It takes a lot for me to put a joke review to be on the same level of bad quality as [these reviews](https://letterboxd.com/yddraiggoch/films/reviews/by/activity/)
is it bad that i hate big letterboxd accounts? like their reviews are always just so damned annoying. and not in any way where it'd challenge my thinking, they're just plain annoying
I think it's a movie that's the victim of both age and its own success. It's been so influential that it's been copied and parodied all over the place, and any film that's known mainly as "the greatest of all time" will struggle to keep up with the hype on first viewing. Meanwhile, it was huge at the time due to numerous technology and filmmaking innovations, which are now commonplace. If you're just coming to it today from a modern rather than historical context, I can see why it would be underwhelming to people who haven't seen many of its contemporaries, and that's even without people doing stupid things like trying to apply 21st century social mores to the story.
I would also suggest that if you go into something being told it's the "greatest movie of all time," that leaves a whole lot of room for disappointment. Unless you are immediately floored by its unprecedented perfection, it might seem like a failure.
Agreed, I luckily went into Citizen Kane with low expectations: I thought it would have aged terribly, would feel overrated, and only still in the discussion because of a small group of elitists.
Holy shit did I enjoy watching it.
Still haven't gotten around to Citizen Kane, but I had a great scenario with 2001, where I watched it when I was like, 12 - not only did I find it incredibly boring and hate it, but I luckily also forgot 90% of it by the time I saw it in IMAX a few years ago. I went in with an open mind, but broadly remembering it as bad
Holy *shit* it blew me away
Hey if you can make a movie like this at 26 years old, that was groundbreaking in scope and still talked about nearly 100 years on… Have at it!
I hope this doesn't get misconstrued or taken negatively, but if you watch a movie that's considered one of the greatest of all time, that's a moment where you go in within an open mind and set your expectations on what movies should be based on that. Set your standards, so to speak
Similar effect with The Big Lebowski and being told it’s ‘The Funniest Movie of All Time’ years and years before finally seeing it.
Saw it. It’s pretty good. I can totally acknowledge why people like it so much. But funniest of all time makes me expect something so outright, objectively funny that I am unable to stop myself laughing throughout the whole movie.
I don’t think any movie can live up to the title of Greatest ___ of all Time.
I've had replies to my praise of Casablanca, where I say it absolutely is one of the best movies ever, to the effect of 'you sound surprised. a movie most people thought was good was good.' The point is that if I have no expectations and a movie is great, I am going to give it a high rating. If I have high expectations because of movie's reputation and I don't like it I am going to give a worse rating than if I had no expectations at all. The fact that a movie can live up to "one of the best of all time" is an incredible achievement.
I’ve watched both Kane and Casablanca for the first time within the last 6 months and have to say they’re both pretty much perfect. I was so pleased to have both of them live up to my expectations. It’s definitely a little more impressive when a ‘great’ film lives up to the billing
I wouldn't ever recommend anyone go into CK without the proper context and grounding in other movies that it influenced, not to mention some familiarity with movies that came before so the contrast can be appreciated. It's like trying to read Shakespeare blind with no knowledge of the history or understanding of the language.
I’ve went to Matrix like this when I watched the first time. Can’t tell you how disappointed I was. (Not saying that it was a bad movie by any means, but I thought it would be better)
That's the thing, when many claim one thing to be the GOAT, it leads to a lot of people either being contrary to be cool, or the expectation is so high that they're let down.
You see it with music, athletes, games, everything
I haven't heard of people calling Oppenheimer terrible (but then again I wasn't a fan of it even when it came out so maybe I wasn't interested enough to pay attention). I do recall people switching on Barbie being terrible the moment it got Oscar nominations though.
It just has too high expectations. I think people compare them to *their* favourite or best movie they’ve ever seen and they are like nah, this or that is better.
Sometimes it's just superficial, but I can also understand people today just not getting into it. The problem is that it feels like you've seen it all before, but that's because at the time no one had seen a lot of the standards and ideas it pushed that we take them for granted today.
also attention seeking contrarianism. lots of bad hot takes out there from folks who are more interested in putting their own opinion out there, then they are in the actual film
It happens on Goodreads all the time.
You can practically place money that on any well-regarded book, the top review will always be 1 or 2 stars and amount to ‘I heard this was good, but I think it SUCKED!’
Except I would actually argue that 2001, while a technical marvel, is not a very interesting or compelling film. But that's a hot take for another day.
Citizen Kane is good though.
2001 doesn't have the same problem because it's so experimental, if anything it has aged better. Whereas the premise of Citizen Kane has been copied over and over.
This is it. Expectations too high from all the hype, left underwhelmed. There are better movies than Citizen Kane but in the context of its time and film history it is one of the most important and excellent films, pioneering all kinds of techniques and plot complexities we take for granted today. Movies went from lightweight entertainment to serious art thanks to Citizen Kane. For that it should praised even if it isn't the film you enjoy the most.
Exactly. There's tons of movies I don't like that are considered the greatest of all time and there's also movies that I consider my favorites that are disliked by the majority. As long as I like the movie I don't care who thinks its good and who doesn't and if I don't like a movie then I'm glad there's many people that are able to get enjoyment from it.
For a 40s Hollywood movie Citizen Kane always struck me as far more fast paced than average. Compared to something like the Maltese Falcon, which came out the same year to much more success, Citizen Kane is a barrage of stimulation
It’s crazy how the thing just moves, especially in the first half (second half is still great but the lonely Kane in Xanadu stuff does cause the pace to check up a bit I think). A lot more humour and lighthearted moments than I think most would expect too (although that is trademark Welles in many ways).
I literally saw it for the first time last week and loved it. I was expecting a lot of great filmmaking, but I was surprised by how much I was impressed by the script, which I thought was excellent. I also loved the pace of it. It’s pretty phenomenally edited and structured. You basically ‘learn’ his life story within 10-15 minutes, but then the movie really dives into interrogating all of it to search for the ‘clues’ which explain the man. The framing of it as an investigation is a great way to focus the whole thing too; you’re encouraged to ask questions and sort of judge the guy, rather than just viewing it as a fictional biopic (which it is).
None of this should be too surprising though. For all Welles’ wonderful talent for filmmaking, and his great talent as an actor, the way I kind of think of him is as cinemas ultimate showman. I think of the theatricality and confidence of his turn as Harry Lime, or the eloquence and humour with which he explained his approach to storytelling and direction in interviews. The guy seemed very aware of the fact that he was ultimately an entertainer, and he wore the attention he garnered so well imo. Kane is like the total realisation of all of those qualities. The film really feels aligned to his personality and demeanour. There’s more ideas crammed into it than in most filmmakers entire careers. Phenomenal creativity and showmanship
As the saying goes, "Classics are classic for a reason."
It's why I don't like calling things dated. Plenty of old movies are superbly entertaining. Especially pre-Code era films. Like the original Scarface, or The Testament of Dr. Mabuse. Those movies fuckin' move!
Hell, I remember watching 12 Angry Men in grade 10 and reaching the point where we had to turn it off because the period was almost over. Everyone was so pissed! Stagecoach? Phenomenal. Great character work and action.
i’m a little confused how you could have such seemingly well informed opinions about Welles and have just seen Kane for the first time last week. decided to watch his oeuvre in reverse chronological order?
Hell, Orson even through in a jump scare out of nowhere just to make sure the audience was sitting up and paying attention. That fucking bird gets me every time.
Yeah tbh I find the criticism of it being boring so strange. I watched it in high school, a time when I had an AWFUL attention span for film, and I actually dug the hell out of it.
Greatest movie of all time is debatable (and always will be if you assign it to any film) but I still enjoyed it a lot.
I loved it when I first watched, genuinely thought it would be slow and boring. Found it to be much lighter and humorous in places than I ever expected. If you ever get to watch it with the Ebert commentary it really brings a further level of appreciation
I think it’s more influential and important than it is anything else, personally. I also think that it’s older, black and white and that turns some people off (they’re wrong.). I also think when a movie is dubbed one of the best movies of all time, people have different expectations
I totally agree, and beyond that, I think it's a filmmakers movie, and most of its genius goes over people's heads. The symbolism and cinematography in *Citizen Kane* is incredible and so seamless in its execution that it's simply missed by probably 75% of modern audiences.
