The Great Citizen Kane Debate Comes to a Thrilling Conclusion

So, The Great Citizen Kane Debate is over and the wonderful ladies over at True Classics have tallied the results. As follows:

First Place: The Mythical Monkey, from A Mythical Monkey Writes About the Movies, for his entry Citizen Kane: Best Ever?
Second Place: Rachel, from The Girl with the White Parasol, for her entry Citizen Kane Takes the Stand
Third Place: Jill, from Sittin' on a Backyard Fence, for her entry Wait a Minute, There's No Cane in Citizen Kane 

Wow! I got second place, guys! That is, I mean to say, this is such an honor and...oh, just think of something really eloquent and pretend that I said it. It feels pretty special to stand up there along with two such talented and insightful bloggers as the Honorable Mr. Monkey and Jill. They both wrote excellent entries, so please, if you haven't already, go over and read them. And while you're at it, just go back to the list of entries for this debate and read them all. I was amazed by the effort and ability that went into this event and the way that everyone rose to the challenge. And for everyone who came over here to comment and debate, I just want to thank you all. You guys hold me to a high standard and I wouldn't have it any other way.

There's a reason my blog is littered with blogathons and contests and it isn't because I like getting shiny awards (well, I do like getting awards but I promise that isn't the main reason). It's because I can't resist the chance to connect with other bloggers and when the topic on hand is as rich and divided as Citizen Kane, it's a double treat. I know I walked away from this event with a whole new perspective on this film and its audience. When I watch it again (which probably won't be for at least eight months--I need my Citizen Kane hiatus), I'll be thinking about this debate and the varied but brilliant ideas that people brought to the table.

In short, thank you, fellow bloggers. Since I was watching The Great Man's Lady last night, I'll let Joel McCrea sum up the rest of my feelings.

Citizen Kane Takes the Stand

"Citizen Kane is perhaps the one American talking picture that seems as fresh now as the day it opened. It may seem even fresher. A great deal in the movie that was conventional and almost banal in 1941 is so far in the past as to have been forgotten and become new."

~Pauline Kael, Raising Kane

"For me (Orson Welles) is just a hoax. It's empty. It's not interesting. It's dead. Citizen Kane, which I have a copy of — is all the critics' darling, always at the top of every poll taken, but I think it's a total bore. Above all, the performances are worthless. The amount of respect that movie's got is absolutely unbelievable."

~Ingmar Bergman, interview with Jan Aghed

Well, a challenge has been extended. Those three fine ladies, Brandie, Carrie, and Nikki over at True Classics have thrown down the gauntlet to the blogosphere: Make your case for Citizen Kane. Is is the greatest film of all time or the most overrated? And if it is "just a hoax," as Ingmar Bergman would have it, is there a film out there that can take its place as Greatest Film Ever Made?

 

My own position on the matter can be stated in two parts. And the first is this: any attempt to rank a single film above all others is a complete crock. For one thing, nobody's ever been able to see every movie ever made. Even if by some miracle, a person could sit around for the rest of their life, doing nothing but watching movies and carefully ranking them according to cinematic value, they would never be able to even come close to seeing every film. The Internet Movie Database, for example, lists over 400,00 films, a number which doesn't even take amateur productions into account. Let's say this miracle person watched 5 movies a day, every day of the year, for 80 years. Then they would have seen a mere 146,000 by the end of their lifetime. Most cinephiles eventually come to terms with the fact that not only will they not get to see every movie ever made, they won't even get to see every great movie.

The deeper problem with ranking films is, even if you make the assumption that you've seen every worthwhile piece of celluloid out there and are now free to hand out merit badges, is that art just can't be assigned value that way. I know that we movie lovers have an obsession with making lists. And then arguing about the lists. And then rewriting the lists. 

But while those lists do have plenty of value for sparking controversy and discussion, they have no power to assess a movie's worth. If you believe that both The Lady Eve and Strangers on a Train are great movies, how do you go about deciding which one should be ranked higher? How much weight are we supposed to give to technical and visual merit versus story and content? Does the beauty of something like Triumph of the Will make up for its appalling purpose? Do we have to ration out how much space we give to John Ford on our list so that Douglas Sirk can have room? Actually, I enjoy pondering these questions because they force me to think deeply about the films I love. I think list-making is good exercise but then again, so is jogging on a treadmill. In either case, you shouldn't expect to get anywhere.

But here we come to my second point which is a little more complicated. Citizen Kane is not the Greatest Movie of All Time, but if we do have to arbitrarily assign a movie this title, then I think Citizen Kane makes as good a case as any and better than most. Birth of a Nation was more technically innovative, Gone with the Wind was a bigger movie event, and Rashomon redefined our ideas of how a story is told, but Citizen Kane is, for me, one of those rare movies that combines all the elements we look for in a film. Visual mastery, an exciting story, a talented cast, and most importantly, the ability to be rediscovered. Every time I see Citizen Kane (and I ration out my viewings), it feels like I'm seeing it for the first time.

