So, like almost every weekend I prepared myself to watch a movie in calm solitude, but this time I couldn't decide for which one. Finally, I made my mind for Citizen Kane, the one considered for almost everyone as the best film ever made, and a film I knew nothing about. I had no idea of the plot, the characters, or the hype for all that matters.
I still can't believe I skipped Lavalantula for this disaster. Two excruciatingly boring hours of watching a psychopath, control freak with s**tloads of money were anything but pleasant. The only thing that kept me going through that miserable experience was the stupid Rosebud "mystery", and of course it was the SHOCKING revelation that the guy had mommy issues or something. And there I was expecting some twist about a big plan the guy had, to which that word was crucial... nope, it was his childhood's toy. What a piece of s**t.
And please don't come with the usual "OMG IT WAS IN THE 40 YOU HAD TO BE THERE THE DIRECTOR WAS 25 YEARS OLD ZOMG CAMERA ANGLES" nonsense. A good movie is forever a good movie, no matter the year. This is a torture that could put to sleep a Queen's Guard on duty and I wouldn't desire it to anyone.
Before you all come and chew me alive, I would like to know why, if you actually do, consider this such an awesome movie, and if you feel entertained when you watch it. Also, if you're going to come and say that I didn't understood the movie, have the decency of explaining it to me. :twirl:
PD: yeah, I registered to post this, but I always lurk the site from the shadows. I was just too p**sed off and had to rant somewhere. :hot:
Citizen Kane is a pretty towering technical achievement (by the way, it turns 75 next year). It advanced cinema in many ways, from it's camera usage (seriously, compare the stuff it does to almost any film made within 20 years of it), non-linear storytelling, naturalistic performance, and even editing. There's a lot to like there. But...
No. I can't say I find it terribly entertaining. I wouldn't say it SUCKS personally, as I can appreciate it for what it is, but I found a lot of the story actually dull, depressing, and boring. Which is not what Welles was going for. So, I can't say I'm really disagreeing with you.
Also, I'm amazed (and slightly jealous) you managed to see this without having what Rosebud is spoiled for you. I'd had that spoiled by a bunch of different TV shows before I saw it.
The other film that gets tossed around a lot as the best film ever is The Godfather. I think that deserves it's reputation much more. It's not my favorite film, but I'd call it nearly flawless if that counts for anything. So, maybe try that one instead sometime.
Also, I love the Citizen Kane remake trailer, "Kane".
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWteTA_XncQ#)
Thanks for coming from the shadows.
I never really sat down and watched Citizen Kane but I got the impression that the movie was a 'movie critic movie'. It's a movie that's always going to high ratings because established Hollywood movie critics seemed to enjoy it.
And...
For some gosh reason, Breakfast at Tiffany's is an established Hollywood director's movie. If you want to be a successful Hollywood Director you need to watch the movie.
I've seen it once. In a small cinema in Leeds in 1998. I cannot remember a single thing about it... nothing.
Yeah. It's got a few cool shots and camera tricks but ... meh.
Quote from: Gabriel Knight on October 04, 2015, 12:46:02 AM
So, like almost every weekend I prepared myself to watch a movie in calm solitude, but this time I couldn't decide for which one. Finally, I made my mind for Citizen Kane, the one considered for almost everyone as the best film ever made, and a film I knew nothing about. I had no idea of the plot, the characters, or the hype for all that matters.
I still can't believe I skipped Lavalantula for this disaster. Two excruciatingly boring hours of watching a psychopath, control freak with s**tloads of money were anything but pleasant. The only thing that kept me going through that miserable experience was the stupid Rosebud "mystery", and of course it was the SHOCKING revelation that the guy had mommy issues or something. And there I was expecting some twist about a big plan the guy had, to which that word was crucial... nope, it was his childhood's toy. What a piece of s**t.
And please don't come with the usual "OMG IT WAS IN THE 40 YOU HAD TO BE THERE THE DIRECTOR WAS 25 YEARS OLD ZOMG CAMERA ANGLES" nonsense. A good movie is forever a good movie, no matter the year. This is a torture that could put to sleep a Queen's Guard on duty and I wouldn't desire it to anyone.
Before you all come and chew me alive, I would like to know why, if you actually do, consider this such an awesome movie, and if you feel entertained when you watch it. Also, if you're going to come and say that I didn't understood the movie, have the decency of explaining it to me. :twirl:
PD: yeah, I registered to post this, but I always lurk the site from the shadows. I was just too p**sed off and had to rant somewhere. :hot:
As a newbie here, first of all, welcome.
Secondly, it is unwritten law on this site to be able to dislike or like a film and others will respect your views even if they don't agree with you.
