Latest Movie News Headlines

The UnPopular Opinion: Citizen Kane

Jul. 11, 2012by: Alejandro Stepenberg

Immortals new UnPopular Opinion header

THE UNPOPULAR OPINION is an ongoing column featuring different takes on films that either the writer HATED, but that the majority of film fans LOVED, or that the writer LOVED, but that most others LOATHED. We're hoping this column will promote constructive and geek fueled discussion. Enjoy!

**** SOME SPOILERS ENSUE****

Look, I know that there are an equal number of people that love CITIZEN KANE as those who merely respect it.  My opinion may not inherently be an altogether unpopular one.  But the fact that it is routinely voted the best/#1 film of all time, coupled with the point that there are indeed people who genuinely love it as a film in and of itself, has inspired me to share my opinion on this... I don't know what.

Which is that I in no way see it as even a good film, let alone "the best film ever made."  There are certain elements about it I respect, because it would be awfully ungrateful not to do so considering the profound effect Orson Welles' supremely (at the time) unorthodox filmmaking methods have had upon all of cinema since.  But that doesn't mean I have to like the film at all, which, as I said, I most definitely don't.

CK UnPop 5

"You know, Mr. Bernstein, if I hadn't been very rich, I might have been a really great man."

CITIZEN KANE is an awfully curious beast.  Made when Welles was 25, with mostly untested (in terms of cinema experience) actors and a titanic behind-the-scenes tug of war that nearly prevented it from ever existing, CITIZEN KANE is first and foremost a labor of pure of love.  On that ground alone, I certainly respect its existence and Welles' extraordinary perseverance.

And it is very true that Welles made use of quite a few techniques, both in terms of narrative structure and technical storytelling, that had not existed up until that point.  Many aspects of filmmaking that we take for granted now, be it the use of visual metaphor or fractured/episodic storytelling that jumps back and forth in time or certain elements of camera language, all had their grand beginning in Welles' cinematic leviathan.  But that impressive technical trickery is all the film really has going for it, and if I'm not going to brook such a thing these days with movies like SUCKER PUNCH then I'm certainly going to make an allowance for CITIZEN KANE just because it's in black and white.

CK UnPop 2

"Hello, Charlie. I didn't know we were speaking..."
"Sure, we're speaking, Jedediah: you're fired."

I have no problem with CITIZEN KANE because of its age - I love plenty of older films.  They're what I grew up watching, so I'm well aware that the tone and pacing of the storytelling was different in the forties from the way it is now.  But good goddman is this film slow.  While new at the time, and theoretically useful in terms of exploring the mystery of Charles Foster Kane, the plot structure of interview and recollection bookended by newspaper investigation just does not work well at all considering the story being told and the character(s) being explored.  It removes conflict from this particular story in a general sense, and the recollections are then spread far too thin to maintain any sense of interesting evolution or conflict on their own.  I'd even say that the almost episodic structure makes me feel as though I’m missing out on certain steps in Kane’s story. In trying to encompass a life so large as Kane’s, the story loses the meat which might truly tie it together and make it memorable on an emotional and intellectual level.

It is, all in all, just a supremely unsatisfying story. One could even liken it to PROMETHEUS in that sense – a film which, while exceedingly pretty, asks all sorts of questions and revels in its own mystery without providing any answers.  Without even providing many tools with which audience members might find the answer out for themselves.  This is then compounded by how the story within the film itself has no real resolution. The film might technically have one becuase the structure comes full circle and "The End" is written across the screen, but the story and characters do not, and so the experience of watching it is made all the more frustrating.

CK UnPop 3

"Love! You don't love anybody! Me or anybody else! You want to be loved - that's all you want! I'm Charles Foster Kane. Whatever you want - just name it and it's yours! Only love me! Don't expect me to love you ."

“I don’t think any one word can explain a man’s life,” says the reporter who has spent the whole film searching out the meaning of "Rosebud," Kane's dying word.   Well it's a spot on thing to say, because nor can Orson Welle's one movie explain a character as vast as Charles Foster Kane.  It of course doesn't help that the film chooses to ignore the chance to explore any touch (brief sled bits excluded) that might make Kane remotely human, relateable, or understandable, and instead center solely on a selfish, cruel, achingly ambitious, nigh-on sociopathic man whose ruthlessness knows little boundary.  There must be something human if we're to sympathize with such a man, and "Rosebud" is simply not enough.

