It�s hard to know exactly what to say about this film; so much has been said already. There is no doubt that it had a profound effect on American cinema, quite possibly the most profound effect of any film made before or after it. But I think its milestone achievements tend to give it a place of slightly more prominence than its actual story would justify. There is no doubt that it is a visual masterpiece. Tolland and Welles used the deep focus shot and mis-en-scene to spectacular effect. Welles also made use of sound in ways that were never even dreamed of before this; his background on stage and with Mercury Theater Radio are very much on display here. From a story-telling perspective, it is far more complex than most films of its era. The way things go forwards and backwards is very interesting, as it the actors� ability to be convincing at almost any age�which brings me to the acting. It is amazing. Welles displays his overwhelming screen presence here. And Cotten is outstanding as well. In fact, everyone is outstanding. (This must have really ticked off Hollywood, since Welles brought most of them with him from NY.) Finally, though the film is damaged by its story. It is a sad story about a sad man, and the ending is a real downer. In fact, although the ending is quite possibly the most famous thing about the film, I felt that it pulled its punch at the very end. At the last second, right as everything is coming together, it kind of trickles away. My only criticism of a great, great film.
�As Charles Foster Kane who owns eighty-two thousand, six hundred and thirty-four shares of public transit - you see, I do have a general idea of my holdings - I sympathize with you. Charles Foster Kane is a scoundrel. His paper should be run out of town. A committee should be formed to boycott him. You may, if you can form such a committee, put me down for a contribution of one thousand dollars.� |
|
