Citizen Kane: Film review: Is Citizen Kane The Greatest Film Ever Made?

The 1941 film Citizen Kane was written, and directed by Orson Wells, who even co - stars in this film. Many film critics consider this film to be the greatest film ever made. This film symbolically narrates the lives of William Randolph Hearst and Orson Wells by narrating the life of Charles Foster Kane, a juggernaut in the American newspaper business. Interestingly, this film begins with the death of Charles Foster Kane (played by Orson Wells) and is narrated mostly through flashbacks of the people who knew him best.

A reporter, Jerry Thompson (played by William Alland) tries to find information about Kane's life and his dying word "Rosebud...". Thompson first encounters Kane's previous wife Susan Alexander (played by Dorothy Comingore) but she does not tell him anything other than," Get out!" So, Thompson then goes to an archive of Walter Thatcher (played by George Coulouris), a rich banker and Kane's guardian growing up. Thompson learns a lot about Kane's childhood. He discovers that Kane grew up in poverty as his parents were in charge of a boarding house. His parents ended up giving Kane away to Thatcher. At the age of 25, Kane enters the newspaper business and completely takes over the New York Inquirer. He hires elite journalists for the Inquirer. In fact, he persuades them to leave a paper called the Chronicle for the Inquirer. Everything starts off right for Kane as he is in charge of one of the most powerful Newspaper industries in the world, he marries the president's niece, Emily Monroe Norton (played by Ruth Warrick) and he launches his campaign to be the next Governor of New York. His newspaper even creates two separate headlines in case if Kane wins the election. However, Murphy's law soon comes into effect for Kane and he ends up having to make some tough decisions.

Overall, I really enjoyed this film. Personally, I think this is the greatest film ever made. I liked how the entire film is told through flashbacks. That's not something you see a whole lot in films today and it made me appreciate this film so much more. There's a mystery throughout the film that critics are calling the greatest mystery in all of cinema. This is a film that no matter how many times you watch it, you still leave with questions about it, particularly about Kane's dying word "Rosebud...". This is a film that definitely challenges you and really gets you thinking. That's what I liked most about it. I would definitely recommend this film to anyone looking for a great drama.

Film Noir Analytical Blog Entry

So what exactly is film noir? Film noir is actually a french term that literally means "black film". Generally, films in a film noir had a "dark" aura about them, most likely because film noirs originated after World War II and they correctly described society at that point in time. Personally, I strongly believe that film noir is not a genre. I believe that it describes an era. Film noirs refer to a set number of films that correctly described society after the second World War. There are several characteristics of a "film noir" that strongly persuade me to believe that "film noir" is not a genre.

Generally, a film noir is centered around a cold, pessimistic male character. These male characters typically encounter a beautiful and seductive femme fatale. We see all of this in films like the Maltese Falcon (when Spade (Humphrey Bogart) encounters Brigid O'Shaughnessy (Mary Astor) for the first time), and Chinatown (Gettis (Jack Nicholson) encounters the real Evelyn Mulwray (Faye Dunaway) and ends up investigating a murder). However, we do not see a femme fatale in either Touch of Evil nor Night in the City. There is an obvious lead male character in both of these films though. The purpose of the femme fatale in a film noir is that the femme fatale will use her womanly wiles to manipulate the male character. We clearly see this in Chinatown, as Gettis is persuaded by Evelyn Mulwray to investigate her husband's murder. We also see this in The Maltese Falcon, as Spade meets with O'Shaughnessy and she tells him that she and Thursby were partners. She says that Thursby possibly killed Archer but she does not know how Thursby died. Spade agrees to investigate the murders of Archer and Thursby.

Some other key characteristics of a film noir are shifty alliances and moral ambiguity. We clearly see this in The Maltese Falcon. Spade is confused and at war with himself. He can't decide on whether to help himself, O'Shaughnessy, her enemies, or the police. We also see this Touch of Evil. However, it is not the central male character dealing with moral ambiguity or shifty alliances. The lying Hank Quinlan (played by the one and only Orson Wells) continually transitions alliances throughout the film. This is also evident in Chinatown as Jake Gettis has to deal with moral ambiguity. He has to deal with the law and he is continually transitioning his alliances with the law throughout the film. In Night and the City, this is somewhat evident as Harry Fabian (played by Richard Widmark), a hustler who is constantly coming up with different schemes that eventually go nowhere is constantly changing alliances all throughout the film.

Most importantly, I believe that film noir refers to an era of films that correctly described the darkness of society after World War II. I believe that these films were very specific to that time period. I feel that directors would make these movies in response to the atmosphere of society. Another reason why I think that film noir refers to an era is because films are clearly marked as "first" "second" , etc. For example, The Maltese Falcon was considered to be the "first" film noir. Touch of Evil was considered the "last" film noir. Film noirs only lasted from the mid 1940's to the late 1950's. There have been several attempts though to remake these films. However, I don't think these films succeed as film noirs. They take several characteristics of film noir but I don't think that they can be classified as a film noir because I feel that a film noir was very specific to a certain time period. I feel that these films can never be re-created because film noirs can't be appreciated the same way as it was back in the 40's and 50's. Director's can try and remake these films but they will not be appreciated as much as they were back in the 40s and 50s.

Night in the City: Film Reveiw

The 1950 film noir Night in the City was written by Gerald Kersh and Jo Eisinger. This film was directed by Jules Dassin. This film was based on the book written by the writer of the film Gerald Kersh. This film takes place in London and narrates the life of a hustler, Harry Fabian (played by Richard Widmark). Murphy's law is certainly in effect for Fabian throughout this film as nothing ever goes right for him. Until, one night in which he believes he has the opportunity of a lifetime. He encounters the most famous wrestler of all time, Gregorious (played by Stanislaus Zbyszko), and his son Kristo (played by Herbert Lom). He intends to take over professional wrestling now that he has a "connection" to the most famous wrestler of all time. However, in the end, Harry Fabian discovers that he is only fooling himself.

To be honest, this wasn't the greatest film I've ever seen. I thought it was good but I definitely would not recommend to anybody. I thought the plot of the story at times was kind of dry and it didn't do a very good job of attracting the viewer. I honestly had trouble following the plot of this film and many times I had to stop and rewind the film. I would definitely not recommend this film to anyone.