Why the hell is citizen kane considered the best movie ever?

[wiffleball 4,790]

Just saw another poll where this movie was (still) ranked as the best movie ever?

 

 

I've never watched the thing all the way through. Can someone tell me why it's supposed be so great?

 

I thought the acting, the direction - all the technical things was pretty mediocre.

 

My personal theory is this movie has been "Macy Gray'd". Remember when she came out and it was considdered so cool to think she was the best thing ever? (even though she sucked) Hollywierd does that a lot. They take something ridiculous, but start with the whole "Emperor's New Clothes" gig until nobody would dare say otherwise. - Same thing with fashion. They chit on the runway nobody would be caught dead in, but everybody oohs and ahhhs like the designer just cured cancer.

[MDC 7,413]

It was technically innovative at the time but you're right - Citizen Kane is really dated and not a great film anymore.

[RLLD 4,230]

Rosebud? Lemme tell you about rosebud....

[Snuff 10]

With the reasoning that it is old or outdated, can we conclude then that older sports stars (Babe Ruth, Muhammad Ali, etc.....) can no longer be included in the best ever? Would that not be the same thing?

[kutulu 1,676]

It sucks. Just ask me.

[wiffleball 4,790]

With the reasoning that it is old or outdated, can we conclude then that older sports stars (Babe Ruth, Muhammad Ali, etc.....) can no longer be included in the best ever? Would that not be the same thing?

 

I don't think so.

 

 

I don't think anybody would reasonably argue that, for example - Johnny Unitas would be nearly as successful if you could transport his 25 year old incarnation into today's game. To my knowledge, most people wouldn't say 'he's the best QB of ALL time, just the best QB of HIS time.

 

- Regardless, it's an entirely different subject that's been hashed and re-hashed on talk radio and elsewhere since damn near the dawn of sports and s/b in another thread if you want.

 

This is about the Best Movies Ever. I'd agree that maybe it was the best movie of its time (?), but sure as hell doesn't seem like the best movie of all time.

 

Which isn't to say that older movies are necessarily not as good as newer films. Just this one particular sure as hell doesn't strike me as being the best movie ever by a longshot.

[paulinstl 296]

The reason why it continues to be held in such high esteem is because film people understand the directorial genius of it. Orson Wells used some techniques that had never been seen before. The overall blend of sound, camera and cinematograghy was unique and it stood the industry on it's ear.

 

As far as the meaning of the movie and it's metaphors, like "Rosebud" being the loss of innocence, the bigger picture behind the movie was a metaphor for America in a post Depression and pre WWII world. One of the biggest undercurrents in the movie was Kane's failure to use his ability to it's potential. That theme struck a chord in post Depression US.

 

One interesting quote from Z French film director Francois Truffault: "Everything that matters in cinema since 1940 has been influenced by Citizen Kane."

 

Next time you watch it, pay attention to the camera and what it is showing you and remember it was from 1941. It is a really fantastic visual movie.

 

As far as it being dated, so are The Beatles, yet everybody agrees they were so huge because of the technical breakthroughs they recorded, and that they were tuned into the subconscious psyche of a gereration at the time, just as Citizen Kane was.

[kutulu 1,676]

The reason why it continues to be held in such high esteem is because film people understand the directorial genius of it. Orson Wells used some techniques that had never been seen before. The overall blend of sound, camera and cinematograghy was unique and it stood the industry on it's ear.

 

As far as the meaning of the movie and it's metaphors, like "Rosebud" being the loss of innocence, the bigger picture behind the movie was a metaphor for America in a post Depression and pre WWII world. One of the biggest undercurrents in the movie was Kane's failure to use his ability to it's potential. That theme struck a chord in post Depression US.

 

One interesting quote from Z French film director Francois Truffault: "Everything that matters in cinema since 1940 has been influenced by Citizen Kane."

 

Next time you watch it, pay attention to the camera and what it is showing you and remember it was from 1941. It is a really fantastic visual movie.

 

As far as it being dated, so are The Beatles, yet everybody agrees they were so huge because of the technical breakthroughs they recorded, and that they were tuned into the subconscious psyche of a gereration at the time, just as Citizen Kane was.

 

Ernest Goes to School > Citizen Kane

[paulinstl 296]

Ernest Goes to School > Citizen Kane

 

Wouldn't have expected anything less from somebody who thinks 80's hair metal is the pinnacle of Rock music.

