Posted by Runshouse21 at nytgate1.nytimes.com on January 07, 2004 at 12:52:13:
In Reply to: Not trying to start a debate or anything... posted by on January 07, 2004 at 12:43:40:
: : But thats just me.
: -But a lot of its accolades come from the technical side of filmaking.
Yes yes
For instance, I don't think any movie had ever shown a ceiling. That doesn't seem like a big deal, but it really is. No more play-like standies behind them.
BLAH! If wells didnt do someone else would have
: -The camera work was really groundbreaking for that time too. Angles were used to represent power Kane was almost always an up-shot, and others were viewed at a downward angle. Distance was used to represent attachment/seperation. The scenes of he and his wife eating dinner represent that the best. Just watch as they move away from each other as the movie progresses. This probably wasn't the first time these techniques were used, but there were definitely used very effectively here to tell the story without words.
Did you cut and paste that or was that from your text book. Sorry if that sounds offensive but it does sound like something out of james liptons mouth. I wonder if anyone has the directors notes to see how much of this "groundbreaking" filmmaking was intentional.
: -And, I think there were some studio issues like this was the first film that a director didn't have to answer to anybody, or was at least given a huge amount of artistic control.
OK but I dont think that has to do with it being over rated
: -And, most importantly, you would have to sit around and watch a ton of films from the 40's and before to be able to get a sense of what a grounbreaking film it is.
Thanks for the condesending tone. Regardless of how many movies from the 40's i watch I still feel that it is over rated and there are many other films that are better.