Citizen Kane (PG)

Most sports experts concur that George Herman Ruth, better known by the nickname ‘Babe’ is one of the greatest baseball players in the 150-year history of the game. Ruth finished a Hall of Fame career with an almost unheard of .342 average and 714 home-runs – a record that stood for over thirty years. But how would Babe Ruth have fared if he were on the field today? In the day and age of faster, stronger, and just plain better athletes, armed with multi-million dollar contracts and limitless training, exercising, and health regimens, would the portly cookie-dough-bodied Ruth even compare to the worst player on any given team? Ruth played from 1914-1935 in a whites-only league. The parks were smaller. The players were slower. No one was firing 100 mph fastballs.

Similarly, when Alexander Graham Bell invented the first telephone in 1875, it was a novel and unheard of creation. With a cord chaining it to the wall, the device was the size of a love-seat, but people of that time were in awe. How would it have looked in comparison to the car phones of 1985, or the iPhones of today?

Because of technological, societal, and conditioning evolution, it’s almost unfair to make comparisons of subjects from one era to the next, and this holds true to form in the realm of movies.

Are the classics to passé for the current populous?

Many so-called experts and critics will identify the 1941 film “Citizen Kane” as one of, if not the best, movie ever made. Excuse my generation-x lackluster vocabulary, but that’s quite a ballsy statement. To identify something, not as great, but as the greatest of all time, is really remarkable, albeit unfair. Someone entering a theatre in 1941 was going to watch a movie for the sole purpose of being entertained. Someone in 2013 seeking out “Citizen Kane” is expecting to be blown away. A movie from the 1970s is a movie from another generation. A movie from 1941 is a movie from another lifetime. As such, I’m not quite sure it’s fair to judge this in 2013. Think of this: not one person in “Citizen Kane” is alive today. If you were fifteen when it was released, you would be pushing ninety now. So as you read further, ask yourself if you have a lot in common with your grandparents or even great grandparents.

Nevertheless, the film is heralded as magnificent and groundbreaking. It’s studied in film classes worldwide. Roger Ebert and countless critics, bloggers, and movie lists say it’s the best thing since sliced bread so it must be, right?

“Citizen Kane” tells the story of one Charles Foster Kane (Orson Welles), an abundantly wealthy newspaper mogul, who dies in the very first scene of the movie as an old man laying in bed. Clutching a snow globe, Kane utters the word ‘Rosebud’ and drops the snow globe, causing it to shatter as he passes on. The news of his death is shown to be the top story around the entire world. A reporter named Jerry Thompson (William Alland) goes about in attempt to learn about Kane’s life and specifically to discover what the word Rosebud could possibly mean. Interviewing Kane’s former love interests and business associates, the story of Kane’s life is revealed through a series of flashbacks.

As a child, Kane grew up in poverty in Colorado, his most happy moments being playing in the snow outside his house. In order to secure a better future for their son, Kane’s parents send him to live with wealthy banker Walter Parks Thatcher (George Coulouris) in New York. Kane grows up with the benefit of money and education and at the age of 25, inherits a fortune from Thatcher where he quickly enters the newspaper business and becomes an almost immediate success. This is the point where I dozed off for about 10 minutes; don’t worry, I rewound and replayed what I missed (which was pretty much the same thing on an endless loop).

The story goes on to show how Kane conquered the newspaper industry, one city and one paper at a time, growing so wealthy that there wasn’t anything he couldn’t buy. His mansion filled with collectible statues and artwork from around the world, not on display but shuffled into a storage room where they resided as his possessions. Thompson spends considerable time interviewing Kane’s second wife, Susan Alexander (Dorothy Comingore) in a vain attempt at discovering the meaning of Rosebud. “Citizen Kane” is renowned for its final scene, in which the identity of Rosebud is final revealed.

Once again is it fair to compare?  The movie is lauded for its revolutionary cinematography, story, music, and prose. But does this hold up to today’s standards?  That’s not for me to decide, as I have no basis of comparison for these things. As a Buff critic, I am tasked with reviewing the movie as a whole and determining if it’s something someone would want to watch for enjoyment purposes.

“Citizen Kane” is entertainment tycoon Orson Welles’ feature film debut. Welles, just 26 at the time, had already achieved success and admiration for his work in Broadway and is perhaps best known for his controversial 1938 radio broadcast of “War of the Worlds.” Welles does a great job of directing and the concept of the movie is very intriguing in the search for the meaning behind Rosebud (a word I had heard numerous times referenced over the years and never knew came from this movie). The concept of telling the story through flashbacks has been done in abundance since, but was novel at the time.

The acting is exceptionally bad, save for Welles himself, who carries the movie in a near James Stewart-like performance; but then again, I think this is to be expected from something this far removed from the present day. Goofy gags are set up in places where they shouldn’t be and the art of subtly is lost completely on the talent, where it seems like they assume every single detail has to be spelled out as if the audience is a bunch of ten-year olds. Even the theatrical poster for the movie contains the words “It’s Terrific!”  As if one would have to be told this before going in. Imagine the poster for “Zero Dark Thirty” saying “Wowie!  What a great movie!”  But again is this unfair of me to judge?  Maybe. This is not an Earth-shattering statement: people in 1941 were completely different than people are today. People in 1941 could care less about their Facebook status. They talked instead of texted. A tweet was something you had a doctor look at. They were worried about war with the Germans. They would no doubt faint dead away if they saw a screening of “Zero Dark Thirty.” Osama bin Who?

Just because something is supposed to be great doesn’t mean that it is – I’m reminded of the heat I took when I said I hated “The Matrix.” I think a lot of people like to convey that they are more sophisticated and in tune with art by saying they like something that “experts” deem worthy. More often than not, they say they like something for no other reason than the credit it may carry.

I accept “Citizen Kane” for its place in history, but in the fairness of reviewing its entertainment value in 2013, it’s not the greatest movie of all time by far. Check it out for its historical significance. Your tastes may be different than mine, but please don’t say you like it just because you think you have to.

– by Matt Christopher