 

[kutulu 1,676]

Wouldn't have expected anything less from somebody who thinks 80's hair metal is the pinnacle of Rock music.

 

 

I don't like hair metal.

[MDC 7,413]

Citizen Kane is dated as hell.

 

Some older movies like Rear Window or Cassablanca have stood up very well over time and would probably still be regarded as good movies if they were released today. Citizen Kane is silly and melodramatic, and only regarded as a great film because of its influence on cinema. Otherwise it's a pretty unremarkable movie.

 

hth.

[edjr 6,580]

Wouldn't have expected anything less from somebody who thinks 80's hair metal is the pinnacle of Rock music.

 

 

 

That's me Pissel. I hate the ernest movies though

[kutulu 1,676]

That's me Pissel. I hate the ernest movies though

 

I hate them to.....but I did play it the other night for the rugrats to watch from the free on demand comcrap movies.

[Sparkling Wiggles 0]

I think the real question is, who is fatter? Orson Welles or wiffle?

[Snoopy1 0]

Just saw another poll where this movie was (still) ranked as the best movie ever?

I've never watched the thing all the way through. Can someone tell me why it's supposed be so great?

 

I thought the acting, the direction - all the technical things was pretty mediocre.

 

My personal theory is this movie has been "Macy Gray'd". Remember when she came out and it was considdered so cool to think she was the best thing ever? (even though she sucked) Hollywierd does that a lot. They take something ridiculous, but start with the whole "Emperor's New Clothes" gig until nobody would dare say otherwise. - Same thing with fashion. They chit on the runway nobody would be caught dead in, but everybody oohs and ahhhs like the designer just cured cancer.

 

First off, I'd disagree wholeheartedly about the technical things being mediocre. Direction & cinematagraphy in Kane is extraordinary. Gregg Toland, the director of photography's work on that movie inspires people to this day. His work with lighting, lenses(he invented a special lens just for that film) was incredible. Going hand and hand with this was Well's and Toland using angles and specific shots sybollically at different times in Kane's life, something that to my knowledge wasn't ever done before.

 

For instance, when Kane is sent off to boarding school(I think, been years since I've watched it), He is in the far background while his mother, father and Leyland??? are in middle and foreground...similiarly when he loses his newspaper, the same composition is used. Both times major events are happening in his life, where he's not involved in the decision at all.

 

More innovations per Wikipedia:

The most innovative technical aspect of Citizen Kane is the extended use of deep focus (the use of deep focus was not, contrary to urban myth, unprecedented, but it had never been used to this extent). In nearly every scene in the film, the foreground, background and everything in between are all in sharp focus. This was done by renowned cinematographer Gregg Toland through his experimentation with lenses and lighting. Specifically, Toland often used telephoto lenses to shoot close-up scenes. Anytime deep focus was impossible — for example in the scene when Kane finishes a bad review of Alexander's opera while at the same time firing the person who started the review — Toland used an optical printer to make the whole screen appear in focus (one piece of film is printed onto another piece of film). However, many deep focus shots were the result of in-camera effects, as in the famous example of the scene where Kane breaks into Susan Alexander's room after her suicide attempt. In the background, Kane and another man break into the room, while simultaneously the medicine bottle and a glass with a spoon in it are in closeup in the foreground. The shot was an in-camera matte shot. The foreground was shot first, with the background dark. Then the background was lit, the foreground darkened, the film rewound, and the scene reshot with the background action.

 

Another unorthodox method used in the film was the way low-angle shots were used to display a point of view facing upwards, thus allowing ceilings to be shown in the background of several scenes. Since movies were primarily filmed on sound stages and not on location during the era of the Hollywood studio system, it was impossible to film at an angle that showed ceilings because the stages had none. Welles' crew used muslin draped above the set to produce the illusion of a regular room with a ceiling, while the boom mikes were hidden above the cloth.

 

One of the story-telling techniques introduced in this film was using an episodic sequence on the same set while the characters changed costume and make-up between cuts so that the scene following each cut would look as if it took place in the same location, but at a time long after the previous cut. In this way, Welles chronicled the breakdown of Kane's first marriage, which took years of story time, in a matter of minutes. Prior to this technique, filmmakers often had to use a long period of screen time to explain the character's changed circumstances. For example, in Erich von Stroheim's masterpiece Greed, the breakdown of the marriage of the main characters takes almost an hour of screen time, even in the most abbreviated cut.

