What a wonderfully written, narrated and edited analysis! So comprehensible but also incredibly smart. Loved the part about the composition of the scene and the power structures it signified. Certainly made me think more about the film.
This could be the best explanation of the movie. The maximum that a reviewer can explain because everything about it is explained here. When 10/10 writing and 10/10 directing come together maybe the best of all time movie comes out
The way you highlighted Kane and Thatcher's relationship was brilliant. I need to watch the movie again, seeing it "anew", realizing now that there is ALWAYS a "sled" in between them: Kane, throughout his life, sees Thatcher as his "beloved antagonist," the one who afforded him opportunity, as well as robbed him of his mother. And Rosebud, the seal to bind these two together, both makes and breaks Kane. Rosebud is Kane at his purest; Rosebud is where his failures, namely his ownership by Thatcher, began. Rosebud is all, and the sled is in every scene, though invisible.
A snow board I'd kept from my daughter's childhood brought me here. That snow board ended up gone by accident and it made me think of rosebud. How important certain things mean in our lives. We too often discount inadvertently certain things lost. At the time, they don't seem that important, but after the loss, it's then we realise how much we miss them. I guess the loss is the only true way we realise the importance. We should take more time before we discount something and really think about how we will feel if we let something go.
You did a fantastic job with this. I'd like to make some additional observations. 1. When Susan talks about singing she explains that her mother wanted her to sing "grand opera". Kane's interest in her voice is to give her what her mother wanted for her, even though her voice would have been more suited to singing in turn of the century Operetta and Vaudville productions. If Kane had simply backed her in that kind of career instead of massive French Grand Opera productions she may have been a success, and he would have taken the "qoutes" off the word "singer" that appeared in the rival newspapers. 2. Emily Monroe Norton Kane is a blue blooded snob, racist and cold fish. She is exactly the kind of woman that Kane's mother would have him marry. The depiction of their marriage does indeed show Emily's negative traits, especially when the subject of Mr Bernstein visiting Charles II in the nursery is discussed. Clearly Emily is not only offended by the gift Bernstein bought for her son, but is offended by Bernstein himself, who is depicted as the kindest, most upbeat character in the film. Charles is deeply offended when Emily tries to ban Bernstein from the nursery. Her only motivation to do so would be the above mentioned snobbery, racism and cold personality. Bernstein is obviously a Jewish person. Kane not only admires Bernstein but in his way wants justice and equality for all people of all faiths. This small section of the film is the exact point where Charles and Emily's marriage ends for all intents and purposes. By the time we have the exchange "People will think....what I TELL them to think" Charles despises Emily because of her racist and class oriented views. His whole reason for choosing a woman like Susan over Emily is due to Emily's character flaws. 3. Susan and Leland are painfully ungrateful people. Kane "punishes" Leland by allowing him to go to Chicago and continue his career as a theater critic. Leland therefore continues to enjoy a lavish lifestyle despite the fact that his friendship with Kane is over. We also know that Leland had his own designs on Emily, and most likely always resented the fact that Kane "stole" her from him with his money. He must have been very angry with Kane when he learned of his affair with Susan. Then when Susan has her premiere and Leland is too drunk to finish his bad review, Kane writes the review for him, then fires him while giving him a 25000 severance check. That sum would be worth $875,000 in today's money, clearly enough for Leland to buy a home, start a business, and in general have a successful life separate from Kane. He refuses the money because the insult is more important to him than accepting a very generous severance. Susan meanwhile is not at all grateful for the lavish lifestyle Kane gives her. She makes no attempt to find a type of performance that works for her voice. When the bombastic opera coach insults her Kane defends her, as any husband would, rich or poor. If Susan had just advised Kane that she should be singing Operetta and Vaudvlle roles, styles that would have accommodated her slender but pleasant voice very well, he would have still gotten what he wanted but she would have been far more successful. Later on she makes no attempt to take on her role as "Mrs Kane" and rule as a society hostess. She just wants to go back to New York and party on Kane's money. She isn't a bad person per se, but she makes no attempt to grow. In the end she loses her money because of the stock market crash and ends up a drunken bar room singer, still performing but in the lowest of all possible venues, as opposed to the many avenues that would have been available for her voice had she been more grateful. In general it's important to remember that all of the narrators in this story are flawed. Berstein loves Kane, so he tells the most upbeat story. Leland hates him so he tells the darkest story. Thatcher doesn't understand him so he tells an empty story from a financier's point of view. Susan is self centered, so she tells of hurting Kane by leaving him. The butler basically lies about events, so we can never really be sure if Kane even destroyed his bedroom, as monumental a scene as that is. It is a truly great story and a truly great film because all of these layers, and more, can be found with continued viewings. I still consider it the greatest film of all time due to its rich storyline, as well as the fantastic cinematic achievements.
