|
Wait, didn't he say a few days ago that he was going to put a new strip up on Thursday? Is this just a bonus unexpected strip? Thank you for working more, Onstad.  Gomi posted:Someone actually liked Citizen Kane? Why? I watched it just for cultural literacy's sake at home one day and was just bored for 3 hours. "An rear end in a top hat lives, is an rear end in a top hat, dies." Please explain what I was missing? Someone always brings this up whenever anyone mentions it here. Citizen Kane is important because of its advances in cinematography, not because of its story. Nowadays you wouldn't notice the nice touches because they're common now.
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 16:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:18 |
|
|
Even if you didn't like the movie itself everyone should watch it just so they recognize all the neat plot and cinematography tricks that were invented there and are basically standard everywhere else now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 16:33
|
|
|
Happy Hippo posted:A film that appeared like lightning out of a clear blue sky that created many technical and structural devices that are still in common use today. Yeah, I can definitely appreciate the technological innovations of it, and for a serious film-nerd I can see it being of great historical interest. But it wasn't very interesting as a story, is what I'm saying. The Jim Corrigan comics have wild visual flair and fascinating games with layout are played, but the stories all boil down to 'a guy is depressed and then bad things happen,' which is why all the technical innovation doesn't create a lasting interest -- it's more the equivalent of a tech demo than an actual game, to draw a videogame analogy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 16:35
|
|
|
Gomi posted:Yeah, I can definitely appreciate the technological innovations of it, and for a serious film-nerd I can see it being of great historical interest. But it wasn't very interesting as a story, is what I'm saying. Sure, if you want. I found it kind of boring, too. Here it all comes down to opinion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 16:41
|
|
|
It sounds like it would be a lot more interesting to watch Citizen Kane with a film-nerd who would be able to point out the advances and innovations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 17:09
|
|
|
Citizen Kane was released in 1941. If you watch it within the context of the films of that era it is absolutely insane.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 17:12
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:It sounds like it would be a lot more interesting to watch Citizen Kane with a film-nerd who would be able to point out the advances and innovations. There's a DVD version out there with commentary by Roger Ebert that I've always meant to watch.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 17:15
|
|
|
This sounds like my first experience with Shakespeare, which was reading Romeo and Juliet in class, and how after one page the teacher had to spend half an hour explaining the significance of what we just read and how we should all be laughing our asses off at the incredible comedy of their play on words. At some point you have to just draw a line in history and say "here, watch West Side Story" instead, knowing full well that as lame as the dance-fights were, it will one day be replaced with Leonardo DeCaprio.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 17:22
|
|
|
glug posted:This sounds like my first experience with Shakespeare, which was reading Romeo and Juliet in class, and how after one page the teacher had to spend half an hour explaining the significance of what we just read and how we should all be laughing our asses off at the incredible comedy of their play on words. You should be laughing your rear end off at Shakespeare without needing anyone to explain it, dude was awesome and great at wordplay.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 17:41
|
|
|
Forgive me if my understanding of olde englishe and collier, choler and carrying coals just wasn't up to par to dig on their brilliance. It's language we don't use today, so how are you supposed to appreciate it the same way as they did 400 years ago when it was timely, and you're like 15 in high school. http://blog.shakespearegeek.com/2008/06/what-exactly-is-collier.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 17:44
|
|
|
Watch Citizen Kane, then watch RKO 281.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 17:50
|
|
|
Thank you for reminding me this exists, I need to track it down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 17:53
|
|
|
Happy Hippo posted:There's a DVD version out there with commentary by Roger Ebert that I've always meant to watch. It is fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 18:00
|
|
|
Cobweb Heart posted:Someone always brings this up whenever anyone mentions it here. Citizen Kane is important because of its advances in cinematography, not because of its story. Nowadays you wouldn't notice the nice touches because they're common now. This is exactly the reason I was bored with Blade Runner.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 18:05
|
|
|
"Citizen Kane's wife sings like what would be amazing for the back of a knee or a pineapple" was the funniest thing I have read in a long time. withak posted:Even if you didn't like the movie itself everyone should watch it just so they recognize all the neat plot and cinematography tricks that were invented there and are basically standard everywhere else now. Silly numbers of people have this problem of not appreciating something in the context of the time it was made and it drives me up the wall. "I watched The Exorcist for the first time the other day and it was totally in no way scary at all what a lovely movie the remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street was way scarier you should watch it I know you "like films.""