 

Welles also pioneered several visual effects in order to cheaply shoot things like crowd scenes and large interior spaces. For example, the scene where the camera in the opera house rises dramatically to the rafters to show the workmen showing a lack of appreciation for the second Mrs. Kane's performance was shot by panning a camera upwards over the performance scene, then a curtain wipe to a miniature of the upper regions of the house, and then another curtain wipe matching it again with the scene of the workmen. Other scenes effectively employed miniatures to make the film look much more expensive than it truly was, such as various shots of Xanadu.

 

The film broke new ground with its use of special effects makeup, believably ageing the cast many decades over the course of the story. The details extended down to hazy contact lenses to make Cotten's eyes look rheumy as an old man. Welles later claimed that his own dashing appearance as a young man also involved a lot of makeup (including some strategically applied tape to give him a mini-facelift).

 

Welles brought his experience with sound from radio along to filmmaking, producing a layered and complex soundtrack. In one famous scene the elderly Kane strikes Susan in a tent on the beach, and as the two characters silently glower at each other a woman at the nearby party can be heard hysterically laughing in the background, her giddiness in grotesque counterpoint to the misery of Susan and Kane. Elsewhere, Welles skillfully employed sound effects to create a mood—such as the chilly echo of the monumental library, where the reporter is confronted by an intimidating, officious librarian.

 

In addition to expanding on the potential of sound as a creator of moods and emotions, Welles pioneered a new aural technique, known as the "lightning-mix." Welles used this technique to link complex montage sequences via a series of related sounds or phrases. In offering a continuous sound track, Welles was able to join what would otherwise be extremely rough cuts together into a smooth narrative. For example, the audience witnesses Kane grow from a child into a young man in just two shots. As Kane's guardian hands him his sled and wishes him a "Merry Christmas" we are suddenly taken to a shot of Kane fifteen years later, only to have the phrase completed for us: "and a Happy New Year." In this case, the continuity of the soundtrack, not the screen, is what makes for a seamless narrative structure.

 

What Wells did, IMO, would be akin to a man scaling a 20,000 foot mountain, while the rest of the mountain climbers are stuck at 5,000 feet, and doing it 20 years before anyone else would hit the 15,000 foot mark. Sure, people have surpassed that mark now, but he led the way and did things nobody else had even thought of trying. And nobody has really raised the mark by another 15,000 feet in ways like he did, IMO.

 

For sure, Citizen Kane is one of the reasons I ended up becoming a camerman, then editor. As a piece of art it my field, it's inspiring, even today.

[Groundhog 24]

it pales in comparison to Cannonball Run II.

[RicemanX 20]

it pales in comparison to Cannonball Run II.

or Over the Top

[paulinstl 296]

Citizen Kane is silly and melodramatic, and only regarded as a great film because of its influence on cinema. Otherwise it's a pretty unremarkable movie.

 

hth.

Doesn't help at all. Your opinion is noted, wrong, but noted.

[dolfan06 1]

It's cool that Shawshank got some respect. Not sure why LOTR 1 is ranked when LOTR 3 was a better movie. Also notable that LOTR 1 is the only movie from 2000 forward on the list. Only 3 comedies from 1977 forward (Annie Hall, Tootsie, and Toy Story if you count that as a comedy). Overall I think the last 20 years are severely underrepresented. American Beauty, Chicago, Braveheart, Traffic, Field of Dreams are all better than a number of movies on the list.

[Sparkling Wiggles 0]

I can just see paulinstl after his 15th longneck in the bar, oggling the bartender. He just got done complaining about the fact that the Cardinals have a pitcher on their staff that even the Royals cut. Then, he goes into his reasoning why Citizen Kane is one of the best films, ever.

 

I'm telling you. This has happened. paul probably doesn't remember it, but it happened.

[paulinstl 296]

I can just see paulinstl after his 15th longneck in the bar, oggling the bartender. He just got done complaining about the fact that the Cardinals have a pitcher on their staff that even the Royals cut. Then, he goes into his reasoning why Citizen Kane is one of the best films, ever.

 

I'm telling you. This has happened. paul probably doesn't remember it, but it happened.

