|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Citizen Kane: Is it wrecked if you know the ending?
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 03-10-2014 09:53 PM
There is no such thing as the definitive "greatest movie ever made" or any other subject. I think Mike was probably using those words because he has heard about this one movie (probably in another thread that Leo and I have been duking it out).
What Kane does represent was one of the single biggest departures from how movies were made before it and after it. Though not as significant, historically, but certainly fascinating was that a 25-year old Orson Wells pioneered the Director, Writer Star person...he wore a lot of hats! Orson played a man of his age and one that was MUCH older and did so very well.
The best way to appreciate Kane and where it stands in film history is to look at the movies that came before it and then those that came after it. It is undeniable, it was the turning point in how movies were to be made. It is much more on the revolutionary side of things than evolutionary. It is really up there with the advent of the talkies because it changed movie making that much. And just like with talkies...the techniques in lighting, story telling, cinematography that were pioneering in Kane have been developed and refined. It wasn't the last word in movie making, the was the first statement in modern movie making.
And Justin...while the movies you mention deserve their accolades, they don't measure up, except for Avatar (but not for the same reasons), in terms of the impact it had on the industry. With Avatar, I have to say the real turning point in Digital Cinema was made. It was THE one movie, even more than Star Wars before it, that got the exhibitors thinking..."I need to get me a Digital system so I can cash in on that new 3D thing." We were getting orders much faster than the manufacturers could fill them even though it normally only mean one system per complex. And with that, the momentum was created for where we are now. But it really wasn't the evolutionary 3D and animation techniques that were in Avatar that did it. My prediction is that Avatar 2 isn't going to have the same sort of impact...but that is my prediction.
In any event, knowing about "Rosebud" will not hurt your movie watching enjoyment (or perhaps boredom). I do suggest that you keep your mind open and if you don't get it on the technological side, watch most any movie made before it. My prediction is that you will enjoy it anyway because the story is quite good and the aforementioned film making techniques were also done very well.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 03-10-2014 11:22 PM
Just to paint the picture in broad strokes, Citizen Kane is the Jimi Hendrix of contemporary movie making. Kane wrote the language for it.
Jimi Hendrix definitely was not the most technically precise rock guitarist ever. There's dozens of guys who could play circles around him (Eddie Van Halen, Zakk Wylde, Dimebag Darrell Abbott, Joe Satriani, Steve Vai, etc., etc., etc.). Hendrix didn't have the best "feel" in phrasing of his licks. Guys like Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Jeff Beck, Stevie Ray Vaughn and many others could pull tears out of peoples' faces with their playing.
The difference with Hendrix: he did it FIRST. Hendrix invented the language of modern rock guitar. So many other axe men could play better, but they ALL were copying Hendrix in some way or other. There's just no way around it.
And that's how it is with Citizen Kane. Some snotty movie-maker today (who never soiled his hands with a magazine of film) could act like Kane is beneath him, but he would have to try very damned hard and probably fail in futility to deliberately avoid any influence Kane has left on the movie making craft.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 03-10-2014 11:49 PM
quote: Mike Blakesley
So I've never seen "Citizen Kane" and I keep reading about how it's the best movie in the history of movies, so I would like to see it, but I've heard thousands of times over the years about how the word "Rosebud" is whispered at the end, and it refers to a sled, and so on.
My question: Is the movie ruined by me knowing this info? Am I going to watch it and say "That's IT? WTF?" Or will it still be a worthwhile investment of time to watch it?
I know if you watched "The Sixth Sense" knowing the ending, it would spoil that movie, so...
I don't think knowing what "Rosebud" means will ruin the movie.
It depends on how you view the movie, if you go in with your bucket of popcorn and watch it for its pure entertainment or storytelling value, then knowing the ending might ruin it for you. Just like knowing the ending of Pulp Fiction would ruin it for me.
The movie was a very influential film and if you go in and watch it for those reasons, then who cares if you know what "Rosebud" means.
Not sure if anyone has mentioned it yet, but Orson Welles was just 25 when he starred, co-wrote, and directed the movie. The technical achievements were very influential. Its a good movie to read and learn about after you see it.
quote: Mark Ogden
If for no other reason, see it for the cinematography. Gregg Toland was a master of lighting, composition and use of focus. Wells considered him so important to the picture that he gave him equal credit.
True.
quote: Mark Ogden
Truth be told, though, the film isn't holding up well. It was seen as pretty significant when in the latest "Sight and Sound" critics poll, it was knocked off the top by Vertigo. It's awfully theatrical and a little over the top at times, but still important to the history of cinema. The most important movie ever made? Well, except for Birth of a Nation, Sunset, The Last Laugh, The Passion of Joan of Arc, Battleship Potemkin, Breathless and a few more, all of which were more influential than Kane ever was.
I think AFI knocked it off from #1. I wouldn't call it the greatest movie of all time, but I would say it is one of the greatest or a better term is one of the most important. I liked Casablanca more.
quote:
And don't watch it at home. Run it at the Roxy!
Good call Mark!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God
Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 03-14-2014 10:39 AM
quote: Bobby Henderson
Jimi Hendrix definitely was not the most technically precise rock guitarist ever. There's dozens of guys who could play circles around him (Eddie Van Halen, Zakk Wylde, Dimebag Darrell Abbott, Joe Satriani, Steve Vai, etc., etc., etc.). Hendrix didn't have the best "feel" in phrasing of his licks. Guys like Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Jeff Beck, Stevie Ray Vaughn and many others could pull tears out of peoples' faces with their playing.
Totally off-topic, but two musicians lived next door to each other in London. Well, not literally, they lived there a couple of hundred years apart. Hendrix lived at No. 23 Brook Street, and next door, at No. 25 lived G.F. Handel. No. 25 is now the Handel House Museum, and they have held exhibitions about Hendrix.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 03-18-2014 12:29 AM
quote: Edward Havens
Knowing what Rosebud going in should not hurt your viewing expereince, but it being THE MOST IMPORTANT MOVIE EVER MADE might hurt your viewing experience if you put too much expectation on it. Just try to watch it with an open mind, and if you don't like it, that's cool too.
+ about 500, Amen, Brother, etc. etc.
As others have noted, there are a huge number of innovations, trying stuff out, both visually and also in terms of sound, acting style (e.g. the first scene with Susan in the bar - long monologue to camera) and story structure. Add on top of that the fact that Welles was grinding a political axe, too (if there were to be a remake now, I guess it would probably be about Murdoch), and to me the movie is dense and disorganized. It's got flashes of brilliance to it - so many and so quickly, in fact, that the movie doesn't really gel as a whole. And no, knowing the ending (both literally and the alleged metaphor) doesn't spoil it.
For me, The Magnificent Ambersons is a far more successful movie, even with the studio-imposed happy ending. I think the discipline of adapting someone else's story and not playing the lead himself helped to focus Welles. Maybe it's partly because I find the story itself absolutely fascinating (America's rapid industrialization at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries), or that Tim Holt and Anne Baxter pulled out performances which IMO, they never even got close to again (thereby proving that Welles really had something). He also inspired amazing achievements from his technical crew, too - a tracking shot in the ball near the start would make the Steadicam stuff in The Shining look like a wobbly home movie, and the audio reverb in one of the later scenes of Agnes Moorehead in the kitchen of the (now run-down) house must have been near impossible to achieve with 1940s ribbon mikes and tube preamps.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic