# SDMB Movie Club, a.k.a. We've Got Movie Sign! **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [July 17, 2001, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755 "2001-07-17T03:01:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![GraceTX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c4cdca/32.png) [@GraceTX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GraceTX)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2001, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/21 "2001-07-18T00:35:48Z")
Well I’ve already screwed up my Tuesday night movie viewing. It’s after 7:35 CST and I’m still at work. :mad: Can I do a make-up session on Wednesday? ---
**Author:** ![detop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/bcef8e/32.png) [@detop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/detop)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2001, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/22 "2001-07-18T00:50:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by LNO \* > \*\*You can be pretentious! Whereas other people have Amazon Women on the Moon and Earth Girls Are Easy (cough cough), you can have Casablanca and Citizen Kane! Women will swoon, men will admire you, and small children will run shrieking because you forgot to wear pants. \*\* Of these four, the only one I **don’t** have (yet) is _Casablanca_ and I have seen it ! Count me in for the discussion. ---
**Author:** ![mrblue92](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@mrblue92](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mrblue92)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2001, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/23 "2001-07-18T16:21:24Z")
So where is this discussion of which you speak? I dug up and watched this bugger again last night, you know. (Well, watched most of it. I did doze off for a minute or two during the part where Kane is trying to make his second wife into a star.) Still cold and uninviting perhaps, but I could appreciate it a little more this time through. On the plus side, I had most of _Father Goose_ taped after it, and I adore Cary Grant’s work. He’s the epitome of cool. Which reminds me… I need to buy that movie and _Operation: Petticoat_… and _Bringing Up Baby_. ---
**Author:** ![mongrel\_8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@mongrel\_8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mongrel_8)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2001, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/24 "2001-07-19T14:36:25Z")
I agree with **mrblue**. I thought that Citizen Kane was pretty cold and uninviting. It seemed to lack something that really made me want to get into the story. ---
**Author:** ![Mystery\_Dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f14d63/32.png) [@Mystery\_Dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mystery_Dog)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2001, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/25 "2001-07-19T16:02:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by mrblue92 \* > **_Amazon Women on the Moon_–I could have sworn that was an Abbott and Costello movie… They had these balloons that popped whenever Lou (who they had declared King) had an unfaithful thought or something along those lines.** Hijacking for a moment here… That was _Abbott and Costello Go to Mars_. That movie will go down in infamy for its inaccurate title; Bud and Lou actually went to Venus. All right, return to your business of discussing _good_ movies. ---
**Author:** ![Mystery\_Dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f14d63/32.png) [@Mystery\_Dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mystery_Dog)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2001, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/26 "2001-07-19T16:09:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by mrblue92 \* > **_Amazon Women on the Moon_–I could have sworn that was an Abbott and Costello movie… They had these balloons that popped whenever Lou (who they had declared King) had an unfaithful thought or something along those lines.** Hijacking for a moment here… That was _Abbott and Costello Go to Mars_. That movie will go down in infamy for its inaccurate title; Bud and Lou actually went to Venus. All right, return to your business of discussing _good_ movies. ---
**Author:** ![lno](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a8b319/32.png) [@lno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lno)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2001, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/27 "2001-07-19T20:13:58Z")
Sorry about the delay… (And bear in mind I have no film background. If someone with more knowledge and insight wants to jump in, please be my guest.) Part of me wishes that I had a solid grounding in film styles and techniques so I could better understand the groundbreaking nature of the film. To be sure, certain elements were admirable, but I get the feeling (to paraphrase a friend) that a film buff telling someone that Citizen Kane was groundbreaking is similar to an old music fan trying to tell a dispassionate kid with his guitar that all modern guitar work is derived from Jimi Hendrix. I’m sure it contributes to the general feeling of people today that Citizen Kane and Casablanca aren’t as good of a movie as The Matrix or Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Lack of background leads to lack of understanding leads to lack of appreciation. (If I could find it, I’d link the thread in GD where someone questioned “Just what’s the big deal about Mozart, anyway?”) The movie _was_ pretty cold and distant. Kane didn’t seem like a person that you could grow to love; rather, the archetype of the businessman who holds himself above common things and common people. A few parts jumped out at me… **Bernstein:** “Girls delightful in Cuba. Stop. Could send you prose poems about scenery, but don’t feel right spending your money. Stop. There is no war in Cuba, signed Wheeler.” Any