CITIZEN KANE embodies the exact same style vs substance debate that still rages to this very day, encapsulating it just as perfectly as every flashy film that chooses to let the cool new toys and tricks far outweigh any of the other considerations that make up a good movie.  Is it still the most influential? Very possibly.  But that doesn't change my thought that, on the whole, it is far from the greatest film ever made in terms of cohesive and comprehensive cinematic achievement.  On those terms, in fact, it consistently comes up largely lacking for me even under the label of merely "a good movie."  Meaning that, at the end of the day, by the time the credits roll there is far too much left hollowly echoing through time for CITIZEN KANE to be anything other than an instructional piece of celluloid.

CK UnPop 1

“He never believed in anything except Charlie Kane, he never had a conviction except Charlie Kane in his life.”

Oh, and if you have any suggestions for The UnPopular Opinion I’m always happy to hear them. You can send along an email to ajstepenberg@joblo.com, spell it out below, slap it up on my wall in Movie Fan Central, or send me a private message via Movie Fan Central. Provide me with as many movie suggestions as you like, with any reasoning you'd care to share, and if I agree then you may one day see it featured in this very column!

Extra Tidbit: The audience watching Kane make his big election speech was actually a photo, and not comprised of real people at all. Reportedly, "hundreds of holes were pricked in with a pin, and lights moved about behind it" in order to generate the illusion of movement.
Source: JoBlo.com

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

4:50PM on 07/13/2012

Learn The History

It's clear that you don't even know the history of this movie. Orson Welles made this movie as a jab at William Randolph Hearst. "Rosebud" is actually the nickname WRH gave his girlfriend's vagina. The whole production was kept under-wraps so WRH wouldn't find out. No one knew what it was until the movie came out. The cool thing is that while making the movie Orson Welles also started to embody the character, so Citizen Kane is the combination of Welles and WRH. Do your homework.
It's clear that you don't even know the history of this movie. Orson Welles made this movie as a jab at William Randolph Hearst. "Rosebud" is actually the nickname WRH gave his girlfriend's vagina. The whole production was kept under-wraps so WRH wouldn't find out. No one knew what it was until the movie came out. The cool thing is that while making the movie Orson Welles also started to embody the character, so Citizen Kane is the combination of Welles and WRH. Do your homework.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:53AM on 07/12/2012
Really?
Really?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+2
8:25PM on 07/11/2012
Talk about a very brave article. As mentioned, it takes a great deal of balls to trash talk Kane. I do give props for recognizing it's status in film history though. Even if you don't like the film itself, you do have to admire the skill that went into making it. However, I think a point is missed in the time period for the film. I can't say what the context of the story at the time was, but it is likely that it is very purposely told the way it is and the Kane is designed the way he is. Kane
Talk about a very brave article. As mentioned, it takes a great deal of balls to trash talk Kane. I do give props for recognizing it's status in film history though. Even if you don't like the film itself, you do have to admire the skill that went into making it. However, I think a point is missed in the time period for the film. I can't say what the context of the story at the time was, but it is likely that it is very purposely told the way it is and the Kane is designed the way he is. Kane himself is in fact designed partly after Willi am Randolph Hurst, so there is likely a connection there. However, I disagree about the story. For me, despite it's age, subject matter, and length, it is a very satisfying story. It's a biopic, and in so being, it's a very well done biopic. We get to know Kane very well, and the way in which the film is technically made reinforces the story, a story which is essentially about a boy who never have a childhood and never really grew up. Rosebud is genius in that it really summarizes the entire point of the film in one word. I'm not sure what multitude of mysteries the film presents, as it's a fairly straightforward tale supported by the technicalities of the film, but the one lingering message, what is rosebud?, is answered quite successfully. As far as Kane's character, I can agree there. He becomes a pretty despicable person, but there are some very redeemable qualities early on, and his descent from greatness is a great watch, with the exclamation point of Rosebud at the end being the kicker. It's not a tale for everyone. I have film school friends who hated it. However, I don't think it's a bad film simply because the story isn't likable. That seems to be a matter of opinion, so I would argue against calling this a bad film.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
8:24PM on 07/11/2012
Talk about a very brave article. As mentioned, it takes a great deal of balls to trash talk Kane. I do give props for recognizing it's status in film history though. Even if you don't like the film itself, you do have to admire the skill that went into making it. However, I think a point is missed in the time period for the film. I can't say what the context of the story at the time was, but it is likely that it is very purposely told the way it is and the Kane is designed the way he is. Kane
Talk about a very brave article. As mentioned, it takes a great deal of balls to trash talk Kane. I do give props for recognizing it's status in film history though. Even if you don't like the film itself, you do have to admire the skill that went into making it. However, I think a point is missed in the time period for the film. I can't say what the context of the story at the time was, but it is likely that it is very purposely told the way it is and the Kane is designed the way he is. Kane himself is in fact designed partly after Willi am Randolph Hurst, so there is likely a connection there. However, I disagree about the story. For me, despite it's age, subject matter, and length, it is a very satisfying story. It's a biopic, and in so being, it's a very well done biopic. We get to know Kane very well, and the way in which the film is technically made reinforces the story, a story which is essentially about a boy who never have a childhood and never really grew up. Rosebud is genius in that it really summarizes the entire point of the film in one word. I'm not sure what multitude of mysteries the film presents, as it's a fairly straightforward tale supported by the technicalities of the film, but the one lingering message, what is rosebud?, is answered quite successfully. As far as Kane's character, I can agree there. He becomes a pretty despicable person, but there are some very redeemable qualities early on, and his descent from greatness is a great watch, with the exclamation point of Rosebud at the end being the kicker. It's not a tale for everyone. I have film school friends who hated it. However, I don't think it's a bad film simply because the story isn't likable. That seems to be a matter of opinion, so I would argue against calling this a bad film.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:25PM on 07/11/2012
I'd actually be really interested in hearing an unpopular opinion about my favorite film of all time, Seven Samurai.
I'd actually be really interested in hearing an unpopular opinion about my favorite film of all time, Seven Samurai.
-8
3:29PM on 07/11/2012
Wow.. I've got to give it to you Alejandro for taking on against such classic. It takes balls and I applaud that. I've still got to revisit it to give a proper comment but regardless.. good work man.

