Citizen Kane voted Best Film.....again (1 Viewer)

[Nathan V]

GO FELLINI!!!

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

I've always liked the Sight and Sound list. While I may not agree with a few on the list, they are not without merits. Overall, the list works for me.

~Edwin

 

[Christ Reynolds]

wow, some of those critics sure love welles. sure he made citizen kane. as far as im concerned, its mediocre at best compared to some of the other films mentioned. i'd have picked vertigo all day long before kane. nice to see 2001 up there. and whats with the list of top 10 directors? welles cant be compared to hitchock or fellini or kurosawa in that category, yet he is #1. and coppola ahead of hitchcock and bergman? someone is biased. that lost of best directors could be rearranged drastically.

 

[Larry Sutliff]

The S&S List is good, but I think that GRAND ILLUSION ,THE THIRD MAN and CITY LIGHTS should be in the Top 10.
EDIT:Other titles that should be on this list:SUNSET BOULEVARD and LAWRENCE OF ARABIA. But the only film that I think should be removed from the list is POTEMKIN(good, but overrated IMHO). So in 2012 they should have a Top 20 list.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I was surprised to see Bronenosets Potyomkin in there, but it's certainly worthy, having as much impact on filmmaking prior to 1941 as Citizen Kane has had after 1941.

 

[Terrell]

Let me ask a question. Is there anyone that thinks Citizen Kane isn't the greatest film ever, and just gets voted that way because of it's name, and because it's been thought of that way for so long?

Just curious.

 

[Tom Ryan]

Citizen Kane, whatever you think about it, certainly has staying power. It's been #1 on the Sight & Sound list for every decade since about ten or twenty years after it first came out (I guess maybe it first hit #1 on the 1962 list?). And as I see the film more and more, and, listening to Ebert's commentary on the DVD, recognize its genius, I'm not sure it doesn't deserve every single accolade it receives.

 

[Larry Sutliff]

I agree with Tom. KANE is nowhere near my personal favorite film, but I understand why so many people consider it the best. The photography, the editing, the acting, the dialogue-the film is pretty close to perfection.

 

[Jarod M]

Well, I won't argue the point about Coppola, but Welles did a lot of incredible work, and I'm not talking about just Kane, Ambersons, and Touch of Evil.
And about Kane being number 1, believe me, the people voting on this are not mindless drones. If they didn't really like Kane that much, they would not vote for it. And if you look at how each individual voted, you will notice that Kane was not included on several top 10s. And the backlash against the film would have started by now if there was going to be any backlash at all.

 

[Steve Christou]

Kane is always number one, I admire the film, but my pick for greatest film of all time would be David Lean's Lawrence of Arabia.
Vertigo is closing the gap on Kane, who knows maybe in 10 years there might be an upset, Jimmy Stewart the Usurper, maybe?
What was Vertigo's position in 1992's list, anyone know?
ps. Wonder which list means more to the film buff, the critics or directors?

 

[teapot2001]

Vertigo was ranked #7 in 1982 and #4 in 1992, increasing each time.

~T

 

[Steve Christou]

Thanks Thi, hmmm have to watch my dvd of Vertigo again to see why it's nipping at Kane's heels.
Judy: Where are you going?
Scottie: One final thing I have to do, and then I'll be free of the past.

 

[Adam_S]

I'm happy that The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence is on the list this time around, though disapointed that the Searchers fell out of top ten favor, it was number 5 last time iirc.

As to Citizen Kane, well I've only seen it once, but I've noticed that with many magnificently crafted films, they ALL improve each time you see them, finding nuances and subtleties that may never have been apparent on first viewing. I think some of the significance of CK is that it is first spectacular failure that ambitiously flew in the face of the Hollywood system. Almost as though it's the first European film, or film created solely as art, by a completely American artist and backed fully by a major studio. I think some of the attention lavished on Citizen Kane can be attributed to the audacity to which it flew in the face of many ingrained traditions, and that it was the first to do that. I don't think it's very affecting or effective in telling a story, it's almost overwhelemingly selfsatisfied, like Pulp Fiction.

Anyone else surprised that "The Shawshank Redemption" isn't at least in the list comprising those that got at least three votes? to me that's the best film of the last twenty years.

Adam

 

[SteveGon]

Let me ask a question. Is there anyone that thinks Citizen Kane isn't the greatest film ever, and just gets voted that way because of it's name, and because it's been thought of that way for so long?

I think it's the greatest film ever made. Not my favorite film, but it certainly deserves its status.
Too bad The Third Man didn't make the list this time though I believe it was on some prior lists. To me, it is the perfect film noir and a supremely well-crafted movie as well. How could you forget that beautiful photography, that uniformly excellent cast, that memorable dialogue, that heart-breaking final shot, and that offbeat zither score?

 

[Ray Chuang]

I think what makes Citizen Kane so great is the fact the storytelling and cinematography was extremely revolutionary for its time. The use of the flashback-style storytelling was very effective, and the there are many scenes in the movie that are still studied today for its superb use of lighting. I think what hurt Citizen Kane in its initial release was the fact William Randolph Hearst knew it was a "disguised" biography of him and Hearst used Hedda Hopper--a legendary Hollywood gossip columnist with considerable influence in her heyday and close friend of the Hearst family--to rip the movie to pieces.
I consider Lawrence of Arabia almost as good because director David Lean was one of the first directors to really use widescreen cinematography to full effect. You really have to see the movie in a real movie theater to understand why it took everyone's breath away with its widescreen vistas.