On my last Citizen Kane re-watch, I was struck by what a strange, strange film it is. Even in just those first few moments. The establishing shot of Xanadu, the light that flashes in the window, the snowglobe, those monstrous lips uttering the word "Rosebud"...some people compare Citizen Kane to a horror film but for me, the opening owes more to the Surrealists. The story is set up as a relatively straightforward mystery: what is the meaning of Kane's dying word, "Rosebud?" The telling, however, is anything but straightforward. We are handed off to various narrators (Kane's loyal employee Mr. Bernstein, his embittered friend Jed Leland, his second wife Susan, his butler, his banker) but even as the facts pile up, nothing is really explained. The narrators are bitter and biased, their stories roam beyond what they themselves witnessed, and they never come close to answering the real question of the film: Who was Charles Foster Kane?

I once had the pleasure of watching Citizen Kane with a friend who had never, ever been told about the ending. When we finally reached the secret of Rosebud, my friend gasped, jumped up in his chair, and proceeded to complain for ten minutes about what a crap ending this was. Rosebud was the sled? What a cop-out. As fun as it was to watch my friend flip out over a sixty-odd-year spoiler, it did make me think that if you take it as a mystery, Citizen Kane is an utter failure. It's a mystery that tells you flat out that all its clues lead nowhere. It's an end with no beginning.

 

I've had a theory for a while that Citizen Kane is the cinematic equivalent to Hamlet. Both works stand at the head of their respective canons, whether people believe they deserve it or not. Everyone who loves movies has to deal with Citizen Kane and everyone who loves English literature has to make their terms with Hamlet. Both works are essentially shaggy dog stories that purport to be about one thing (Hamlet's revenge against Claudius, the mystery of Kane's last word) and resolve in a way that makes this one thing seem incredibly hollow. Both stories center on one very powerful and mysterious person and their slow descent into self-destruction. And both works seem to attract a lot of the same criticisms, that they're boring, the protagonist is unlikable, that nothing gets resolved. But I believe that both Hamlet and Citizen Kane have something of the same irresistible appeal for people: they force the audience to question themselves. The mystery is not in the events of the plot, but in pondering the question of what lies at the heart of a human being.

And I think that emphasis on the individual is also part of the reason why Citizen Kane is so often ranked higher than its American competition, higher than Casablanca or Gone With the Wind. It strikes at the great American fascination with the self-made man, a myth that's dominated our culture from The Great Gatsby to The Social Network. Like The Great Gatsby, Citizen Kane is essentially a demolition of that myth. Charles Foster Kane doesn't "make" himself; his fortune is thrust upon him. His fantasies of using that money to do good prove weak, his patriotism is exposed as war-mongering, and even the simple right of telling his own story is taken out of his hands. While this kind of story isn't necessarily more valid or worthy than any other narrative, nevertheless, it's the kind of story that Americans tend to claim as being most, well, American. And tied in with Citizen Kane's search for success is of course, the story of its own creator, Orson Welles, his blazes of glory, his failures and thwarted endeavors. Casablanca is the ultimate cinematic escape and Gone with the Wind is the ultimate cinematic event, but Citizen Kane is the ultimate cinematic quest.

I've dwelt more on Citizen Kane's story more than its visuals, probably because I find it easier to go after narrative than I do picking apart Welles' gorgeous, fascinating camera work. When I watch Citizen Kane, I'm always in danger of losing myself in one particularly weird or beautiful shot. Just look at the way Welles and Toland light those reporters in the newsroom, with beams of light echoing around their faces and hands. Or the Thatcher Library, which looks like it should be the set for a medieval miracle play. Susan Alexander's jigsaw puzzles, the sharply angled ceilings, Kane thunderously clapping into empty space. This is the reason why I don't watch Citizen Kane very often; I don't ever want to reach the point where its images fail to shock me.

Citizen Kane is often touted as a cinematic pioneer, blazing new trails and techniques in creative filmmaking. Welles and Toland's use of deep focus, their experiments with camera angles, wipes, montages, matte paintings, and animation all play a part in making Citizen Kane's reputation as one of the most technically innovative movies of all time. But what makes me marvel isn't that these filmmakers pioneered so many new methods, but that even now, Citizen Kane still looks exciting and new. So many times, a work of art that was once fresh and ingenious turns stale after those same innovations are recycled a thousand times over. It isn't just that Citizen Kane looks different from every movie that came before it. It looks different from every movie that came after it.

I'm going to end my commentary on Citizen Kane with a personal confession. The reason why I named my blog, "The Girl with the White Parasol." Anyone familiar with Citizen Kane knows Mr. Bernstein's famous speech in which he remembers one fleeting glimpse of a girl with a parasol, years and years ago. "I only saw her for one second. She didn't see me at all, but I'll bet a month hasn't gone by since that I haven't thought of that girl." When I chose that quote and title for my blog, I worried for a long time that people might think I was calling myself after that long-lost girl. And wouldn't that seem like the height of arrogance? No one ever questioned me on the subject but here is my chance to set the record straight. The girl with the white parasol isn't me. For me, the girl represents a brief flash of beauty in a person's life. One of those brief moments that stay with us forever, no matter where we end up or what we do. The reason I watch films is so that I can find those moments of beauty, whether they come from a Technicolor image or from the throb in an actor's voice or from a string chorus. That's why I named my blog, "The Girl with the White Parasol." That's why I love film. And that's why I love Citizen Kane.

