https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKra6_NAey8

In this interview that was originally filmed in 1958 Orson Welles, the director, writer, and lead actor of Citizen Kane, divulges what was going on with studio politics at the time and how the innovation of the film came to be. I find that the talk of studio politics in this interview to be very interesting. Welles tells the interviewer how there were people in the studio trying to shut dow the production during filming and how this is a result of constant “revolutions and counter revolutions.” In fact, he says that people were trying to take down the head of the studio largely because of the insane contract given to Welles, another interesting part of this interview that reveals more of what Hollywood was like at the time. Welles said that he was very resistant to agree to a contract because he wanted total control over his film but the studio kept coming back with offers until he had just that, total control. Later in the interview he remarks how special this was and says he never had an opportunity like that again.

He also sheds a tiny bit of light on the underhandedness that could go on at the time in such a tense political landscape. A newspaper man who believed Kane was heavily based upon him went as far as trying to frame Welles for a crime so the film wouldn’t release. Welles also remarks that this film isn’t allowed to be shown in Russia, again showing the tense political landscape.

Though Welles does not seem adverse to the politicalizes of his film and when asked says that it was meant to be a social document and an attack on the acquisition of property and corruption but he didn’t “try to find a story to match the idea.” He then says, “Of course I think that the storytellers first duty is always to the story.”

I think one of the most interesting part of the interview is the credit Welles gives to inexperience. When asked about the sheer innovation seen in this movie and how he has the confidence to do it he simply says ignorance. He says, “It’s only when you know something about a profession I think that you’re timid or careful.” He continues to remark that the only limit he had was his imagination ad he was gifted with a cinematographer who “didn’t care if he was criticized if he failed.” He also decided to cast almost the entirety of the cast from a theatre and none of them had ever been in front of a camera but he said, “That was deliberate, we didn’t want anybody who knew anything.”

In general, I think this interview is very interesting as it offers a new and unique perspective on how to go about making a film, especially one that has an immense amount of innovation. I think it forces the viewer, if they are a filmmaker, to ask what were experience and fear is holding them back from making. It also brings top questions about Hollywood and how we make films, is divided control the best option or would total control of a film from start to finish like Welles had make a better film. This is certainly a worthwhile interview to watch, especially since so much is covered in a rather short interview.