Citizen Kane - What's the deal?

[Honus]

Citizen Kane is always put up as the greatest movie ever made, or some such. The first time I tried to watch it I quickly fell asleep. I was really tired that day, so I figured that was not a fair trial. I rented it again. This time I didn't fall asleep, I just got bored. The movie sucks, IMHO. It is unwatchable. What am I missing?

I've heard others agree that they didn't really like the movie much, but it was ahead of its time and that's what makes it great. Well, I'm sorry, but it came out two years after Wizard of Oz and Gone with the Wind, both of which completely kick Citizen Kane's butt.

Wizard of Oz is the best movie ever. I've watched it beginning to end probably 20 times and have watched significant parts of it 25 times. I never get tired of it.

The next best movie is The Godfather, which I can also watch over and over.

[TheDon]

It is opinion that Kane is the best movie, not known fact since "best movie" changes as time progresses.

in logic we learn that opinion is not valid unless proven by fact, so by a logicians standpoint it is invalid the movie is the greatest or best.

[JollyRoger]

I thought that movie sucked too.

[KarTek]

I guess you have to be emotionally involved to a large degree for CK to work. I agree WoO is a great movie. I don't know about "best" but it's up there. BTW, have you ever read the WoO book? It's even more detailed than the movie with additional story lines.

It may seem somewhat shallow but I consider Back to the Future I to be a contender for my favorite movie of all time. I want to be entertained by a movie with a triumphant ending and it dosn't dissappoint.

[TheDon]

Originally Posted by KarTek

It may seem somewhat shallow but I consider Back to the Future I to be a contender for my favorite movie of all time. I want to be entertained by a movie with a triumphant ending and it dosn't dissappoint.

wooooooo!!!!

BTTF part one and two are it.. didnt care for the wild west thing

[Honus]

Originally Posted by TheDon

...in logic we learn that opinion is not valid unless proven by fact...

That doesn't sound right to me. An opinion can be discredited if its factual basis is flawed, but I don't think an opinion can be proved or disproved. For example, my previously stated opinion that Wizard of Oz is the best movie ever is flawed because I haven't seen every movie ever made. On the other hand, my opinion that the Wizard of Oz is the best movie I can recall seeing is solid. There is nothing illogical or invalid about that opinion. It is my opinion. I might change that opinion and I don't expect everyone to agree with it, but it is my opinion.

I am trying to think of an opinion that can be proven by fact. Can you think of any examples of that?

[kerry]

Originally Posted by TheDon

It is opinion that Kane is the best movie, not known fact since "best movie" changes as time progresses.

in logic we learn that opinion is not valid unless proven by fact, so by a logicians standpoint it is invalid the movie is the greatest or best.

It's is facts themselves that are so troublesome. What is a 'fact' as compared to a widely help opinion?

[mgburg]

Who has EVER agreed on the #1 selection of ANY "Best of..." lists?

All lists are subjective...the criteria for deciding what is the best, worst, smelliest, smallest, etc., is simply in the eye, ear or nose of the beholder...

GWTW, CK, WoO...and on and on and on...

You like horror over drama? /

How about the "Friday the 13th" series? Movie or TV versions?

Gets complicated now, doesn't it?

Classics vs. B-stock...Horror vs. Drama...Drama vs. Comedy...etc., etc., etc....

Where do you stop?

And, in the end, isn't it all about WHAT YOU LIKE?

[Honus]

Originally Posted by KarTek

...BTW, have you ever read the WoO book?...

No I haven't, but I have been looking for something to read. I couldn't find anything that caught my eye, so I was about to read Confederacy of Dunces for about the 4th time. I think I will give WoO a try.

[kerry]

David Cook's History of Narrative Film has about 20 pages devoted to Citizen Kane. He begins with the cinematography, stressing it's innovation in using deep focus to create a depth of field previously unknown in films.

[jlomon]

AFAIK it has more to do with the way the movie was shot than the movie itself. Welles use of various camera angles and his directorial style was considered groundbreaking - a true turning point in the craft of film making. The subject of the movie, a thinly veiled attack on William Randolf Hearst and the power of the press (and the fact that Welles was able to get it made at all), also made it great. But it was a box office bomb when released.

[TheDon]

Originally Posted by kerry

It's is facts themselves that are so troublesome. What is a 'fact' as compared to a widely help opinion?

hey look, a tree.

[LaughingGravy]

As mentioned above, from a standpoint of innovation at the time as well as cinematographic (is that a word?) composition, it is indeed a wonderful movie.

In the context of the time, it also pokes huge fun of Hurst, his newspaper empire at the time and personal life in a big way.

That has a lot to do with it,too.


The BTTF movies are great, also because they are really the last movies of the big box office type to be made without any computer animation.
Considering what they pulled off in those movies, that's pretty significant using what is now considered old technology....optics.
Yeah, the Marty vanishing hand in BTTF was badly done upon seeing it on video/dvd now, but the rest of all of those movies are amazing.

[kerry]

Originally Posted by TheDon

hey look, a tree.

Or is it a bush or shrub?

[TheDon]

Its a Larch