Citizen Rosebud

Rating: 9/10 (24 July 2000)

Like visiting the dentist Citizen Kane is one of those movies that should be seen at least once every year. And preferably on a big screen. It demands (and deserves) a level of concentration that television viewing seldom allows, and the rich photography of Greg Toland is best seen in a darkened cinema. I agree somewhat with those who claim that Citizen Kane has been ruined by the many accolades that have been poured over it, forcing us to take a stand on whether we agree that this is the best film ever made or not, rather than enjoying the experience of the movie itself. It has been subject to so much study, and is held forth as an example of so many different things in film-making that one approaches it almost with caution -again a bit like the dentist. But only if we can put aside all our knowledge of the film's history, its reception and controversies, and forget for a while how much it influenced American film-making, can we get to the underlying core of the film; and the myth of both Kane and Welles. For one cannot help but seeing Kane as at least a facet of Welles himself -he put not only his heart, his wit and his intelligence into the making of the film, but fed many of his subconscious fears and delights into the portrayal of Kane, and thus into the enigmatic aspects of the film. Much attention has been given to "Rosebud". Too much I think, for though the search for Rosebud is the initial and driving motive of the narrative, the film never properly focuses on why this is so important. In one sense the search for Rosebud is the "MacGuffin" of Citizen Kane -it serves only to bring the story forward. Kane's last word is "Rosebud", and the last image we see on screen is the peeling word "Rosebud" on the burning wood. Go back to the beginning of the film and the first word we hear is "Rosebud. So Rosebud is a starting point and ending both for Kane AND for the movie, but has little significance in the broader story of his life.
Citizen Kane is not a film that engages the viewer emotionally, and is as such a very cold film. We have little sense of identification with any of the characters, and though we are treated to insights in certain facets of their characters, we are never given enough to really CARE about them. We see the characters rather as a scientist views his lab animals -interested but detached. None of the characters really reveal much about themselves, only their thoughts about Kane, and as such this is the main weakness of the film. Though seen in another light of course this could be regarded as one of its strengths. Welles glibly focused his attention on technical and narrative innovations rather than emotional studies which I suspect he was incapable of presenting truthfully at this time in his life. It is the showman Welles behind Citizen Kane, not the poet. But the show is so good that it becomes a poetry of its own, and though there is little passion in the way he presents his characters, there is true love in the shooting style of almost every frame. Kane and Welles the director share therefore the traits of being gifted, original and highly successful personalities yet aware of something unattainable on a human level. This is part of the true myth of Citizen Kane , and of the enigma of Orson Welles.
The film is intriguing in style, mood, composition and structure and is in my opinion one of the very best made films of all time, but I cannot say with honesty that it is one of the best films ever made due to its emotional detachment. But perhaps when I see it again next year, I will think otherwise