 

[Mike Kelly]

My biggest surprise is that it appears the critics and directors are still weighing heavily on the older established classics. The most recent film on either top ten list is 1980's Raging Bull (#7,Director's List). There was some speculation that perhaps Tarkovsky would have an impact, but this didn't happen. I'm not sure if any of the so-called critically acclaimed English language films of the past 20 years (Schindler's List, Pulp Fiction, Blue Velvet, Unforgiven, Fargo) will fare that much better in 2012).

 

[Seth Paxton]

You know, I finally got around to watching the Battle for Citizen Kane that comes with the DVD (a PBS special on Wells/Hearst/CK).

It's not like CK was ever considered a bad film. Clearly there is only one reason it failed at the box office, and that's the enormous influence over Hollywood that Hearst still had.

He brought out every kind of cheap and dirty threats he could muster against RKO and H'wood in general. Called Wells a communist, among other things, in his "news"papers, threatened things like letting Americans know that H'wood was really run by Jews and immigrants (which scared the Hebrew population that was a big part of H'wood) in a time when Americans were a bit freaked out by such things (coming off the depression people were uptight about immigrants taking jobs, for example).

Just really a scumbag at that point in life. We always say "look, CK didn't win an Academy Award, which shows the Academy is morons". Well, they did have the balls to nominate the hell out of it, but no one was willing to back it for a win. It's only win went to the screenwriter. People BOO'd when Wells was mentioned (or the film) during nominations because he was seen as a troublemaker. Not for the daring film that he made, but for aggrevating Hearst and bringing his wrath down upon the rest of H'wood. Everyone was running scared from Hearst and that got Wells and CK blackballed big time. Much worse than I had previously thought. I thought some negative articles were written on the film and no advertising was offered. If only that were true. It went A LOT farther than that. Movie houses couldn't show it because Hearst would not take their adverts in his papers for ANY OTHER FILMS EVER if they did.

So it's not really a case of people not recognizing how great the film was. It's a case of Hearst using his newspaper propaganda machine for one last cause.

I knew that much of CK was Hearst, but I never realized the extent that it was true. Making up stories and implying scandalous ideas with no proof, a regular thing for Hearst apparently. He even called for the assassination of William McKinley in his papers, and when it happened for real the political backlash against him cost him his political career.

So that's what the film was up against for recognition. It never stood a chance and it's truly a miracle the film survived to be seen at all. Initially Hearst made a move to buy the copies and have them burned.

But people that were viewing it were saying right away that it was one of the greatest things they'd ever seen.

And, of course, it also probably cost us many other great Wells films as Hearst basically ruined Wells. He would forever after be in the position of begging/fighting for work rather than having the power that making a major hit film would have brought - think Kubrick, Lucas, Spielberg, or Kurosawa, for example.

Wells was wearing out his welcome, but had Kane been fully supported rather than fully attacked, it's quite likely it would have been an immediate smash and swept the Oscars. Thus entrenching him in Hollywood, reaffirming to RKO why they gave him so much power in the first place. Sure Wells might have gone on to self-destruct in some other way, but you never know how many films down the line that would have been.

 

[teapot2001]

I was looking for more information behind the top ten of the past 25 years at the Sight and Sound website. I didn't find any, but I saw something interesting in the poll by visitors with the movies selected from the top of the critics' list.

This is based on 139849 votes:
1. The General (Keaton) 7.3%
2. Vertigo (Hitchcock) 6.9%
3. La Regle du jeu (Renoir) 6.7%
4. Sunrise (Murnau) 6.5%
5. Tokyo Story (Ozu) 6.4%
6. Seven Samurai (Kurosawa) 6.4%
7. The Godfather and The Godfather Part II (Coppola) 6.2%
8. L'Atalante (Vigo) 5.9%
9. 2001: A Space Odyssey (Kubrick) 5.6%
10. Rashomon (Kurosawa) 5.4%
11. Touch of Evil (Welles) 5.1%
12. The Searchers (Ford) 4.7%
13. A bout de souffle (Godard) 4.5%
14. L'avventura (Antonioni) 4.5%
15. The Passion of Joan of Arc (Dreyer) 4.3%
16. The Story of the Late Chrysanthemums (Mizoguchi) 3.9%
17. M (Lang) 3.0%
18. Pather Panchali (S. Ray) 2.2%
19. Jules et Jim (Truffaut) 1.4%
20. Citizen Kane (Welles) 1.2%
21. Le Mepris (Godard) 0.6%
22. La dolce vita (Fellini) 0.5%
23. 8 1/2 (Fellini) 0.3%
24. Au hasard Balthazar (Bresson) 0.2%
25. Singin' in the Rain (Kelly, Donen) 0.2%
26. Battleship Potemkin (Eisenstein)

~T

 

[Steve Christou]

Interesting list Thi, well the biggest upset is Citizen Kane all the way down to 20, what does that tell us hmmm?
Vertigo has vanquished Kane finally, well in this list anyway.
Buster Keaton numero uno? Was that meant to be funny?
Duck Soup is the greatest comedy ever IMO.
I've seen 11 of those films listed, my favorite film from that list is 2001 A Space Odyssey, with Singin' in the Rain, The Godfather and Vertigo up next.

 

[DeeF]

I'm not surprised about the "popular" list voting in Buster Keaton. I'm more surprised that the critics are not including more Charlie Chaplin (Modern Times is at #35).

While Citizen Kane remains powerful, and Vertigo ascends the ladder, Chaplin and Keaton seem to be descending. There was a time (in my lifetime) when Chaplin was considered the greatest moviemaker of all time, and his insistence on silents during the sound era only intensified his artistic pre-eminence. What happened? I wonder.