Wow.. I've got to give it to you Alejandro for taking on against such classic. It takes balls and I applaud that. I've still got to revisit it to give a proper comment but regardless.. good work man.

Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:02PM on 07/11/2012

Missing the point

Citizen Kane is considered the greatest film of all time because of the revolutionary techniques Orson Welles used to tell the story. Things that no one had every used before. The opening news reel and the breakfast scene are two examples that come to mind. This is of course lost on audiences today that have become so accustom to such cinematic techniques, not realizing that Welles' film is a big contributor to what are now basic storytelling conventions.
Citizen Kane is considered the greatest film of all time because of the revolutionary techniques Orson Welles used to tell the story. Things that no one had every used before. The opening news reel and the breakfast scene are two examples that come to mind. This is of course lost on audiences today that have become so accustom to such cinematic techniques, not realizing that Welles' film is a big contributor to what are now basic storytelling conventions.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:55PM on 07/11/2012
Your right, but that doesn't make the film (plot, action, depth, flow, connection between audience and cast, and so on) better. It only helps in the ability to shoot the motion picture, the film as it stands when watching it, is lacking in making the audience become emotionally involved. Example, watching the Matrix for the first time, and seeing their action scenes only made the action part of the film better. When you revisit the film today, it still holds up because of the plot and the
Your right, but that doesn't make the film (plot, action, depth, flow, connection between audience and cast, and so on) better. It only helps in the ability to shoot the motion picture, the film as it stands when watching it, is lacking in making the audience become emotionally involved. Example, watching the Matrix for the first time, and seeing their action scenes only made the action part of the film better. When you revisit the film today, it still holds up because of the plot and the depth that comes with that film. The action scenes that were so innovative then don't hold up now, but the film as a hole still does. The greatest film of all time, should be able to withstand the tests of time, having technology always evolving, the foundation of film (story telling) will always be there. Im my opinion this film doesn't pass the tests of time.
-34
12:36PM on 07/11/2012
Anyone who calls any old movie "best movie ever made" can't be taken seriously anyway.
Movies are an audio visual experience. "Old" (anything before 77, some exceptions to the rule) movies aren't "experiences". People invented film, and just took a camera (with no knowledge of art, composition, etc. whatsoever), and filmed some story. Film is about so much more.
Sure, even today, most filmmakers don't get that. But still, today there are SOME who do get it (that a movie is so much more than
Anyone who calls any old movie "best movie ever made" can't be taken seriously anyway.
Movies are an audio visual experience. "Old" (anything before 77, some exceptions to the rule) movies aren't "experiences". People invented film, and just took a camera (with no knowledge of art, composition, etc. whatsoever), and filmed some story. Film is about so much more.
Sure, even today, most filmmakers don't get that. But still, today there are SOME who do get it (that a movie is so much more than just the "story" - because if it just was the story, go read the screenplay).
And just because something is the "first" thing to do something doesn't make it good.

