Anyone who didn't see the film in theatre (I'm assuming everyone on this blog) has or had heard of it as the greatest film of all time. When I watched it, I tried to do so with a critical eye, attempting to hate it. I invested so much thought into the movie when I finished it I really loved it. The reason was Kane being one of the better characters I had ever seen. It didn't hurt that the film pushed the medium with long, multi-layer-depth shots. I don't necessarily agree that is the greatest film ever made, but I do think it is one of the better ones .

I'm like you Michael. I tried to "hate" it too. I did a stint in film school in the early 90's and, as expected, they rammed this movie down our throats.

And I tried, tried HARD, to hate it. "Greatest movie of all time? Pfffft!"

I failed.

It's remarkable. Even to this day, there really isn't anything quite like it. I probably watch it twice a year, usually when I'm feeling particularly bitter about the state of movies in general (yesterday's post about the impending onslaught of reboots certainly could have stoked a Kane viewing, that's for sure! :D ).

Citizen Kane always reminds me that film as a medium IS important and valid and worth fighting for.

Let me echo a point Michael made: If you have not seen Kane in a movie theater, make it one of your bucket list items. Each shot composition in terms of conceit, framing, and lighting is fantastic.

Its narrative structure while not wholly original works on all levels and we continue to see films that emulate - conscious or not - the approaching including The Social Network: Create a circumstance in the present that allows the plot to bounce around in a character's past to 'discover' who that character is and how they became what they became. TSN uses the two lawsuits in a similar way that CK uses the journalist investigating chapters in the P's life.

I watched it in my teens. After hearing its name whispered around about it being the "greatest film of all time" (this was pre-movie ranking websites, pre-internet, etc), I finally rented it -- on VHS.

I had no idea what to expect, other than it was a "classic". From the first frame to the very end I was utterly enraptured. I couldn't get my head around the fact that this was made so long ago, yet its story and cinematic style was unlike anything I've experienced before.

I think I watched it 2 or 3 more times before having to return the tape to the video store. I was thrilled years later to get the film, with all the special features, on DVD.

Side note: Roger Ebert's DVD commentary is the best I've ever listened to. It's like a master's class in analyzing that film. It's not just a thorough backgrounder on the movie; he talks about how the shots were composed, lit, staged, framed -- stuff I've never really thought of before.

My only slight misgiving is that Ebert reveals a little too much about the 'movie magic' -- how certain f/x shots were accomplished. Now, whenever I watch it, I always see the seams, so to speak. For instance, the tracking shot atop the nightclub.

But overall, the commentary is a treasure.

Agreed on the Roger Ebert commentary. It's excellent.

I already shared this story on the blog, but I watched this when I was twenty-seven. And I'm glad I waited so long. I don't think I would have appreciated Kane without a little bit of life under my belt.

Gotta love KANE.

Though, personally, I think it's not Welles' greatest accomplishment. Give me OTHELLO, MR. ARKADIN, CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT, or THE TRIAL.