Just watched Citizen Kane for the first time and can’t stop learning more about it. Your video is one of the most informative, engaging and interesting pieces about the masterful film. It’s truly the Citizen Kane of Citizen Kane essays. Well done, sir!
I see that Kane's mother had good intentions and try to do what's best for him; however, she unintentionally did more harm than good. She and Thatcher took the choice away from and made decisions for him while he was a child.
"I have had his bags packed for a week, now.." She's eerily-cold for someone's dear mother. Also sounds like she KNEW about sending Charles before her (drunken?) husband who seems emotional and (obviously) abusive.
@@hippojuice23 she knew it wasn't the best choice but wanted her son to have a better life. Talk about irony that caused Charles to see things differently.
I did a paper in a film critics class. For the most part, I agree with the topics brought up and the relation to Rosebud. But actually, as we all know Welles was a masterful genius with symbology so, I will offer something to ponder. On the 1st Christmas after being in the care of his guardian, he received his second sled. There are only two frames that show the name of that sled. Crusader was the name, freezeframe it and you will see. My paper was contrasting the Crusader that Kane became rather than the innocence of his youth with Rosebud. My point is that the Crusader was the motivation for his life, feverish unrequited love for the underdog, and not Rosebud. He was forced to leave Rosebud behind as he had left the first sled by its name. But that yes, in the end, he missed his innocent youth, motherhood, and apple pie, to the point of his dying word. Of all the material things in his life, he could not have that simple sled...Rosebud and the different life that could have been.
You give an incredibly powerful insight to one of the greatest and possibly most complex movies ever made. I believe that in making the film Orson Wells gave a reflection of life within the story that he told. It is just the bones that is brilliantly made and told. You have added flesh giving a unique and very interesting interpretation of the way in which everyone got to where they were in the film. In many ways it is just a love story between Charlie Kane and his second wife Susan. Because of the early absence of his mother’s love, if that ever existed, he never learned to love a woman. Everything harks back to the final moment as a chid when with his sledge ‘Rosebud’, the chance for him to learn love from his mother was callously taken away. His father impotently stood by and watched being powerless to intervene. Almost as a ghost, his father’s impotency in him reoccurs at key turning points in his life. Brilliant film and very thoughtful review which adds real flesh to the bones.
@@CinemaAbsurdist Not at all, the essence of a really great film is the discussion that it generates considering the issues that arise. As a story it is possibly fanciful as reality took a leave of absence. The power is within the interaction between the characters as the tale unfolds. In a modern context, one can only wonder whether there are similarities between Charles Foster Kane and Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Neither would appear to have love as a child and both ruthlessly sought it throughout their lives. Kane in a benign way and Putin with ruthless cruelty towards a nation that wants self-determination and freedom for its citizens. Interesting that Citizen Kane was Donald John Trump’s favourite movie. One can only wonder whether he saw himself in Kane. He is very much a man seeking love throughout his life with little evidence of having received any as a child.
I have no idea why you only have 00 subscribers bruh. That observation of authoritative figures on both sides, and him evolving into being the authority was genius.
It's really just about the loss of innocence. Every other detail is secondary to that and simply adds more detail. It was only when I had children that I realised how magical childhood really is.
This is fascinating. I have watched this film at least 5 times and I was perplexed. This is a film that grows on the viewer. I wasn't impressed with it the first time I watched, but have really come to regard this film as a cinematic work of art. And, this is an epic explanation of Rosebud, and very deep. Thanks for the commentary on this.
