Citizen Kane? [Archive]

Hermie

05-25-2004, 02:28 PM

Crazy_dog no.3

05-25-2004, 02:40 PM

Yeah I like Schindler's List too. It's #10 on my top 10 list. And Godfather's #4.

It's just that Kane and Lawrence of Arabia don't have interesting characters or situations. Films like Godfather and LOTR are 3+ hours in length but it's justified because we give a sh*t about what's going on. I doubt many people today would care about what's going on in 'Arabia.
OK, so he's wondering around the desert with some beautiful cinematography. So what? He's been doing that for about an hour and pretty much nothing of note of note has happened. The most boring bit is the end, although by then I was half-asleep so I may be wrong.

IG-64

05-25-2004, 08:35 PM

Originally posted by txa1265
I can't even believe this discussion is happening ...

... I weep for the future ...

;)

Seriously though - I find the inverse to be true. The newer generation is immediately bored with anything black & white, without thrashing guitar, without big-boom or over-the top action or CGI.

Mike

For you information Mr. I'm Old and All-knowing :P

I've watched my fair share of old movies, there are tons of better movies, old and new, that are better that citizen kane. Even my mom, who watches old, B&W movies all the time thought that it was boring crap. What about Rebecca? What about the classics with Vincent Price?

Now it's my turn. What's with the hate of all things computer? Anything with CGI is instantly worthless crap. It's making the way for more fantasy movies. CGI can work wonders if done correctly. Like Jurrasic Park, Terminator 2, AotC, and LotR, with Gollum, and Balrog, and the fell beast, and all the massive armies. I don't like movies just because they have CGI, just because its "technology". I don't like movies just for their "flaring guitars" or over-the-top action, just because it's "cool". I know when a move is a good movie, i'm not just a druggie with a mohawk and tattoos. The new generation is not so blind as you may think.

Astrotoy7

05-26-2004, 05:45 AM

Originally posted by IG-64
I watched Citizen Kane last night, and would like to ask.

Why in the heck does everyone say this is the best movie ever made!?

It bored me to death. :bored:

ok. IG, pray tell...what is *your* idea of the "best movie ever made...... *waits in suspense*

also, you really need to clarify, Citizen Kane is definitely one of the greatest American movies ever made. Im still partial to Kurosawa's work, particularly Ran, Rashomon, which also float around critics top 100s list...

CK is unique for its time, almost mind blowing, you have to realise that. You have to think about the way Hollywood worked back then, the studio system, where the role of producers and directors was far from what it is today. Orson Welles is *the man* who revolutionised Hollywood. He truly was the pioneering director auteur. If it wasnt for OW, then people like George Lucas, Martin Scorsese, Francis Coppola, Steven Speilberg, David Lynch etc may bever have been. In a very weird and perverted sense, *some* of Hollywood seems to have reverted to the studio driven "churn em and burn em" attitude to film-making....... but that's another debate altogether...

also, just because it is critically acclaimed as a great cinematic work, doesnt mean its entertaining, especially to teenagers.... as disturbingly serious as even you seem IG.... :p ...and Vincent Price movies, entertaining yes, revolutionary cinema masterpieces...ummm NO :D

....Rosebud.... I always giggle at that, as Rosebud is a gorgeous little seaside place in my part of Australia :D

mtfbwya

IG-64

05-26-2004, 06:08 AM

Originally posted by Astrotoy7
ok. IG, pray tell...what is *your* idea of the "best movie ever made...... *waits in suspense*

also, you really need to clarify, Citizen Kane is definitely one of the greatest American movies ever made. Im still partial to Kurosawa's work, particularly Ran, Rashomon, which also float around critics top 100s list...

