arthur_tafero This film is currently rated as being in the 600s of popularity among film viewers. This says quite a bit about the general illiteracy of the American filmgoer. This is easily one of the top ten films of all time; and without any possible contradiction, it certainly belongs in every critic's top 100 films. Any critic who doesn't have it in their top 100, would not be considered a real critic in my book. Is it the best film of all time, as proposed by several critics? I don't think so, but it certainly is in that kind of company. The story of William Randolph Hearst (not Hurst, as one misinformed critic had written) is a tragedy on several levels. And yet, its life's illusions we all recall, we really don't know life at all (apologies to Joni Mitchell). The film is magnificently shot to perfection. Shots that had never been tried before on film were common in this one. This unauthorized biography got Welles into a lot of hot water with Hearst, who tried to have the movie prevented from being completed or shown on several occasions. The dialogue is superb; the actors are letter-perfect, and the story is mesmerizing. What else could you want from a film?

shubhamsrivastavalu This is a film revolving around the life of a popular business tycoon, Charles Foster Kane whose life ends with the mystery word 'rosebud.' While the newspaper attempt to solve the mystery film takes us back into the life of Kane- to struggle of his mother, his rising as a business tycoon and his tense relations with his two wives. The film revolves on the entangled life of a rich person who tries to win over everything with his money and influence. Susan Alexandar's (Dorothy Comingore) entry is pleasant but gradually Kane's monopoly and her monotony makes things worse into her leaving Kane. The movie has many literary satires expressed smartly through the cinematography and direction like false journalism and reputation. Overall the movie is a testimony of the extra weightage given to money makes a man poor- emotionally and socially. This was less of entertainer and more of learning stuff that gives it a classic element.

loganalaxanian Personally I found this film to be a little bit overrated for my taste, but can understand why some love it. I just found the film's story to be too slow and boring and I was disappointed by the ending. I do realize this film was ahead of it's time and thats why it was so highly praised, but I've seen way better films. One thing I can say about Citizen Kane is the film was the lighting, camera angles, cuts, and makeup was executed perfectly.

tugquarles Apparently my expectations were too high but I was very disappointed in "Citizen Kane". I had heard the hype for years and was savoring the moment of watching the "greatest film in cinema history". I love movies from the silent era through the late 40s and there is the occasional 50s and 60s movies that I enjoy as well. Perhaps it's the movie stars that attract me to those movies. However, "Citizen Kane" didn't fulfill my expectations and I was disappointed in the story and especially the ending.