Rating: 
Summary: Stick with the original.
Review: If you are really interested in learning about the background of "Citizen Kane," you will be better off watching the extra features (commentary, etc.) on the Citizen Kane DVD. "RKO 281" does a poor job of shining new light on a wonderful movie, and isn't nearly as enlightening as listening to Roger Ebert discuss Kane's place in history on the DVD's audio commentary (and this is coming from someone who isn't a huge Ebert fan).This movie, at barely 90 minutes, does a quick gloss job of the "story behind the story," and provides very little insight into the brilliance that went into the making of Citizen Kane. Welles broke new ground with Kane, using new techniques such as shooting with the camera in the floor to get intimidating shots from below. But RKO 281 shows too little of that, favoring weak dramatic dialogue that is neither unique nor interesting. This movie had the chance to show how Welles set the standard for film. They succeeded only in making one of the greatest films of all time into an utterly forgettable story. Liev Schreiber was given a very difficult task - play boy wonder Orson Welles. For the most part, he failed. Welles, a larger-than-life phenom with an ego to match, comes across as an annoying and temperamental brat who is loathe-able not lovable (or even likeable). John Malkovich and James Cromwell turn in good performances, but that's the problem. I walked away from this film thinking, "the supporting cast was pretty good" when I should have been thinking, "so that's how it happened!" Great premise, lousy production.
Rating:
Summary: Stick with the original.
Review: If you are really interested in learning about the background of "Citizen Kane," you will be better off watching the extra features (commentary, etc.) on the Citizen Kane DVD. "RKO 281" does a poor job of shining new light on a wonderful movie, and isn't nearly as enlightening as listening to Roger Ebert discuss Kane's place in history on the DVD's audio commentary (and this is coming from someone who isn't a huge Ebert fan). This movie, at barely 90 minutes, does a quick gloss job of the "story behind the story," and provides very little insight into the brilliance that went into the making of Citizen Kane. Welles broke new ground with Kane, using new techniques such as shooting with the camera in the floor to get intimidating shots from below. But RKO 281 shows too little of that, favoring weak dramatic dialogue that is neither unique nor interesting. This movie had the chance to show how Welles set the standard for film. They succeeded only in making one of the greatest films of all time into an utterly forgettable story. Liev Schreiber was given a very difficult task - play boy wonder Orson Welles. For the most part, he failed. Welles, a larger-than-life phenom with an ego to match, comes across as an annoying and temperamental brat who is loathe-able not lovable (or even likeable). John Malkovich and James Cromwell turn in good performances, but that's the problem. I walked away from this film thinking, "the supporting cast was pretty good" when I should have been thinking, "so that's how it happened!" Great premise, lousy production.
Rating: 
Summary: ROSEBUD......ROSEBUD........
Review: Just finished watching this video and I thought that it was great. I have already read about W.R. Hearst and had seen the PBS documentary series American Experience do an episode on the making of Citizen Kane and the troubles that Orson Welles was faced with. This movie covers everything that I have ever read or seen previously. If you run across this movie I suggest you take the time to watch it.
Rating:
Summary: My eyes! Oh, it burns!
Review: Okay, maybe it's not *that* bad, but it's close. I went into this movie with a lot of anticipation, being a long-time fan of Welles and "Citizen Kane," but my hopes were crushed by the mediocre acting, blatant inaccuracies (yes, I know it's a movie, but a movie about a real situation shouldn't have quite so much make believe) and overdramatics. For instance, that scene where Welles talks Mankiewicz into coming back on "Kane" by telling that sob story about his father? Feh. Not even close to believable. Liev Schrieber is, sadly, typecast (at least in my mind) as the might-be-a-killer, Cotton Weary, from the "Scream" films. I tried not to hold that against him, but his performance as Welles was so unconvincing that it kept coming to mind. Welles was such an unusual and magnetic personality, with his deep, distinctive voice, that it's hard to imagine any actor playing him well. Vincent D'Onofrio gave a better performance in "Ed Wood" as Welles than Schrieber can manage here. Not to say his acting was bad, mind you, but just that I didn't for a moment have any kind of feeling that it was Orson Welles. The yelling and screaming about how "Kane" is all he's got seemed so phony. Unfortunately, that was about the most exciting thing about the role. That is only one of the reasons, however, why it was impossible to enjoy the movie. Melanie Griffith was so bad as Marion Davies, I can hardly put it into words. I'm sure poor Miss Davies is spinning like a top in her grave. John Malkovich gets some good lines as Herman Mankiewicz; he's at his best when trying to talk Welles out of making "Kane." James Cromwell does a creditable job as William Randolph Hearst, and the scenes between Hearst and Marion could have been really quite touching if it weren't for Melanie and her enormous hot pink lips. Ech. For serious Welles fans and film historians, or even those with only a casual interest, you are much better off watching the documentary "The Battle Over Citizen Kane" (as another reviewer recommended) than trying to get the "making of Kane" story from this film.
Rating: 
Summary: Almost Perfect
Review: Really good, but not quite great, this film seems little more than a "recreation" of the already very well-known facts surrounding the production of "Citizen Kane". The relationship between William Randolph Hearst & Marion Davies (Cromwell & Griffith, respectively) seem to be the most interesting parts of the movie and I wish that much more had been done with them. And don't blink, you may just miss Brenda Blethyn as Louella Parsons. Roy Scheider, John Malkovich and Liev Schreiber as Welles are all wonderful. On the whole, a well-done piece, I just wish there had been more.