CK is unique for its time, almost mind blowing, you have to realise that. You have to think about the way Hollywood worked back then, the studio system, where the role of producers and directors was far from what it is today. Orson Welles is *the man* who revolutionised Hollywood. He truly was the pioneering director auteur. If it wasnt for OW, then people like George Lucas, Martin Scorsese, Francis Coppola, Steven Speilberg, David Lynch etc may bever have been. In a very weird and perverted sense, *some* of Hollywood seems to have reverted to the studio driven "churn em and burn em" attitude to film-making....... but that's another debate altogether...

also, just because it is critically acclaimed as a great cinematic work, doesnt mean its entertaining, especially to teenagers.... as disturbingly serious as even you seem IG.... :p ...and Vincent Price movies, entertaining yes, revolutionary cinema masterpieces...ummm NO :D

....Rosebud.... I always giggle at that, as Rosebud is a gorgeous little seaside place in my part of Australia :D

mtfbwya

"at the time" and the "went through this to make it" just doesn't cut it for me. It was boring and in no way presents to me or my family as the best movie ever made. If it were me, I'd say Ben Hur, or LotR. If it wasn't meant to be entertaining, then it's just stylized crap. I'm sorry, but if a movie is going to be the best ever made, it has to be entertaining. "Revolutionary" and "pioneering" do not equal best movie ever made when it bores you to death. You can sit here and talk about "director" this and that, but if it doesn't have the entertainment value that movies are made for, then it's not the best ever. Like my mom said (shes an artist) there were many great painters that opened up new grounds for art, but you can't say that they're the best painters just because of it.

txa1265

05-26-2004, 06:56 AM

Originally posted by IG-64
Mr. I'm Old and All-knowing :P Thanks for using my full title ;)

What about Rebecca? What about the classics with Vincent Price? Well, Hitchcock's work was absolutely great.

But Vincent Price's movies?!?! What's next - "where's teh luv for 'THEM!'" (just kidding)? I love the Vincent Price movies - they were a staple of my youth.

Now it's my turn. What's with the hate of all things computer? Anything with CGI is instantly worthless crap. What - are you kidding me?!? Since when have I presented myself as anti-technology? I prefer CGI Yoda, for instance. I love the use of technology in movies. Look at Tron, Last Starfighter, and even Star Wars itself.

I have been a techno-geek since when it was really unfashionable to be one (fortunately for me I don't look too much the part ;) )

I don't like movies just because they have CGI, just because its "technology". I don't like movies just for their "flaring guitars" or over-the-top action, just because it's "cool". I know when a move is a good movie, i'm not just a druggie with a mohawk and tattoos. The new generation is not so blind as you may think. I never made any claims as to your tastes. But diffferent movies have different 'feel' and pacing, and many older movies took their time to develop the story.

Movies today are made largely around the channel-flipping, reality-TV watching, instant fame-and-gone mindset, with shortened attention spans. Movies like 'My Dinner With Andre', a fave of mine growing up, wouldn't be in a 'normal' theater today, because they are clogged with 6 screens of Shrek (which my whole family enjoyed, BTW), 4 each of Van Helsing and Troy ...

Taste does matter, but there is also an appreciation to be made for the context of time. For example - Vivaldi bores the crap out of me. I have never been much of a fan of his stuff. I even bought an album of the Four Seasons because I knew I should appreciate it. But ultimately I knew that work of the classical, romantic and modern era were more my style. But I've studied Vivaldi, I appreciate his work. I also understand the harmonic limitations of his day. Is he to be penalized for not living in the post-modern expressionistic period? I don't think so.

There are plenty of other examples - Metropolis, Nosferatu ... I love those. I don't know what you think about them, or if you've seen them.

Mike

txa1265

05-26-2004, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by IG-64
if a movie is going to be the best ever made, it has to be entertaining. There I challenge you.

I think that there is a case to be made that there are things made to entertain and those made to stimulate and challenge you intellectually. There are things that hand you the experience (like LotR, no disrespect) and things you need to draw it out from (like Stardust Memories, for example).

And your mother the artist should also realize that the artists who pave the way should be paid their respects, because there must have been something in their work - not just the idea, but an actual expression of that idea - that pushed the boundary. So perhaps not best ever, but certainly great.

And, really, the whole idea of 'best ever' is pretty much crap anyway. I see Citizen Kane as being in the pantheon of film accomplishments, along with many other great works from around the world.

... but most of my favorite films do not occupy a place in that pantheon of greatness - they're just fun movies I love. Like the whole Star Wars collection.

Just because it is great doesn't mean you'll like it either. Look at music. Do you think that if greatest all-time piece of music was compiled that anything from the rock era would or should be in the top 25? Does that matter for what you enjoy? Doesn't for me. I like what I like and don't get hung up on what others think ... until they get hung up on forcing labels ... like best ever.