"I think it would be fun to run a newspaper..."

I'm no Charles Foster Kane, nor do I own a newspaper, but I come bearing blog-relevant news. The weather may be getting colder, but it looks like the blogosphere will be heating up in the next few months with some promising new events. Orson Welles is almost as excited as I am. (P.S. It did take me a few extra minutes to realize he's brandishing a pipe in that still, not a gun.)

The Great Citizen Kane Debate (November 2011), Hosted by Brandie, Carrie, and Nikki at True Classics

"Here’s your chance to either defend Kane’s position as King of the Cinematic Mountain, or to knock it off its storied pedestal. At some point during the next month (until November 13th), put up a post on your blog either explaining why Kane deserves to be numero uno, or lay out your reasons why it is overrated. And if you are among those who feel that Kane is not the best movie of all time, tell us which film really IS, in your opinion, and defend your choice!

The entries will be judged by Carrie, Nikki, myself, and a couple of guest judges whom we haven’t determined yet. We’ll be looking at several factors, but first and foremost, we’re looking for enthusiastic, informative, and entertaining entries that will engage us–and your readers–in lively discussion. And we will award prizes to our top three favorites entries!"

I knew I was committed to this contest before I even finished reading the rules. It's a debate about Citizen Kane! The film for which my blog was named! It's going to be a challenge to come up with something intelligent to say about one of the most discussed films of all time, but that's what makes it so fun. Judging by all the creative and talented folks I've met hanging out at the True Classics blog, I know that my fellow bloggers are going to meet this challenge and then some.

The For the Boys Blogathon (November 19th-20th, 2011), Hosted by Katie and Hilary at The Scarlett Olive Podcast

"There’s a staggering amount of estrogen in our blogs and podcasts. We’d like to shake the content up a bit and expand our masculine audience. Many classic films fall under the manly umbrella: shoot-‘em-up westerns, shadowy noir, timeless war tales, and action-filled gangster ploys. Females are capable of enjoying these types of films, but we feel they were primarily geared towards men. So, here is what we ask of you:

• Think about the quintessential films in these genres

• Reflect upon why these films appeal to men

Guidelines/Rules: 

Write a blog (or podcast) regarding the masculine gender in film, genres that appeal to men, films in these genres*, or a combination of any of the above. If you are male or female and disagree with this completely … write about that!"

This is probably the opportune moment to admit that The Magnificent Seven is my holiday film of choice. Something about that thumping Elmer Bernstein score just gets me in the right shopping/decorating/snuggling mood. So I'm really looking forward to this manly blogathon. I have the feeling that this one's going to generate a lot of conversation and debate.
 

The Dueling Divas Marathon (December 20th-23rd, 2011), Hosted by Lara at Backlots

"I am hosting the Dueling Divas Blogathon, which I have scheduled to take place between December 20-23. It’s a ways off, so as to leave enough time to plan your blogging schedules accordingly. Participants may blog about any of the following types of Dueling Divas:

• Those who had a rivalry in real life, either over a particular film role or over a personality clash, ie Bette Davis and Joan Crawford
• Those who had a rivalry on the screen, ie Mildred and Veda from Mildred Pierce
• Any dual role (see what I did there? Duel? Dual? Be proud.) played by an actor or actress in a classic film, ie Hayley Mills in The Parent Trap.

It’s totally free reign, you can write about the divas themselves, compare and contrast one of each of their films, and if you’re going to write about dual roles, you can talk about the differences in their characters or the actor’s technique in portraying them…you get the idea."

I think this wins my vote for the Best Blogathon Name this year; it just rolls off the tongue. There's a lot of exciting possibilities for this one: evil twins, backstage feuds, hair-pulling fights. How can you resist?

The Humphrey Bogart Blogathon (December 23rd-25th, 2011), Hosted by Meredith at Forever Classics

"As most of you probably know by now, Humphrey Bogart is my favorite actor. In honor of his 112th birthday on December 25th, I've decided to host my first blogathon, which will run from December 23-December 25th. I realize that's it's three months away, but if you'd like to participate, I ask that you let me know by December 22nd. Your post can be about his films, his life or anything else Bogie-related."

Bogie really is the best medicine for those holiday blues and chills. What better way to celebrate the birth of Christ than to re-watch Bogart pistol-whipping a few bad guys? Is there a better hymn to brotherly love than The Treasure of the Sierra Madre? I don't think so.  Let's set aside some time this holiday season to celebrate one of cinema's greatest actors.