An American Colossus and the People Around Him

Rating: 10/10 (25 April 2007)

There are now 810 comments on this, possibly the greatest of all American films (if not all films). This review is about an issue I always think about - how horrific was Kane to his country, his associates, and his intimates?
Kane's personality is that of a man desperate to try to hold onto the affections of everyone who encounters him. He has had little real family life (as his mother - Agnes Moorehead - makes the blunder of taking him away from a somewhat drunken father - Harry Shannon - and giving his upbringing to a cold banker - George Coulouris). Kane understands what love is, but he has no way of concentrating his idea of it - he is uncertain if he is going to lose the affections of everyone.
If he had been brought up properly he would have been able to do things more stably. Instead he keeps switching personality depending on whom he meets. He is the breezy young newspaper owner who is determined to shake up the fusty paper he bought (to the delight of Joseph Cotton and Everett Sloan, but to the dismay of old time editor Erskine Sanford). He is the crusading liberal in the face of banker Coulouris (as a way of evening scores, and of reminding the banker of how most of the public saw the rich in 1898). He is the young lover to his first wife (Ruth Warwick), but they grow apart. Frequently it is suggested that his first wife Emily was harmless. What is ignored is she's an anti-Semitic bigot about his close associate Bernstein (Sloan). Hardly a harmless type. She also is not very supportive about his political hopes.
The most interesting problems about Kane's personal choices for popularity and love is the "Alexander" problems. He meets Susan (Dorothy Comingore) by sheer accident, and the simplest things breaks the ice between them. But Susan does not stop the affair, and it becomes the "Achilles' Heel" of Kane's run for Governor of New York. Boss Gettys reveals the relations of Kane and Susan, destroying the former's political career and his marriage. But nobody ever notes the following:
1) Kane was committed to political reform - to end the power of a crooked Boss. Emily's selfishness or anger in not sticking to Charles helps this crook retain power. It's hardly edifying conduct. 2) The public willingly drops supporting Kane in the election - their amusement enhanced by the scandal. But they too are saying they support a crooked Boss and his system. 3) Getty does tell off Kane about his pig-handedness, but this does not explain away his own willingness to use partial extortion (he offered to sit on the story of the love affair if Kane "discovered" he was too sick to continue running for Governor - the election is only a few days off!). Actually, despite Ray Collins' splendid handling of the role, Gettys is not an admirable character.
The scandal also affects Kane's friendship with Jed Leland (Cotton). Cotton has already been suspicious when the Enquirer hires away the staff of the Chronicle in 1897. Bernstein makes a cynical comment that these writers can change their opinions to match their new owner's. Leland is not sure (but they don't change Kane's political opinions). When Leland hears about Kane's affair, he becomes a drinker, and he insists on working in Chicago - away from Kane and New York City. Kane really wanted him to remain.
Later, when Susan tries to be an opera singer Leland begins a negative review (that Kane finishes). Kane does fire Leland, but tries to give him a large severance check (which Leland rips up). Susan is a small harpy screaming about Leland's review, and refusing to consider Leland a friend of Kane's ("Friends don't do that!!", she screams). Kane was ripped apart by these two. Keep in mind, he did not have to marry Susan after the scandal broke - but he did make her his wife. It does not satisfy her. As for Leland, his father died a bankrupt suicide when Kane helped him out. He is certainly an ingrate.
Susan is always denying that she wanted to be an opera singer. Certainly she lacks the voice or talent. But that does not prevent her from continuing a singing career once she divorces Kane. Who's actually lying here?
Gradually the attempts to be all things to all people to keep their love just fails. Kane (at the start) is labeled a Communist by Thatcher at a Congressional hearing, and some spokesman at Union Square (addressing a labor rally) calls him - after a moment of spaced, uncertain waiting, a "Fascist". Everyone calls him or looks at him as what they want to look at him as.
What did he do wrong? He revolutionized newspapers. He helped promote the Spanish American War, and the Panama Canal. He helped elect Teddy Roosevelt in 1904. He stood for reform of political government in New York State in 1916. He also stood against the entry into World War I (a point many people to this day feel we should have avoided). He built an opera house in Chicago. His empire shrunk a bit in the Depression, but most remained in tact. His art collecting was outlandish, but it saved many precious items from destruction in World War II. And while he did AT FIRST support the fascist and Nazi leadership (as many prominent leaders and social figures did through 1936 or so), he later denounced them. Actually, Kane turns out to be a pretty useful citizen of the U.S. for his times, not such an ogre.
Can a case be made that this flawed man deserved to be respected? Yes. Bernstein was right - and remains the only friend of his who was faithful to the end.