A Personal View of Citizen Kane

Rating: 10/10 (27 October 2013)

What can be said about Citizen Kane (1941) that hasn't already been said? Sights and Sounds magazine came out with its decennium list of best films ever and for 50 years gave Citizen Kane top prize. Last year Citizen Kane was relegated to the number two spot by the Alfred Hitchcock classic Vertigo (1958). Previously anyone worth their stuff would have to admit that Kane is at least among the best movies to ever exist. So to spell it out, even with some light bruising, Orson Welles's freshman feature has some high expectations to overcome.
I won't justify the critics by writing a manifesto on its artistic value. There are too many essays out there already who have done that in the past seventy years. Besides which, despite my enthusiasm for film and film history, I am by no means an expert. Therefore my "academic" justifications would seem disingenuous and misleading. Instead I will be introspective and give you my person reasons why Citizen Kane is, to me, one of the best movies ever committed to celluloid.
My interest in Citizen Kane peaked when I was in my late teens. This is when I started to take film seriously for its social and artistic value. Citizen Kane has appeared on multiple lists of important movies and therefore I was simultaneously intrigued and intimidated by the thought of watching it. After all the works of Federico Fellini and Robert Altman are for the most part plebeian to me despite being universally acclaimed. I have no serious means to justify my reasons for disliking Altman or Fellini so if I was not a fan of Welles I was clearly an unlearned philistine.
Strangely enough I was compelled to watch Citizen Kane only after watching Reefer Madness: the Movie Musical (2005). The Showtime original feature made veiled references to William Randolph Hearst; the larger than life newspaper tycoon who became the inspiration for Charles Foster Kane. I knew that Kane didn't exactly glorify the man so the scales were tipped and I rented it.
The first five minutes of the movie I had to remind myself I was watching something made in 1941. The use of shadows, mirrors and the assortment of camera techniques could easily fit into a modern Hollywood thriller. Cinematographer Gregg Toland used deep-focus camera techniques to fixate on both Charles Foster Kane and the space in which he inhabits. The technique was used extensively during the last act to create a sense of eerie emptiness, whereby Kane's world was enveloping him.
Deep-focus cinematography is just one of the many reasons Citizen Kane is from a technical standpoint near perfect. The story switches back and fourth between flashbacks, told from a myriad of different people. Their opinions effect the overall impression the audience gets of Kane and as a result, we cannot truly believe everything they say. Kane is seen as warm and brash in one flashback, then seen as cold and distant in another. What results is a movie whose central character leaves you with more questions than answers.
I suppose the movie's enigmatic tone is what interests me the most about the film; along with its brazen political underpinnings. It was pretty clear upon release that Citizen Kane was a film a clef, and William Randolph Hearst who wasn't exactly pleased by its release. He accused Orson Welles of being a communist and according to legend Hearst arranged for a naked woman to jump into Orson Welles's arms when he entered his hotel room in New York. There would also be a photographer in the room to take a picture that would be used to discredit him. Welles stayed away from his hotel room that night so its unknown whether this is true.
What was true was Hearst may have sunk the film. It was a financial dud for RKO films and it would only go on to win a single Oscar for best screenplay. Welles would go on to direct a hand-full of American films before settling in France, however his autonomy was compromised. He would never have complete artistic control for a major studio financed film again. This is not to say his other American films; The Lady from Shanghai (1947), Touch of Evil (1958), and The Stranger (1946) weren't excellent. But if Welles had more freedom to do what he wanted, he might have had more than just Citizen Kane and The Trial (1962) to brag about.
While I could go on and on about the brilliance of Citizen Kane, the best way I can summarize it is to say that among the list of movies accredited as "the best ever," Citizen Kane is among the least overrated. The plot is great, the story structure is great, the artistry is great; everything about it is great. The best? Well that's ultimately up to you.
http://theyservepopcorninhell.blogspot.com/