Back to Reviews

Reviews Comments: "Greatest Movie Ever" Citizen Kane film/book review by Steve Potter

There's a weird thing with movies these days that when a bunch of critics call it the greatest movie of all time, you're an idiot if you don't like it. Trust me on this; you're not an idiot if you don't like Citizen Kane.

My biggest problem with this movie is that I don't give a shit. I really don't. Throughout the entire movie, I was just asking myself, "Why should I care about any of these people?" Kane's an asshole, and that's fine. No one ever said main characters had to be nice. But normally when a main character is an asshole, I should still be invested. At least a little.

Why should I care about Kane? Because he died alone? So what? He deserved it. Because he wasn't born an asshole, but it was a result of his upbringing? So? There's only one scene of him being halfway decent, and that's when he was a kid.

Kane's a ridiculously static character, which I consider a serious problem in a character study. Nothing changes Kane; he's always an asshole. The only thing that changes is his environment and how the public views him.

I have other problems with this movie, too. Some of the actors in the smaller supporting roles just give performances that can only be described as goofy. The newsreel at the beginning of the film pretty much spells out the entire plot, leaving nothing to the imagination. The crux of the film is reliant on a plot hole.

It's a well-made movie, but GREATEST movie ever? Not by a long shot. "12 Angry Men." "Casablanca." "Lawrence of Arabia." THOSE are movies that live up to the hype. Citizen Kane? Not so much.

Anyway, that's just my opinion, so flame me if you want.


  • Diabolo
  • 30th Jul 12
Can you try to review the so called "innovation" that the movie brought up to the cinema? even if technically it was already done before by other movies.
  • Tuckerscreator
  • 30th Jul 12
Jerkass Woobie, that's what was intended. Though Kane is static? I beg to differ. He starts out a wild idealist in his youth, ready to change the world with his papers. By his forties, he's now the establishment, and becoming more authoritarian in his thought, but starting to sense the need for a love in his life. At the end of his life, he's a rigid gripping old man, but secretly mourning that he's lost all he wanted.

The newsreels is supposed to spell out the plot, just like the simulation at the beginning of Titanic spells out the sinking. It's so we the audience can tell at what point we are in the narrative.
  • longstreth
  • 14th Aug 12
According to Sight and Sound, it's no longer the greatest movie of all time!

I'm okay with that; I liked Vertigo more anyway.
  • MHMhasf1998
  • 26th Nov 13
Just asking longstreth, what is the greatest movie of all time NOW?
  • Wackd
  • 27th Nov 13
  • MHMhasf1998
  • 11th Mar 14
Thank you. I should have seen that from your comments, if I wasn't sleepy at the time.
  • luomo
  • 12th Mar 14
Well I must say Vertigo was much more entertaining than Citizen Kane, which put me to sleep. The "greatest movie ever" moniker is always BS, but I guess someone must wear the crown and Vertigo is as good a choice as any.
  • doctrainAUM
  • 12th Mar 14
Citizen Kane, unlike The Grapes of Wrath, managed to keep my attention the whole way through. It's a movie not afraid to be funny on occasion. That may seem minor, but its reputation leads a lot of people thinking otherwise.
  • terlwyth
  • 2nd Jun 14
Vertigo definitely fits better than this crap. Although Tucker is right that there is a bit of a change in attitude, ultimately the motive doesn't not shift. Ultimately it is about a man in love with himself who wants the rest of the world to agree.

But if I wanted a plot like that, I could watch Oliver Stone's Nixon.

I'm glad to see the one review speaks for me.
  • uncannybeetle
  • 2nd Jun 14
'Nothing changes Kane.' That's not true at all. He starts out an idealist and loses that idealism as he gets older and experiences hardships and disappointments. That's what the 'editorial' he writes when he takes over the newspaper and later rips up in his old age is meant to show.
  • Pannic
  • 2nd Jun 14
Nah, there's totally no difference between the young Kane who comes up with the Declaration of Principles and the middle-aged Kane who fires a journalist for writing a negative review of his wife's opera performance. Complete static character.
  • SonOfFalstaff2
  • 12th Sep 14
The idea that the movie relies on a plot hole is untrue. It's pretty heavily implied that the butler was the one who heard his last word and in the opening scene he's not alone, merely the scene is shot in such a way to emphasize the loneliness he felt at the time of his death.
  • TheRealYuma
  • 4th Nov 15
The funny thing is that Citizen Kane was hated during its time. It wasn't until years later that it became recognized as one of the greatest films of all time.

In order to post comments, you need to

Get Known