It's more than just the end of innocence. It is realizing that his mother did not love him unconditionally. This film is, by Orson Welles' own words, meant as a sociological statement about the modern "acquisitive" (Orson Welles own word) society and its destruction of the nuclear family and its sacred, spiritual bonds. Please read Robert Bly's take on this very subject in "Iron John". This is the most poignant condemnation of industrial, post-agragrian society in contemporary culture. It is the final twist of the "mother complex". Another film dealing with the same subject but set in pre-industrial Europe is Kubrick's masterpiece "Barry Lyndon". These two films are perhaps the finest films ever made, certainly the most acutely psychological and intelligent.
I always think of Roseburg the town I was born in... That like some dullision I have built up some mad interconnected mythos of epic grandiose proportions. Anywhoo it would really mean nothing if this wasn't such a great film. @&^$ props to the uploaders explanation
For abit more of my mainly off basis/topic... The Croatian kuna... Their dollar equivalent, looks and sounds semi similar to Kane. The 5 lipa coin has oak leaf with acorns on it and "quercus robur" written (red or strong oak in Croatian) This also links to Roanoke and croatowan @&^$ Mind the spelling before the Mongolian capital Xanadu was karakorum I won't illustrate the lesser similarities of connections my brain just seems to see... Karak (kan sorta mirrored on itself) and orum/Orson Just for a candid example. I'm not trying to be some Stupid troll I'm attempting an artsy expression of appreciation..... @&^$ thanks
Imagine being cast out of your crib, into the reality of life? Nobody took my sled away, my parents or anything, I never had that. So I see him and Michael Jackson as very lucky, they have something to miss.
thanks i didn't pay much attention to certain detail like trapping angle in those two scenes, that's so thoughtful! they spoke too much and fast can't divide my concentration to the look detail and to what they say... this film is less attractive and less enjoyable compared to Hitchcock's or Charlie Chaplin's, but they named it the highest rated film ever, second behind Paddington 2!!!! shocking
What a wonderfully written, narrated and edited analysis! So comprehensible but also incredibly smart. Loved the part about the composition of the scene and the power structures it signified. Certainly made me think more about the film.
Thank you very much :)
This could be the best explanation of the movie. The maximum that a reviewer can explain because everything about it is explained here. When 10/10 writing and 10/10 directing come together maybe the best of all time movie comes out
Thank you so much! Your comment made my day. Also, 10/10 for Greg Toland's incredible cinematography!
@@CinemaAbsurdist everything is 10/10 😄. You are an amazing channel keep the good work up!
@@merttimur123 Thank you so much! Will definitely try to keep bringing good content to you!
The way you highlighted Kane and Thatcher's relationship was brilliant. I need to watch the movie again, seeing it "anew", realizing now that there is ALWAYS a "sled" in between them: Kane, throughout his life, sees Thatcher as his "beloved antagonist," the one who afforded him opportunity, as well as robbed him of his mother. And Rosebud, the seal to bind these two together, both makes and breaks Kane. Rosebud is Kane at his purest; Rosebud is where his failures, namely his ownership by Thatcher, began. Rosebud is all, and the sled is in every scene, though invisible.
Great point!
Really explained a lot about the film and made me appreciate the symbolism of Welles’s camera work.
Thank you! Props to Greg Toland too!
I don't usually comment on videos. But this was a terrific video, well done!
Thank you!
I wrote a paper on this film in University for my film degree and this is a perfect synopsis. Well done.
Thank you!
Hey I’m currently also wiring on this film. Would u mind helping?
A snow board I'd kept from my daughter's childhood brought me here. That snow board ended up gone by accident and it made me think of rosebud. How important certain things mean in our lives. We too often discount inadvertently certain things lost. At the time, they don't seem that important, but after the loss, it's then we realise how much we miss them. I guess the loss is the only true way we realise the importance. We should take more time before we discount something and really think about how we will feel if we let something go.
Surely if it's stored in our memory the possession becomes immaterial so to speak.
@@nutcracker2916 good point.
Great video, wonderful analysis. The meaning of "Rosebud" was haunting me. Now I appreciate the film even more. What a masterpiece!
You did a fantastic job with this. I'd like to make some additional observations.
1. When Susan talks about singing she explains that her mother wanted her to sing "grand opera". Kane's interest in her voice is to give her what her mother wanted for her, even though her voice would have been more suited to singing in turn of the century Operetta and Vaudville productions. If Kane had simply backed her in that kind of career instead of massive French Grand Opera productions she may have been a success, and he would have taken the "qoutes" off the word "singer" that appeared in the rival newspapers.