answer? **Kane:** Yes. “Deer Wheeler: you provide the prose poems. I’ll provide the war.” I’m sure there are conspiracy theories galore of how modern-day businessmen are secretly responsible for wars, but the instigation of the Spanish-American War is something that’s almost unbelievable. Here we have Kane, willing to provoke a war to sell newspapers. (Spanish Galleons Off Jersey Coast?) What sort of modern equivalent can there be? Kane does seem somewhat of a sympathetic character, despite flashes of a callous nature. He’s a Faustian figure- success, arrogance, downfall. Not entirely sympathetic, but it’s not easy to just dismiss him. The ‘No Trespassing’ sign on Xanadu’s gate in the opening shot of the movie seems apropos, given that we’re trespassing into Kane’s mind and history for the rest of the movie. Thatcher, Kane’s guardian, seems almost to engender an Oliver-Twist-ish atmosphere in regards to Kane’s childhood, and this relationship continues as Thatcher’s authority wanes. ("…I might have been a really great man." “Don’t you think you are?” “I think I did pretty well under the circumstances.” “What would you like to have been?” “Everything you hate.”) Just scratching the surface here, and throwing out some topics for thought and conversation. ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2001, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/28 "2001-07-19T23:39:01Z")
> [@](#): > > _LNO says:_ I’m sure there are conspiracy theories galore of how modern-day businessmen are secretly responsible for wars, but the instigation of the Spanish-American War is something that’s almost unbelievable. Here we have Kane, willing to provoke a war to sell newspapers. (Spanish Galleons Off Jersey Coast?) What sort of modern equivalent can there be? Actually, this is one of the most obvious references to [William Randolph Hearst](http://lpc1.clpccd.cc.ca.us/lpc/dry/www/eng7/group4/danresearch.htm): > [@](#): > > However there seemed to be a little thorn in Hearst’s side, “his former mentor, and previous employer Joseph Pulitzer”(Wierichs 1), also a prominent newspaperman of the time. “The two were in a head-to-head circulation war” (Wierichs 1). The goal of each was trying to gain the others business, in doing this they waged war and the main weapon was yellow journalism. “The American public purchased more newspapers because of this form of writing, and this strongly encouraged Hearst and Pulitzer to write more sensationalized stories” (Wierichs 1-2). > > The dominant and well-known evidence of this battle was the reporting of the increased pressures of a war with Spain. Each one wrote sensationalized stories forming public opinions of the tensions between the United States and Spain. “More than a million copies of the Journal (a Hearst newspaper) were sold each day at the height of the crisis” (Garraty 468). “It is said that the Spanish-American war is Hearst’s War” (Mugridge 1), due to the over-dramatized > reporting of his newspapers. Even though Hearst was against interfering with other nations (Mugridge 1), he couldn’t resist the increased newspaper circulation. > > In 1897, Hearst and Pulitzer both sent reporters to Cuba. Hearst sent Frederic Remington a local illustrator. Over the course of his visit he corresponded with Hearst, after a couple of weeks he asked to come home saying, “There was no war on which to report” (Anderson 1999). “Hearst asked him to stay, saying, “You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war”” (Anderson 1999). Hearst didn’t really start the war but he definitely added fuel to a dim fire. Biography Citizen Hearst author W.A. Swanberg has said: “It was an unnecessary war. It was a newspaper’s war. Above all it was Hearst’s war” (qt in Anderson 22). The others, of course, include San Simeon/Xanadu, Marion Davies/Susan Alexander, and the failed runs for governor of New York. _Kane_’s reputation is largely in part to the fact that it indulges in any number of bravura cinematic devices, but none of them ever seems gratuitous; they all seem designed to add a sliver of insight to a man who largely remains an enigma. Just some technical observations: **Gregg Toland’s deep focus photography** (so esteemed by Welles, he shares the final credit card with the director): The scene when his parents are arguing about his fate in their small house, CFK is playing outside, clearly in focus through the distant window. With multiple planes in focus, Welles sets up a composition that reinforces the idea that CFK’s being torn between opposing forces, both of which claim to love him. **The editing:** One of the most famous scenes is the breakfast table, where the complete dissolution of a marriage is portrayed in a single setpiece. This is cinematic shorthand–the ability to communicate volumes about a relationship in a few deft strokes. **The sound design:** Remarkably subtle, even by contemporary standards. Bernstein says, “Leland and Mr. Kane–they haven’t spoke together for ten years.” And indeed, one of the early scenes has an audio dissolve from Leland stumping for Kane in one scene to Kane’s own political speech in the next–they do speak together, acting as a single voice, and their closeness is reinforced by having one complete the other’s sentence, while also using another shorthand device to indicate the passage of time (this is preceded by another audio dissolve: Kane clapping at Susan’s place to someone clapping at the political rally–this time allowing the audio to act as ironic foreshadower) This is just for starters, for other scenes linger: The camera going through the closed window of the nightclub; the camera following Susan’s voice up to the rafters of the opera house; jigsaw puzzles as metaphors; the party (which is also initiated by a clever time-condensing jump cut); the chiaroscuro of Xanadu’s hallways. And I haven’t even gotten into Bernard Herrmann’s great score, the excellent acting down to the small bit parts, and the screenplay that goes beyond a mere Faustian fable–it’s also a meditation on aging, memory and nostalgia. Personally, I like _ **The Magnificent Ambersons** _ better, but _Kane_ never fails to yield rewards after multiple viewings, no matter how many times I’ve seen and come to “know” it. It is a cold and unyielding film–all of Welles’ work was–but Kane was never meant to be fully understood. It’s a fool’s errand that the reporter is on (and Welles even makes a joke by throwing us that red herring at the end); LNO mentions the opening shot of the “No Trespassing” sign, but when the film’s over, we return (IIRC) to the exterior of the mansion, remaining outsiders to a man who never even fully understood himself. And remember, there were _two_ sleds. ---
