I read a film review of Citizen Kane by John C. Flinn Sr. This review was very interesting to me because it is from 1941, the year when the movie came out. I thought it was cool to read a review from the year it came out instead of decades later. The film reviewer has the perspective of someone in 1941 as opposed to someone now. These perspectives are very different because a lot has changed between 1941 and now. However, I think one thing that holds true is that this movie is very highly regarded in the film world and is often referred to as one of the greatest movies ever made. The review states that “[i]t happens to be a first-class film of potent importance to the art of motion picture” (Flinn). I think this sentence is evidence of how important and admired the film is because, even in 1941, right after the film came out, reviewers knew how important it was for the art itself. Flinn talks about the film’s new uses of montage, high-quality photography, and special effects. Further emphasizing the film’s observed greatness by reviewers.
One thing I found from this interesting review was the comparison of Charles Kane to a real-life person that was William Randolph Hearst. Like the main character, Hearst was a multi-millionaire newspaper publisher and many events that happened to Kane also happened to Hearst in his life. In the movie, Kane lives in a castle called Xanadu, and in real life, Hearst built and lived in a castle on the central coast of California called Hearst Castle. I visited this mansion a couple of years ago so it’s funny to see a replica of it show up in film. Another piece of evidence that supports Kane’s character being influenced by Hearst is the fact that there were protests against the film’s release from employees and executives of Hearst’s organization (Flinn).
Something else interesting I learned about the film from the review is that most of the actors in the movie hadn’t had previous screen experience. All the acting in the movie was very good which is surprising now after learning that they are mostly new actors. I like that the Welles took a chance on new actors instead of hiring career actors who had a lot of experience.
Lastly, there was a phrase that stood out to me in the review about the narration and story. Flinn discusses how Kane’s life story is told by 5 different people and we learn about different parts of his life from each of them and he writes that his life was “[p]ieced together, like a jigsaw puzzle” (Flinn). This wording hear reminded me of how during the movie, Susan was constantly doing jigsaw puzzles at Xanadu. I don’t know if the author did that intentionally or if it was by coincidence.
Overall, I enjoyed the film but I don’t know if I would put it in my top films of all time. I think I need to rewatch it a few times and pay attention to different, specific aspects of it to recognize its greatness more. I also think I would have a greater appreciation for it if I watched it in 1941 when a lot of the techniques and things the film did were very new and never done before.
Article:
Flinn, John C., Sr. “Variety.” Variety, 15 Dec. 2022, variety.com/1941/film/reviews/citizen-kane-1200413671.
I find it really interesting that you were able to find an article on the film the year it came out! I think that the jigsaw puzzle was not accidental in the film. When I watched the film, I thought it was strange how Susan was obsessed with jigsaw puzzles; I felt like there had to be a deeper meaning to it. After reading your review, the puzzle makes sense.
It also reminds me of what we discussed in class about the versions of self. Specifically, we talked about how there are as many versions of yourself as the people you encounter. Connecting this to the film, the director may be connecting this theory to Kane and Hearst.