I agree with that. If you want an insight into how innovative the movie is, watch the movie with Roger Ebert's commentary. I had to watch the film for a class in college, and I watched it twice. Once without the commentary, and once with. And while I liked it the first time, the second time with the commentary made me appreciate the movie in a whole new way.
Adding to this, I think modern viewers struggle with the innovations in Kane. Many likely haven't watched a good amount of films from the 20s and 30s and therefore won't see what Kane accomplished for the medium. Beyond that, everything Welles innovated has been improved or perfected along the way. Hard to read about its monumental significance and then watch it only to see nothing new or mind-blowing.
I think the title of being one of the best movies of all time not only spurns some contrarians and gives too high of expectations but also means that people just starting to get into film will watch it very early on in their key cinema education since it's at the top of almost every list.
It's a movie that gains more value as you learn to appreciate its influence and importance and how revolutionary its elements were for the time. Going in cold from a modern perspective makes the movie seem just kinda ordinary because it's been replicated so thoroughly by the medium and still holds up so well. Without being able to appreciate its symbolism/intricacies it comes off as a fine movie, but that's well below the expectation of "best movie ever" resulting in disappointment. It's an awful choice as an introduction to Kino but its name recognition means a lot of people will start there.
Black and white is not why people are dissapointed that it doesn't live up to the hype. Lots of black and white movies from that time get lots of love from the newer generations
It's a film I respect more than I enjoy. If I went in to it without thinking about its technical achievements and clear influence on cinema, I wouldn't find it to be too exciting.
The problem is people overhyping it. It isn’t most people’s #1 favorite movie, yet it’s often been called the “greatest movie of all time.” So a first-time viewer goes in with *extremely* high expectations, but the movie is hard to fully grasp on the first watch, so people are disappointed after one watch.
If they look up explanations of what’s so great about it, they see dry, unexciting claims about *influential cinematography.* Most people don’t watch movies to see *influential cinematography!* So that doesn’t motivate most people to rewatch it. Also, a lot of first-time viewers don’t get to have the pleasure of puzzling over “rosebud” before it’s revealed, because jerks have spoiled it for them without giving a spoiler alert.
I had to watch it at least 3 times before I really got how great it is. Ideally, you should plan to watch it repeatedly, first going into it cold with limited expectations, then watching some videos that analyze it, and coming back to it later knowing which scenes are especially important to focus on.
I think there’s a bunch of things to unpack here:
1. Citizen Kane was a groundbreaking film… in 1941. It was immediately influential, films began mimicking its style, cinematography, effects, editorial choices- you name it. All these aspects have been built and expanded upon, they’ve evolved into what we have today. But, even though what was new in 1941 is old hat now, we should still throw respect on the OG’s name.
2. Its pace is glacial by the standards of modern films. Not a bad thing, just a challenging one when you’ve been raised on tiktok.
3. Contrarianism is not to be underestimated. I avoided Kurosawa’s work for most of my life because every time I said I liked A Fistful of Dollars, some film-studies douch-nozzel would offer an “um actually, I preferred it in the original Japanese” put down. When I did see Yojimbo I was blown away, but that’s not the point.
The backlash is absolutely undeserved imo. Even without its influence on filmmaking, it's still just a really good film in it's own right. A must-see for anyone who likes There Will Be Blood.
Some things are more "influential" than good and they don't necessarily hold up for some people who don't have that context. I.e. the Beatles being "overrated" to some people or Seinfeld. With context there's no denying how groundbreaking these things are but they've been copied so many times that they don't seem great by today's standards to some people.
Literally any movie has people who dislike it, especially those with a greatest of all time status.
Of course it holds up, of course not everyone is going to like it.
Of course some people don’t like it in good faith, of course some are dumb kids who couldn’t tell a good film if it hit them like a train.
I went to film school 25 years ago and it was slow then. It's a great technical movie no doubt about it, any filmmaker can get really into the details and the narrative.
But it's a 83 year old movie, its slow paced and dialogue heavy. It's dated.
Even 70s avant garde movies can seem no that great in our postmodern world.
I never liked it. I watched it twice in film school and gave it another shot in my 30s. It’s a groundbreaking technical achievement that is incredibly boring.
Yeah I think there’s a lot of pretense in these comments too. “They just don’t like black and white or dialogue driven films. It has too much hype so people want to hate it.”
Citizen Kane is boring for a lot of people. But it’s not for any of those reasons. 12 Angry Men is literally 12 dudes in a room and fits all the criteria here and is absolutely riveting. Hara Kiri is just a guy sitting cross legged telling a story. Banger.
It depicts an honestly unbelievable protagonist. He’s just a good guy who grows cynical because he gets rich and powerful. It’s a bullshit fable.
There Will Be Blood takes Citizen Kane but makes it real by showing the type of person who slavishly pursues power and wealth is psychopathic from the start and they use their wealth to further destroy people.
Watching Citizen Kane in 2024 is just watching a story that could have and has been told better at this point. It’s a historical piece at this point and I’ll get hate for saying it but it has no relevant story to tell.
The difference is Daniel Plainview was never a good person and never really pretended to be. Charles Foster Kane was always ambitious, but he was also idealistic and believed in the power of his profession to change the world for the better. His original drive was not merely to enrich himself. But in order to be successful and stay that way, he had to change himself so much that he could no longer see the world he once wanted to save.
I love There Will Be Blood, Hara Kiri, and Twelve Angry Men. All infinitely better overall films than Citizen Kane.
To be fair, I think I went in to watching it the first time at 18 with high expectations and was very whelmed by Citizen Kane.
In comparison, I watched Casablanca, Seven Samurai, and The Bicycle Thief shortly after watching Kane for the first time, and those films I loved.
People like what they like obviously. But anyone that tells me I just don’t understand Citizen Kane is just someone demanding that their opinions be taken seriously.
A tragedy needs to have a somewhat believable and sympathetic character to have emotional resonance. Depicting a billionaire as the real victim of capitalism is laughable and completely not relatable. Personally I would go so far as to say the subject of the movie treats the audience with contempt although I understand it won’t be a common opinion.
I don’t need to hear a single more time how I don’t understand how groundbreaking the cinematography was when these same people can’t seem to grasp why modern audiences have absolutely zero attachment or interest for Charles Foster Kane.
To me that's the appeal of the story: not that Kane is someone I can identity with, but because he's someone I *can't at all* sympathize with by the end. And yet I do find him admirable at the beginning, and over the course of it I watch him the whole time and still can't quite tell exactly at what point he becomes unrecognizable as a human being.
The tragedy isn't for Kane himself, it's for the world that lost the man he used to be. Somewhere along the way he became the very thing he once railed against, and it's treated not as a singular event that only happened to him but as a systemic problem that happens to *everyone* who wants to make an impact. The very system they're trying to change consumes and absorbs them, and they become tools of it.
It's become a homework movie to a lot of people.
Its like how Charles Dickens went from being basically the Marvel Studios of English writing (getting paid by the word to crank out disposable, populist, low brow, entertainment for the masses) to being considered high literature because of his work reaching the top of the Brit lit canon.
A lot of people consume Kane and Dickens thinking they're about to experience the best thing ever, and when they aren't blown away they dislike it more than normal.
They've literally been told that this is Great Art their whole lives. With that kind of baggage something that's even ok or just fine suddenly seems bad.
Contemporary films move faster than older films, so audiences who aren't used to watching older films find old movies boring. They don't like Citizen Kane because they've actually seen Citizen Kane, because of its reputation. They have almost certainly not seen any other films from 1941, and they would dislike those films even more.
Criticism right now is just saying "everything that was good is actually bad. everything that was bad is actually good."
Reappraisal is good, but a lot of criticism is lazy and uniformed and I blame death of the author for most of that.
The “greatest of all time” moniker is grossly misunderstood. It isn’t meant to signify that in a vacuum, it’s a better movie to watch than any other, but that the craft and technique on display, and the way those are combined into a single work, make it the most significant work in the development of the medium. There were movies before *Citizen Kane*, and those after.
