Great work of poetic art

Rating: 10/10 (5 May 2004)

"Citizen Kane" is a very mature film. And you have to participate, as a viewer, to get into this one. For example, the use of short lenses with everything in focus (background, foreground, etc) forces you to choose for yourself what you think is more relevent in the frame. Welles and Tolland never impose their vision on you. It also gives way to overlapping dialogues, which was unheard of back then, and still is rarely seen in standard Hollywood movies. Same thing with the editing. Welles seldom cuts in talking scenes, instead he just keeps long takes rolling, therefore, once again as a viewer, you have to participate and focus on what you think is more important in the scene, rather than have the habitual overuse of separate talking heads forcing you to see one actor and not all of them. In "Kane", you can witness all the characters' reaction to the events. Sometime Welles will cut only at the very end of a dialogue for dramatic emphasize. Then, there is the structure of the film. Everyone seems to think they knew the real Charles Foster Kane. But nobody really ever knows everything about another person. That's both the beauty and the tragedy of any human life. But by giving us first of all the death of the main subject with his final and famous dying word, Welles is using a gimmick to allow us to witness different recollections by the people who think they knew him best. But the bottom line is, all they can do is give us a rendering of different events and can never get at the heart of the man. And that's why no one really knows about Rosebud. "Kane" never had a huge budget but it made a wise use of special effects that don't call attention to them like "The matrix" does, for example. That gave a grand look to the picture. But you never realize it as you're watching the film. There would be a lot more to say about this wonderful work of art, but it would take years to match all that has been written about "Citizen Kane" and a lot of people explain the film a lot better that I can. I'm just asking the potential viewers of Orson Welles film to use a little intelligence while viewing it. It's a piece of poetry. Even Jack Kerouac was flabergasted by the poetic aspects of it. It gave new meaning and exploded boudaries for cinema. So to call this film dated, to me is like saying that Beethoven's fifth symphony isn't worth listening to because it's been made so long ago. Time doesn't have an effect on true works of art except to keep them alive and aging well, like a good bottle of wine.