|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: I think I would have liked this more... (Reply to this comment)
by voxpoptart
I'll add the Fellini film then, sure - my Netflix Queue is a staggeringly long mix of recent movies, mid-eighties comedy-dramas someone liked, foreign art films, Groucho Marx/ Buster Keaton, obscure indie movies "selected" by Netflix to my tastes, and whatever the heck else i felt like i was missing one day. Fellini will fit the bill.
You're right to praise Welles's courage. Of course we both realize that he can't be blamed for the hype, but i still know how hype can grate.
cheers,
- Brian
|
Jun 23 '04
9:46 am PDT
|
|
I think I would have liked this more... (Reply to this comment)
by aeb89
... had it not been hyped up by the AFI as The Greatest American Film of All Time. Though, I do respect the amount of guts it took Orson Welles to criticize William Randolph Hearst while he was still alive.
CITIZEN KANE is often compared to Federico Fellini's 8½, and, if you haven't seen it already, I would highly recommend it (I think it's better than KANE) - but, I should fairly warn you ahead of time: if you don't normally like "old" movies, this one is old and it has subtitles. Nonetheless, it's a classic and I wish more people would seek out Fellini's work.
|
Jun 22 '04
1:56 pm PDT
|
|
Re: A slight error (Reply to this comment)
by voxpoptart
Thanks! Finally got a spare moment to fix this.
|
Jul 31 '03
3:07 pm PDT
|
|
A slight error (Reply to this comment)
by st_patrick
You call the reporter who interviews Kane's associates Herbert Carter. Actually, the reporter is named Jerry Thompson. Herbert Carter is the former Editor in Chief before Kane took over.
Patrick
|
Jul 20 '03
4:11 pm PDT
|
|
Re: .......... (Reply to this comment)
by voxpoptart
It is much like the Mona Lisa to me, which is a fine painting, and even historically significant, but frankly I just don't think it is among the best ever. The Mona Lisa was being written up as the best painting of all time even before it was finished, and in my opinion people only call it a great painting at this point because people have been doing so for so long.
Thanks for the feedback. In general i think this is going to be true of the best anything; once everyone "knows" it's the greatest, smart people who care about greatness will find lots of reasons why it's the greatest, and it will become self-evidently true because gosh, look at all those reasons!
The Mona Lisa is a particularly strange case because it's become such a joke: advertisements have her endorsing cold remedies and cough syrups, sometimes while wearing a mustache, although unlike the Statue of Liberty she's never raised her hand to endorse a deoderant. It's suprising, too, that so few subsequent painters have decided "Oh, we just need a quirk of a smile to get famous? I can draw that".
I'm glad you acknowledge Kane as being 5-star-worthy. I'm not sure how you or i would even choose a Greatest Ever, but as Officer points out, plagiarizing a shot from King Kong ought to be worth _something_....
smiling enigmatically,
- Brian
|
Mar 31 '03
6:18 am PST
|
|
Re: Maybe It's Just Because . . . (Reply to this comment)
by voxpoptart
[In the next decade, there will be essays, perhaps, pointing out how Welles predicted in CITIZEN KANE the entire American nation's arc from innocence to fascism.]
Gosh, i wish i thought you were talking nonsense, or at least misinterpreting me. Sadly, you talk sense.
Well done! [And I know a little bit about CITIZEN KANE.]
You certainly do! He does, people; you're invited to check if you don't believe me.
-Brian
|
Mar 31 '03
6:12 am PST
|
|
Welcome to my WOT (Reply to this comment)
by Officer
I remember when I watched this film for the first time in a film appreciation class when I was 16 or so, the teacher stopped the film to point out an unusual quirk that has remained one of my favorite bits of cinematic trivia:
The shot of Kane and friends picnic-ing on the island? Watch the skies for a pterodactyl, a borrowed effect from RKO's King Kong!
Great review and definitely worthy of your addition to my WOT in and of itself. I'm off to read more...
~Ryan
|
Mar 30 '03
12:02 pm PST
|
|
.......... (Reply to this comment)
by Vormancian
Okay so sometimes I don't get around to stuff real quick. ;)
This is really a great review, and you put forward an interesting, and extremely valid point.
There are lots of different sorts of reviews. There is a kind of review of this movie which would be sort of 'You already love film, have seen jillions of films, and here's why you should think this one is the best ever'... or something. And then, just as your question states, there is the sort of review for a wider audience.
And yours has a little something for everyone, even those who already think it a great movie.
I should tell you though, especially since you've mentioned me ::blush::, I'm actually one of those oft-mentioned but rarely seen Kane detractors. I think it's a great movie sure, and I'd certainly give it five stars, but I don't think it's in the upper echelons of the best movies ever.
