Comments on: Movie. Citizen Kane, 1941. (HIx: 0)

By: TJH

TJH — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 03:21:59 +0000

Jim — exactly. Orson was goy, but his rapid ascendancy appears to be a textbook case of correlative goy/hebe exploitation.

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 19:01:49 +0000

Actually, they are from another planet. It is called planet Hollywood, as you have already pointed out.

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 18:28:46 +0000

I’m glad that some viewers more astute than myself didn’t like the movie either. I never could understand why I watched it at all, and certainly didn’t like it, when everybody seemed to think it was so great. See the reviews on Netflix. Either they or we must be from another planet.

By: MRB

MRB — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 19:39:09 +0000

Some movies are bad and yet are still enjoyable to watch because some aspects of them are so good. Think of Tombstone.

Some movies are bad and yet are still enjoyable simply because they are so bad. Think of Top Gun.

Some movies are bad and yet we deceive ourselves into enjoying them because we want them to be good. Think of Gods and Generals.

And some moves are bad and yet we find ourselves feeling guilty that we do not enjoy them because we are told they are so good. Think of Citizen Kane.

I concur with the zero rating. Nobody could possibly sit down for the first time and enjoy the movie on its own merits. And since nobody could possibly sit through it for the third or ninth time and enjoy it on its own merits, the best solution is to avoid it altogether — even if the only alternative is to watch Maverick and Iceman dual for the coveted “Top Gun” title for the tenth time.

And speaking of Kane, the American Film Institute has come out with its new top 100 movies. It should come as no surprise that the Hollywood scum have ranked it number one.

By: TJH

TJH — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 12:29:45 +0000

No Jonathan, no frustration! I’m quite blissfully happy in my ignorance (if ignorance it be).

By: JAD

JAD — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 23:56:56 +0000

You oversimplify my response.
I pointed to Shakespeare because you mentioned Shakespeare.

Further, I did not just say that Shakespeare was a favorite of Welles, I stated that much of Shakespeare shines through in Welles’ work. I can empathize with your frustration over hearing technique emphasized above substance, but that does not speak to the substance of movies like Citizen Kane. As I said before, it is instructive to see the horror of a life lived for self.

By: TJH

TJH — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 19:36:22 +0000

Say, I criticize Jones’ ability as a musical composer; then a defender of Jones comes back and says, “if you read up on Jones you would realize Brahms is one of his favorites.”

By: JAD

JAD — Wed, 30 May 2007 12:02:43 +0000

How is it not instructive to see the horror of a life lived for self?

If you read up on Welles you would realize that Shakespeare is one of his favorites (he wrote a textbook on how to enjoy him at a very young age), and much of that shines through in Kane and Arkadin, and and and…..

I can see how you might not want to give it your highest rating, but a 0 is really overkill.