Rating: 
Summary: Great film marred mostly by DVD inadequacies
Review: Telling true stories is always a tricky affair. Unlike simple fiction, you have to tell the truth *and* a good story simultaneously. I don't know how good the *truth* is in RKO 281. I'm not a CITIZEN KANE expert. The closest I come is being able to mention that the screenplay is based on an acclaimed PBS documentary. If PBS' history was right, I guess, RKO 281 stands a better chance of being real as well. I do know, however, that the *story* of RKO 281 is good enough that I want to *believe* it's the truth. In this current era of unrestricted parody and vigorously litigated free speech cases, it's hard to imagine a time in America where artistic criticism of a private individual would've caused movie studios consternation, but RKO 281 convincingly captures the fear of the period. Along the way, it gives us a tantalizing peek into the lives of the people involved with CITIZEN KANE, dropping hints about their personalities. I found myself constantly wanting to know more about the characters than this movie told, but there's enough characterization here for a great story. This is, after all, not a biography of Orson Wells or William Randolph Hearst, but the story of the making of one film. HBO managed to assemble a stellar cast to inhabit the lives of these characters for this made-for-cable movie, and the money was obviously worth it. Each major character is consistently well acted, and one can't help but be drawn into their stories. John Malkovich and Liev Schreiber's Mankiewicz and Wells play particularly well off each other, defining the moral heart of CITIZEN KANE as they show themselves to be each other's conscience. Having the friendship parallel the creation of the film is a clever dramatic tool, serving up a human subplot while simultaneously moving along the greater narrative. Absorbing as the characters are, however, it's not a perfect film. Details about the Hearst side of the argument are sketchier, and despite attempts to explore the personal relationship between Hearst and his mistress, we're left asking significant questions about him. Was he really as cold-blooded as portrayed here, or was he just personally wounded by CITIZEN KANE? What happened to his threat to expose Hollywood if the movie was released? Though in decline, he still retained newspapers at the time of the movie's release, so why didn't he carry through with his threat to publish details about Hollywood's private lives? Wouldn't that have sold papers and increased his revenue at a time when he needed the money? RKO 281 builds Hearst up as a heavy in its first hour, and then kind of just forgets about that side of him in the second. In my mind, there's a metamorphosis of his character from confident to defeated that isn't sufficiently explained in the movie. [DVD notes: For a film about the making of film, this DVD has ironically no additional features. This is an entirely criminal example of neglect, and the film loses mass quantities of brownie points for it. At the very least there should've been a director's commentary. Additionally I think it would've made some great sense to have packaged this as a double DVD, along with the PBS documentary.]
Rating:
Summary: Worthy supplement worth waiting (a bit longer) for.
Review: Thatcher's advice to Charles that he "invest" his money and show some patience rather than squander it on "things" should be heeded with respect to this purchase. Word has it that the DVD of "Kane," due out this fall, will include "The Battle Over Citizen Kane." As for the "Battle" it should be of interest to those who are already grateful for the production, release, and survival of arguably the world's greatest film. I've found that showing it to neophyte film students, however, can actually be counterproductive to an appreciation of the artistic achievement represented by the original. "Kane" needs no sensational, contextual, extrinsic props. It's an autonomous, archetypal, living aesthetic world unto itself.
Rating:
Summary: Great Insiders View of What Mostly Happened
Review: This film sheds light over the life and times of Welles during the making of Citizen Kane. Some of the dramatic elements are real, based upon my study of the Hearst boycott and studio attempt to buy and burn the negatives. This movie is a joy to watch, a real first-rate movie, even if you've never seen Citizen Kane. The DVD itself is basic with very good image quality, but nothing else. No features besides a still of chapters. The acting and dramatism is great, and I really enjoyed watching this film.
Rating:
Summary: William Randolph Hearst vs. Orson Welles re: "Citizen Kane"
Review: This HBO docudrama was inspired by the documentary "The Battle Over Citizen Kane,' which tells the now legendary story of publisher William Randolph Hearst trying to have Orson Welles' great film destroyed. Liev Schreiber is surprisingly good as Welles, while James Cromwell plays Hearst, John Malkovich is screenwriter Herman Mankiewicz and Melanie Griffith plays Marion "Rosebud" Davies in this riveting drama. Even if you do not know the story behind the film, you will enjoy the battle between the newspaper magnate and the brilliant young filmmaker. This 1999 film was directed by Benjamin Ross ("The Young Poisoner's Handbook) and would obviously make a great double-feature with "The Battle Over Citizen Kane" and/or "Citizen Kane" itself. Your choice, but you really cannot go wrong with any of these films.
Rating:
Summary: William Randolph Hearst vs. Orson Welles re: "Citizen Kane"
Review: This HBO docudrama was inspired by the documentary "The Battle Over Citizen Kane,' which tells the now legendary story of publisher William Randolph Hearst trying to have Orson Welles' great film destroyed. Liev Schreiber is surprisingly good as Welles, while James Cromwell plays Hearst, John Malkovich is screenwriter Herman Mankiewicz and Melanie Griffith plays Marion "Rosebud" Davies in this riveting drama. Even if you do not know the story behind the film, you will enjoy the battle between the newspaper magnate and the brilliant young filmmaker. This 1999 film was directed by Benjamin Ross ("The Young Poisoner's Handbook) and would obviously make a great double-feature with "The Battle Over Citizen Kane" and/or "Citizen Kane" itself. Your choice, but you really cannot go wrong with any of these films.
|