Anything that gets labeled "the greatest of all time" and is then seen by many people with high expectations will get push back.
As for me, I like Kane just fine but there are several films from that era I much prefer.
Sometimes with old movies you have to watch it while keeping in mind the time in which it was released. If you don’t do that old films don’t always hold up. Might be these kids just don’t know anything about film/American cultural history
It's literally because the snootiest of film bros will frequently cite it as "their favourite movie" or "the best movie" and it really isn't a great story - it's full of holes, it's pretty melodramatic, and it isn't the most interesting subject to most people.
So when most people finally get around to watching it, they're underwhelmed and bored and they think to themselves "The fuck is wrong with these people who like this?"
The movie was groundbreaking in regards to production, but I would agree that anyone who cites it as their favourite movie is probably just trying to keep up the image of "serious movie watcher." And a lot of people cite it as their favourite film.
I reject your premise. Your thesis seems to be based on a minority opinion of reviews on Letterboxd, there are things like sample size that matter.
I think you have to work your way towards learning to appreciate older and older films as someone interested in film. I have noticed a tendency of rejecting black and white films with the generation younger than me (I'm 35) but hell, when I was 14 Michael Bay's Bad Boys was my favorite film.
These people calling Citizen Kane boring will discover an entry point into vintage films, like Casablanca, and hopefully go from there.
People confuse "considered the greatest movie of all time by critics especially back in the day" with "will literally become my favourite movie ever and if it doesn't then it's actually overrated"
I've always enjoyed the movie, but never understood all the accolades. I think the real life drama and massive clash of the egos was a far more interesting story. There are a couple of good movies on the subject, "Mank" and "RKO 281".
I watched it for the first time last year, expecting it to be a little over hyped and not quite as good as its reputation suggests.
I thought it was fucking great.
I don’t think it has anything to do with expectations honestly. Sometimes I need to watch a movie twice to like it but I hated it the first time I watched it.
I think so many of those revolutionary things it started have become more commonplace now and people aren’t impressed by it when they expect more from something regarded so highly
Three reasons a) expectations make even a good movie appear worse b) there are great contemporary movies like awara that doesn't get attention because they are not American c) They are spoiled for choices as the world of cinema have many gems, calling something greatest movie naturally invites animosity
i mean i, as a young 20 something, love old movies but i think calling it the best film of all time is an extremely overly generous stretch. it’s literally just a movie. i found movies like the mummy (1932) or rope (1941) to be more engaging, just to name movies from around the same time. it’s definitely an important movie technically, but i don’t think the story holds up anymore
I like it, but I don’t think it’s “the greatest movie of all time”. I think those high expectations might off put some people seeing it for the first time.
I give it a 4.5/5
I remember once hearing it called a "film class movie" and that's a good way of putting it. Is it objectively well made? Absolutely. Is it a fun film you return to over and over? Nope. I think I have it at like a 3.5 myself. I recognize how well made it is, but I watched it a handful of times in college and probably won't be going out of my way to watch it again.
It’s still one of the greatest movies ever made. The opinions of Ciara and Penny won’t change that fact. I’m assuming they’re both in their mid-20s and are trying to be contrarians.
To be honest, I think most people that hate on it without some sort of specific criticism are more often than not stuck in the mindset of “old = bad/boring”. For a time I definitely thought that way and thought it was cool to dismiss older work as irrelevant and pretentious. With most older movies, especially stuff like Citizen Kane, people talk about them for a reason.
I think, for the most part people still like it. I don't wanna be that guy, but I feel like with the new generations, it's a take what you can get kind of thing with no regard for the time period and limitations and influence. It can be boring for sure but it's revolutionary. What it does for cinema is huge. Short attention spans only breed more immediate pleasures which is not the case for most old movies.
This is me presuming they're even young, I don't know at all.
Most young people will always hate old things. Has always been the way surely? I recall finding black and white films boring when I was younger, same with classical music. It’ll only be when they’re older that they can appreciate films like Citizen Kane.
I’m sorry but reddit posts like these make me so irrationally annoyed lmao. Like you really can’t figure out why an app that’s populated by teenagers and 20 somethings who were raised on fucking spiderman and pixar has some negative reviews for an old ass black and white film that came out fuckin 80 years ago? Like is that really such a puzzle for you?
I didn't like the movie. I think it's the praise that gave you higher expectations for it. Sometimes, it would disappoint you more if it doesn't live up to them.
A student in my class, 19 years old, said "it's boring AF." I watched it a couple years ago and thought it still held up well.
As others said, it is popular to hate popular things.
People spewing shit like “anyone who says this is their favorite movie is lying” are always insanely annoying, but I just have to tap the sign again which reads: “block and move on”.
It doesn’t hold up. It’s “great” because of innovations made in the movie, which are now common place. It absolutely has a significant place in history, but it’s long and boring as hell.
If someone tells me they love Citizen Kane I immediately assume they are a snooty critic type because the movie isn’t loveable. What they mean is that they like or love studying it or that they appreciate it. I do not believe it surprises anyone or makes people feel anything deeply or is engaging anymore.
I think it's important to consider that each person has their own experience with a film. And this is subjective. People who really like cinema, consume reviews and know classic films will probably have a different experience with a film like Citizen Kane than people who just started liking cinema. In fact, those who gave the title “best film of all time” to this film were critics analyzing very subjective and difficult to measure things. For some people, it is just boring. And comparing to some movies, it really is! I myself like other types of films and that's okay. But I understand that it is an important masterpiece that you should know to understand cinema.
I think some people are more influenced by their own expectations than others. This is one thing I know about myself. If I am looking forward to a movie, I am usually let down. I’m far more likely to love a movie I’m surprised by. I wish it weren’t true — but it definitely is.
It absolutely holds up because it has extremely modern (ahead of its time) pacing and cinematography.
Also very timely with a mogul controlling the media for personal and political gain.
I think a lot of it has to do with the pacing of CK. Old films have a very different pacing to contemporary movies and if you don’t have any experience of watching them it can be a slog. I say this as a teacher who has shown older films to students who just don’t know what to expect. Like the time I screened *Blade Runner* and the universal response was “boring”.
What made Citizen Cane remarkable does not stand out as much anymore. We are used to see films shot this way. We are used to having narrative structure this way. Movie makers since then have taking those tricks and techniques and expounded up on them.
It is highly revered because it was ground breaking. It was ahead of its time. It doesn’t feel that way now.
Hate the sentiments of the second review btw, it is insufferable and incredibly self absorbed to think everybody who have a different opinion than you is just faking it.
The worst is seeing this in film school. You're being told about how important and great it is and then forcing a room full of people to watch it. Pretty much everyone in my class was like "what's the big deal."
What I run into is those who don’t see how influential this is and how ahead of the curve it is while still being a fantastic middle finger to a terrible person.
My family just says it’s dated because the make up and sets are “old” and it’s just people talking - so it’s boring.
It's a product of its time. The framing of scenes and transitions from one to the next were groundbreaking at the time and elevated it as a result. Since it's not anything special now and the movie is judged squarely on its entertainment value it stands to reason why people find it boring, because it is.
The movie is more for film makers and not the general viewing public.
Its a technically innovative film way ahead of its time but its story and characters are really not interesting. There are many vastly better films than KANE.
People love attention on social media, Letterbox is no different. Some people genuinely think that Captain America and the Winter Soldier is one of best movies of all time, now is up to you if their opinion matter or don't.
It's kind of always been my opinion that a lot of old movies are Hella boring. I just cannot stand older editing styles where it feels like so many scenes can't justify their existence and pad out time cause they had to record a person walking down the street for 20 minutes and couldn't afford to waste the film. I know it's controversial but if I ever rewatch 2001: A Space Odyssey again it'll be at 1.5x speed. It's just too damn slow.
