Merin Coats
It's easy to see why Citizen Kane triumphs so heavily in the critical realm of film. There are clearly powerful forces at work here. Orson Welles revolutionized the technical aspects of film-making with deep-focus, the use of the "wipe", as well as the way the story is told as flashbacks from a series of people, to name only a few. I confess that my rube-ish, uncultivated eye didn't pick up on all the nuances nor realize what I was seeing until after I did a little research. However, I did pick up on a few things right away, particularly how many shots were done at a low angle. This made the subjects loom in comparison with the viewer's eye. I found the low angle shot particularly prominent in the scene where Susan leaves Kane and he tears apart the room. He stumbles about savagely, more monster than man, so that the room seems fragile and delicate next to him. It's almost as if the room can barely contain him. The fact that Kane appears so un-human (not to be confused here with inhuman) is particularly juxtaposed against the fact that we are seeing him at a moment where his behavior is so vulnerable, personal and genuine.
Because Citizen Kane was the first of its kind in so many ways, I find myself wondering how much of the movie influenced popular opinion and how much the reverse was true, a concept discussed at length in our readings. Was the disillusionment of the American Dream a wake-up call for the public at the movie's dissemination or a merely a reflection of an already growing concern? Most likely, I suspect it was a combination of the two. Movies questioning the possible corruption in the government were already starting to appear. It would follow that some of the basic American ideals might come under the same scrutiny. Either way, Welles has more than twice over earned the honors regularly bestowed upon the film. But by the same token, one might say that the people who loved the film and love it still have earned those honors as well.