Ah finally a response. I can finally talk "film" to someone now lol. I must disagree with you on many grounds. Ofcourse we're all entitled to our own oppinion, and here is mine: Citizen Kane is a masterpiece because he explores character. The film was ABOUT citizen kane. From beginning to end, from the "docu reel" to rosebud. It was all beautifully and so intricately woven together. The script was flawless. I've only begun reading the script, and WOW is all I have to say.

You say it doesn't stand the "test of time." I say "time doesn't stand the test of greatness." Our "taste" for film has dramatically changed. Many can't recognize a good film if it hit them in the head. Because we are so desensitized to a world of bad and poorly made film. Where all we need is a few explosions here and there to be satisfied. It's not about good taste in film anymore, now it's about too much " taste enhancers ." For example, one film critic likened our generation of movie goers to (forgive the bad taste in illustration) eating cow dung. Hollywood has turned into a big cow dung factory and passing it off as steak. They keep giving you cow dung and calling it steak. And after a while, because you become hungry, you eat the cow dung called steak. And then after awhile, as you become customed to eating cow dung and calling it steak, you become to accept the cow dung as steak. And then the cow dung actually begins to taste like steak. And so you have one big giant cow-dung-making factory called hollywood. Phew, that was a long illustration but you get my point.

Ok here's another illustration. You have comic books and then you have Picasso and Renoir. Someone likes the comic book illustration more, not because Picasso and Renoir "fails the test of time," but because our time has failed the test of greatness. We pass off entertainment as a good film. The world is sooo easily entertained that that shouldn't even be a criteria. Buy some Britney Spears cds and pass it off in a circus with that level of judgement. Anyways, a good film SHOULD entertain you--i'm not saying it should bore you to death. But i think a lot of the greats like Citizen Kane has the ability to "bore" someone is because of subject matter--not because of the script. The script is outstanding. Orson Welles has succeded in the emotional level of character as well--we are just to numb to realize it. Numb because our time has changed. Acting has changed. The acting then and the acting now is totally different--Because in real life we don't act like the people 60 years ago. People acted different--so the reality in the films back then, to us, is somewhat unreal. Times have changed, indeed. Now we want scantly clad women carrying guns and fighting off Rock monsters so to save the world from utter destruction (i.e. Tomb Raider the movie), entertaining, indeed. Ok...i know..i'm ranting. Hehe.

Ok, you said Citizen Kane's fall wasn't tragic. Good. The movie wasn't about Citizen Kane's fall. The movie was--about Citizen Kane, the man, the "communist," the american, the man himself. Orson Welles weaves together the who, what, when, and where of Citizen Kane's life--he did that so flawlessly, as it all came together...beginning and ending with "rosebud," the story was balanced and unified. Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful.

But ofcourse, our taste in films, like our taste in art, has "transcended" (yes i'm being sarcastic). We like explosion, boom boom boom, ENTER THE MATRIX in a Cell Phone to transport into another dimension. Camera frame freeze to super praying mantis type kick. "Cool." ;)

Don't get me wrong... I like the contemporary stuff, it's "cool." But the classics are simply...genius.

Justmarvin