 

Every single thing you just mentioned are topics in my seminar. Shoot me an email and I'l let you know where and when the next one is being held. Half off for Sanctuary members.

 

p.s. I remember everything, and I have those exact coversations already this week.

 

[wiffleball 4,790]

Sure, people have surpassed that mark now,

 

 

But see, that's the POINT now, isn't it?

 

It's like saying Wilbur and Orville's plane is better than the F-16 because: 1) It flew first and 2) other planes after that built on the same principles.

 

 

 

I can see recognizing it as a seminal work. That doesn't make it the BEST movie of all time.

[paulinstl 296]

But see, that's the POINT now, isn't it?

 

It's like saying Wilbur and Orville's plane is better than the F-16 because: 1) It flew first and 2) other planes after that built on the same principles.

I can see recognizing it as a seminal work. That doesn't make it the BEST movie of all time.

 

Again, I go with The Beatles analogy. Music experts 25 years from now will all claim that The Beatles were the greatest rock band in history, even though other groups have expanded and eclipsed The Beatles' technological breakthroughs.

 

[Sparkling Wiggles 0]

Every single thing you just mentioned are topics in my seminar. Shoot me an email and I'l let you know where and when the next one is being held. Half off for Sanctuary members.

 

p.s. I remember everything, and I have those exact coversations already this week.

 

If I was a Sanc member, I'd probably take you up. Also, I have no clue what your email is.

[Snoopy1 0]

But see, that's the POINT now, isn't it?

 

It's like saying Wilbur and Orville's plane is better than the F-16 because: 1) It flew first and 2) other planes after that built on the same principles.

I can see recognizing it as a seminal work. That doesn't make it the BEST movie of all time.

 

 

I tried to explain that in my analogy, people have surpassed the mark, but not by the lengths that Kane surpassed everything previously.

 

It's just such a massively influential work and you have to remember AFI is made up of people in the industry. When it comes to story telling, narration, cinematagraphy, editing, sound design...this is one of the films we study over and over.

 

I still sit down and watch it once a year, at least.

[wiffleball 4,790]

I tried to explain that in my analogy, people have surpassed the mark, but not by the lengths that Kane surpassed everything previously.

 

So it's a relative rank, not an absolute one. You're then saying that there have been movies that have clearly surpassed this film in every category. Which would make them a better movie than CK. Which takes us back to it was the best movie of ITS time, but not ALL time.

 

I appreciate your insight and understand what you're saying. I just believe a listing with a title like this is absolute, not relative. To say other movies have clearly surpassed it, but this is somehow the best movie seems contradictory. If the listing was for most influential movies, most innovative, most ahead of its time - damn sure your analysis would win the day.

 

It'd be like having a list of the strongest creatures on earth and listing the ant as #1. True - relative to body size (for this discussion), but damn sure not the strongest creature on earth.

[PackerAttacker 0]

Its the same as athletes in a way... its a nostalgia thing. People have a hard time saying anybody new is better thant the old timers. Nobody will ever be considered greater than Babe Ruth. Noone will ever say there are centers greater than Kareem, Wilt, and Russell.

 

Even though... fact is... theyd all be killed in todays game.

 

Same for movies.

 

I like the post too... I completely agree with the runway model thing.

[dolfan06 1]

Also, Dazed and Confused, Fast Times at Ridgmont High and Breakfast Club all deserve consideration for that list.

[Snoopy1 0]

So it's a relative rank, not an absolute one. You're then saying that there have been movies that have clearly surpassed this film in every category. Which would make them a better movie than CK. Which takes us back to it was the best movie of ITS time, but not ALL time.

 

I appreciate your insight and understand what you're saying. I just believe a listing with a title like this is absolute, not relative. To say other movies have clearly surpassed it, but this is somehow the best movie seems contradictory. If the listing was for most influential movies, most innovative, most ahead of its time - damn sure your analysis would win the day.

 

It'd be like having a list of the strongest creatures on earth and listing the ant as #1. True - relative to body size (for this discussion), but damn sure not the strongest creature on earth.

 

 

I'd agree with that, it is relative. CK surpassed by far anything done previously, ahead of it's time innovatively and it's extremely influential. So it's all those factors that put it at the top of the list, regardless of it's actual worth in comparison to films that have followed.