I will try to avoid repeating what others have said and focus on what these reviews say
First Review
This is not a surprising opinion to have. Most people who watch films are doing so for entertainment, if they don't like the story, they don't like the movie. It's nothing against them or the movie itself, it's just an opinion. There are so many classics out there and not everyone is going to like all of them
Second Review
I'm presuming what this person means is people who are saying this is their favourite film are doing so to look more film literate than they actually are. And while I don't think everyone who says this is lying, I do think that some of them are. But the only way we would know this is to look at that person's rating for other classic films. If they have no classic films rated below 4 stars, I would not believe they were being honest. As I said before "There are so many classics out there and not everyone is going to like all of them". A classic does not deserve a higher review just because it's a classic
I watched it once and wasn't really impressed. I read about some of its history and importance, watched it again, and enjoyed it more. Then I watched it with the Roger Ebert commentary and enjoyed it even more. I've seen it 5 times now and I'm of the opinion that it's about a ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ and a half star movie.
Yes it's an aging thing and if anyone wants to say "i am this year old and still think blah blah blah" not everyone is movie enthusiasts and the general population will mostly be disinterested in old movies. Only a few old movies like 12 angry men can hold up much better in this generation
It's a film non-film experts (including me) may not appreciate regardless how technically groundbreaking it was at the time. So we'll primarily watch for the plot. And the plot is boring.
I absolutely adore Citizen Kane. I hadn't seen it in probably 15 years until I finally sat down and told the person that I watched it with sarcastically "Ready to see the greatest movie of all-time" because some people think it's funny that it has that moniker, so I was just being sarcastic.
I watched it, and loved it more, and the other person said "It was...good". I accidentally created a false-hype for someone new to it and I felt so bad. I did exactly what causes people to dislike it and I'm so mad at myself! 😂 Citizen Kane is one of the best movies I've ever seen for the record..
I dislike Citizen Kane because I was bored shitless watching it, and for the last 40 minutes I was just waiting for it to end — not because it’s old and black and white. Casablanca is from the same era and I absolutely loved it, as well as other 1940s films I enjoyed far more.
Edward Norton did a talk at Oxford recently where he brought up Joseph Campbell's observation that stories or myths lose their salience when the observer cannot see themselves in the tale. The example in question was Fight Club and how it didn't start as a success but gained recognition over time. He likened it to Dustin Hoffman's Graduate, but I digress.
The point is that people saw themselves in the narrator of Fight Club because he was resisting what society had "planned" for him. The "go to school, work, have kids" gambit, how Project Mayhem was a vision of rebellion, etc. This was a context that could be resonated with by audiences: they recognise the landscape, the sentiment, the disassociation, even.
I've put off Citizen Kane. I tried it for a moment but lost interest quickly thereafter but knew I had to revisit it eventually. Keyword is eventually, and however many years later, I still have not seen it. There's a reason contemporary film gets hyped and is top of the charts on Letterboxd. Furiosa, Challengers, and Dune 2 probably will not endure in significant ways (just my opinion.)
On the other hand, you have relatively recent films like There Will Be Blood that are probably going to be classics, or celebrated for acting prowess. Moonlight comes to mind, too.
I'm not saying most people can see themselves in the middle of an industrial boom or gold rush in the middle of the desert, I'm saying that the norms of the 2000/10s are still paletable. That is, they're comparatively more salient.
It's difficult watching acclaimed film because a lot of the time they're dramas and yeah, come on, let's be real, they can be slow. That's the nature of non-blockbuster, artistic film. Have it age for too long and it'll obscure the audience's own reflection. Fight Club will go the way of Citizen Kane eventually. Thus the cycle continues, until another film retells the essence again for Gen Z or whomever comes next.
Edit: I want to make it clear that in the spirit of cinephilia we all make sacrifices to watch something "boring" to have an open mind and understand canonical film and art despite it having aged. Its contributions to contemporary genres, how it's a "proto" something, how it shaped filmmakers and actors
Edit 2: Case in point, Paths of Glory. It's an old, boring film that is said to be a critique of war, its senselessness, and so on. Is it for most people? No. But it was created by a legend and it should be appreciated for it's contribution to film
Some people seem to be strongly affected by hype, and this movie is criminally overhyped imo. I think its fall from the top spot on Sight and Sound is a reflection that people are watching more foreign films now, and the American canon is being challenged by world cinema. Rightfully so, I think. Worth watching, but if you’re expecting the greatest movie of all time and you’ve seen a lot of movies, you’ll probably be disappointed.
Because they are watching it from the perspective of someone over 80 years later, with 80 years of movies heavily influenced by Welles. If you aren’t actively interested in filmmaking techniques and history it’s hard to understand why people care about the movie so much.
That all being said, I do think there is something to be said for something both hugely influential in its day and still just as entertaining to non critics or creators generations later. 2001: A Space Odyssey may have a been a more critically acclaimed film but there’s a reason why you don’t see people who aren’t film buffs obsessing over it today while you very much do still see tons of people in love with the original Star Wars. Not trying to say that mass appeal is inherently better but being able to appeal to both critics and casuals from many generations is something very difficult to achieve even among the greatest artists.
It’s a different era and really only appreciated by cinema aficionados who look at style, music, filmography as well as for a storyline…if people are looking for car chases and robot men, this won’t do it. Plus it’s in black and white, a culture shock for many youngsters. I know people who won’t consider watching a film in black and white. The point of the film is lost to such as these.
Same thing happened with the Beatles. Younger people will listen or watch out of context of the time period and not understand the impact the art had. Citizen cane is fine, not bad, didn't blow my mind, but I can recognize how great it is for how much it influenced.
It's rated 4.2 on Letterboxd which is a great score. You can't just take two isolated reviews and use this to show that so many people dislike it.
For a good time go to the popular feed and read through the comments for Lucy’s review
Still my all-time least favorite Letterboxd review. Not only is the joke lame but so is the sentiment.
I find the shitty joke much more offensive than disliking the film.
Yeah. That's a terrible review
It takes a lot for me to put a joke review to be on the same level of bad quality as [these reviews](https://letterboxd.com/yddraiggoch/films/reviews/by/activity/)
Oof yeah. Can’t tell if it’s rage bait or just a spiteful person
is it bad that i hate big letterboxd accounts? like their reviews are always just so damned annoying. and not in any way where it'd challenge my thinking, they're just plain annoying
No it’s sane. They’re all insufferable
I haven't heard that name in a while... She's on my block list
FWIW it’s not in the site’s top 250
Burned most of their battery looking for 2 two stars together. Didn’t know they could just sort it that way. “Eye roll”
Didn't have to scroll too far tbh. Also I get it's obv well rated, but it's also not in the top 250 which is crazy to me for a film of this stature.
I think it's a movie that's the victim of both age and its own success. It's been so influential that it's been copied and parodied all over the place, and any film that's known mainly as "the greatest of all time" will struggle to keep up with the hype on first viewing. Meanwhile, it was huge at the time due to numerous technology and filmmaking innovations, which are now commonplace. If you're just coming to it today from a modern rather than historical context, I can see why it would be underwhelming to people who haven't seen many of its contemporaries, and that's even without people doing stupid things like trying to apply 21st century social mores to the story.
I came at it from a modern standpoint and loved it
So many Dislike The Whale and that has a 3.7 avg on Letterboxd
Its “greatest movie of all time" status makes people want to dislike it. I see the same thing happening with 2001
I would also suggest that if you go into something being told it's the "greatest movie of all time," that leaves a whole lot of room for disappointment. Unless you are immediately floored by its unprecedented perfection, it might seem like a failure.
Agreed, I luckily went into Citizen Kane with low expectations: I thought it would have aged terribly, would feel overrated, and only still in the discussion because of a small group of elitists. Holy shit did I enjoy watching it.
Still haven't gotten around to Citizen Kane, but I had a great scenario with 2001, where I watched it when I was like, 12 - not only did I find it incredibly boring and hate it, but I luckily also forgot 90% of it by the time I saw it in IMAX a few years ago. I went in with an open mind, but broadly remembering it as bad Holy *shit* it blew me away
Holy shit, I would watch that in IMAX in a second.
Hey if you can make a movie like this at 26 years old, that was groundbreaking in scope and still talked about nearly 100 years on… Have at it! 
I hope this doesn't get misconstrued or taken negatively, but if you watch a movie that's considered one of the greatest of all time, that's a moment where you go in within an open mind and set your expectations on what movies should be based on that. Set your standards, so to speak
Similar effect with The Big Lebowski and being told it’s ‘The Funniest Movie of All Time’ years and years before finally seeing it. Saw it. It’s pretty good. I can totally acknowledge why people like it so much. But funniest of all time makes me expect something so outright, objectively funny that I am unable to stop myself laughing throughout the whole movie. I don’t think any movie can live up to the title of Greatest ___ of all Time.