So, as a lot of the time: It is true this is the single most overrated movie ever (with Dark Knight coming close), but obviously not for the reasons stated (again, WHY ALWAYS THE FIXATION ABOUT THE STORY - THAT IS THE SCREENPLAY, not the MOVIE)
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:20PM on 07/11/2012
You're referring to "blockbusters". There weren't any of what we would call blockbusters before '75-'77. Experiences are a little different. Hitchcock alone gave audiences plenty of "experiences". Kurosawa, too.
You're referring to "blockbusters". There weren't any of what we would call blockbusters before '75-'77. Experiences are a little different. Hitchcock alone gave audiences plenty of "experiences". Kurosawa, too.
5:39PM on 07/11/2012
Totally agree, because Gone With the Wind, Wizard of Oz, 2001: A Space Odessey, King Kong, and Planet of the Apes are not experiences.
Totally agree, because Gone With the Wind, Wizard of Oz, 2001: A Space Odessey, King Kong, and Planet of the Apes are not experiences.
12:04PM on 07/11/2012
Everyones entitled to their opinion, this just means every film critic to ever live is wrong
Everyones entitled to their opinion, this just means every film critic to ever live is wrong
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+0
11:59AM on 07/11/2012

I agree, its a good film but no way is it the best film of all time

On its own Orson Welles's most famous movie probably isn't all that bad. It was innovative for its time (one of the main reasons i care for it so much) but when compared to other classics of the 40's like Casablanca, It's A Wonderful Life, The Lost Weekend... It fails emotionally, cinematically and is a little dull. Citizen Kane is a movie like so many others that have been hyped up, and i believe for the wrong reasons. It was a film that was marvelled at its innovative film making abilities.
On its own Orson Welles's most famous movie probably isn't all that bad. It was innovative for its time (one of the main reasons i care for it so much) but when compared to other classics of the 40's like Casablanca, It's A Wonderful Life, The Lost Weekend... It fails emotionally, cinematically and is a little dull. Citizen Kane is a movie like so many others that have been hyped up, and i believe for the wrong reasons. It was a film that was marvelled at its innovative film making abilities. I think when people today watch this film they search for things, and find things that aren't really there because of that immortal hype its gotten.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:49AM on 07/11/2012

Not the best ever...

I will also agree that this is not the best ever. Maybe for it's time, it was awe-inspiring. My suggestion for the future..."Raging Bull." Could barely tolerate sitting through it. Overrated imo.
I will also agree that this is not the best ever. Maybe for it's time, it was awe-inspiring. My suggestion for the future..."Raging Bull." Could barely tolerate sitting through it. Overrated imo.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:41AM on 07/11/2012

Just to pre-empt a particular complaint I've seen in entries past...

Yes, I really do believe what I write in these columns. I'm never trying to just stir the pot or be controversial by supporting or decrying a particular movie. Just wanted to put that out there,
Yes, I really do believe what I write in these columns. I'm never trying to just stir the pot or be controversial by supporting or decrying a particular movie. Just wanted to put that out there,
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+28
7:38AM on 07/11/2012
Not to slam you too much for having the gall to criticize this one, you really do miss the point. When a man is dead you can never know that man. Of course whole parts of his life are missing, because the people interviewed don't know them. The mystery is an inherent part of the movie. I feel sorry for you if you can't enjoy a movie that doesn't supply its own answers. That's kind of the point really. You can't sum up a person's entire life, and no little hint like Rosebud is gonna help. Is it
Not to slam you too much for having the gall to criticize this one, you really do miss the point. When a man is dead you can never know that man. Of course whole parts of his life are missing, because the people interviewed don't know them. The mystery is an inherent part of the movie. I feel sorry for you if you can't enjoy a movie that doesn't supply its own answers. That's kind of the point really. You can't sum up a person's entire life, and no little hint like Rosebud is gonna help. Is it the best film ever made? Of course not. No film can truly be called that. But it is a supremely well-crafted film with rich characters and neat camera work. Charles Foster Kane is not meant to be approachable. Not since his younger life anyway. Like other men of power, he puts forward a tough exterior, is full of vulnerabilities, and yet, perhaps part of him is still that little boy playing in the snow. Maybe that was his last truly happy memory.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:42PM on 07/11/2012
Well said!
Well said!
7:35AM on 07/11/2012

Just to pre-empt a particular complaint I've seen in entries past...

