Citizen Kane (1941)

Written by Herman J. Mankiewicz & Orson Welles

Directed by Orson Welles

1998 List Ranking: 1

2007 List Ranking: 1

Across all these various film lists, there are certain milestone-movies that have made me excited to reach. For the Disney Animated films, it was any film I hadn’t seen before. For the Best Pictures, there were the historical “firsts” on each list, and for Pixar, it was the chance to go back and revisit films I hadn’t seen in years, or in some cases, decades. This list is no exception: there are certain films that make me very excited to see them, usually because of the prominent place they hold in the history of cinema.

Citizen Kane is, without a doubt, one of those films. Since my interest in cinema developed, this film has always been described as the greatest film ever made. The American Film Institute listed it as number 1 on both their original and their updated lists of the best American movies. In short, this is a film that I have been very excited to finally watch. Having done so, I now find myself apprehensive about writing this review; it’s certainly a good film, but is it the best film ever made? I honestly don’t know. And that hesitancy to declare it as such is flagging a lot of self doubt: if I’m going to consider myself an at-least casual reviewer of movies, how can I not give Citizen Kane an automatic A+? What does that hesitancy say about me?

Orson Welles as Charles Foster Kane

For those of you who haven’t seen it, Citizen Kane follows Charles Foster Kane’s life as told in allegedly-non-linear flashbacks, as a reporter interviews those who knew him about the significance of his dying word: “Rosebud”. Kane, portrayed by Orson Welles, is a thinly-veiled amalgamation of a variety of media moguls, but primarily on William Randolph Hearst. Through the film, we travel somewhat forward through time as we learn of Kane’s upbringing, his rise to fame, his first marriage, his affair and subsequent second marriage, all the way to his death. Along the way, we try to discover just what “Rosebud” is referencing to.

The moody beginning of the film’s frame story

I’ve mentioned before that I really enjoy playing with non-linear storytelling, so this film’s semi-use of it was definitely intriguing. I wouldn’t say that I learned anything very significant because of it (the ending reveal of “Rosebud”’s meaning is not helped nor hindered by the non-linear storytelling), but it was still interesting nonetheless. I’ll also say that while the film touches on non-linear storytelling (by going back and forth between the frame story of the reporter and flashbacks to Kane’s life), the flashbacks are presented, with perhaps a couple minor exceptions, in chronological order, so perhaps non-linear isn’t quite appropriate; to apply the term non-linear to this film really is like applying it to 1997’s Titanic or even 2004’s The Phantom of the Opera, films which rarely have the term “non-linear” applied to them. I’m going to talk more about it later, but reordering the different flashbacks to not be so chronological could have done wonders for the film.

An example of deep focus: Kane’s mother in the foreground, Kane’s father in the mid-ground, and young Kane in the background, all in focus

Something else that Kane is noted for are its striking visuals, and I do have to agree with that. Welles and his cinematographer Gregg Toland make heavy use of “deep focus”, in which everything in the frame, foreground, mid-ground, and background, is in focus (usually, only one or two of these elements are), and of preferring low angles. Kane is often erroneously thought to have pioneered these techniques, much like The Birth of a Nation allegedly pioneered its innovations, but again we see it isn’t true. Just a year before, Toland was experimenting with deep focus in John Ford’s The Long Voyage Home. The visuals are certainly attention grabbing and visually interesting, but I find it intriguing that we have another film that “innovates” but really doesn’t; it’s just a more popular film to do so.

On a quick side note, I do also want to point out the great makeup used in the movie. Seeing the leading actors age (in some cases, almost right in front of our eyes) and not look cartoonish is a testament to the makeup designers’ abilities: I never once was unconvinced of the age of everyone.

Kane’s impassioned speech during a failed political bid

The performances in the film are generally very well done. Welles, as Kane, obviously is front and center through quite a lot of the film, and he does a great job in his role. He is more subdued in his older years, which, on the one hand makes sense, but on the other, if the idea of “Rosebud” becomes more important to him in these years, then there probably should be something more than just shuffling around muttering “Rosebud” to himself. The other performances aren’t bad, either, but they all are outshone by Welles’ magnetic performance.

Okay, if you don’t know or want to know what “Rosebud” is, skip the next paragraph.

The end of “Rosebud”

Alright. Rosebud. I’ll admit that the knowledge of Rosebud being his sled was spoiled for me long ago, and I do absolutely think it effected my experience as a viewer. When I saw the sled in his flashback, I basically said to myself, “Okay! That’s important!”. And then about another hour of the film goes by and we never see the sled or hear it mentioned ever again. And then, in the closing moments of the film, we learn that Rosebud is the sled. First off, before y’all attack me (MANUEL), I GET that the sled represents his lost childhood/innocence. However, it seems so left-field from what we’ve seen in the movie. Until that moment, there has been ZERO indication that that lost innocence has been on his mind, and the last reference to the sled was at least an hour before (within the runtime of the film, that is). This is where I think being more non-linear could have helped the film. By moving the flashback of his childhood to a little later in the film, I argue that it would make a deeper connection to the Rosebud revelation (again, please note that I said LATER, not TO THE END). It would also create a nice parallel to the placement of the sequence in the overall film to when Kane is focusing on it. I know y’all are gonna harp on me about this (*sigh*), but I stand by my opinion.

Is Citizen Kane the greatest movie ever made? No. It’s not. There, I said it. Is it a BAD movie? Also, no. There is a lot that’s good about it, but I’m honestly underwhelmed by this film that is so highly lauded. I have said it before, and it definitely bears repeating now: there is, quite obviously, no accounting for taste. Citizen Kane is an astounding directorial/cinematic debut for a young genius like Orson Welles, but great, it ain’t.

FINAL GRADE: A-