Mike

IG-64

05-26-2004, 07:26 AM

Originally posted by txa1265
There I challenge you.

I think that there is a case to be made that there are things made to entertain and those made to stimulate and challenge you intellectually. There are things that hand you the experience (like LotR, no disrespect) and things you need to draw it out from (like Stardust Memories, for example).

And your mother the artist should also realize that the artists who pave the way should be paid their respects, because there must have been something in their work - not just the idea, but an actual expression of that idea - that pushed the boundary. So perhaps not best ever, but certainly great.

And, really, the whole idea of 'best ever' is pretty much crap anyway. I see Citizen Kane as being in the pantheon of film accomplishments, along with many other great works from around the world.

... but most of my favorite films do not occupy a place in that pantheon of greatness - they're just fun movies I love. Like the whole Star Wars collection.

Just because it is great doesn't mean you'll like it either. Look at music. Do you think that if greatest all-time piece of music was compiled that anything from the rock era would or should be in the top 25? Does that matter for what you enjoy? Doesn't for me. I like what I like and don't get hung up on what others think ... until they get hung up on forcing labels ... like best ever.

Mike

In a way, thats exactly what I think. People can't really label "best movie ever" so why making a mistake trying?

So perhaps not best ever, but certainly great.

Exactly my point.

Astrotoy7

05-26-2004, 08:24 AM

hey IG - here's aan idea. But perhaps it me be interesting and educational to watch CK with the commentary turned on. Most versions have excellent commentaries on them, including peter bogdanovich(another director), who does a great job of pointing out things that were done in that film. Ben Hur is a cool movie, one of my faves, another great achievement. But its not CK....

at the end of the day, there are some people who like Citizen Kane, some people who dont, and some people who miss the point....

mtfbwya

IG-64

05-26-2004, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by Astrotoy7
hey IG - here's aan idea. But perhaps it me be interesting and educational to watch CK with the commentary turned on. Most versions have excellent commentaries on them, including peter bogdanovich(another director), who does a great job of pointing out things that were done in that film. Ben Hur is a cool movie, one of my faves, another great achievement. But its not CK....

at the end of the day, there are some people who like Citizen Kane, some people who dont, and some people who miss the point....

mtfbwya

A good movie shouldn't need explaining. You shouldn't have to ask why it's a good movie.

txa1265

05-26-2004, 09:36 AM

Originally posted by IG-64
A good movie shouldn't need explaining. You shouldn't have to ask why it's a good movie. Exactly, like Eraserhead ...

ok, mike, now you're just f-ing around ...
Mike

Sam Fisher

05-26-2004, 10:17 PM

Freakin, I own that movie, but only watched it once, seeing as it only takes once to know the end >.<

Astrotoy7

05-27-2004, 08:38 AM

Originally posted by txa1265
Exactly, like Eraserhead ...

ok, mike, now you're just f-ing around ...
Mike

Mike, stop toyin with the cineplex generation man ! I doint get to talk about it much here but I am a *crazed* David Lynch fan.... Eraserhead was visionary and insane, the magnum opus of film school films ! The recent release of the Eraserhead SE DVD from DavidLynch.com is something to behold. I never thought they could pull it off on DVD, but they did....

mtfbwya

IG-64

05-27-2004, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by Astrotoy7
Mike, stop toyin with the cineplex generation man ! I doint get to talk about it much here but I am a *crazed* David Lynch fan.... Eraserhead was visionary and insane, the magnum opus of film school films ! The recent release of the Eraserhead SE DVD from DavidLynch.com is something to behold. I never thought they could pull it off on DVD, but they did....

mtfbwya

Wow, you don't agree with anything do you? :p

Darth Groovy

05-27-2004, 05:49 PM

Citizen Kane is a movie I never grow tired of. Even though it is dated, it is still revolutionary by modern film standards. Orson Wells went to great lengths to get the right camera angle, such as digging large holes in the floor, and pointing the camera up, so that Charles Foster Kane, always seemed larger than life.

I think part of the reason it bores you folks to tears, is that you don't understand the meanings behind the actions in the movie. The movie tells the tale of the rise and fall of an ordinary man, who inherates wealth at a very young age, who can afford to buy anything and everything but happiness. "Rosebud" is the symbol of his childhood, which is where the transition from poverty to wealth initially took place, in the end, he wants to go back to wear he was, but it is already too late. It's really a simple plot, money cannot buy you love.

