Citizen Kane

[murlough23]

Citizen Kane is often cited as the film to end all films. I was wondering if it would be something that I might like. The rationale seems to be that it's a technical marvel for its time, but I don't seem to see as much praise for its actual plot. I have enjoyed some other "classic" movie of the era such as Casablanca, but in general I've approached "old" movies with caution. Should I give this one a try?

NP: "The Loveliest Sound", Starfield

[bloop]

I think it's a film worthy of a lot of respect, and worth at least a shot, sure.

I think Casablanca might be the more likable of the two, though.

[Josh]

Fwiw, I love Citizen Kane for a lot of reasons, not many of them technical; it's a really powerful and moving piece of work, I think, though it's also  very subtle, to the point that many viewers think it's boring. But that's just because their attention spans are too short; it's a marvelous film, and probably deserving of all the praise it receives.

My favorite Orson Welles film, F for Fake, is a much, much different picture... but I'll save that for another day.

[murlough23]

Fwiw, I love Citizen Kane for a lot of reasons, not many of them technical; it's a really powerful and moving piece of work, I think, though it's also  very subtle, to the point that many viewers think it's boring. But that's just because their attention spans are too short; it's a marvelous film, and probably deserving of all the praise it receives.

Part of the issue may be that people who study films know what to pay attention for; people who merely watch films might not unless someone gives them a heads up. Context matters here. As much as I can gain insights into a film by understanding the context of the time in which it was made and the technical achievements and the type of mood/irony/symbolism/etc. that the writer and director were going for, none of these are things that will usually occur to me naturally.

So I guess what I'm saying is, set me up to be in a position to best appreciate the film, and then I will make a point to go watch it.

[enemy anemone]

I'd watch Casablanca again because I like it.

I'd only watch Citizen Kane again if I felt like looking for what I missed the first time and if I were armed with notes or commentary on what to notice.

[bloop]

Yeah, but his question wasn't whether he should watch "Citizen Kane" again, but whether he should bother with a first time.  To that, the answer is a resounding "yes".

[enemy anemone]

I guess what I was trying to say was that I would have preferred to be more prepared the first time I saw it. just watching it didn't really do anything for me.

[bloop]

Well, in that case, the commentaries on whatever DVD edition I have are very good (Roger Ebert and Peter Bogdanovich, but I would still suggest just watching the film first for just the story.

[Vlad!]

FWIW I loved Citizen Kane. At first I thought it was one of those movies that film wankers extol but nobody else gets anything out of[1], but I enjoyed it on its own merits. For some reason, and real film wankersbuffs will probably sneer at this, it reminds me of The Saddest Music in the World. Both of them took a little more effort to get into than most movies nowadays, but both were very rich once the shell was cracked.

[1] And yes, I watched it because at the time I was thinking it would be interesting to be a film wanker.

[murlough23]

Yeah, but his question wasn't whether he should watch "Citizen Kane" again, but whether he should bother with a first time.  To that, the answer is a resounding "yes".

Sure, but I'm afraid that I'll be in exactly the position schil is in now after my first time. And I generally don't watch commentary tracks unless I own the DVD. Usually because I need to get the rental DVD back so I can get another one, and I don't have another two hours to carve out for a second viewing of a film I just watched.

(I still haven't listened to all of the commentaries on the DVDs I own, truth be told. I listen to the ones for TV shows, but generally not as much for films.)

[murlough23]

And yes, I watched it because at the time I was thinking it would be interesting to be a film wanker.

Which I guess makes you a film voyeur.

[enemy anemone]

Ebert has a Viewer's Companion to Citizen Kane.  I would have gotten more out of the movie if I had read something like this first. (I would not have watched it with the commentary turned on before watching it without. but I also would not have been interested enough to rewatch with the commentary immediately.)

[Vlad!]