2. Emily Monroe Norton Kane is a blue blooded snob, racist and cold fish. She is exactly the kind of woman that Kane's mother would have him marry. The depiction of their marriage does indeed show Emily's negative traits, especially when the subject of Mr Bernstein visiting Charles II in the nursery is discussed. Clearly Emily is not only offended by the gift Bernstein bought for her son, but is offended by Bernstein himself, who is depicted as the kindest, most upbeat character in the film. Charles is deeply offended when Emily tries to ban Bernstein from the nursery. Her only motivation to do so would be the above mentioned snobbery, racism and cold personality. Bernstein is obviously a Jewish person. Kane not only admires Bernstein but in his way wants justice and equality for all people of all faiths. This small section of the film is the exact point where Charles and Emily's marriage ends for all intents and purposes. By the time we have the exchange "People will think....what I TELL them to think" Charles despises Emily because of her racist and class oriented views. His whole reason for choosing a woman like Susan over Emily is due to Emily's character flaws.
3. Susan and Leland are painfully ungrateful people. Kane "punishes" Leland by allowing him to go to Chicago and continue his career as a theater critic. Leland therefore continues to enjoy a lavish lifestyle despite the fact that his friendship with Kane is over. We also know that Leland had his own designs on Emily, and most likely always resented the fact that Kane "stole" her from him with his money. He must have been very angry with Kane when he learned of his affair with Susan. Then when Susan has her premiere and Leland is too drunk to finish his bad review, Kane writes the review for him, then fires him while giving him a 25000 severance check. That sum would be worth $875,000 in today's money, clearly enough for Leland to buy a home, start a business, and in general have a successful life separate from Kane. He refuses the money because the insult is more important to him than accepting a very generous severance.
Susan meanwhile is not at all grateful for the lavish lifestyle Kane gives her. She makes no attempt to find a type of performance that works for her voice. When the bombastic opera coach insults her Kane defends her, as any husband would, rich or poor. If Susan had just advised Kane that she should be singing Operetta and Vaudvlle roles, styles that would have accommodated her slender but pleasant voice very well, he would have still gotten what he wanted but she would have been far more successful.
Later on she makes no attempt to take on her role as "Mrs Kane" and rule as a society hostess. She just wants to go back to New York and party on Kane's money. She isn't a bad person per se, but she makes no attempt to grow. In the end she loses her money because of the stock market crash and ends up a drunken bar room singer, still performing but in the lowest of all possible venues, as opposed to the many avenues that would have been available for her voice had she been more grateful.
In general it's important to remember that all of the narrators in this story are flawed. Berstein loves Kane, so he tells the most upbeat story. Leland hates him so he tells the darkest story. Thatcher doesn't understand him so he tells an empty story from a financier's point of view. Susan is self centered, so she tells of hurting Kane by leaving him. The butler basically lies about events, so we can never really be sure if Kane even destroyed his bedroom, as monumental a scene as that is.
It is a truly great story and a truly great film because all of these layers, and more, can be found with continued viewings. I still consider it the greatest film of all time due to its rich storyline, as well as the fantastic cinematic achievements.
Excellent points, and very well made! I hadn't considered the flawed narrators, thank you : )
It truly is a film that keeps on giving
@@CinemaAbsurdist You are most welcome. Your original video is brilliant, one of the best film analyses I have seen on CZcams.
This was awesome and got me thinking even more about this timeless masterpiece!
Thank you very much!
Just watched Citizen Kane for the first time and can’t stop learning more about it. Your video is one of the most informative, engaging and interesting pieces about the masterful film. It’s truly the Citizen Kane of Citizen Kane essays. Well done, sir!
Thank you very much :)
Amazing analysis for an amazing film! 5:15 really stood out. Thank you for making this!
Thank you! I'm glad you liked it!
I see that Kane's mother had good intentions and try to do what's best for him; however, she unintentionally did more harm than good. She and Thatcher took the choice away from and made decisions for him while he was a child.
