Alessandro Montecalvo
3/9/15
CM 241- Understanding Movies
Citizen Kane

By the time Citizen Kane came out in 1941, many technological advances had been made in terms of filmmaking. Different photographic techniques became important as they were chosen and implemented for specific reasons and at specific times of the film. Citizen Kane is considered by many critics to be one of the best films of all time mainly because it was so innovative at the time. The film is often praised for its cinematography, sound, and narrative structure. I personally did not love the film because I found it to be a bit boring at times. It felt more like a biography of Kane’s life and not much more. I kept waiting for “it” to happen but no monumental or memorable event really ever occurred. The film begins with Charles Foster Kane on his deathbed as he whispers his last word “rosebud”, before dropping his globe and it shattering everywhere. The rest of the film is essentially a chase by a reporter named Jerry Thompson as he tries to find out what Kane meant by “rosebud”. Through a series of interviews that Thompson conducts, we get an in-depth look at Thompson’s life through flashbacks in the perspective of many people who knew him and were close to him.
The setup of the movie was something I did enjoy. The film began at the end of Kane’s life and then progresses through flashbacks. I always find it interesting when movies are set up that way because traditionally a film has a conclusion at the end of a film while Citizen Kane showed us Kane’s fate right away. This film was one of the first to implement a storyline in this manner. Kane’s story unfolds in overlapping segments by different narrators who add information to Kane’s life. Another interesting aspect of the film is that every narrator may have a biased or slewed view or judgment of Kane for a variety of reasons and therefore their accounts and memories of Kane could very well be cast in doubt.
The audience first learns that Kane was taken away as a child by a banker named Thatcher. Kane’s parents wanted to send Kane off so he could live a better life with more opportunities. Kane is basically robbed of his childhood and that is reflected in his behavior as an adult. He feels the need for materialistic items, perhaps in hope that those items would fill the void he feels inside himself. This theme is a reoccurring one in the film and many photographic techniques are used by Orson Welles, who not only starred in the film, but also wrote and directed Citizen Kane. Techniques like deep-focus and ‘mise-en-scene’.
Deep focus and ‘mise-en-scene’ work together and enhance emotion and meaning in this film. Deep focus means that everything is in focus in a cut or scene, including the background. This technique uses different lighting and angles for desired effects and overlapping actions. Effectively manipulating the ‘mise-en-scene’, which encompasses the organization of setting, lighting, and actor movement for deep focus actively engages the whole space of the frame without leaving the viewer confused.
The best example of deep focus being utilized in this film is when we learn of Kane as a child through Thatcher’s interview with Thompson. There is a scene where Kane is in the background joyfully playing with his sled while his parents are in the foreground speaking with Thatcher about Kane’s future. The effect of this scene was that Kane was still the focal point. I found myself watching what Kane was up to in the background while listening to the conversation. Many times, a director will focus on the foreground so that the conversation is the focal point. By still focusing on Kane with my eyes and hearing the adults discuss his future, I couldn’t help but sympathize with Kane and I felt bad about the future he was about to endure. Perhaps the most important part of the scene is Kane’s sled. It symbolizes his happiness and his simplistic life. At the end of the film, we learn that “rosebud” was in fact the name of the sled he had when he was still a young boy.
Another impactful example of deep focus was the scene when Kane discovers his wife, Susan Alexander, attempt suicide. In the scene, we see Susan Alexander lying in bed with drugs right next to the bed. As Kane steps into the room we see a shot of him and the drugs. The use of deep focus creates a relationship between the container of drugs and Kane. Based on this, the audience could conclude that Susan Alexander did not attempt to commit suicide but rather was assisted by Kane in her attempt. Overall, deep focus is most effective in scenes that depict Kane’s personal isolation because it gives the audience a clear view of the space Kane has no power or control over.
As the film progresses we see Kane’s life as an adult through the memories of Kane’s good friends and employees, Mr. Bernstein and Leland, and Thompson also has one more conversation with his ex-wife Susan. Most significantly, Thompson interviews the butler Raymond, who remembers Kane saying “rosebud” following an argument after Susan left him. Each person gives his or her own version of an abandoned boy who grows up to be an isolated, needy man. All reveal in some way that Kane is egotistical, desperate for attention, and incapable of giving love (other than through materialistic objects). These faults eventually caused Kane to lose his paper, fortune, friends, and beloved second wife, Susan. The reporter never does find out what Kane meant by “rosebud”. In the last scene of the film, Thompson is leaving Kane’s abandoned castle, Xanadu, when the camera focuses on a group of workers burning some of Kane’s “less valuable” possessions. In the fire is the sled that Kane was riding the day his mother sent him away. Painted on the sled is the name “rosebud”. It is noteworthy to mention that out of everything Kane experienced during his eventful lifetime, his last word was one that brought him back to his childhood. Ironically, in a room full of valuable objects and statues, the most valuable item to Kane was the least valuable monetary item. This represents that his most valuable memory had nothing to do with materialistic items but rather had to do with innocence and happiness, two things he was robbed off that very day when he was sent away to Thatcher.
An aspect of the film that is interesting to me is how Kane is perceived. I wonder how different the flashbacks would have been if they were coming from Kane’s perspective rather than from others who knew him. Would he have painted the same image of himself as the others or was he completely unaware of how his actions and words were being taken? For example, when Thompson first goes to interview Susan Alexander, she is drunk and unwilling to answer any of Thompson’s questions. Clearly she may have an altered view of Kane based on her last interactions with him before he passed away. Charles Kane did many questionable things in his life like trying to force Susan Alexander to become an opera star, even though she didn’t have the drive or talent to become one. He also ran a successful newspaper but eventually he lost it and it is discovered that he ran the newspaper mainly to help enhance his political career. However, was he really as bad as he was made out to look?
The most important theme of the film in my opinion is that money and materialism mean nothing if you are unhappy. The rise and fall of someone who seems to have it all is a theme we see over and over today, through movies, documentaries, books, and TV programs. Kane was a collector of many things. I truly believe Kane just collected things in hopes of those objects filling various voids in his life. He did not actually care for the items but hoped they would somehow bring him happiness. Through his materialism, Kane attempts to improve the insults of the real world. Kane had no control over his mother’s abandonment and he was also disappointed by the failure of his political career and many of his friends’ rejection. He ends up at Xanadu alone, with his possessions as his only companions. Despite having so many nice things, the only two possessions that carry meaning for Kane on his deathbed are a simple snow globe and sled. This exemplifies and intensifies the basic message that money doesn’t buy happiness, a message that is still ever so present in our society today. To Kane, family, love, and close friends would have made him much happier and perhaps a better person.
All in all, Citizen Kane had many strengths as a film. It was innovative in a variety of technical ways such as its use of deep focus and different lighting and angle shots. Also, its plot and storytelling setup were effective in portraying Kane is the specific manner intended. Also, the actors all performed marvelously and were all praised for their performances. The film is realistic, cynical, and ironic. The message portrayed is a very important one, which makes the film even more powerful. Indeed I found the film to be boring at times but overall I did enjoy it. We never get a clear answer as to what drove Kane to do what he did during his life. I’m not sure whether he is the victim or the villain but what is certain is that Kane was an enigma. The representation of “rosebud” shed only a vague light into his character as a whole. Lastly, we know that Kane died an unhappy man and for that reason the audience must ask themselves about the benefits and downfalls of money and power and its inevitable connection to happiness.