I love Citizen Kane, and I want it on DVD, but it's kind of pricey right now, so I make do with my VHS copy.

Poggle

05-27-2004, 05:58 PM

I watched Citizen Kane last night, and would like to ask.

A good film yes but anyone saying it is the best film ever has utterly lost the plot

Astrotoy7

05-28-2004, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by IG-64
Wow, you don't agree with anything do you? :p

huh ! I wasnt even disagreeing with anything in that post ! Whatcha talkin bout man ! :p

mtfbwya

txa1265

05-28-2004, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by Astrotoy7
Whatcha talkin bout man ! :p
Of course, what you meant was

Wuchu talkin' 'bout, Willis?!

;)

Mike

Astrotoy7

05-28-2004, 09:21 AM

Originally posted by txa1265
Of course, what you meant was

Wuchu talkin' 'bout, Willis?!

;)

Mike

yeah, I still cant get over that pic Rhett posted with Gary Coleman and David Hasselhoff, its my deskie now, and Ive been talking like Arnold Drummond all week..... look out for the gooch !

:p

mtfbwya

SeleneRayne

05-28-2004, 09:34 AM

I have never saw this movie before, but from the sounds of it, I have mixed reviews, it sounds like people say it's one of the greatest movies ever, and some say they were so bored, they thought a sharp stick in the eye looked better than the movie.

Samuel Dravis

05-28-2004, 09:47 AM

Originally posted by SeleneRayne
I have never saw this movie before, but from the sounds of it, I have mixed reviews, it sounds like people say it's one of the greatest movies ever, and some say they were so bored, they thought a sharp stick in the eye looked better than the movie. Some people say something's great just because its a 'classic', perhaps in it's own time, but now it has very little reflection on the current world. I say, Dickens, etc had their time, now move over and let us have our own. :p

They may be excellent, use english perfectly, have the best angles ever achieved before then, etc, but if they don't relate to the contemporary world, they have no meaning.

Astrotoy7

05-28-2004, 09:51 AM

Originally posted by SeleneRayne
.....and some say they were so bored, they thought a sharp stick in the eye looked better than the movie.....

yes Selene, Kain is as entertaining as a stick in the eye.......umm...I mean umm.....Citizen Kane :p

*awaits subsequent death threat from Kain*

mtfbwya

Sabretooth

05-28-2004, 09:56 AM

Never heard of CK. What sort of a movie is that? Oh, and is Kain the lead actor in it? Then it has 99.9999% chance of boring...

*screams*

Oops!

*scrams*

Poggle

05-28-2004, 10:00 AM

Plot Summary for
Citizen Kane (1941)

Multimillionaire newspaper tycoon Charles Foster Kane dies alone in his extravagant mansion, Xanadu, speaking a single word: "Rosebud". In an attempt to figure out the meaning of this word, a reporter tracks down the people who worked and lived with Kane; they tell their stories in a series of flashbacks that reveal much about Kane's life but not enough to unlock the riddle of his dying breath

Its orson welles finest work except the voice of unicron in transformers the movie :)

Astrotoy7

05-31-2004, 06:22 AM

I'd like to thank all who got on here and whined about a movie they generally havent seen and definitely dont seem to understand... I got out my CK 2 disc special edition last nite.... man, what an experience.... :)

salutes Orson Welles, for havin the mustard to do what he did, Herman Mankiewicz for contribution to the screenplay, the mercury theatre actors, and Bernard Hermann for yet another wonderful score...

now kiddies, get back to your ROTK DVD good isnt it, yes

*looks forward to Ep3, in hypocritical fashion* :p

mtfbwya

Astrotoy7

05-31-2004, 06:28 AM

Originally posted by Samuel Dravis
Some people say something's great just because its a 'classic', perhaps in it's own time, but now it has very little reflection on the current world. I say, Dickens, etc had their time, now move over and let us have our own. :p

They may be excellent, use english perfectly, have the best angles ever achieved before then, etc, but if they don't relate to the contemporary world, they have no meaning.

ok, here we go. In 500 years time, I wonder if anyone will find relevance or amusement in most of the junk that passes for literature today.