"I have had his bags packed for a week, now.." She's eerily-cold for someone's dear mother. Also sounds like she KNEW about sending Charles before her (drunken?) husband who seems emotional and (obviously) abusive.
@@hippojuice23 she knew it wasn't the best choice but wanted her son to have a better life. Talk about irony that caused Charles to see things differently.
Rewatched it before mank.
You connected the dots so perfectly. Thanks a lot.
Thank you very much :)
I did a paper in a film critics class. For the most part, I agree with the topics brought up and the relation to Rosebud. But actually, as we all know Welles was a masterful genius with symbology so, I will offer something to ponder. On the 1st Christmas after being in the care of his guardian, he received his second sled. There are only two frames that show the name of that sled. Crusader was the name, freezeframe it and you will see. My paper was contrasting the Crusader that Kane became rather than the innocence of his youth with Rosebud. My point is that the Crusader was the motivation for his life, feverish unrequited love for the underdog, and not Rosebud. He was forced to leave Rosebud behind as he had left the first sled by its name. But that yes, in the end, he missed his innocent youth, motherhood, and apple pie, to the point of his dying word. Of all the material things in his life, he could not have that simple sled...Rosebud and the different life that could have been.
This was an incredible analysis. Can't wait to see your other work!
Thank you!
Incredibly interesting and very well put together!
Thank you so much!
For real man this is an amazing breakdown. Thank you.
@@andrewwoodward8563 Thanks a lot :)
This movie making me sad.getting my childhood memories back😞😞...this masterpiece💔
amazing analysis, keep going you will grow
Thank you very much!
You give an incredibly powerful insight to one of the greatest and possibly most complex movies ever made. I believe that in making the film Orson Wells gave a reflection of life within the story that he told. It is just the bones that is brilliantly made and told. You have added flesh giving a unique and very interesting interpretation of the way in which everyone got to where they were in the film. In many ways it is just a love story between Charlie Kane and his second wife Susan. Because of the early absence of his mother’s love, if that ever existed, he never learned to love a woman. Everything harks back to the final moment as a chid when with his sledge ‘Rosebud’, the chance for him to learn love from his mother was callously taken away. His father impotently stood by and watched being powerless to intervene. Almost as a ghost, his father’s impotency in him reoccurs at key turning points in his life. Brilliant film and very thoughtful review which adds real flesh to the bones.
Thank you very much, you have deeply humbled me :)
@@CinemaAbsurdist Not at all, the essence of a really great film is the discussion that it generates considering the issues that arise. As a story it is possibly fanciful as reality took a leave of absence. The power is within the interaction between the characters as the tale unfolds. In a modern context, one can only wonder whether there are similarities between Charles Foster Kane and Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Neither would appear to have love as a child and both ruthlessly sought it throughout their lives. Kane in a benign way and Putin with ruthless cruelty towards a nation that wants self-determination and freedom for its citizens. Interesting that Citizen Kane was Donald John Trump’s favourite movie. One can only wonder whether he saw himself in Kane. He is very much a man seeking love throughout his life with little evidence of having received any as a child.
@@Hastings_Farm very interesting points, thank you for sharing them!
I have no idea why you only have 00 subscribers bruh. That observation of authoritative figures on both sides, and him evolving into being the authority was genius.
Thank you so much for your kind words :)
Awesome explanation.
Thank you!
This is a fantastic review! Love your style. The analysis is sound, crisp & heartfelt. Look forward to more of this...👏👏
Thank you very much! Made my day :)
Thanks for making this. Such a sweeping universal meaning this film has. Was great to hear you expand on it.
Thank you!
Brilliant review, with refreshing analysis. Well done, sir, I commend you.
Thank you very much!
It's really just about the loss of innocence. Every other detail is secondary to that and simply adds more detail. It was only when I had children that I realised how magical childhood really is.
Excellent analysis, the film is full of symbolic images and movements I wasn't aware of until now that I've heard your explanations, Thank You !!!
Thank you very much :)
Very good analysis that uses actual scenes from the film to support his point of view. Well done! 👏
Thank you!
This is fascinating. I have watched this film at least 5 times and I was perplexed. This is a film that grows on the viewer. I wasn't impressed with it the first time I watched, but have really come to regard this film as a cinematic work of art. And, this is an epic explanation of Rosebud, and very deep. Thanks for the commentary on this.
