Reviews of Citizen Kane

Citizen Kane

Posted : 3 weeks, 5 days ago on 30 June 2008 04:24 (A review of Citizen Kane)

Wunderkind Orson Welles shot himself in the foot with this film. This is the kind of amazing, practically perfect in every way, film that a director makes towards the end of his career. Not the first one out of the gate. Loosely based on a true story, but given fantastic visuals to play with and an interesting premise -- what can one word reveal about a man? What could it explain? Well, nothing really, because nothing along these lines can really be explained. Who was he? Not even his two wives and best friends knew. "Rosebud" was just a symbol ? a security blanket, of his childhood before it was interrupted, and his long lost innocence. If the reporters found it, they wouldn't understand what it was beyond the physical object. But back to the visuals for a minute, one of the first sequences in the movie involves a snow globe that is overlapped on top of Kane's dying face, rolls out his hand (we're now back to reality), and smashes on the floor. In walks the nurse and towards his bed, we see this from the point-of-view of the broken snow globe. I love it so much. I'm not going to lie, I was totally afraid to watch this movie. Its reputation is staggering; almost frightening really, luckily it lives up to the hype.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Great? Yes. Perfect? Not quite.

Posted : 1 year, 2 months ago on 28 May 2007 09:08 (A review of Citizen Kane)

I finally got around to seeing this classic. It took me a few tries, because I kept falling asleep (to be fair, I always started it late at night, while in bed, so take into consideration). After 3 tries, I finally got around to finishing it.

I had real high hopes for this classic. Being so high up in IMDb Top250, and on top of that, being called Number 1 film of ALL TIME by American Film Institute, well, it did have a lot of things to live up to. Is it a great classic must-see film? Yes, of course, although it can be very tough to watch as the pacing is quite slow at times and film is told in very non-linear flashbacks. But I honestly believe it gets such high marks and acclaim because of the significance of the revolutionary-at-its-time filming style of Orson Welles and the massive controversy associated with its release. Basically, the film is a satirical portrayal of the rich tycoon that plagued the US when this film was released, mainly a mockery of newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst, who was so infuriated by this picture his banned any mention of this film in his newspapers and actively accused Orson of being a communist, and even offered millions to try to buy the negatives of the film so he could destroy it.

The story, as mentioned before, is told in flashbacks of the rise-to-power of a newspaper tycoon, who becomes corrupted by power, loses all his friends and loves, and dies a lonely man surrounded by all his material gains. On his deathbed, he mutters 'Rosebud' and the media sends out a reporter to interview all the people in his life to try to find the meaning of that word. But there lies the weak point of the film - I really couldn't care less why he said Rosebud, what it means, and what the implications of him saying that as his last word was.

Watch this movie for its historical importance, watch it for its incredible performances, watch it for its controversy, watch it for its outstanding direction by the legendary Orson Welles. But if you are hoping for a captivating story, an adventure, a tear-jerker, an epic masterpiece, you may be disappointed as it's basically a character-study of a man who got corrupted by wealth.

Great film? yes. Best film ever? Not in my books.

3 comments, Reply to this entry