Citizen Kane: 81 Years Later

By Charlie Schutt

“Here, for Xanadu's landlord, will be held 1940's biggest, strangest funeral; here this week is laid to rest a potent figure of our Century - America's Kublai Kahn - Charles Foster Kane.”

Earlier this week, I got the chance to watch “the film”. Hopefully we all know which movie I’m talking about: “Citizen Kane.” Released in 1941 to complete critical acclaim, it has remained a constant favorite throughout the last eight decades. Written and directed by Orson Welles, the film follows the rise and fall of a wealthy journalist named Charles Foster Kane (also played by Welles for most of the film). Today, I want to take you through my thoughts on the film, and why I believe that “Citizen Kane” is what made American film what it is today.

When I think of words to describe “Citizen Kane”, I often come up with “interesting”. Because truly, that’s what it is. It has an interesting lead character, an interesting story, interesting visuals, and an interesting way of handling all three. Orson Welles was the pioneer of new ideas, adapting stage productions like, “Caesar”, “Macbeth”, and “Romeo and Juliet” in the 30s, as well as dabbling in radio, creating a complete dramatic recording of “War of the Worlds” and countless others. So, when he broke into directing with “Citizen Kane”, he was already experienced with the kinds of stories that audiences wanted to hear, and it paid off. He crafted an interesting mystery, told almost entirely through flashbacks, with a genuine message behind the payoff. He invented camera shots in this film, and occasionally got lost in his own creativity, doing mirror shots that had really no purpose other than to look “interesting”. There’s the word again. All in all, I enjoyed the film for what it was, and I think, for many years, it could have been considered the best film of all time.

So what makes it so great?

Characters: In the film, you’re given a core of four main characters; Charles Kane, Jed Leland, Susan Kane, and Emily Kane. Charles starts out the film as a child, playing in the snow at his cabin. However, he is quickly whisked away to a comfortable life of wealth and fame, growing up with the knowledge that he will come into an enormous fortune when he comes of age (25). As the film progresses, we watch as he purchases a newspaper company called the “Inquirer”, and takes over operations. Kane makes it an institution dedicated to yellow journalism, which uses bombastic titles and exaggerated stories to grab the attention of the reader and increase circulation. Within a few years, he’s married to the niece of the sitting President, and has a child. However, one night, he meets a singer and begins to struggle with infidelity. During this time, he also runs for governor of New York. We watch as his marriage deteriorates, and his scandal is revealed, effectively ending both his family life, and his political career. He marries again, this time to the singer, but makes the same mistakes that he did before. He neglects what his wife wants in favor of what he wants, and she leaves him after attempting suicide. Charles lives out the rest of his days alone, with a palace full of wealth, but no happiness. Of all the characters in this movie, Charles is my favorite (and not just because of his name). You see the real regret that he has, but you also realize that he can’t change. He’s locked in to his bad habits, and he has to watch his life fall apart as a result. It’s a very sympathetic story, and Orson Welles portrays the character perfectly.

Although Charles is my favorite character, Jed is a close second. From the beginning of the film, he is Charles’ wingman and best friend. They are close friends for a long time, until having a falling out about halfway through the film. The last straw is drawn when Jed writes a scathing review about Charles’ wife in the paper. Jed is fired, and has no part in Charles’ life until after his death. Although Jed wanted to move on from the “Inquirer”, he understands how many years of his life have been given away to Charles, and how much of his own talent has been spent for another man. His character is the one person giving Charles a moral compass, so once their friendship ends, things go downhill for everyone.

Finally, we come to the wives. Charles’ first wife is named Emily. She is the niece of the President, and loves Charles for his charm and wit. She marries him and stays with him for ten years, having a son with him, and slowly understanding that Charles never actually loved her. Her arc is the saddest, because she handles his affair with the utmost grace. Instead of getting angry about what happened, she acts as though she had almost expected it, and simply offers Charles the advice of pulling his name from the ballot box. She quickly takes their son and leaves Charles, not appearing for the rest of the film. Susan falls in love with Charles much the same way. He charms her one night, and showers her with compliments about her musical abilities. She engages in an affair with him, and is the reason that he is outed and loses the election. Regardless, when Emily leaves, Charles marries Susan, and forces her to become an opera singer, although she is inclined against it. He builds her a theater, and puts on performances there until her attempt at suicide. When he realizes the pain that he is causing her, Charles takes her back to his residence in Xanadu, where they both live until Susan grows tired of being alone all the time. She cannot handle Charles’ eccentric behavior, so she leaves him, and opens her own bar, where she lives the rest of her life. Again, her arc is painful, because we’ve already seen one woman fall into Charles’ trap. Susan is just his second try at a successful relationship, and he fails once again.