 

Another thing to consider about AFI being made up of movie folks, well a heck of lot of those folks are actors. Most have probably been told CK is the best movie so they just vote for it, cmon if these actors were brainiacs would we get movies like America's Sweethearts???

 

For me, I still cant get over the compositions in that movie, choice of angles, the deep focus shots, just don't see things like that anymore.

 

I totally can understand when you specify that it might be the most influential, most important...Best is such a loaded term, these lists are mostly just silly anyway.

 

So...what would you have ranked as the best picture of all time?

[wiffleball 4,790]

So...what would you have ranked as the best picture of all time?

 

Man, that's like picking the prettiest woman of all time. Technically, I just don't think I have the chops to say.

 

I do think the acting has gotten far better. It's pretty obvious when you look at some older films that actors were having a hard time breaking from their Broadway acting techniques and realizing that they were in an entirely new medium. Some of the 'child' actors are just absolutely amazing. Natalie Portman was better as a teenager than many every got to be in their entire career. I think folks like Cagney were just laughable.

 

Visually, I think no movie 'pops' like The Quiet Man. It's one of those movies I have to watch every time it comes on. Maureen Ohara's hair contrasted against the verdant hills of Ireland is breathtaking. The cinematography on that film is rivalled maybe only by TLOR.

 

I was very pleased to see Saving Private Ryan on the list. The first 10 minutes of that film may be some of the most compelling I've ever seen.

 

So, I guess bottom line. I disagree fundamentally with the list. I can see making a list of the top 100 movies of all time. But to try and rank any of them as some quantifable number better than another (is one movie ten times worse than another?) is like trying to digitize love.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

You guys are a bunch of focking ass-clowns if there ever were any.

 

Citizen Kane was amazing on so many levels. Perhaps the most important was how controversial and daring it was. It was pretty much the first movie to portray a rich, accomplished man in a somewhat poor light. Up until that point, wealth was considered synonomous with virtue in mainstream culture.

 

Also, the movie was a direct attack on William Randolph Hearst, whose greed virtually destroyed journalism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Randolph_Hearst

 

There are many, many other reasons why this movie is so spectacular. At the time, it was considered revolutionary in terms of film technology. It introduced many new techniques into film that are still used to this day.

 

Also, do you realize how much of the dialogue is still referenced in our culture?

 

In short, Wiff, you ought to at least watch the whole damn movie before you spew forth an ignorant, uninformed opinion on its worth.

[wiffleball 4,790]

Also, do you realize how much of the dialogue is still referenced in our culture?

 

Well, he's got me there. They didn't even have a name for roses that hadn't bloomed yet before this little gem came out.

 

 

 

 

Discussed and answered already worms.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Discussed and answered already worms.

 

I realize that, but I just had to express how shocked I was that this was even a question in the first place.

 

It'd be sort of like if you only saw a piece of The Last Supper, and then asked: "why the hell does anyone think its that great of a painting anyway?"

 

[CantTouchThis 23]

Never seen it, mainly because everyone i know who has seen it says it is very boring....

[IndyTom 0]

As far as it being dated, so are The Beatles, yet everybody agrees they were so huge because of the technical breakthroughs they recorded, and that they were tuned into the subconscious psyche of a gereration at the time, just as Citizen Kane was.

 

This was the analogy I was thinking of as well. The Sgt. Pepper album has been considered the best album of all time for many years. It is credited with using recording techniques that was unheard of at the time. Their innovation is what inspired future generations of musicians.

 

On an unrelated note, movies like "It's a Wonderful Life" were actually failures at the box office. However, it has gained such a massive following, thanks to television, that the movie will forever be a staple at Christmas time.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Never seen it, mainly because everyone i know who has seen it says it is very boring....

 

Everyone you know must be a focktard.

[Guest tiki_gods]

It poked fun at mainstream media and William Randolph Hearst.

[kutulu 1,676]

 

I still sit down and watch it once a year, at least.

 

 

I rent it once a year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

to poop on.

[Voltaire 5,316]

It may be the best movie ever, whatever, I don't know much about the art of filmmaking and I'm glad it helped the folks behind the camera get ideas on how to do things.

 

To me though it was boring and unentertaining. I don't intend to watch it again.

[supermike80 1,910]

I liked it quite a bit. Yeah it might be a bit dated and what not, but the movie was pretty cool.