flick because it was so groundbreaking.

This movie was almost destroyed several times. Just getting it to theaters was a win. Great movie.

DELS A SI DUBESOR

Studied it in art school, while studying filmaking.
It's in ALL filmaking classes it seems.
What FAX and Hamas Jenkins says applies.
But to be honest I was bored watching it myself...as well as Potemkin.
I think, if I rewatched it today, I'd feel differently.

I guess if i was to watch it I would get alot more jokes on the simpsons- ony the Season 2 DVD of the simpsons if you watch the episodes with the Director's commentary they state they stole a ton of matierial from CK

The primary reason I've given CK more than 2 tries is because of the reviews I've read over the years.

It doesn't matter for me to know what I'm looking at, I simply can not fathom why it is so highly acclaimed.