Thirdly:
Citizen Kane is a classic film with camera, editing and photographic techniques which blew people away in 1941 and still do today.
Fourthly: saying that it sucks is like saying that
Lawrence of Arabia has too long a running time.
Funny this comes up cuz last night I fell asleep with the TV on and when I woke up an "I Love Lucy" re-run was playing whose special guest star was... Orson Welles. What are the odds? :teddyr:
Anywhoo, I've never seen "Kane" and honestly I don't really ever plan to. It doesn't sound like something that would interest me. Ditto for "Casablanca."
CITIZEN KANE is probably more "important" than great. A lot of the techniques it pioneered simply became part of all the movies that followed; looking back at it today it's hard to realize how different it is from movies made before 1941. Deep focus, for one thing, was a huge innovation.
Roger Ebert's review might help you understand why some people love it: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-citizen-kane-1941 (http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-citizen-kane-1941)
That said I agree it's not a crowd-pleaser or a "fun" movie. I don't even think it's Orson Welles' best movie (I'd go for TOUCH OF EVIL).
And you may be happy to know that in the last Sight & Sound poll, for the first time CITIZEN KANE was not voted the best movie of all time. VERTIGO was. (If you don't like VERTIGO, I can't help you!)
Thanks for the replys, some answers were pretty funny - that video tho. You have no idea how badly I wanted to watch that instead of the original CK. :bluesad:
Back on the movie itself: don't get me wrong, I do understand how it changed the way films were made back then, but there must be many others that did the very same thing along the years and nobody seems to have such nerdgasms with those.
Besides, CK doesn't seems like an enjoyable film for the common fella who gives a rat ass about camera angles and stuff like that. Even when I do enjoy and praise a good acting, memorable scenes and cool outfits, this one it's just boring and a lot of times annoying, the characters are a bunch of a***oles to whom I find quite hard to care about, and the ending is just lame.
On the other hand, I think that calling a movie "the best of all times" is just silly. You can't compare a comedy to a drama or a suspense movie like Vertigo*, because the way you enjoy movies depends on so many factors that each one belongs to their own genre, just like music or books or any other form of art. The "critic's" words about this particular predicament are very, very biased imho; it seems like they just decided one day to call this movie the best thing evar so most of the people that didn't even watched it would repeat that until it becomes a known fact. :twirl:
Anyways, thanks again for the replys, I actually thought I was going to get a lot of hate, but the more I lurk on the Internets trying to find that army of fanatics behind CK, the more I grow convinced that the only ones that are really excited about it are those who get paid for it.
See you around!
* I've seen a few Hitchcock's movies and I think they're much, much more fun to watch than CK. Haven't seen Vertigo tho, I think it will be the next one in my list - after Lavalantula, of course. :cheers:
LAVALANTULA is completely awesome.
Quote from: indianasmith on October 05, 2015, 11:01:54 PM
LAVALANTULA is completely awesome.
Agreed. One of Syfy's best B-Movies. In my opinion, not as good as Sharknado 3, but still pretty good.
I don't think any (well, many) critics actually think CITIZEN KANE was the best movie of all time. Most of us think like you; terms like "best" are meaningless when it comes to movies, it's hard to compare movies in different genres, etc. The "CITIZEN KANE is the best movie of all time" meme comes from it winning the Sight & Sound poll decade after decade, until the last one. That made it the consensus choice and the got-to movie you pulled out whenever you want to make a comparison, for example, "CAGED VIRGINS is the CITIZEN KANE of lesbian vampire movies..."
good point rev. it has become the measuring stick for cinema greatness somehow, with all those "this movie is the 'citizen kane' of...." type comparisons.
just looking on imdb's top 250 of all time. it's a lowly 66th place. I honestly thought it would be top 5 or at least top 10
and Shawshank Redemption is #1 on that list (which I did know it would be) but the weird thing is if you try and substitute the Citizen Kane comparison thing with Shawshank, it sounds wrong... i.e. "The Wicker Man is the Shawshank Redemption of horror movies" sounds wrong. but saying "The Wicker Man is the Citizen Kane of horror movies" kind of works. not sure why that would be...
edit. Jaws is so ridiculously low down on that list. 210th? what the hell.
Quote from: zombie #1 on October 06, 2015, 10:21:51 AM
good point rev. it has become the measuring stick for cinema greatness somehow, with all those "this movie is the 'citizen kane' of...." type comparisons.
just looking on imdb's top 250 of all time. it's a lowly 66th place. I honestly thought it would be top 5 or at least top 10
and Shawshank Redemption is #1 on that list (which I did know it would be) but the weird thing is if you try and substitute the Citizen Kane comparison thing with Shawshank, it sounds wrong... i.e. "The Wicker Man is the Shawshank Redemption of horror movies" sounds wrong. but saying "The Wicker Man is the Citizen Kane of horror movies" kind of works. not sure why that would be...
edit. Jaws is so ridiculously low down on that list. 210th? what the hell.