I'm unable to stop myself from laughing through the entire movie
I've had replies to my praise of Casablanca, where I say it absolutely is one of the best movies ever, to the effect of 'you sound surprised. a movie most people thought was good was good.' The point is that if I have no expectations and a movie is great, I am going to give it a high rating. If I have high expectations because of movie's reputation and I don't like it I am going to give a worse rating than if I had no expectations at all. The fact that a movie can live up to "one of the best of all time" is an incredible achievement.
I’ve watched both Kane and Casablanca for the first time within the last 6 months and have to say they’re both pretty much perfect. I was so pleased to have both of them live up to my expectations. It’s definitely a little more impressive when a ‘great’ film lives up to the billing
I wouldn't ever recommend anyone go into CK without the proper context and grounding in other movies that it influenced, not to mention some familiarity with movies that came before so the contrast can be appreciated. It's like trying to read Shakespeare blind with no knowledge of the history or understanding of the language.
I’ve went to Matrix like this when I watched the first time. Can’t tell you how disappointed I was. (Not saying that it was a bad movie by any means, but I thought it would be better)
That's the thing, when many claim one thing to be the GOAT, it leads to a lot of people either being contrary to be cool, or the expectation is so high that they're let down. You see it with music, athletes, games, everything
Related to how there’s always a backlash to whatever the Best Picture favorite is each year.
Yup. It took no time at all for people to decide EEAAO and Oppenheimer are actually terrible
I haven't heard of people calling Oppenheimer terrible (but then again I wasn't a fan of it even when it came out so maybe I wasn't interested enough to pay attention). I do recall people switching on Barbie being terrible the moment it got Oscar nominations though.
It just has too high expectations. I think people compare them to *their* favourite or best movie they’ve ever seen and they are like nah, this or that is better.
Sometimes it's just superficial, but I can also understand people today just not getting into it. The problem is that it feels like you've seen it all before, but that's because at the time no one had seen a lot of the standards and ideas it pushed that we take them for granted today.
Pretty much this. I re-watched Citizen Kane on BBC again recently, it's still fantastic.
also attention seeking contrarianism. lots of bad hot takes out there from folks who are more interested in putting their own opinion out there, then they are in the actual film
It happens on Goodreads all the time. You can practically place money that on any well-regarded book, the top review will always be 1 or 2 stars and amount to ‘I heard this was good, but I think it SUCKED!’
Except I would actually argue that 2001, while a technical marvel, is not a very interesting or compelling film. But that's a hot take for another day. Citizen Kane is good though.
I would actually argue that you’re wrong about 2001
There’s no way >!the AI hostile takeover!< (at least) isn’t interesting or compelling
Yeah, it's mostly the expectation. It happened to me with Oldboy
2001 doesn't have the same problem because it's so experimental, if anything it has aged better. Whereas the premise of Citizen Kane has been copied over and over.
The thing is, citizen kane is extremely experimental as well, welles changed how movie sets were made, he used really ambitious camera angles too
This is it. Expectations too high from all the hype, left underwhelmed. There are better movies than Citizen Kane but in the context of its time and film history it is one of the most important and excellent films, pioneering all kinds of techniques and plot complexities we take for granted today. Movies went from lightweight entertainment to serious art thanks to Citizen Kane. For that it should praised even if it isn't the film you enjoy the most.
A lot of people don't dislike Citizen Kane now. Those are just two people.
and even if people don’t like it, who cares? i feel like people often forget film is subjective lol
Right. Also it's a movie that has always not been for everybody. These opinions are not in any way new.
Exactly. There's tons of movies I don't like that are considered the greatest of all time and there's also movies that I consider my favorites that are disliked by the majority. As long as I like the movie I don't care who thinks its good and who doesn't and if I don't like a movie then I'm glad there's many people that are able to get enjoyment from it.
Expectations and hype can be damaging.
For a 40s Hollywood movie Citizen Kane always struck me as far more fast paced than average. Compared to something like the Maltese Falcon, which came out the same year to much more success, Citizen Kane is a barrage of stimulation
It’s crazy how the thing just moves, especially in the first half (second half is still great but the lonely Kane in Xanadu stuff does cause the pace to check up a bit I think). A lot more humour and lighthearted moments than I think most would expect too (although that is trademark Welles in many ways). I literally saw it for the first time last week and loved it. I was expecting a lot of great filmmaking, but I was surprised by how much I was impressed by the script, which I thought was excellent. I also loved the pace of it. It’s pretty phenomenally edited and structured. You basically ‘learn’ his life story within 10-15 minutes, but then the movie really dives into interrogating all of it to search for the ‘clues’ which explain the man. The framing of it as an investigation is a great way to focus the whole thing too; you’re encouraged to ask questions and sort of judge the guy, rather than just viewing it as a fictional biopic (which it is). None of this should be too surprising though. For all Welles’ wonderful talent for filmmaking, and his great talent as an actor, the way I kind of think of him is as cinemas ultimate showman. I think of the theatricality and confidence of his turn as Harry Lime, or the eloquence and humour with which he explained his approach to storytelling and direction in interviews. The guy seemed very aware of the fact that he was ultimately an entertainer, and he wore the attention he garnered so well imo. Kane is like the total realisation of all of those qualities. The film really feels aligned to his personality and demeanour. There’s more ideas crammed into it than in most filmmakers entire careers. Phenomenal creativity and showmanship
As the saying goes, "Classics are classic for a reason." It's why I don't like calling things dated. Plenty of old movies are superbly entertaining. Especially pre-Code era films. Like the original Scarface, or The Testament of Dr. Mabuse. Those movies fuckin' move! Hell, I remember watching 12 Angry Men in grade 10 and reaching the point where we had to turn it off because the period was almost over. Everyone was so pissed! Stagecoach? Phenomenal. Great character work and action.
Your tenth grade class was based
i’m a little confused how you could have such seemingly well informed opinions about Welles and have just seen Kane for the first time last week. decided to watch his oeuvre in reverse chronological order?
Hell, Orson even through in a jump scare out of nowhere just to make sure the audience was sitting up and paying attention. That fucking bird gets me every time.
Especially cuz it’s eye is transparent
underrated take
Yeah tbh I find the criticism of it being boring so strange. I watched it in high school, a time when I had an AWFUL attention span for film, and I actually dug the hell out of it. Greatest movie of all time is debatable (and always will be if you assign it to any film) but I still enjoyed it a lot.
Agreed. Was surprised at just how engaged I was.
I loved it when I first watched, genuinely thought it would be slow and boring. Found it to be much lighter and humorous in places than I ever expected. If you ever get to watch it with the Ebert commentary it really brings a further level of appreciation
I think it’s more influential and important than it is anything else, personally. I also think that it’s older, black and white and that turns some people off (they’re wrong.). I also think when a movie is dubbed one of the best movies of all time, people have different expectations
I totally agree, and beyond that, I think it's a filmmakers movie, and most of its genius goes over people's heads. The symbolism and cinematography in *Citizen Kane* is incredible and so seamless in its execution that it's simply missed by probably 75% of modern audiences.
I agree with that. If you want an insight into how innovative the movie is, watch the movie with Roger Ebert's commentary. I had to watch the film for a class in college, and I watched it twice. Once without the commentary, and once with. And while I liked it the first time, the second time with the commentary made me appreciate the movie in a whole new way.
Adding to this, I think modern viewers struggle with the innovations in Kane. Many likely haven't watched a good amount of films from the 20s and 30s and therefore won't see what Kane accomplished for the medium. Beyond that, everything Welles innovated has been improved or perfected along the way. Hard to read about its monumental significance and then watch it only to see nothing new or mind-blowing.
