Talk:Charles Foster Kane

message: In the movie, it is only revealed that G.W. Gettys has evidence that implicates Kane as having an affair with Susan Alexander, not that he has any conclusive proof that Kane actually did have an affair. Susan herself denies that there was any affair when confronted by Kane's wife, Emily Norton, and she seems desperately honest when doing so. Kane, meanwhile, seems indignant that Gettys is willing to destroy Susan's reputation for his own political gain and refuses to allow himself to be blackmailed: clearly, he feels like he has nothing to hide. Kane, in the middle of a political campaign, was very image-conscious and fully aware that his campaign for governor hinged on his percieved moral standing in the community. It seems unlikely that he would throw all that away with a casual adulterous affair, though he may not have realized that his actions--going to visit Susan in her apartment (more than once, the movie would seem to suggest)--would have created the opportunity for Gettys to turn the same yellow journalist tactics Kane had employed against others against Kane himself. 
It is, of course, entirely possible that Susan Alexander was lying, that Kane DID have a serious lapse in judgement, and that they did indeed have an affair. However the point is that the movie never makes it clear one way or the other. I edited the article to add that element of ambiguity to it. Antodav 18:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with most of the above - it is unclear whether she actually was his mistress. However, he has set her up in a new and expensive apartment (note the change in scene from the start to the end when he is applauding her piano playing), with a friendly young maid rather than her hostile landlady who does not approve of "gentleman callers". Kane's reaction could be injured innocence - or it could be sheer arrogance and anger that Gettys has got the better of him. We don't know.Paulturtle (talk) 06:03, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: Is being genenrally held to be based on Hearst enough to fit this category? --Spencer "The Belldog" Bermudez  |  (Complain here) 19:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Fictional versions of real people 

message: :Image:Citizen Kane.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Citizen Kane.jpg

message: Absolutely nothing on his first wife, Emily. What's up wit dat? MMetro (talk) 19:50, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationships 

message: For an article relating to one of cinema's most important movies, Charles Foster Kane needs a lot of work. The section "Political views," for instance, is all uncited original-research speculation and POV views. I've removed the most egregious paragraph, filled with POV "as implied by", "apparently" etc., but this section cannot continue to stand in its present form. Without citations from reliable-source authorities on the movie — and there are countless books on Kane — this section is all original research. Ff cites cannot be found, it needs to be removed. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: OR speculation

message: He may be the main character in the most critically-acclaimed American film, but I do wonder whether this article is an unneccesary duplicate of Citizen Kane; most of this is a fairly interpretive biography of a fictional character from one famous film without any critical commentary; the bits that do feature commentary (i.e. "political views") appear to be original research. I would suggest that any useful parts (the inspiration section, for example), would be of more use in the main article. Bob talk 23:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential merge candidate 

message: If I remember correctly, Jed Leland is the one who tells Charlie Kane to be careful not to make promises he can't keep, not Mr. Bernstein. Andacar 02:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's Bernstein.Paulturtle (talk) 16:53, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misquote 

message: As someone that Asperger's syndrome has (I do not have it -- it has me), I see uncanny similarities between the character (except for his wealth) and me. He's cold and unfeeling. He's humorless and self-righteous. He can show an intense focus on something that takes time to achieve, such as doing jigsaw puzzles. Everything that he does is an act. 
No, he is not an evil person. He offends people because he does not understand their emotions, and not out of malice or predatory design. Yes, he can hurt people with his sadistic humor (as with the opera singer). He is not a sociopath who acts with brutality or cheats people in well-planned schemes. 
Villain? No -- but he can certainly put people off.  Pbrower2a (talk) 05:06, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: We'd need a reliable source discussing this before we could add anything along these lines to the article. DonIago (talk) 20:34, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asperger's syndrome? 

message: My recollection is that shops in the 1910s or earlier used to stock sheets of the latest popular songs for people to buy, this being before most people had radios but when cheap pianos were a common aspirational household item. I daresay the shop might have stocked hymns and classical pieces as well, so Susan's job when they meet would have been a bit like being in charge of the LP and pop single records in a shop in the 1960s, 1970s or 1980s. A cultural reference which is probably unknown to most people nowadays. I think we'd need a source though.Paulturtle (talk) 08:33, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sheet Music