I don't like watching commentary. It took me years before I could watch one of my favorite movies, Donnie Darko, again after watching the commentary and hearing what sorts of freaky things were going on in the mind of Richard Kelly. I don't want other people to tell me what I should get out of something. I get what I get. Sometimes I like reading what other viewers thought of the movie or of certain plot events afterwards, but rarely have I found director's commentary to be worth the time it takes to listen to it.

[bloop]

Wow, schil.  Very, very helpful.

I don't watch commentary tracks much, either.  Usually, if I do, it's in the background and I just pick up interesting tidbits as they go.

[murlough23]

I don't like watching commentary. It took me years before I could watch one of my favorite movies, Donnie Darko, again after watching the commentary and hearing what sorts of freaky things were going on in the mind of Richard Kelly. I don't want other people to tell me what I should get out of something. I get what I get. Sometimes I like reading what other viewers thought of the movie or of certain plot events afterwards, but rarely have I found director's commentary to be worth the time it takes to listen to it.

I could go either way on commentaries. I figure the rationale for their existence is that someone who's really into a film or a TV show might be asking themselves, "Wow, I wonder what they were thinking when they came up with that one." I wonder about this often with my favorite TV shows, especially when they do something that really shakes up the status quo. Movies have less time from beginning to end in which to change up their own established system, so I don't ask this question as often about movies, and hence I'm less interested in the commentaries for most of those. But in general, I wonder about the genesis of certain story points, how the cast and crew reacted to a shocker upon reading the script, etc.

The particulars of the industry and of filming techniques and other technical issues, I'm less interested in. So it depends on the commentator. Some of them go off on tangents (Rob Reiner's commentary on The Princess Bride is particularly bad about this). Some of them spend a little too much time on Film School 101. But in general, I like to hear writers talk about the thoughts and ideas that gave birth to their stories, and it's also interesting to hear actors talk about what frame of mind they had to get into to play a certain character, etc.

NP: "There Was No Thief", Relient K

[Celldweller7]

Nothing to do with the original topic, but I find animated movies have the most interesting commentaries.  At least I really enjoyed the commentaries to The Incredilbles, Monster Inc, etc.  Then again I own 11 seasons of The Simpsons and have listened to every commentary on every episode.

[murlough23]

Celldweller! Dude! Blast from the past! I didn't know you were still lurking 'round these parts.

Nothing to do with the original topic, but I find animated movies have the most interesting commentaries.  At least I really enjoyed the commentaries to The Incredilbles, Monster Inc, etc.  Then again I own 11 seasons of The Simpsons and have listened to every commentary on every episode.

I have a couple of those Pixar DVDs; I should watch the commentaries some time.

Didn't The Simpsons have a gag one time where somebody was watching the commentary on Waterworld, and the whole thing was just the director apologizing? Or am I confusing it with some other animated sitcom?

[Celldweller7]

Celldweller! Dude! Blast from the past! I didn't know you were still lurking 'round these parts.

I have a couple of those Pixar DVDs; I should watch the commentaries some time.

Didn't The Simpsons have a gag one time where somebody was watching the commentary on Waterworld, and the whole thing was just the director apologizing? Or am I confusing it with some other animated sitcom?

I haven't been lurking but I recently checked over at the old CMC board and started searching for people on Facebook and then remembered this place.

There is an episode of the Simpsons where Lisa thinks she is watching the commentary to The Postman and it is actually just Kevin Costner standing there apologizing for the movie.

[murlough23]

I haven't been lurking but I recently checked over at the old CMC board and started searching for people on Facebook and then remembered this place.

Well, I hope you find it to be a worthwhile place to come back to (recent turmoil that I caused regarding the election notwithstanding). it's certainly better than the dilapidated hell-hole that CMC has become in any case.

There is an episode of the Simpsons where Lisa thinks she is watching the commentary to The Postman and it is actually just Kevin Costner standing there apologizing for the movie.

I knew it was one of those films featuring Kevin Costner being full of himself. Oddly enough, I sort of enjoyed The Postman.

NP: "Isn't It Love", Andrew Peterson