**Author:** ![Crunchy\_Frog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ebca7d/32.png) [@Crunchy\_Frog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crunchy_Frog)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2001, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/29 "2001-07-20T00:04:12Z")
I just saw this thread for the first time today. I’ll rent _Kane_ tomorrow and discuss it Monday, I guess (that’s when I’m at work again.) Although, IIRC, I wasn’t too damn impressed with _Citizen Kane_ the first time I saw it. Yeah, nifty camerawork for the time, but on the whole I remember it as slow and dull. What really ruins a film for me is the lack of a character to identify with, and I think _Kane_ falls into this catagory. If I don’t care what happens to any of the characters, I’m not going to like the movie. For those of us not bright enough to pick up the symbolism or notice the great camerawork, or the editing, or other technical aspects of the film, _Kane_ is over-rated. It is not entertaining and the lack of a main identifiable character (for me anyway) keeps me from getting pulled into the story and caring what will happen to the protagonist next. But, it has been years since I first saw it. I’ll rent it again tomorrow and see if my opinion has changed at all. ---
**Author:** ![detop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/bcef8e/32.png) [@detop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/detop)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2001, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/30 "2001-07-20T00:51:25Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Crunchy Frog \* > What really ruins a film for me is the lack of a character to identify with, and I think Kane falls into this catagory. If I don’t care what happens to any of the characters, I’m not going to like the movie. For those of us not bright enough to pick up the symbolism or notice the great camerawork, or the editing, or other technical aspects of the film, Kane is over-rated. It is not entertaining and the lack of a main identifiable character (for me anyway) keeps me from getting pulled into the story and caring what will happen to the protagonist next._\* Actually, in that case I find it the opposite, if you have never seen the movie, you try to find something endearing about Kane, and you keep watching, and watching, and watching and find nothing. Instead, you see a relentless drive towards self-destruction as a human being. Sure, he’s rich, he’s powerful, but anything that touches relationships is worthless (his marriages, his family, his friend). All his life he tries to be loved for himself, but he cannot help to apply his business ruthlessness to a field not suited for it and he loses everything. The whole movie is like a slow motion car wreck, you always hope that he’ll redeem himself, only to see him fail at each step. Somebody mentioned previously that Rosebud was his lost innocence. I think it was more of a reminder of the road he was not allowed to take. ---
**Author:** ![lno](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a8b319/32.png) [@lno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lno)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2001, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/31 "2001-07-20T00:52:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ArchiveGuy \* > \*\*Actually, this is one of the most obvious references to [William Randolph Hearst](http://lpc1.clpccd.cc.ca.us/lpc/dry/www/eng7/group4/danresearch.htm): > \*\* I can’t believe I didn’t mention Hearst. Yeah, I was quite aware of that-- what I was trying to get at with ‘modern-day businessman’ is someone from 1980-present. Such as, say, Bill Gates provoking a war with Iraq to sell more copies of Windows. ---
**Author:** ![FisherQueen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/58f4c7/32.png) [@FisherQueen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FisherQueen)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2001, 10:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/32 "2001-07-20T10:57:17Z")
I rented and watched it too. I liked his use of light- characters whose faces were lit, or partially lit, or comletely shadowed in ways that added to the mood of the scene. I found the scenes where Kane tries to turn Susan into a star surprisingly touching. I think he started out meaning well, wanting to raise her from poverty and make her dreams come true as was done for him- but then his pride got in the way and he wasn’t able to let it go. If he’d just set her up as a nightclub singer instead of an operatic star, she might have been okay. And the age-old objection: if Kane dies all alone, then how does anyone know what his last words are? ---
