 "Best Film Ever? Yes, I Think So." | 2009-10-07 |
| - Reviewed By d_mikels |
Yes. Count me in as one of "Them." A Kanenite. Orson Welles's initial motion picture effort, CITIZEN KANE, not only is Welles's best film--it's the best film ever made. Because of the story? Well, that's certainly interesting enough in its own right, but it's not the reason this powerful film is the best ever captured on celluloid. Look, any film that spawns books, documentaries, commentaries, and makes countless "Best Films of All Time" lists has got something unique and magical going for it. So what is it? To explore this topic, I highly recommend you get this TWO-DISC SPECIAL EDITION of CITIZEN KANE.
Made in 1941, when Welles was a mere twenty-five, CITIZEN KANE was light years ahead of its time in production, imagery, lighting, sets--unparalleled cinematography. Easily one of the most creative and innovative of all films, CITIZEN KANE is a haunting presentation of moving camera shots (often through what are supposed to be inanimate objects), of rooms with low ceilings made of cloth (for lighting purposes, plus the cloth easily hid the boom mikes), of scene lighting contrasts where one character is in light, the other in total silhouette, of scenes shot entirely by a below-ground-level camera, of surreal close-ups, of a despondent Kane walking across the screen, his reflection captured in hundreds of mirrors. All of the visual tricks and optical illusions serve to enhance and symbolize the story of Charles Foster Kane, a newspaper tycoon so extravagant and outrageous in his efforts to attract acceptance and love he ultimately garners neither--and loses everything, especially a connection to his childhood. ("Rosebud.") That Welles was making a thinly-disguised biography of mogul William Randolph Hearst was lost on no one, especially Hearst, who made so much trouble with RKO Studios the film was quickly shelved, and didn't find an appreciative audience until years later.
While this special edition contains several extras, you must view movie critic Roger Ebert's commentary. Ebert, an unabashed and enthusiastic student and fan of CITIZEN KANE, is a wealth of information about all the scenes and their background history, about all the tricks and gimmicks and optical illusions Welles and cinematographer Gregg Toland (the real star of this movie) dreamed up to make watching this film so mesmerizing. For supporting actors, Welles brought over his Mercury Theater radio performers, who all made their screen debuts here, including Joseph Cotten, Dorothy Comingore (playing a very shrill and petulant second wife), Agnes Moorehead, Ruth Warrick, Everett Sloane, and William Alland (a longtime Welles assistant). On disc two you'll find the documentary "The Battle Over Citizen Kane," a 1996 PBS production; it explores the lives of Hearst, Welles, and the controversy surrounding the production of CITIZEN KANE in meticulous and fascinating detail. The delicious irony here, in the film and in all of the extra features, is that not only is CITIZEN KANE the portrayal of William Randolph Hearst--it is also a thorough examination of the personality of Orson Welles himself. Best movie ever? A resounding yes.
--D. Mikels, Author, The Reckoning |
| |
| "Citizen Cane" | 2009-10-06 |
| - Reviewed By User: ABVCRMKM3M0IO |
Orson Welles. Man in his early twenties and never in a movie wrote and stard in
this hit movie.He plays a young man running a news paper to a middle aged Man running for office to his downfall until death.He ages beautiflly in the movie
which is part Drama and part Comedy.A must see movie.
The real William Randolf Hearst tried to buy the Film to destroy it but he failed
and the movie became a #1 hit.He also tried to destroy Orson Welles. |
| |
 "Good not great. So shoot me." | 2009-09-01 |
| - Reviewed By User: A18OUQEK7IZ2F2 |
It can be difficult to watch a "classic" film like this because of all the baggage that comes along with it. It's a challenge to stay unbiased. Almost like when a trial has to be moved because all the potential jurors have already been influenced. Citizen Kane certainly falls in this camp. After all, it is perennially ranked #1 (AFI, Sight & Sound, etc.) and thus there is an *expectation* that it will be one of the best.
It might well be other people's favorite film, but I cannot say the same. It was very good, and I will surely watch it again (I've already watched it twice on this nice new DVD). But I can think of several movies I like better, including Casablanca which came out a year later.
Funny enough, I see more of a parallel between Charles Foster Kane and Orson Welles (later in life) than I do between Kane and William Randolph Hearst. In the end I think the film is a technical masterpiece and kudos to Welles, who of course also directed and produced. But in my opinion, he was better in Touch of Evil (1958).
I think honestly this is a three-and-a-half star movie and I should probably round up because of all the great extras on this release.
|
| |
| "Two disc set of Citizen Kane" | 2009-08-31 |
| - Reviewed By User: ASJ54MITON1NO |
| Well, the second disc, I didn't really care for, the story behind the making of Citizen Kane, even though I've read about it before. The actual film itself, is one of the best films ever made. Welles and company were so innovated for the times, and even now with today's standards of film making, the cinematography, lighting and editing really shine through, but it's the structure of the film that is really interesting, the way the story is told, not in linear format, the many layers of the story and seeing Welles as Kane age before our eyes, really adds to the depth of the character and story as well. |
| |
 ""Rosebud..."" | 2009-08-07 |
| - Reviewed By arlando909 |
There are lots of movies we can argue one must see in his lifetime. Casablanca, Ben Hur, Star Wars, The Godfather, The Wizard of Oz, Gone with Wind... just to name a few, but few stand as high on that list of "Movies you should see at least once," quite like Citizen Kane. At the time of it's release in 1941, it was hailed as one of the movies which changed the industry. The reasons why are all but forgotten now. So all Citizen Kane has to stand on now is it's story, acting and script. All of which are fine. It's a movie that has aged somewhat well over the years. The debate over the greatest movie ever made will rage on fforever (but you mostly see Citizen Kane and Casablanca somewhere on that list). When Citizen Kane debuted, however, it was incredibly good craftsmanship for filming. Remember, film was fairly young at this time. There were still a lot of things that were being played around with and experimented with in film. Citizen Kane, upon release, was hailed as a technical achievement that, for many reasons may seem like they aren't such a big deal today. But they WERE a big deal then.
