Acquiunk wrote:Piffka, Cranky didn't get the point. What Well's was saying was that despite his fortune, the last time Kane was truly happy was when he was a boy before he had inherited his money.
Oh, I think Mr. Cranky got the point, but did you get his point... who cares? Orson Welles' Kane is a throughly unlikeable and not very believable gentleman whose only redemption is that he longed for his childhood. The reason people love Kane is the titilation and/or historical factor of the equally awful W.R. Hearst, or they love the fabulous camera angles, etc. The story is imminently forgetable. I might be more inclined to accept some glimmer of interest if you tell me about the unique camera work and how wonderful it is in black and white... all the dark, mysterious shots echoing his dark nasty, irredeemable soul.
And speaking of forgetable... what do you mean inherited his money? It is true I haven't watched this film for a long time, having slept through it in my college film class and never been able to sit through it since, but I could have sworn Kane was a poor young man who made it on his own.
Is this a sacred cow movie or what? LOL It is JUST a film. I thought we were supposed to be toppling some sacred cows.