Yes, I really do believe what I write in these columns. I'm never trying to just stir the pot or be controversial by supporting or decrying a particular movie. Just wanted to put that out there,
Yes, I really do believe what I write in these columns. I'm never trying to just stir the pot or be controversial by supporting or decrying a particular movie. Just wanted to put that out there,
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:09PM on 07/11/2012
In your opinion, the best film of all time would be??
In your opinion, the best film of all time would be??
6:35AM on 07/11/2012
I like this movie for one thing - Orson Welles. If it's not for him, Citizen Kane would be just another movie.
I like this movie for one thing - Orson Welles. If it's not for him, Citizen Kane would be just another movie.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+12
6:35AM on 07/11/2012

Wow

You're complete misunderstanding of the film really makes it hard to argue your points. Perhaps you should give it a few years and revisit it.

A point you touched on while mentioning Prometheus is something that is annoying me more and more - Some movies are trying to raise question for the audience. That is their point, their mission. I have the complete opposite reaction to most movies these days, which plots can be figured out in the trailers, which is I don't want to be spoon fed. If you
You're complete misunderstanding of the film really makes it hard to argue your points. Perhaps you should give it a few years and revisit it.

A point you touched on while mentioning Prometheus is something that is annoying me more and more - Some movies are trying to raise question for the audience. That is their point, their mission. I have the complete opposite reaction to most movies these days, which plots can be figured out in the trailers, which is I don't want to be spoon fed. If you can't figure out why Kane basically says 'Fuck you Gettys I'm staying in the race.", or anything else he does it's actually not going to benefit you at all if I take the time to explain it.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:40AM on 07/11/2012
I have no problem with raising questions - they're what keep an audience hooked and invested in seeing the movie's outcome. But I do have a problem with leaving things so vague as to be nigh-on inscrutable on a movie-wide level, as well as refusing to provide an audience with enough tools (in terms of the information parceled out during the storytelling) to make even a few informed deductions and/or inductions about what they just witnessed. PROMETHEUS (and CITIZEN KANE) ask all sorts of
I have no problem with raising questions - they're what keep an audience hooked and invested in seeing the movie's outcome. But I do have a problem with leaving things so vague as to be nigh-on inscrutable on a movie-wide level, as well as refusing to provide an audience with enough tools (in terms of the information parceled out during the storytelling) to make even a few informed deductions and/or inductions about what they just witnessed. PROMETHEUS (and CITIZEN KANE) ask all sorts of questions and raise all sort of mysteries, but they then are unable to provide what is necessary to answer any more than that of the surface level. And that frustrates the hell out of me.
7:41AM on 07/11/2012
I have no problem with raising questions - they're what keep an audience hooked and invested in seeing the movie's outcome. But I do have a problem with leaving things so vague as to be nigh-on inscrutable on a movie-wide level, as well as refusing to provide an audience with enough tools (in terms of the information parceled out during the storytelling) to make even a few informed deductions and/or inductions about what they just witnessed. PROMETHEUS (and CITIZEN KANE) ask all sorts of
I have no problem with raising questions - they're what keep an audience hooked and invested in seeing the movie's outcome. But I do have a problem with leaving things so vague as to be nigh-on inscrutable on a movie-wide level, as well as refusing to provide an audience with enough tools (in terms of the information parceled out during the storytelling) to make even a few informed deductions and/or inductions about what they just witnessed. PROMETHEUS (and CITIZEN KANE) ask all sorts of questions and raise all sort of mysteries, but they then are unable to provide what is necessary to answer any more than that of the surface level. And that frustrates the hell out of me.
+10
5:22AM on 07/11/2012
Well, well, well, aren't you going for a home run, Alejandro? The UnPopular Opinion column goes after the greatest movie ever made. And, I commend you for doing so.

I disagree that Citizen Kane lacks a great story. I disagree that Citizen Kane is all style and no substance. Welles' film tells the tale of us all pursuing the American Dream and the accompanying mystery of that pursuit. Citizen Kane tells the story of our culture's great men whom we all know and whom we all assume to be gods
Well, well, well, aren't you going for a home run, Alejandro? The UnPopular Opinion column goes after the greatest movie ever made. And, I commend you for doing so.

I disagree that Citizen Kane lacks a great story. I disagree that Citizen Kane is all style and no substance. Welles' film tells the tale of us all pursuing the American Dream and the accompanying mystery of that pursuit. Citizen Kane tells the story of our culture's great men whom we all know and whom we all assume to be gods and giants.