Cinematography and Sound: For a movie in black and white, this seems like a strange thing to say, but the colors were excellent. Lighting is used in ways that highlight certain things on screen, drawing your attention wherever Welles wants it to be. Welles also chose a very artistic approach to the film’s cinematography. He used more than one mirror shot in the film, and to be honest, I’m not sure how they pulled it off. Stylistic shots like that weren’t all that common in the 40s, considering that people were just getting settled into the idea of film, let alone actually experimenting with it. That’s what makes the directing of this film so revolutionary. Orson Welles was pushing the limits of what a person could do with film at the time. What he came up with is incredible at best, and satisfactory at worst. The quality of the film is incredible for something that was made in 1941, and it still holds up to a degree. What is most impressive about this film, however, is the sound. The first film with recorded dialogue was “The Jazz Singer” in 1927, fourteen years before “Citizen Kane” released, so this is still the early days of “talkies”. However, the sound was so good that the film was nominated for Best Sound at the Academy Awards. The actors' voices are crystal clear, which is necessary in telling a good story. There are sound effects more than once, (lightning, sirens, animal noises, etc) and they’re always well recorded and placed in the film. Sound editing can be tricky, but the sound team did an excellent job.

Score: To keep with the theme of sound, I would be remiss not to mention the score. One of the first things I noticed about the film was the intensity of the score when uncomfortable or suspenseful scenes were taking place. When the credits rolled, and I saw Bernard Herrmann’s name, I quickly understood why the suspense was so palpable. Composer Bernard Herrmann was nominated for five Academy Awards over the course of his life, and spent most of his career working with Alfred Hitchcock on horror films such as, “The Man Who Knew Too Much”, “Vertigo”, “North by Northwest”, “Psycho”, and “The Birds”. His most famous piece is from a film called “Twisted Nerve”, and most people know the tune without realizing that they do. It gained mainstream popularity when it was reused in Quentin Tarantino’s “Kill Bill Vol.1”. However, before all these accomplishments, he was picked by Orson Welles to score “Citizen Kane”. What astounds me is that “Citizen Kane” was Herrmann’s first film score. He had scored a few radio productions, but “Citizen Kane” was his first project in six years at the time. To be honest, this film might have been the break he was needing to get into the mainstream. It gave him his first Academy Award nomination, and put his name in front of millions of eyes for years to come. Through his score full of deep horns and cymbals, he invokes fear and intrigue in the audience, and allows you to feel the pain that Charles Kane feels throughout the movie. It does exactly what a score is supposed to do: create atmosphere. Although I’m sure the film’s score could stand on its own, when paired with an incredible movie, it makes for a surreal and engrossing experience.

Plot and Themes: When Welles sat down with his writing partner (Herman Mankiewicz) to write this film, I can only imagine that they had a clear picture of the story that they wanted to tell. The film never hides its purpose for being in front of you. It opens on Xanadu, and the first word spoken is “Rosebud”. The film then explains to you that no one knows the meaning of Kane’s last word, and then convinces you that we need to find out. The story hooks you from the beginning with an interesting mystery, and a peculiar set of characters. From Charles’ now senile ex-colleague, to his alcoholic ex-wife, we get a pretty clear picture that almost everyone in Charles’ life has left him. This feeds into the theme of vanity. Because of Charles’ inability to see the needs of others, he loses everyone that he cares about, and dies alone, surrounded by the material. Other themes of the movie include corruption, power, and media. We watch as “The Inquirer'' influences the general will of the public, and how they perceive Kane. The media is used to sway opinions more than once, and it’s ultimately the media business that drives a wedge between Kane and Leland. We see that the election system is corrupt, and the film shows us candidates that are willing to ruin the reputation of their opponents in order to win. It’s understood that people are easily corrupted in their personal lives as well, when you consider the affair that Kane had with Susan. Finally, we see that power can easily go to the head of the person that has it, and that “with great power, comes great responsibility.” Whether that’s responsibility to loved ones, friends, or the business empire that you are running. Charles Kane is a man that never takes responsibility for his own actions, and that is what sinks him in the end.

So does it still matter?

The short answer: Yes. Now for the longer answer. When “Citizen Kane” came out, it was revolutionary. The techniques used in the film were brand new at the time, but over the years the techniques have been used more and more, and often better than in “Citizen Kane”. However, that’s exactly the point. The techniques that were popularized by “Citizen Kane” are still being used today by some of the most popular directors of all time. The Coen brothers, Francis Ford Coppola, and Steven Spielberg have all cited the film as influential on their own films. Besides this, many directors have listed it as one of the greatest films ever made, including Woody Allen, Kenneth Branagh, Sam Mendes, Martin Scorsese, and Sydney Pollack. Consider the fact that I only listed directors that have won the Academy Award for Best Director. When eight of the best directors of all time have a genuine respect for the film, I would say that it has a pretty hefty impact. In conclusion, I would argue that “Citizen Kane” has made an impact on film, but more than that, I believe that we don’t have any idea how foundational the film is in American culture, let alone film. If you have two hours to spare, watch this film. It’s a cornerstone of Hollywood, and an all-around great time.