*pats Shakespeare on the head, Hugs his copy of Macbeth*

mtfbwya

Samuel Dravis

05-31-2004, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by Astrotoy7
ok, here we go. In 500 years time, I wonder if anyone will find relevance or amusement in most of the junk that passes for literature today.

*pats Shakespeare on the head, Hugs his copy of Macbeth*

mtfbwya Why should I care about what people think in 500 years? I'll be frolicking with the grubs, anyway. :p

Prime

05-31-2004, 02:29 PM

Originally posted by Astrotoy7
ok, here we go. In 500 years time, I wonder if anyone will find relevance or amusement in most of the junk that passes for literature today. Like MAD Magazine? :D

Black Knight of Keno

06-01-2004, 08:04 AM

Citizen Kain? Did someone say Citizen Kain?
Really? (http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/negative13.jpg)

The_One

06-02-2004, 10:15 AM

Citizen Kane?
Lawrence of Arabia?
Star Wars?
Lord of the Rings?

Pah! 3 words:

The Big Lebowski

ET Warrior

06-03-2004, 03:12 AM

Originally posted by The_One
The Big Lebowski

:bored:

My roommate at college made me watch this movie last semester. Now, typically, I enjoy all the same movies as him, and we disagree basically only on Star Wars and Fight Club. And now we disagree on The Big Lebowski. I was sitting there watching this movie just waiting for it to get good. Or interesting. Or entertaining. Or EVEN MIND STIMULATING. But it wasn't. BLEH BLEH BLEH on the big lebowski.

Astrotoy7

06-03-2004, 05:52 AM

I was really looking forward to TBL, but it let me down, the only saving grace was john turturo's character, hilarious !

mtfbwya

Crazy_dog no.3

06-03-2004, 06:13 AM

The Big Lebowski? Boring? OK, you guys asked for this... *gets out his AK-74*:rifle1:

The_One

06-03-2004, 08:40 AM

Watch it again. And again. And again.

Trust me, it gets better each time. A lot of the stuff you miss or don't understand the first time - the more you watch it, the funnier it gets, to the point where you could watch it every day and never tire of it.

That is why it's such a great movie. It's up for debate whether it's the greatest movie ever made, but there's no question of it being the funniest ;)

toms

06-03-2004, 08:49 AM

big lebowski rules... as do all coen brothers films (except the man who wasn't there...)

There seems to have been a very radical shift in the way films are shot and edited over the last 5 years.

Things have moved into a much more fluid, mtv like, cgi enhanced, action packed, quick cut way of doing things. Watch action films from 10 years ago, for example, and they seem failry dull by comarisson, as we expect them to get straight into the action in the first five minutes.

Kane is a classic, but it is a purist's film. Many of the shots in it had never been done before, some were thought to be impossible. And I have seen the story rehashed 100s of times in tv episodes and so on. The central performance is also brilliant. It was never meant to be a "fun" film. It was supposed to be intelligent, thought provoking and moving.

Current films are fsar more slick, and in many ways much better, but they do seem to have (on the whole) lost a lot of the magic and heart that used to exist in the medium.

-----

CGi as a medium isn't bad. No mediums are bad, there are always good and bad uses. THe problem I have with it a lot of the time is that, a lot like graphics in computer games, it is just a quest to stick in as much CGi as possible and make it bigger than the last guy... often at the expense of the film, characters and plot.

Any pixar film, for example, has both good visuals, but also great characters, plots, emotions and so on. I LOVE all their films.

Gollum, Yoda... both worked well as characters and were belivable.

CGi battles in AOTC and Two Towers were both great, realistic and heart pounding.

On the other hand, just sticking in CGi doesn't make the film good. Look at TPM, Blade 2, daredevil, etc... And with LOTR, Troy, SW, Chronicles of riddick, etc... we seem to have reached a point where they are competeing just to have the biggest CGi army, rather than the best use of an army.

I'm of the opinion that special effects (of all types) are best when you don't notice them. The best special effect in jurrasic park was an early facial mapping scene that no-one noticed. Directors now almost seem to want to make their CGI stand out in order to show that they have big budget CGi... and when cgi stands out (usually though bad compositing) it really looks fake.

Basing a film on special effects is a bad idea, as they date rapidly. That is why you need a decent film to contain them. This is why the original SW films already look more realistic than TPM which looks SO FAKE already...