Almost everyone knows the story of Citizen Kane, but it doesn't hurt to recount it. The story begins on Kane's death bed. He utters one last word: "Rosebud..." before he dies. Because of this, people are in question as to what Kane's last word meant. What was the meaning behind "Rosebud" and who or what was it? As people investigate, the audience is treated to Kane's life. From being taken from his real parents to rising to being the best of the best in journalism. And ultimately his downfall. We see as Kane lives his life and becomes of the most iconic people in the world. We meet several people and learn to really appreciate Kane as a character. The movie keeps plowing forward until we the audience learn just what Rosebud really is. It may not seem like much from the get go, but the screenplay in and of itself really plays out really well. As we learn about Kane we're willing to be taken for a ride. The last scene in particular--when we learn what Rosebud is--is a really fantastic scene in and of itself.
Yet there were certain things about Citizen Kane that made it unique for its time. The first is that the movie is essentially a host of flashbacks telling the story of Charles Foster Kane. It spans so much time, but it gets through it quickly. Again, it seems like no big deal to us, but the way Orson Welles does it is still a technique very few do. Even though time is passing in Kane's life, we hardly get that sense. The time periods seem to mesh together because rather than tons of hardcuts we're mostly treated to it fading through his life, sometimes even in the same room. Another technique that was done really well that was introduced by Citizen Kane was using makeup to make the characters age. This, of course, is still done to this day. The final technique that was quite astounding was the film's camera work. Again, not a big deal in this day and age, but consider that Citizen Kane truly showed people you could do things with simple cuts and edits and pan shots. For example, being able to see everything in the background foreground etc. in sharp, clear focus. This was pretty amazing before. If you take film classes, I'm sure you may get someone who goes on about this. Citizen Kane's cinematography seems to be a favorite historical fact of many film buffs.
It may also seem strange that the cinematography is praised because for the first time in a shot you can see the ceiling of a home. This is because many films didn't get filmed on location. Seeing things like this was quite an amazing achievement when Citizen Kane came out. To put it simply, there's historical significance to what Citizen Kane did for film. Of course, you don't exactly think of that these days when you think of Citizen Kane. Most of us, of course, remember "Rosebud" and others of us remember that first scene. Many of us (myself included) weren't even around when Citizen Kane was the big influence it was. Put simple, Citizen Kane was like Star Wars. So innovative and different for its time that it sort of lives on as a result.
Of course, that also means that certain things about Citizen Kane are truly forgotten. Unless you actually study film or read up on it, those who watch Citizen Kane now might be scratching their heads wondering just what the big deal is. Indeed Citizen Kane does have things about it which might not bode well in this day and age. The first being that Citizen Kane just feels long. It's a two hour long movie, but I won't lie... it's boring. It's an amazing film that everyone should see at least once, but it can be boring. And it has little to do with special effects (which I'm not a big fan of anyway) or anything like that. It's because the movie just moves at a snails pace. It takes a lot of time to really develop Mr. Kane, but a lot of it can be very boring to watch. Yet at the same time there are many exchanges that are quite interesting to watch. The narrative in and of itself is very good. It's just that... like I said, it's boring. There are times when watching that you sort of feel like asking "Are we there yet?" It's mostly in the middle when the film begins to drag, but as we move on, especially that last scene, the brilliance of the film's screenplay can be seen.
With it's reputation of being among the greatest films ever made, it may surprise people to know that Citizen Kane didn't take home that Oscar for Best Picture. In fact, of all the awards it was nominated for at the Academy Awards... it only won one. For screenplay. Despite all it's innovations in cinematography, art direction, and editing, Citizen Kane was never honored with an Oscar for any of these categories. And when reading up on Citizen Kane you sort of get the feeling that perhaps the film was cheated out of those awards.
In spite of it all, Citizen Kane is a movie worth viewing at least once if you're a big movie lover. It's one of those movies that ought to be viewed not just for enjoyment, but perhaps for historical purposes as well. It is nice to say that the story and narration have aged incredibly well and are still fondly influential. It's just a shame that the innovations of Citizen Kane aren't realized in quite the same manner. |
| |
| "A realistic review from a semi-serious film viewer." | 2009-07-15 |
| - Reviewed By lsh89 |
| I'm no movie buff but I think I take movie viewing more seriously than the typical person. Avoiding the argument of how historically significant it is (as nearly every review seems to do) I would just say that it is a pretty good film. That's it. It's not life changing, not one of my favorites just a pretty good film. It essentially works like an allegory film where at the end it got me to think a little bit. I said "Hmm..." and then I moved on. That's all there was to it for me. If you like old films with a moral to ponder then you'll probably find the film interesting. If you don't then watching this film is not going to make you "enlightened" or "hip" so just watch what you like. |
| |
Expedited Available