I think the title of being one of the best movies of all time not only spurns some contrarians and gives too high of expectations but also means that people just starting to get into film will watch it very early on in their key cinema education since it's at the top of almost every list. It's a movie that gains more value as you learn to appreciate its influence and importance and how revolutionary its elements were for the time. Going in cold from a modern perspective makes the movie seem just kinda ordinary because it's been replicated so thoroughly by the medium and still holds up so well. Without being able to appreciate its symbolism/intricacies it comes off as a fine movie, but that's well below the expectation of "best movie ever" resulting in disappointment. It's an awful choice as an introduction to Kino but its name recognition means a lot of people will start there.
Black and white is not why people are dissapointed that it doesn't live up to the hype. Lots of black and white movies from that time get lots of love from the newer generations
Just to clarify, I meant two different things there, I think the hype can be an issue for some and some people are reluctant to watch B&W movies
People dislike any movie, Idk why people not loving Citizen Kane is so surprising to you
Lmao two comments represent everyone apparently
It's a film I respect more than I enjoy. If I went in to it without thinking about its technical achievements and clear influence on cinema, I wouldn't find it to be too exciting.
The problem is people overhyping it. It isn’t most people’s #1 favorite movie, yet it’s often been called the “greatest movie of all time.” So a first-time viewer goes in with *extremely* high expectations, but the movie is hard to fully grasp on the first watch, so people are disappointed after one watch. If they look up explanations of what’s so great about it, they see dry, unexciting claims about *influential cinematography.* Most people don’t watch movies to see *influential cinematography!* So that doesn’t motivate most people to rewatch it. Also, a lot of first-time viewers don’t get to have the pleasure of puzzling over “rosebud” before it’s revealed, because jerks have spoiled it for them without giving a spoiler alert. I had to watch it at least 3 times before I really got how great it is. Ideally, you should plan to watch it repeatedly, first going into it cold with limited expectations, then watching some videos that analyze it, and coming back to it later knowing which scenes are especially important to focus on.
I think there’s a bunch of things to unpack here: 1. Citizen Kane was a groundbreaking film… in 1941. It was immediately influential, films began mimicking its style, cinematography, effects, editorial choices- you name it. All these aspects have been built and expanded upon, they’ve evolved into what we have today. But, even though what was new in 1941 is old hat now, we should still throw respect on the OG’s name. 2. Its pace is glacial by the standards of modern films. Not a bad thing, just a challenging one when you’ve been raised on tiktok. 3. Contrarianism is not to be underestimated. I avoided Kurosawa’s work for most of my life because every time I said I liked A Fistful of Dollars, some film-studies douch-nozzel would offer an “um actually, I preferred it in the original Japanese” put down. When I did see Yojimbo I was blown away, but that’s not the point.
The backlash is absolutely undeserved imo. Even without its influence on filmmaking, it's still just a really good film in it's own right. A must-see for anyone who likes There Will Be Blood.
Some things are more "influential" than good and they don't necessarily hold up for some people who don't have that context. I.e. the Beatles being "overrated" to some people or Seinfeld. With context there's no denying how groundbreaking these things are but they've been copied so many times that they don't seem great by today's standards to some people.
Literally any movie has people who dislike it, especially those with a greatest of all time status. Of course it holds up, of course not everyone is going to like it. Of course some people don’t like it in good faith, of course some are dumb kids who couldn’t tell a good film if it hit them like a train.
I liked it when I saw it, but I do remember it being very slow, and I think a lot of people confuse slow with boring.
I’ve never found it that slow relative to other dialogue driven dramas.
Maybe I'm misremembering, It's been a while...
If anything, it's probably too fast.
Anything that doesn’t obsess over timely dopamine hits is called slow online Even Denis was forced to speed up his Dune for no reason at all
I went to film school 25 years ago and it was slow then. It's a great technical movie no doubt about it, any filmmaker can get really into the details and the narrative. But it's a 83 year old movie, its slow paced and dialogue heavy. It's dated. Even 70s avant garde movies can seem no that great in our postmodern world.
I never liked it. I watched it twice in film school and gave it another shot in my 30s. It’s a groundbreaking technical achievement that is incredibly boring.
Yeah I think there’s a lot of pretense in these comments too. “They just don’t like black and white or dialogue driven films. It has too much hype so people want to hate it.” Citizen Kane is boring for a lot of people. But it’s not for any of those reasons. 12 Angry Men is literally 12 dudes in a room and fits all the criteria here and is absolutely riveting. Hara Kiri is just a guy sitting cross legged telling a story. Banger. It depicts an honestly unbelievable protagonist. He’s just a good guy who grows cynical because he gets rich and powerful. It’s a bullshit fable. There Will Be Blood takes Citizen Kane but makes it real by showing the type of person who slavishly pursues power and wealth is psychopathic from the start and they use their wealth to further destroy people. Watching Citizen Kane in 2024 is just watching a story that could have and has been told better at this point. It’s a historical piece at this point and I’ll get hate for saying it but it has no relevant story to tell.
The difference is Daniel Plainview was never a good person and never really pretended to be. Charles Foster Kane was always ambitious, but he was also idealistic and believed in the power of his profession to change the world for the better. His original drive was not merely to enrich himself. But in order to be successful and stay that way, he had to change himself so much that he could no longer see the world he once wanted to save.
I love There Will Be Blood, Hara Kiri, and Twelve Angry Men. All infinitely better overall films than Citizen Kane. To be fair, I think I went in to watching it the first time at 18 with high expectations and was very whelmed by Citizen Kane. In comparison, I watched Casablanca, Seven Samurai, and The Bicycle Thief shortly after watching Kane for the first time, and those films I loved.
People like what they like obviously. But anyone that tells me I just don’t understand Citizen Kane is just someone demanding that their opinions be taken seriously. A tragedy needs to have a somewhat believable and sympathetic character to have emotional resonance. Depicting a billionaire as the real victim of capitalism is laughable and completely not relatable. Personally I would go so far as to say the subject of the movie treats the audience with contempt although I understand it won’t be a common opinion. I don’t need to hear a single more time how I don’t understand how groundbreaking the cinematography was when these same people can’t seem to grasp why modern audiences have absolutely zero attachment or interest for Charles Foster Kane.
To me that's the appeal of the story: not that Kane is someone I can identity with, but because he's someone I *can't at all* sympathize with by the end. And yet I do find him admirable at the beginning, and over the course of it I watch him the whole time and still can't quite tell exactly at what point he becomes unrecognizable as a human being. The tragedy isn't for Kane himself, it's for the world that lost the man he used to be. Somewhere along the way he became the very thing he once railed against, and it's treated not as a singular event that only happened to him but as a systemic problem that happens to *everyone* who wants to make an impact. The very system they're trying to change consumes and absorbs them, and they become tools of it.
It's become a homework movie to a lot of people. Its like how Charles Dickens went from being basically the Marvel Studios of English writing (getting paid by the word to crank out disposable, populist, low brow, entertainment for the masses) to being considered high literature because of his work reaching the top of the Brit lit canon. A lot of people consume Kane and Dickens thinking they're about to experience the best thing ever, and when they aren't blown away they dislike it more than normal. They've literally been told that this is Great Art their whole lives. With that kind of baggage something that's even ok or just fine suddenly seems bad.
Is there any film in the world that plenty of people don’t dislike?
Contemporary films move faster than older films, so audiences who aren't used to watching older films find old movies boring. They don't like Citizen Kane because they've actually seen Citizen Kane, because of its reputation. They have almost certainly not seen any other films from 1941, and they would dislike those films even more.
Tik tok brain ruins people
Criticism right now is just saying "everything that was good is actually bad. everything that was bad is actually good." Reappraisal is good, but a lot of criticism is lazy and uniformed and I blame death of the author for most of that.
People have opinions.
I didn't care for Citizen Kane but I loved Casablanca. 🤷
The “greatest of all time” moniker is grossly misunderstood. It isn’t meant to signify that in a vacuum, it’s a better movie to watch than any other, but that the craft and technique on display, and the way those are combined into a single work, make it the most significant work in the development of the medium. There were movies before *Citizen Kane*, and those after.
Too hyped up at this point.....make you create an unimaginable status for the movie
Anything that gets labeled "the greatest of all time" and is then seen by many people with high expectations will get push back. As for me, I like Kane just fine but there are several films from that era I much prefer.
Can I be old and just blame Gen Z?