It is much like the Mona Lisa to me, which is a fine painting, and even historically significant, but frankly I just don't think it is among the best ever. The Mona Lisa was being written up as the best painting of all time even before it was finished, and in my opinion people only call it a great painting at this point because people have been doing so for so long.
Same with Kane. It's always going to get the most votes for best film ever (in any significantly large poll), but (in my opinion) based more on the fact that calling it the best movie ever is 'the thing to do' rather than on its actual merits.
But, let me reiterate, I do think it's a great movie, just seriously overpraised.
Be all that as it may, this is nevertheless an absolutely excellent review. It looks at the movie from several angles (as I think was mentioned... sort of), and it has a nice, healthy dose of you put into it.
Great job.
Cheers!
|
Mar 30 '03
12:02 pm PST
|
|
Maybe It's Just Because . . . (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
I took a nap, voxpoptart, but your combination of details and speculative meditation makes your review of CITIZEN KANE for me the best one here, acing out several very good ones.
I liked how you tied the Newsreel to Kane's passage from innocent, to idealistic liberal, to outraged radical, to conservative, to reactionary. That's a pattern most of us Americans follow, at least in a small way. [In the next decade, there will be essays, perhaps, pointing out how Welles predicted in CITIZEN KANE the entire American nation's arc from innocence to fascism.]
Well done! [And I know a little bit about CITIZEN KANE.]
[Macresarf1]
|
Mar 29 '03
1:13 pm PST
|
|
Re: Cool! (Reply to this comment)
by voxpoptart
1971 was a heckuva year for movies, huh?, he agrees, reminding himself that it's been too many years since he saw Willy Wonka. Actually i checked IMDB's dates on a hunch, and you haven't even named my favorite 1971 movie: Little Murders, scripted by the great Jules Feiffer. Before 1971, of course, is the void.
totally rad,
- Brian
|
Mar 28 '03
11:27 pm PST
|
|
Re: Oh, it's Art, baby. It's Art up the yin-yang (Reply to this comment)
by voxpoptart
Thank you muchly for your kinds words. Yours too, Sue -- i'm quite genuinely happy that instead of talking about Citizen Kane and coming off like an ignorant doofus, i come off like the thoughtful, informed doofus i've always dreamed of being. (You get thanked for kind words too, Aashok, but c'mon, you're the only one here who doesn't Trust me yet; what, peer pressure ain't good enough for folks anymore?)
As for Mike's swelled head, he lives in Ontario, much of which is either vast uncharted wasteland or Shania Twain's hometown. There should be plenty of room for spare head molecules to fit.
cheers!
- Brian
|
Mar 28 '03
12:41 pm PST
|
|
Re: Re: oooh no!!! (Reply to this comment)
by drdevience
*wry grin*
Somtimes a swelled head is a very gooood thing....
*cough*
If you leave us, can we come too?
Doc
|
Mar 28 '03
8:03 am PST
|
|
Re: oooh no!!! (Reply to this comment)
by mfunk75
Doc & Sue-
My big head and I are not amused. Your taunts and jibes hurt. They really do. I just might take my reviews, my big head, and my oversized pillow and go home. Mwah. ;)
-mike
|
Mar 28 '03
6:02 am PST
|
|
This is such...... (Reply to this comment)
by millinocket,  in Movies
........a very, very good review. Historical background, summary, analysis, humor, you got it all in there. Aside from the annoying mfunk shout out ;) (Doc is right you know, he can hardly get out of the house as it is). Damn, you're good! -
Sue
|
Mar 27 '03
9:58 pm PST
|
|
oooh no!!! (Reply to this comment)
by drdevience
What have you done?? We'll never get that swelling down now... how will Mike's hat ever fit again?
You've likely created a monster ya know...
Run away! Run away!
Doc
|
Mar 27 '03
6:02 pm PST
|
|
Oh, it's Art, baby. It's Art up the yin-yang (Reply to this comment)
by mfunk75
And there are plenty of terrific, informed, witty, deeply thoughtful movie reviewers right here on Epinions (mfunk75 and Vormancian jump immediately to mind) who could surely explain to you exactly why Citizen Kane is Great.
Actually, I've made several attempts, in the last few years, at writing the definitive Citizen Kane review (I know, I know; Pauline Kael has already done so. But this one would by my definitive Citizen Kane review). Sometimes I don't have the words; other times I see the whole endeavor as utterly pointless. Either way, the review isn't written yet.
Yours is. A great piece, this. It manages to include both objectivity and subjectivity, in fairly equal supply, the better to give your reader an idea of just what Kane means to you. I would still be this impressed even if you hadn't given me an unsolicited shout-out off the top.
Cheers..
-mike
|
Mar 27 '03
5:05 pm PST
|
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.