It is pleasing that culture has, over the last few months, become more available to individuals, regardless of their access to excessive levels of wealth. With more time on their hands, people have been able to spend hours appreciating cultural mediums - books, films, TV programmes, online theatre productions - that, in a fictional manner, reveal a significant amount about a civilisation and its history.
If, like myself, you haven’t yet succumbed to the streaming services of Netflix, Amazon Prime or Britbox, you may appreciate the brilliance of BBC iPlayer in particular at releasing films and TV boxsets for an extended period of time. One of life’s great pleasures is scrolling through the A-Z of a certain category, making a list of everything to get around to watching, but that the hustle and bustle of life prevents from ever being watched. But we now have that time. Scrolling through the range of online films, I saw that ‘Citizen Kane’ had been made available for over a year. There is still plenty of time for readers of this blog to watch the two hour iconic film. I would definitely recommend you doing so. For a number of years, ‘Citizen Kane’ has garnered a certain reputation in my mind. Regularly chosen every decade by film critics for ‘Sight and Sound’ magazine as the greatest film of all time, there was huge controversy when Orson Welles’ masterpiece was overtaken by Alfred Hitchcock’s ‘Vertigo’ in 2012. Generally, I like to go into a film knowing as little as possible. I don’t like film trailers, not least in the cinema, for I believe they often spoil the best parts of the viewing experience. With ‘Citizen Kane’, that was mostly the case. Apart from making the sensible assumption that the movie would feature an individual (or more) with the surname Kane, I had no clue what would take place. Yet its reputation was impossible to escape. Critics - individuals who are paid to watch, review, analyse, investigate films, the experts of all things film - believe this two hour creation to be the greatest *ever* made. Inevitably, my expectations going in (the living room) were high. There were many aspects that made the film extremely riveting and enjoyable. Writing these reflections, I've deliberately tried to look at the thoughts and views of others as little as possible. There will no doubt be plenty of opportunities to read books, articles, essays analysing intricate details of its production afterwards. For now, I wanted to offer just my perceptions. The first was noticing that the fine Kenneth Branagh has certainly followed in Orson Welles’ footsteps. In ‘Citizen Kane’, Welles is the director, producer, co-screenwriter and Charles Foster Kane, the main protagonist. It makes Branagh directing and starring at Poirot in ‘Murder on the Orient Express’ look like child's play. The film starts with a death, the death of Charles Kane himself. This immediately gripped me. There was going to be no climatic moment later on where the viewer discovered whether our protagonist survived. He was dead, most definitely dead. I was intrigued then, to see how Welles would make the next two hours gripping enough, when the outcome was already known. Detective programmes like Columbo on Channel 4 would always manage this, when the culprit of a crime was known from the start, by discovering how the murderer would implicate themselves. I wanted that same tension about Kane’s life here. It was through a fascinating newsreel, that, within the first ten minutes, most of Kane's story had already been told. This was reflective of news at the time, where individuals would go to the cinema for summaries of the news. How Huw Edwards must mourn that the wonders of modern technology has meant his role cannot be seen in the cinema. With the clearest of voices, the audience learnt about Kane’s journey from humble beginnings to newspaper proprietor, amassing huge levels of wealth before his death in 1941. I liked the intelligence with which Welles was treating the audience. He clearly wasn't afraid for them to learn lots about this individual's life - which was form key parts of the plot later - early in the film. Instead of spoon feeding the audience with information throughout, I imagine he was testing who paid attention to scenes at the start, for they would come to define viewing later on. And yet. There is something missing from this summary. While we learn a great deal about the factual elements of Kane’s life, with the years key events took place highlighted, the newsreel can appear more like a Wikipedia entry. If its purpose is to delve into the key aspects of Kane’s life, it succeeds. But if it aspires to present *who* Charles Kane really was, it doesn’t quite hit the mark. It is in the spirit of this latter challenge that Jerry Thompson (William Alland) goes off on a journey to learn more about this most elusive and enigmatic of individuals. At points the film felt very much like a documentary, as though an excellent Panorama documentary about an influential figure was being constructed. Charles Kane felt like a real individual who had received great power throughout the course of his life. I’ve always been a fan of flashbacks within any cultural medium and it was in this spirit that the audience were able to learn more about his upbringing. Charles Kane initially had a humble upbringing in Colorado, where he enjoyed riding on a sledge in the snow. It is this sledge and aesthetic lifestyle that this with him. Yet, after the wealth of a goldmine is discovered in their area, Kane’s mother Mary (Agnes Moorehead), must to the disagreement of his father Jim (Harry Shannon) decides to send Charles away. Often the most successful figures in the world have experienced great abandonment from a young age. This made me empathetic towards Kane. I don’t have - or want - children, but if I did, they would never be sent away to boarding school or for any other reason. In my view, it is by being with parents that a child develops both a sense of independence and respect for the world. Clearly, thanks to the wealth discovered on their land, his parents thought otherwise, believing his life opportunities would be far superior with Walter Thatcher (George Coulouris), a banker who becomes his legal guardian. Interestingly, it is often through Thatcher's memoirs that key anecdotes are revealed that shape his existence. To improve their relationship, Thatcher buys young