Sometimes with old movies you have to watch it while keeping in mind the time in which it was released. If you don’t do that old films don’t always hold up. Might be these kids just don’t know anything about film/American cultural history
It's literally because the snootiest of film bros will frequently cite it as "their favourite movie" or "the best movie" and it really isn't a great story - it's full of holes, it's pretty melodramatic, and it isn't the most interesting subject to most people. So when most people finally get around to watching it, they're underwhelmed and bored and they think to themselves "The fuck is wrong with these people who like this?" The movie was groundbreaking in regards to production, but I would agree that anyone who cites it as their favourite movie is probably just trying to keep up the image of "serious movie watcher." And a lot of people cite it as their favourite film.
It’s the most overrated film on the planet Still can appreciate it in ways for what it has done for film
I reject your premise. Your thesis seems to be based on a minority opinion of reviews on Letterboxd, there are things like sample size that matter. I think you have to work your way towards learning to appreciate older and older films as someone interested in film. I have noticed a tendency of rejecting black and white films with the generation younger than me (I'm 35) but hell, when I was 14 Michael Bay's Bad Boys was my favorite film. These people calling Citizen Kane boring will discover an entry point into vintage films, like Casablanca, and hopefully go from there.
they got filtered by the bird that screeches really fucking loud in that one scene
thats like the one bit I loved lol
It’s like okay but I can clearly see why people don’t like it
[удалено]
Interesting take
It’s a baller movie. Tight and dynamic. Not my favorite, but these reviews are wild.
If you really give a shit about this its time to log off.
Disappointed by the lack of cane.
People confuse "considered the greatest movie of all time by critics especially back in the day" with "will literally become my favourite movie ever and if it doesn't then it's actually overrated"
the more movies you see, the more you appreciate it. it requires media literacy and many viewers are still acquiring it.
I've always enjoyed the movie, but never understood all the accolades. I think the real life drama and massive clash of the egos was a far more interesting story. There are a couple of good movies on the subject, "Mank" and "RKO 281".
I watched it for the first time last year, expecting it to be a little over hyped and not quite as good as its reputation suggests. I thought it was fucking great.
I found it underwhelming. It doesn’t have the feel it would have had during the era it was released in.
it holds up
I don’t think it has anything to do with expectations honestly. Sometimes I need to watch a movie twice to like it but I hated it the first time I watched it.
I think so many of those revolutionary things it started have become more commonplace now and people aren’t impressed by it when they expect more from something regarded so highly
Three reasons a) expectations make even a good movie appear worse b) there are great contemporary movies like awara that doesn't get attention because they are not American c) They are spoiled for choices as the world of cinema have many gems, calling something greatest movie naturally invites animosity
The scene where he fights all the dudes with _the Cane_ is pretty epic though
one of the most stirring and exciting films i’ve ever seen. so fucking hype the entire way through
It's just your typical normie dipshit social media assholes whose opinions are not worth reading. Move along.
Film school mfs resent citizen Kane with a passion. Its status as one of the greatest films ever made make them resent it.
i mean i, as a young 20 something, love old movies but i think calling it the best film of all time is an extremely overly generous stretch. it’s literally just a movie. i found movies like the mummy (1932) or rope (1941) to be more engaging, just to name movies from around the same time. it’s definitely an important movie technically, but i don’t think the story holds up anymore
I like it, but I don’t think it’s “the greatest movie of all time”. I think those high expectations might off put some people seeing it for the first time. I give it a 4.5/5
It’s basically an art house film, which rarely appeals to the masses.
I remember once hearing it called a "film class movie" and that's a good way of putting it. Is it objectively well made? Absolutely. Is it a fun film you return to over and over? Nope. I think I have it at like a 3.5 myself. I recognize how well made it is, but I watched it a handful of times in college and probably won't be going out of my way to watch it again.
I really wouldn’t lose sleep over this. “This was literally so boring.” That’s subjective, not actually indicative of the movie’s quality.
It’s still one of the greatest movies ever made. The opinions of Ciara and Penny won’t change that fact. I’m assuming they’re both in their mid-20s and are trying to be contrarians.
To be honest, I think most people that hate on it without some sort of specific criticism are more often than not stuck in the mindset of “old = bad/boring”. For a time I definitely thought that way and thought it was cool to dismiss older work as irrelevant and pretentious. With most older movies, especially stuff like Citizen Kane, people talk about them for a reason.
I think, for the most part people still like it. I don't wanna be that guy, but I feel like with the new generations, it's a take what you can get kind of thing with no regard for the time period and limitations and influence. It can be boring for sure but it's revolutionary. What it does for cinema is huge. Short attention spans only breed more immediate pleasures which is not the case for most old movies. This is me presuming they're even young, I don't know at all.
Letterboxd reviews 🤝 Backloggd reviews Corny ass unfunny jokes by trolls who tend to have a terribly incorrect opinion
Most young people will always hate old things. Has always been the way surely? I recall finding black and white films boring when I was younger, same with classical music. It’ll only be when they’re older that they can appreciate films like Citizen Kane.
I’m sorry but reddit posts like these make me so irrationally annoyed lmao. Like you really can’t figure out why an app that’s populated by teenagers and 20 somethings who were raised on fucking spiderman and pixar has some negative reviews for an old ass black and white film that came out fuckin 80 years ago? Like is that really such a puzzle for you?
Maturing is realising these two are right
I hate quirky short reviews that sound like some passing remark from a teenager.
I didn't like the movie. I think it's the praise that gave you higher expectations for it. Sometimes, it would disappoint you more if it doesn't live up to them.
A student in my class, 19 years old, said "it's boring AF." I watched it a couple years ago and thought it still held up well. As others said, it is popular to hate popular things.
Because it's not a Marvel movie
People spewing shit like “anyone who says this is their favorite movie is lying” are always insanely annoying, but I just have to tap the sign again which reads: “block and move on”.
Definitely an age thing
There are a lot of morons with bad taste in the world.
Contrarianism
It doesn’t hold up. It’s “great” because of innovations made in the movie, which are now common place. It absolutely has a significant place in history, but it’s long and boring as hell. If someone tells me they love Citizen Kane I immediately assume they are a snooty critic type because the movie isn’t loveable. What they mean is that they like or love studying it or that they appreciate it. I do not believe it surprises anyone or makes people feel anything deeply or is engaging anymore.
I think some people just like hating and will hate anything and have no taste to begin with
I think it's important to consider that each person has their own experience with a film. And this is subjective. People who really like cinema, consume reviews and know classic films will probably have a different experience with a film like Citizen Kane than people who just started liking cinema. In fact, those who gave the title “best film of all time” to this film were critics analyzing very subjective and difficult to measure things. For some people, it is just boring. And comparing to some movies, it really is! I myself like other types of films and that's okay. But I understand that it is an important masterpiece that you should know to understand cinema.
I think some people are more influenced by their own expectations than others. This is one thing I know about myself. If I am looking forward to a movie, I am usually let down. I’m far more likely to love a movie I’m surprised by. I wish it weren’t true — but it definitely is.
I watched it for school and thought it was entertaining. I couldn’t tell you about all the techniques or whatever but it kept my interest.
People like this is why LB has an inferior group of reviewers to IMDb.
It absolutely holds up because it has extremely modern (ahead of its time) pacing and cinematography. Also very timely with a mogul controlling the media for personal and political gain.
I think a lot of it has to do with the pacing of CK. Old films have a very different pacing to contemporary movies and if you don’t have any experience of watching them it can be a slog. I say this as a teacher who has shown older films to students who just don’t know what to expect. Like the time I screened *Blade Runner* and the universal response was “boring”.
What made Citizen Cane remarkable does not stand out as much anymore. We are used to see films shot this way. We are used to having narrative structure this way. Movie makers since then have taking those tricks and techniques and expounded up on them. It is highly revered because it was ground breaking. It was ahead of its time. It doesn’t feel that way now.
Hate the sentiments of the second review btw, it is insufferable and incredibly self absorbed to think everybody who have a different opinion than you is just faking it.
The worst is seeing this in film school. You're being told about how important and great it is and then forcing a room full of people to watch it. Pretty much everyone in my class was like "what's the big deal."
