I’m also of the opinion that “greatest movie of all time” is a phrase with no meaning and no possible answer. There are any number of reasons for liking or not liking a film, and these may or may overlap with the many reasons for admiring or not admiring a film.
Rottentomatoes.com lists its top movies of (mostly) recent years by the percentage of positive reviews they received, given a minimum of 20 reviews.
There are 82!, you heard me, 82!, films listed that received 100% positive reviews. (Positive is not the same as a 10 or five-star review, however.)
There would be fewer than 82 if I had any say in the matter. (I mean, Dave?)
Citizen Kane is one of the 82, of course. It has as good credentials as any for being in that elite. Yes, it does look dated. Yes, it has been overpraised and overimitated. No, Welles did not do any better films. Nor did he write this one. Yes, the film is overrated by way of apology for Hollywood’s moguls destoying his career. Still, even with all the caveats, I’d rather see Kane up there as #1 than many others that have been suggested for the honor.
Evil Death, please be so kind as to ingest an intact stocking whole. I’d like to think that this forum’s name also reflects the tenor of discussions therein.
I’ll cheerfully mention one of the only other films that readily comes to mind when thinking of the finest movies ever made:
Lawrence of Arabia
Forget that the chronology is more skewed than Ashcroft’s agenda. The combination of dazzling exteriors and downright superb acting (and casting) is only enhanced by a fabulous musical score. Something I find extremely curious is that I cannot, for the life of me, remember any of “Citizen Kane’s” musical score (save the hideous wailing of Kane’s girlfriend in her operatic outings).
Again, for a black and white movie to hold it’s own against so much modern color footage and do so without a memorable sound track is an achievement in itself. However obvious the plethora of cinematic techniques might be to one who has seen the film repeatedly, I’m confident that they were fairly stunning to the less sophisticated film goers of that day. I know my own first viewing of it in a theater was a revelation.
I’ll cheerfully entertain the mention of other films considered to be on a par with “Citizen Kane.” Marley23, thank you for pointing out the nonlinear plot development. Such a device must have been nearly as revolutionary as the first arrival of intercut scenes.
Libertarian, by “four wall rooms” I’m referring to a closed set. Typically, a room interior had one wall missing so the camera could point into it. I seem to recall that some of “Citizen Kane’s” interiors were shot out of a corner, thusly showing all four walls. Again, maybe this wasn’t the first time for this technique. I just find the film’s assemblage of novel and functional effects to be both entertaining and appropriate to good story telling.
That theory reached its apothesis in the 1970s with critic Pauline Kael’s monograph, Raising Kane. It’s now generally discarded by film scholars. There are elements of structure, style, and content in the shooting script for Citizen Kane which just don’t appear in Herman Mankiewicz’s screenplays before or after this one; while on the other hand, you can see in the shooting script a continuum from Welles’ work in theater and radio, and on through the rest of his films.
Mankiewicz probably was responsible for the insider’s knowledge of the newspaper business, and the correlates between Kane’s life and character and those of his former boss William Randolph Hearst.
For whatever it’s worth, when asked for my favorite movies, I don’t cite CK alone, I usually pick at least two others. I agree that “great ever” is pretty meaningless - no one has seen ever film ever in any case. 
But nonetheless, that’s how the lists phrase it (whereas we’re generally intelligent enough to say “my favorite movie,” the AFI is apparently not) and I was trying to make the sentence make sense.
What would you say Welles’s best film is, Evil Death?
Side story: yesterday, a classmate referred to George Orwell’s famous story as “Orson Welles’s Animal Farm.”
Overall, Touch of Evil. Jury’s out on whether his acting performance was better in The Third Man, but I presume we’re talking about writer/director credits.
I dunno, The Magnificent Ambersons is pretty good.
Evil Death, thank you for remembering “The Third Man.” Thanks to this thread, I’ve had its main theme running through my head all day (wearing track shoes, mind you). Would someone please ::cough Cervaise cough :: come in here and give us a thumbnail sketch of Cotten. I seem to recall him always playing the “good guy” until “The Third Man” or one of Hitch’s flicks. Please clarify.
O.K., time for my obligatory link to a list of 200 great films that I compiled a few years ago. This isn’t my personal favorites, but a list I made by looking at a lot of different lists of great films. Every one of these has been proclaimed by somebody as the greatest film ever made:
http://www.dcfilmsociety.org/rv_wendell200.htm
I know nothing about movies or what makes them great. I decided to watch Citizen Kane about a year ago because of everything I heard about it. I thought it was interesting, but I wasn’t very taken in by the storyline. Overall, I did not find it very entertaining.