I have a hard time getting into old movies, particularly of the black and white era.  The style and pacing just seems so archaic.  The acting is different than modern acting, the music is different, the scenes are different.  Still, anyone who knows anything about movies knows that Citizen Kane is a big deal and so, I chose this movie to be my first rental through Netflix (in case you don't read all of my posts, I recently got Netflix and am chronicling my adventures).  My only disappointment in this action was the fact that Citizen Kane was not available on Blu-ray.  I mean, I'm paying 2 bucks a month extra for that feature, and darn it, I want HD!  Oh well.

I must say, after the opening scene of film, I became a bit worried.  The film moves into an old fashioned news montage detailing the life of the main character, Charles Kane.  Its a little long, a little random, and just cheesy (like news montages from this era are by nature).  However, once it ended, the entire mood changed.  The camera cuts to a small screening room.  A projector's light cuts through the darkness and cigarette smoke.  The scene was stunning.  Men barely illuminated, discussing this deceased man.  This scene gave me hope for the whole movie as it set up the famed cinematography of the movie as well as the plot.  Who is Charles Kane really?  Did he care about anything?  And most importantly, what did his dying word, "rosebud", really mean?

The images of the film continue to be amazing.  Giant rooms, deep focused shots (as in everything is in focus from front to back), perfectly cast shadows, and montages cut together with such vigor, they rank up there with Rocky.  Rather than the black and white image being a disadvantage, it brings forth the movies spectacular use of shadow and light.  In terms of style, this movie did not look old.  It should be noted this was the first movie to show ceilings.  The angles which scenes were shot were unheard of before.  Also, many other techniques were pioneered in this movie, but if you want to know about that, you can just Wikipedia the movie.

Another thing that surprised me was the arranging of the plot. Chronologically, the movie is all over the place.  As the main reporter researches parts of Kane's life, flashbacks occur.  But this isn't a movie of two parallel timelines.  The flashbacks cross over each other and go back and forth.  With each flashback a missing piece is filled in, we start to learn the who and the what.  It gives the movie a fresh pace, different from most of the straight forward plots of older movies.  Of course pace only goes so far.  You need to care about the story.

The story is solid, but it really doesn't compare to the visuals.  Its most interesting factor, really its only interesting factor, is Charles Kane himself.  He begins as this man of vision.  A poor, possibly abused child is given the break of a life time, but in exchange, he has to give up the chance at a normal life.  To counter this, he rejects all of the handouts thrown his way, instead choosing to take a failing newspaper and make it something great.  Kane says he stands for the every man.  The problem is, he doesn't know what the everyman is, and so, he loses his way.  Kane slowly but surely becomes a hypocrite, a man so obsessed with his own vision, he cuts off the entire world.  Charles Kane is a man surrounded by the world full of people, yet he's completely alone.

When all of the stuff is gone, the fake friendships removed, Charles Kane is left with one item, one memory of when he was a real human being: Rosebud, his connection to the world.  What is Rosebud?  You'll just have to watch the movie.  Who knows, you might enjoy it.  I enjoyed it, overall.  I can't say I'd put it in a top 10 list.  Thats probably a sign that it is more about the style than the substance.  Style ages, no matter how advanced it is.  To truly appreciate Citizen Kane, I would probably have to watch the top 3 movies from the 40's and then from the 50's too and see how the film technique compares.  I probably won't.

I really can't end this post before I mention Orson Wells' performance.  Orson Wells of course co-wrote, directed, and starred in the movie as Charles Kane himself, going through many different ages.  If there is one thing I do because of this movie, its rent more movies with Orson in it.  The man's tone, his expressions and gestures, the way he says words are mesmerizing.  He can be so charming and yet so repulsive, so timid one moment, so tyrannical the next.  Clearly, Orson Wells is this movie both in front of and behind the camera.  Thank you Mr. Wells, thank you.