Sober-Friend Orson Welles (Liev Schreiber), all charisma and stubborn vision, is signed to direct films for RKO Pictures with a startling amount of creative freedom. Welles decides to make production number 281 a disguised biopic of media tycoon William Randolph Hearst (James Cromwell), a film which would come to be known as "Citizen Kane." But Welles doesn't understand just how much clout Hearst yields. When he gets word of the unflattering production, Hearst does everything in his power to stop it.The power of this film is how "Money and Power" can crush art which makes this scary. The main focus of the film is what "Is Right" what is "Wrong"! This film reminds me when Universal had a fight with religious groups about the film "The Last Temptation of Christ" What is also "Said without being said" is "You Can Win the War" but there is also a price! You pay the price but so does your opposition

esteban1747 Good to know part of the story of how "Citizen Kane (Hearst)" was made. In his first years as an actor/director Welles was a rebel, who did not want to follow what already was available in Hollywood. He wanted something new, critics to the society where he lived, films about how people behave, particularly those extremely wealthy. The films of Welles as an actor/director can be well compared to the novels written by Theodore Dreiser. His films were different and deep in their content and messages if compared with the existing previous ones. It is clear that making "Citizen Kane" was not an easy task for Welles and all of his collaborators. Obstacles were so many, and its final presentation was a real odyssey. This material does not show much details about how it was made, i.e. something about the main heroes, such as Jedediah Leland (Joseph Cotten), Kane's family and others. Liev Schreiber, who has no the paunch of Welles, was able to have a nice performance as the famous actor. Good acting of John Malkovich, as usual, but much more impressive was the acting of Roy Scheider as George Schaefer, the man providing funds for this achievement.

Alan Trevennor If you are into vintage movies, vintage America and conspiracy theories, then this is an entertainment for you.Many other reviews here have outlined the strengths and weaknesses of the film re the truth about the making of Kane, and the relative attributions of credit, blame and opprobrium. I'd like to inject a good word for Roy Scheider's portrayal of RKO boss George Schaefer: His character's struggle to find the right balance between keeping his east coast money men happy, his obvious liking for Welles and the desire to make good movies is very well portrayed.Something I really enjoyed was the portrayal of Welles' and Mank's visit to the Hearst Castle at San Simeon, California. That is a fascinating place, which saw so many famous and talented people visit during Hearst's time there. There's a movie about the lifetime of that place to be made by someone, though I don't think anyone has ever attempted it? Apparently they didn't use the real location for RKO281 - a lot of it seems to have been done in London. Was that cost, or did the Hearst Castle trustees refuse....? Anyway, if you're up for a good tale woven around some known facts, but not sticking to them too tightly, take the RKO281 ride, you'll have fun. Just don't let it become your true picture of Mr Welles, Mr Hearst or (most of all) Mr Mankiewicz.

JoeytheBrit A better film would no doubt have spent much more time on dissecting what makes the two key protagonists - Welles and media magnate Hearst tick, but RKO281 barely seems to scratch the surface, coming up with only superficial reasons for each character's stubborn intransigence, but this is still a pretty good examination of the story behind the production of what has since come to be widely regarded as the greatest film ever made.Liev Schreiber lacks the boyish exuberance of the 25-year-old self-proclaimed genius but is adequate in the role and is hampered by a script that refuses to reveal too much about his character beyonds its pertinence to the making of the film. But then, this isn't a biopic about Welles so perhaps it's unfair to be too critical on that score. James Cromwell scores much higher as William Randolph Hearst, a ridiculously wealthy man whose obsession for material things as a way of compensating for his own perceived shortcomings resulted in both his downfall and the release of Welles' classic. The script, after first introducing him as some sort of tyrant (Welles compares him to Hitler in a key speech to the RKO board), eventually becomes more sympathetic towards him. What Hearst tried to do back then is probably no different to what a high-profile individual would attempt now were they discover a film highlighting some of the most intimate aspects of their life - upon which it shines a damning light - would do. Only today, the production would become mired in a sea of lawsuits that would see its release either permanently delayed or held up until the death of the person in question. The two men's encounter in a lift after Welles has emerged seemingly victorious from their scrap does a good job of putting into context the cost of the battle to both of them.The Marion Davies character, played here by Melanie Griffith, is probably the most sympathetic of the lot. The fact she remained with Hearst until his death a decade after the events depicted in the film suggests there was more to their relationship than the allure of otherwise unattainable wealth and beauty and this is an aspect that the film doesn't overlook.I don't know how accurate this depiction of the events surrounding the making and release of Citizen Kane are, but it provides a fascinating glimpse behind the scenes nevertheless, neatly placing the events into context with the larger world view of impending war and depression. Definitely worth a look.