**Author:** ![lno](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a8b319/32.png) [@lno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lno)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2001, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/33 "2001-07-20T13:23:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FisherQueen \* > \*\*And the age-old objection: if Kane dies all alone, then how does anyone know what his last words are? \*\* To quote from [imdb.com](http://imdb.com)’s list of goofs for the movie: > [@](#): > > **Incorrectly regarded as goofs:** > It has been claimed that Kane’s last words could not have been known as he was alone in the room. This is incorrect; the majordomo says that he was in the room, heard Kane say “Rosebud,” and that when the paperweight slipped from Kane’s he knew he was dead. ---
**Author:** ![mongrel\_8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@mongrel\_8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mongrel_8)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2001, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/34 "2001-07-20T14:18:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by LNO \* > \*\*I’m sure it contributes to the general feeling of people today that Citizen Kane and Casablanca aren’t as good of a movie as The Matrix or Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Lack of background leads to lack of understanding leads to lack of appreciation. \*\* I don’t want you to misconstrue what I said about Citizen Kane being cold as that which I don’t care for any old movies. I really liked Casablanca when I saw it and have enjoyed watching other older movies. ---
**Author:** ![lno](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a8b319/32.png) [@lno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lno)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2001, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/35 "2001-07-20T14:51:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by mongrel\_8 \* > \*\*\I don’t want you to misconstrue what I said about Citizen Kane being cold as that which I don’t care for any old movies. I really liked Casablanca when I saw it and have enjoyed watching other older movies. \*\* I didn’t have you in mind at all; I was thinking more of a coworker who became almost enraged upon reading the Top 100 list, indignant that CTHD and Matrix weren’t listed. (I tried pointing out that the list is from 1997, but he was already beginning a tirade of how all old movies suck.) Sadly, there is that point of view in a segment of the population, and that’s the type of person I had in mind when I said that lack of understanding leads to lack of appreciation. ---
**Author:** ![mrblue92](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@mrblue92](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mrblue92)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2001, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/36 "2001-07-22T04:30:04Z")
I kept meaning to chime in, but you guys seem far more knowledgeable than myself. I do recall reading, however, that “rosebud” is (or was at one time) slang for a female body part… ---
**Author:** ![Peregrine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a6a055/32.png) [@Peregrine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peregrine)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2001, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/37 "2001-07-23T06:03:16Z")
The first time I saw Citizen Kane was about 23 years ago, and at that time I too found it cold and uninviting and distant. This time, armed with a considerable amount of commentary, I watched the camera work with more appreciation, and I especially looked for the deeper significance of the sled. I had assumed that it represented the happiness of childhood, but here **ArchiveGuy** mentions that there were two sleds. Today I observed that Rosebud was indeed the second sled, the one given to Charles by his guardian in a lame attempt to make him happy after he had been taken from his home without anybody asking him for his opinion. On receiving it, Charles looked very unenthused, responding with a mechanical “Merry Christmas”. I think the sled may represent the lesson mentioned by Gettys when Kane is ignoring the wishes of his family and everyone else as he refuses to give in to Gettys. “Anybody else, I’d say what’s gonna happen to you would be a lesson to you. Only you’re gonna need more than one lesson. And you’re gonna get more than one lesson.” Throughout the film, Charles is constantly doing things for people, but not what they want. He is benevolent, but he never consults the wishes of his beneficiaries. Though he claims to be an American, and not a communist or a fascist, he really behaves like a dictator. As Leland says,“You talk about the people as though you own them, as though they belong to you.” I think he finally understands the lesson when his second wife leaves him. “Please, Susan. From now on, everything will be exactly the way you want it to be. Not the way I think you want it, but… your way.” Soon after this he picks up the snow globe and makes the Rosebud connection. His parents and his guardian gave him everything, except a choice. Susan would seem to be the just the one to deliver the lesson, according to Leland’s comment: “Susan Alexander? You know what Charlie called her? The day after he met her, he told me about her. He said that she was a cross-section of the American public.” ---
**Author:** ![FisherQueen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/58f4c7/32.png) [@FisherQueen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FisherQueen)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2001, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/38 "2001-07-24T18:56:02Z")
Well, it’s Tuesday, and I’ve got “Casablanca” ready to go. ---
**Author:** ![lno](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a8b319/32.png) [@lno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lno)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755/39 "2001-07-25T17:31:54Z")
And off we go to deal with Casablanca in the [week 2](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=79325) thread. (I’m starting a new thread for each movie for a few reasons- it allows us to keep the discussions separate, it keeps the thread size relatively low, it makes it easy to find an individual movie thread if necessary, and they’ll scroll off into oblivion within one week, usually. If the administration decides that it wants just one thread for this, then we can go ahead with that- I don’t expect every weekly thread to stay active, though.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-movie-club-a-k-a-weve-got-movie-sign/72755.md?page=1)