Kane a sledge. However glamorous, it is not the same as his possession from home. Inevitably, Kane takes opportunities for wealth and influence. Perhaps it is within human nature that when we are presented with the change to hold power, we grab it with both hands. Running The New York Inquirer, his actions very much remind me of when Rupert Murdoch took over ownership of The Sun in 1969, turning the publication from a broadsheet to a tabloid. Stories of scandal and horror are presented everyday; Kane through his publications is able to hold far more influence over the people than an elected politician. If a scandal is written about one day, by the next, it has been changed as a result of The Inquirer. The newspaper side of ‘Citizen Kane’ felt like it had been written for me. I was there in my element, as Welles covered the, surprisingly quiet, newsroom where individuals would rattle away on their typewriters. It’s yet another reason why I want to see James Graham’s ‘Ink’, which covers the rise of The Sun under Murdoch, eventually overtaking its prime rival - the Daily Mirror - in circulation. Kane’s key rival was The New York Chronicle, full of the best journalists. In just six years, he had hired them all to The Inquirer and increased circulation from under 30,000 to over 600,000. With a combination of TV channels, radio stations and papers across America, Kane's clout at influencing citizens is remarkable to witness. It is clear these rich fortunes however, are not sustainable in the long term. Though he is able to buy statues, icons of others, from all across Europe, his own life is not so perfectly carved in stone. It was fascinating to watch Mr Thompson find out about the key strain on his first marriage with Emily Kane (Ruth Warrick). As they age, and Charles’ moustache becomes no more flattering, Emily even resorts to reading The Chronicle over breakfast. Such an act is far more scandalous than an affair, even in the 1930s! The most powerful individuals within journalism can only remain outside the political arena for so long. Kane's campaign for Governor of New York is a surprising change from running all the newspapers, believing his influence can be used to win power electorally. His rally reminded me of Neil Kinnock’s ill fated Sheffield Rally in the 1992 election, where the Labour Party's complacency played a contribution to their eventual defeat. Discovered by his rival Jim Gets (Ray Collins) to be having an affair with young Susan Alexander (Dorothy Comingore), Kane is given an ultimatum: either drop out of the race or his affair will feature on every newspaper front page (bar The Inquirer of course). It surprised me then that Kane chose to fight on, ultimately losing by over a million votes. His success did not mirror that of Boris Johnson decades later. While The Inquirer gave accusations of fraud and unfairness in the count, it was clear his loss was legitimate. The public were put off by both his adultery and arrogance. At point, he speaks as if he owns ‘the people.’ It is clear then that populist rhetoric of an ‘elite’ being placed in conflict against a ‘people’ was just as pressing in a 1930s fictional America as it is today. Divorce and remarriage are a pinnacle part of most people’s life and Kane is no different. When marrying Susan, Kane learns of her aspirations towards a singing career instead of sorting out sheet music in a shop. Except, as becomes perfectly evident, Susan cannot sing. From music lessons with the forceful Signor Matiste (Fortunio Bonanova), it is evident Susan simply cannot be taught. Kane one again uses his wealth and power to ensure she embarks on a godawful operatic singing career. All the critics pan her performance. Indeed, even Jedediah Leland (Joseph Cotten), the arts critic for The Inquirer, is scathing. Falling asleep at the typewriter, Kane himself ends up finishing the dire review…before firing Leland. What does Kane want? It is a question Mr Thompson is trying to explore throughout the film. He clearly desired love and attention from the people, which increasing circulation figures of his publications revealed. Yet, at the same time, electoral defeat and divorce showed that this was only temporary. Coming from such a humble background, the desire for wealth and success have been drilled into him as the bedrock of a perfect life. Wealth he has most certainly, statues absolutely everywhere. It makes characters in F. Scott Fitzgerald's 'The Great Gatsby' looks like individuals in the Stone Age. Success and reputation Kane has most certainly achieved. But like Jay Gatsby, there is a void of personal happiness and meaning. He had become a facade, an illusion built up over decades. The ending doesn’t inspire happiness. Despite living with Susan in Xanadu, a huge mansion in Florida, she eventually leaves him, sick of the entrapment and expectations. Welles beautifully crafts and performs Kane ripping up and destroying their bedroom. He has become personally allergic and sickened by the extent of his material wealth. With others present, including many servants, he is unashamed of them witnessing his material riches. It’s no joke to say that if Channel 5 were making another series on excessive hoarders, the Xanadu mansion would be a perfect edition. He’s also unashamed of his servants witnessing that, personally, he has absolutely nothing. ‘Citizen Kane’ is an open, powerful exploration of an individual’s fall from grace. Far from a coming of age development, Kane is thrust into power and money without parental love and nurture. There is no meaningful journey. It should surprise none of us therefore that he is unable to offer love to others. Technically, the acting is excellent with beautiful long shots, clear voices and true emotions running through. The black and white camera doesn't take this away. Mr Thompson never discovers what ‘Rosebud’, Kane's last word, meant. They are too distracted by all the material possessions that need to be sold. In the end, it was the name of his sledge from home, thrust into the incinerator and reduced to a cloud of smog. Charles Foster Kane was just a human, he lived and then passed away into oblivion. While a deeply influential figure, in reality, he was nothing more than the rest of us: a citizen.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Author:Noah enjoys writing a blog and drinking tea Archives
September 2022
Categories
All
|