Thank you, I'm glad you liked this video! I agree completely about the film. It gets better with every watch.
Great analysis! Makes me appreciate the movie so much more
Thank you!
Excellent analysis
Thank you!
This was an excellent review of the movie! Well done!
Thank you!
nice analysis, keep it up!
Thank you!
to the point analysis. loved it.
Best explanation. I never observed those details while watching the movie until seeing this video. Hats off sir!
Thank you so much!
Great analysis
Thank you very much!
absolutely amazing video!
Thank you very much!
Great video buddy 💯🙌, ur all videos are great, Plssss upload more and more videos.
Thank you, I will get back to posting soon :)
This is absolutely perfect. Congratulations.
Thank you very much :)
BEST REVIEW! LOVE IT
Thank you so much!
It's more than just the end of innocence. It is realizing that his mother did not love him unconditionally. This film is, by Orson Welles' own words, meant as a sociological statement about the modern "acquisitive" (Orson Welles own word) society and its destruction of the nuclear family and its sacred, spiritual bonds. Please read Robert Bly's take on this very subject in "Iron John". This is the most poignant condemnation of industrial, post-agragrian society in contemporary culture. It is the final twist of the "mother complex". Another film dealing with the same subject but set in pre-industrial Europe is Kubrick's masterpiece "Barry Lyndon". These two films are perhaps the finest films ever made, certainly the most acutely psychological and intelligent.
Great review
Just fabulous bro
Great job 👍🏻
Thank you!
Amazing review, I suscribed
Thanks for the sub!
incredible analysis. maybe for the next video let your words ring out before cueing the outro!
Thank you! Will keep this in mind for the next one!
Loved it!! Can't wait for the next one
Thank you!
Welles made this film in his 20's. Fucking incredible
i have to write a paper on this film and this video is super helpful thank u!
Glad it was helpful!
I always think of Roseburg the town I was born in... That like some dullision I have built up some mad interconnected mythos of epic grandiose proportions.
Anywhoo it would really mean nothing if this wasn't such a great film.
@&^$ props to the uploaders explanation
For abit more of my mainly off basis/topic... The Croatian kuna... Their dollar equivalent, looks and sounds semi similar to Kane.
The 5 lipa coin has oak leaf with acorns on it and "quercus robur" written (red or strong oak in Croatian)
This also links to Roanoke and croatowan
@&^$
Mind the spelling
before the Mongolian capital Xanadu was karakorum
I won't illustrate the lesser similarities of connections my brain just seems to see...
Karak (kan sorta mirrored on itself) and orum/Orson
Just for a candid example.
I'm not trying to be some Stupid troll
I'm attempting an artsy expression of appreciation.....
@&^$ thanks
How uncanny! I see a lot of myself in Kane's life too. Perhaps not as larger-than-life as him though.
Very good.
excellent
Thank you!
bravo！thanks！
I like when Kane and the undertaker were tag team partners
He was Jerry Lawler's dentist for a bit
Thank you 🖤📽️🚬
holy shit this is absolutely amazing
Thank you so much!
I have never watched the film, but it makes me want to now. Lol
Thank you! Do check it out, it's a great film!
"It was his sled from when he was a kid, there I just saved you two long boobless hours!"
Jesus, that's Endora (Agnes Moorehead) playing young Kane's mother.
Very good comment!!
Rosebud was his true friend true pleasure... Finally he realized that he should pass his time with his true friend true pleasure with innocence...
Rosebud
OH! He said, "Rosebud!" I thought he said, "nosebleed."
Nothing made him happier than his earlier life
Imagine being cast out of your crib, into the reality of life?
Nobody took my sled away, my parents or anything, I never had that.
So I see him and Michael Jackson as very lucky, they have something to miss.
thanks i didn't pay much attention to certain detail like trapping angle in those two scenes, that's so thoughtful! they spoke too much and fast can't divide my concentration to the look detail and to what they say... this film is less attractive and less enjoyable compared to Hitchcock's or Charlie Chaplin's, but they named it the highest rated film ever, second behind Paddington 2!!!! shocking
Rosebud is object petit a for Kane. That's all
Rosebud gave us Margret
I never even watched the movie.
Indian?
Rosebud