However, I commend you highly for criticizing this film. Your column above recognizes certain truths about cinema. One, no film is perfect. Thus, no film is above criticism. Not Star Wars nor Lawrence of Arabia nor Birth of a Nation nor Terms of Endearment nor Schindler's List nor A Clockwork Orange nor Citizen Kane. I have plenty of films that a person respects as films or that a person understands the appeal. But, I need to recognize the imperfection of these films, and I prefer to recognize their faults publicly. Internet comment boards are made for such discourse. Hell, The Amazing Spider-Man is an example. I know that many MFCers love that film. But, I saw it yesterday and thought "how is this film any different from Spider-Man 3?" That opinion is an unpopular opinion, but a person needs to express how some "great" films are not unequivocally perfect. Two, your words state the truth. Some classics are just dry texts. A person sees the craftsmanship, but the emotional engagement is not there. Such is the nature of complex, sophisticated works. They tend to be cerebral treats, not necessarily heartfelt ones. Three, any discussion on anything benefits from counterargument. A thesis becomes stronger thereby. For example, a common thesis is "Citizen Kane is the greatest film of all time." That statement is not actually very strong unless someone presents a counterargument that in turn causes others to (re)examine why Welles work is so magnificent. Four, the JoBlo site tacitly re-examines aesthetics constantly. For example, AITH reviews evaluate the sex and violence in movies, for such elements influence a film's merit in our community's eyes. Normally, such elements are considered too base, and they are seen to lack literary merit. Therefore, I am saying that your Citizen Kane column exhibits another common truth, besides the truth that no movie is perfect. Most people do not evaluate a film by academic and "cultured" criteria. They have other equally legitimate bases for evaluation.
Thanks again for this column. Great job, man.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:44AM on 07/11/2012
Hey, just wanted to say that I really appreciate your thoughts, disagreement included. Thanks for your comment!
Hey, just wanted to say that I really appreciate your thoughts, disagreement included. Thanks for your comment!
4:54AM on 07/11/2012
I really disagree with you likening this to something empty and hollow. I find the story to basically be the archetype for films about the danger of unlimited success, and I do find Kane to be sympathetic in that. Not simply because of "Rosebud."
I really disagree with you likening this to something empty and hollow. I find the story to basically be the archetype for films about the danger of unlimited success, and I do find Kane to be sympathetic in that. Not simply because of "Rosebud."
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+2
2:22AM on 07/11/2012
I think it's an ok film. Certainly not the best film ever made, so in that respect it is rather overrated, but the thing is, it's praised more so for the craft Welles put into the film rather than the story itself. So yeah, it's decent, but not one that I continually come back to.
I think it's an ok film. Certainly not the best film ever made, so in that respect it is rather overrated, but the thing is, it's praised more so for the craft Welles put into the film rather than the story itself. So yeah, it's decent, but not one that I continually come back to.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:47AM on 07/11/2012
Here is my angry comment about how you are wrong, regardless if I read the entire article or not. This is a well praised/ well hated movie and the fact that we have polar opposite opinions on a movie clearly means you are the wrong one. There, I just summarized every comment on the UnPopular Opinion comment section.
Here is my angry comment about how you are wrong, regardless if I read the entire article or not. This is a well praised/ well hated movie and the fact that we have polar opposite opinions on a movie clearly means you are the wrong one. There, I just summarized every comment on the UnPopular Opinion comment section.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:46AM on 07/11/2012
Citizen Kane may be a well made movie, but it's also a boring and terrible movie too. Citizen Kane is the most overrated movie in history.
Citizen Kane may be a well made movie, but it's also a boring and terrible movie too. Citizen Kane is the most overrated movie in history.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:32AM on 07/11/2012
Um...
No. Just no.
Um...
No. Just no.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:27AM on 07/11/2012
Yeah, I don't like the film either. However, like you said, I respect it. Somewhere in the middle point of the film, there is a bird making a loud noise. It's been said from Welles that this random inclusion was added to "make sure the audience was still awake." I don't know about you guys, but that says a lot.
Yeah, I don't like the film either. However, like you said, I respect it. Somewhere in the middle point of the film, there is a bird making a loud noise. It's been said from Welles that this random inclusion was added to "make sure the audience was still awake." I don't know about you guys, but that says a lot.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
View All Comments

Latest Movie News Headlines


Top
Loading...
JoBlo's T-Shirt Shoppe | support our site... Wear Our Gear!