Any kind of list like that, it's important to note that the film that most people like a lot will win over more divisive movies. That is, a good chunk of people probably vote Citizen Kane a 1 or a 2 because they're so bored over it, even though perhaps even a majority give it like a 9 or 10. Whereas Shawshank gets like all 7s and 8s from almost everyone, so it ends up winning on a weighted vote like that. It's more the movie the fewest people hate and most people really like (but do not always love) that ends up topping those lists.
Yeah. Best movie is a subjective thing. Like CASABLANCA, but never could get into C K. It's just an intellectual appreciation for me...kinda like looking at a tank of tropical fish.
If you're making comparisons: Citizen Kane did more for movie makers than Shawshank, Shawshank did more for movie goers than Citizen Kane.
CK's influence on technical style and story telling techniques can't be overstated, it was pretty ground breaking, but it wasn't exactly a box office hit, even back when it was released.
I still love it, but the best movie of all time, sorry that place is reserved for some truly awful trash [probably Masters of The Universe or Buckaroo Banzai.]
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ekakWBxspA%3Cbr%20/%3E#)
Quote from: zombie #1 on October 04, 2015, 02:27:21 PM
I've seen it once. In a small cinema in Leeds in 1998. I cannot remember a single thing about it... nothing.
Now you are da man.
Quote from: Trevor on October 05, 2015, 02:43:27 AM
Quote from: Gabriel Knight on October 04, 2015, 12:46:02 AM
So, like almost every weekend I prepared myself to watch a movie in calm solitude, but this time I couldn't decide for which one. Finally, I made my mind for Citizen Kane, the one considered for almost everyone as the best film ever made, and a film I knew nothing about. I had no idea of the plot, the characters, or the hype for all that matters.
I still can't believe I skipped Lavalantula for this disaster. Two excruciatingly boring hours of watching a psychopath, control freak with s**tloads of money were anything but pleasant. The only thing that kept me going through that miserable experience was the stupid Rosebud "mystery", and of course it was the SHOCKING revelation that the guy had mommy issues or something. And there I was expecting some twist about a big plan the guy had, to which that word was crucial... nope, it was his childhood's toy. What a piece of s**t.
And please don't come with the usual "OMG IT WAS IN THE 40 YOU HAD TO BE THERE THE DIRECTOR WAS 25 YEARS OLD ZOMG CAMERA ANGLES" nonsense. A good movie is forever a good movie, no matter the year. This is a torture that could put to sleep a Queen's Guard on duty and I wouldn't desire it to anyone.
Before you all come and chew me alive, I would like to know why, if you actually do, consider this such an awesome movie, and if you feel entertained when you watch it. Also, if you're going to come and say that I didn't understood the movie, have the decency of explaining it to me. :twirl: PD: yeah, I registered to post this, but I always lurk the site from the shadows. I was just too p**sed off and had to rant somewhere. :hot:
As a newbie here, first of all, welcome.
Secondly, it is unwritten law on this site to be able to dislike or like a film and others will respect your views even if they don't agree with you.
Thirdly: Citizen Kane is a classic film with camera, editing and photographic techniques which blew people away in 1941 and still do today.[/size]
Fourthly: saying that it sucks is like saying that Lawrence of Arabia has too long a running time.
But...but but but...
LAWRENCE OF ARABIA does have too long a running time... :bluesad: And it is one of my favorite movies. :smile:
CITIZEN KANE we agree is a great film. Doesn't mean everyone enjoys it. :question: However, this posting seems a bit TROLL-ish to me too.
Quote from: Allhallowsday on October 06, 2015, 11:26:45 PM
However, this posting seems a bit TROLL-ish to me too.
Agreed: I'm still trying to recover after watching the 1986 film over the weekend. :wink:
I did enjoy Citizen Kane personally as I enjoy Welles' work in general but yeah, it's not for everyone and is probably a bit overrated.
I've...still not seen it.
Quote from: WingedSerpent on October 07, 2015, 06:44:17 PM
I've...still not seen it.
Poooor li'l punkin... it's on TCM
RIGHT NOW!!! I came here and saw your post... get down on it... get down on it... I always laugh at some part of this movie and some parts are just stunning if you like looking at movies, and as flawed as it might be, movies don't often get this good...