Who dare say it doesn’t hold up? It’s fucking brilliant. The dinner/marriage crumbling montage just by itself…
What I run into is those who don’t see how influential this is and how ahead of the curve it is while still being a fantastic middle finger to a terrible person. My family just says it’s dated because the make up and sets are “old” and it’s just people talking - so it’s boring.
It's a product of its time. The framing of scenes and transitions from one to the next were groundbreaking at the time and elevated it as a result. Since it's not anything special now and the movie is judged squarely on its entertainment value it stands to reason why people find it boring, because it is.
The movie is more for film makers and not the general viewing public. Its a technically innovative film way ahead of its time but its story and characters are really not interesting. There are many vastly better films than KANE.
a contrarian thing id say. i finally watched it a few years ago and it was good vut i wouldnt herald it a masterpiece
They're idiots who don't appreciate good storytelling.
Its a trend
I see only two people, who dislike Citizen Kane
TBF, i felt it is too boring a movie.
People love attention on social media, Letterbox is no different. Some people genuinely think that Captain America and the Winter Soldier is one of best movies of all time, now is up to you if their opinion matter or don't.
It's kind of always been my opinion that a lot of old movies are Hella boring. I just cannot stand older editing styles where it feels like so many scenes can't justify their existence and pad out time cause they had to record a person walking down the street for 20 minutes and couldn't afford to waste the film. I know it's controversial but if I ever rewatch 2001: A Space Odyssey again it'll be at 1.5x speed. It's just too damn slow.
I will try to avoid repeating what others have said and focus on what these reviews say First Review This is not a surprising opinion to have. Most people who watch films are doing so for entertainment, if they don't like the story, they don't like the movie. It's nothing against them or the movie itself, it's just an opinion. There are so many classics out there and not everyone is going to like all of them Second Review I'm presuming what this person means is people who are saying this is their favourite film are doing so to look more film literate than they actually are. And while I don't think everyone who says this is lying, I do think that some of them are. But the only way we would know this is to look at that person's rating for other classic films. If they have no classic films rated below 4 stars, I would not believe they were being honest. As I said before "There are so many classics out there and not everyone is going to like all of them". A classic does not deserve a higher review just because it's a classic
I watched it once and wasn't really impressed. I read about some of its history and importance, watched it again, and enjoyed it more. Then I watched it with the Roger Ebert commentary and enjoyed it even more. I've seen it 5 times now and I'm of the opinion that it's about a ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ and a half star movie.
The real answer OP is because it is a exploratory portrait of an old rich white man which isn’t exactly in vogue right now.
People hear "Greatest movie ever made" then are disappointed when it's just black and white and talking
Yes it's an aging thing and if anyone wants to say "i am this year old and still think blah blah blah" not everyone is movie enthusiasts and the general population will mostly be disinterested in old movies. Only a few old movies like 12 angry men can hold up much better in this generation
Just elitists trying to act like they hate everything that is famous, nothing new.
It’s slow and I guess today’s audiences don’t have the patience for it.
It's a film non-film experts (including me) may not appreciate regardless how technically groundbreaking it was at the time. So we'll primarily watch for the plot. And the plot is boring.
Populist stupidity, and the ease of airing it out.
Some of us prefer Citizen Abel.
You can dislike any movie ever. There no movies that everybody loved and no movies which anyone hated
I absolutely adore Citizen Kane. I hadn't seen it in probably 15 years until I finally sat down and told the person that I watched it with sarcastically "Ready to see the greatest movie of all-time" because some people think it's funny that it has that moniker, so I was just being sarcastic. I watched it, and loved it more, and the other person said "It was...good". I accidentally created a false-hype for someone new to it and I felt so bad. I did exactly what causes people to dislike it and I'm so mad at myself! 😂 Citizen Kane is one of the best movies I've ever seen for the record..
I dislike Citizen Kane because I was bored shitless watching it, and for the last 40 minutes I was just waiting for it to end — not because it’s old and black and white. Casablanca is from the same era and I absolutely loved it, as well as other 1940s films I enjoyed far more.
I gotta say when I watched it for the first time I was blown away, I am one of the people who will die on the hill that it is "that good"
It’s always been a divisive film. It bombed when it originally came out. People found it dreadfully boring then. Welcome to cinema.
Edward Norton did a talk at Oxford recently where he brought up Joseph Campbell's observation that stories or myths lose their salience when the observer cannot see themselves in the tale. The example in question was Fight Club and how it didn't start as a success but gained recognition over time. He likened it to Dustin Hoffman's Graduate, but I digress. The point is that people saw themselves in the narrator of Fight Club because he was resisting what society had "planned" for him. The "go to school, work, have kids" gambit, how Project Mayhem was a vision of rebellion, etc. This was a context that could be resonated with by audiences: they recognise the landscape, the sentiment, the disassociation, even. I've put off Citizen Kane. I tried it for a moment but lost interest quickly thereafter but knew I had to revisit it eventually. Keyword is eventually, and however many years later, I still have not seen it. There's a reason contemporary film gets hyped and is top of the charts on Letterboxd. Furiosa, Challengers, and Dune 2 probably will not endure in significant ways (just my opinion.) On the other hand, you have relatively recent films like There Will Be Blood that are probably going to be classics, or celebrated for acting prowess. Moonlight comes to mind, too. I'm not saying most people can see themselves in the middle of an industrial boom or gold rush in the middle of the desert, I'm saying that the norms of the 2000/10s are still paletable. That is, they're comparatively more salient. It's difficult watching acclaimed film because a lot of the time they're dramas and yeah, come on, let's be real, they can be slow. That's the nature of non-blockbuster, artistic film. Have it age for too long and it'll obscure the audience's own reflection. Fight Club will go the way of Citizen Kane eventually. Thus the cycle continues, until another film retells the essence again for Gen Z or whomever comes next. Edit: I want to make it clear that in the spirit of cinephilia we all make sacrifices to watch something "boring" to have an open mind and understand canonical film and art despite it having aged. Its contributions to contemporary genres, how it's a "proto" something, how it shaped filmmakers and actors Edit 2: Case in point, Paths of Glory. It's an old, boring film that is said to be a critique of war, its senselessness, and so on. Is it for most people? No. But it was created by a legend and it should be appreciated for it's contribution to film
it's very good and very influential but it's definitely no the greatest film of all time, thats why there's a small backlash
Objectively, it holds up, and like all great movies it always will People are just immature
Some people seem to be strongly affected by hype, and this movie is criminally overhyped imo. I think its fall from the top spot on Sight and Sound is a reflection that people are watching more foreign films now, and the American canon is being challenged by world cinema. Rightfully so, I think. Worth watching, but if you’re expecting the greatest movie of all time and you’ve seen a lot of movies, you’ll probably be disappointed.
Because they are watching it from the perspective of someone over 80 years later, with 80 years of movies heavily influenced by Welles. If you aren’t actively interested in filmmaking techniques and history it’s hard to understand why people care about the movie so much. That all being said, I do think there is something to be said for something both hugely influential in its day and still just as entertaining to non critics or creators generations later. 2001: A Space Odyssey may have a been a more critically acclaimed film but there’s a reason why you don’t see people who aren’t film buffs obsessing over it today while you very much do still see tons of people in love with the original Star Wars. Not trying to say that mass appeal is inherently better but being able to appeal to both critics and casuals from many generations is something very difficult to achieve even among the greatest artists.
It’s a different era and really only appreciated by cinema aficionados who look at style, music, filmography as well as for a storyline…if people are looking for car chases and robot men, this won’t do it. Plus it’s in black and white, a culture shock for many youngsters. I know people who won’t consider watching a film in black and white. The point of the film is lost to such as these.
you’re making a lot of assumptions i think pretty much all of my friends would be down to watch a film in black and white maybe even a silent film.
Dude, charge your phone😭🙏
Same thing happened with the Beatles. Younger people will listen or watch out of context of the time period and not understand the impact the art had. Citizen cane is fine, not bad, didn't blow my mind, but I can recognize how great it is for how much it influenced.
Hm? Citizen Kane is a very highly regarded movie. Two negative reviews won’t make a big difference.
Because you scrolled through Letterboxd reviews to find two negative ones back to back
Bro charge your phone