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 18:05
|
|
|
Lots of high horses here. Look, if the Terminator 2 plot is incredibly lovely, it's not going to matter in 30 years that they were the first people to do that crazy weird morphing liquid poo poo, any more than it would matter about bullet-time in the Matrix if the plot sucks as well. Some people find the plot/story/whatever of Citizen Kane to be so dreadful that it's not worth watching it just to appreciate the first time someone used Bullet Time before it became commonplace enough that it's the standard in Bleach commercials.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 18:32
|
|
|
withak posted:Even if you didn't like the movie itself everyone should watch it just so they recognize all the neat plot and cinematography tricks that were invented there and are basically standard everywhere else now. All these reporters are trying to figure out the significance of Kane's last word, "Rosebud", right? Except Kane was alone when he died. No one else was in the room to hear it. How did the reporters find out what his last words were? Were they hiding in the walls? Was Claude Rains their source?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 18:40
|
|
|
McGravin posted:Like the gigantic plot hole? This one: And when someone brought it up, Welles' reaction was silence for a couple of seconds then "You better not tell anyone about this".
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 18:52
|
|
|
Obviously the paparazzi were listening outside the window.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 19:08
|
|
|
McGravin posted:Like the gigantic plot hole? This one: Wasn't it a cut scene where the butler overheard him?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 19:13
|
|
|
Cobweb Heart posted:Someone always brings this up whenever anyone mentions it here. Citizen Kane is important because of its advances in cinematography, not because of its story. It's the kind of movie that you'll enjoy more if you don't lose yourself in it; if you step back and watch it for the artistry or for the historical context (in filmmaking or Hearst-bashing), it's more fun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 20:14
|
|
|
Knowing Citizen Kane's reputation for advancing cinematography and effects but having no idea what techniques it actually pioneered, I think the film totally holds up as a character study. Chuck's story arc is that of a character who never had a real childhood and whose concept of love never matured, so he wants everyone around him to love him but sincerely doesn't know how to make them other than throwing money around. His whole personality fascinated me. On the subject of Achewood, I don't really like the idea of donating money freely to keep a for-profit venture afloat, but I like the comic so I used the donation drive as an excuse to spend some money at the store. I bought the Cartilage Head poster set to replace a set that's been worn out a bit from a couple of moves. It's a great addition to any room that you want to make really creepy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 20:47
|
|
|
next week: the post-pearl harbor recut of the magnificent roombasons Also Citizen Kane is great and not just for its techniques. I could watch it a million times. Godfather stinks peace I'm out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 21:15
|
|
|
Citizen Kane has literally beautiful, complex, layered artistry in each shot, and literally pioneered all of those techniques. It's practically where cinematography began, and aesthetically it holds up very well. So that's why I like it. If you're watching it just for the plot and don't know the historical context of Hearst's life, then its not going to amaze you, but nobody is watching Avatar for the plot, either. Sigma-X fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Aug 24, 2010 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 21:20
|
|
|
Irish Taxi Driver posted:Wasn't it a cut scene where the butler overheard him? Not a cut scene, the butler specifically says he heard him say it in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2010 21:26
|
|
|
People actually dislike Citizen Kane? I watched it 6 months or so ago, and i thought it was incredible, both in terms of cinematography and plot. Of course, no matter what you feel about the film, it's hard to dislike the new strip. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2010 00:02
|
|
|
Dark Chicken posted:Not a cut scene, the butler specifically says he heard him say it in the movie. Just why the Nazi government would honor documents signed by the general commanding the French resistance is left unexplained. In modern terms, it's the equivalent of a captive at Camp Guantanamo walking out the door freely because he has documents signed by Osama bin Laden ordering his release. Also CITIZEN KANE rules, sorry it didn't have enough transforming robots to keep some peoples' attention.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2010 00:12
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Also CITIZEN KANE rules, sorry it didn't have enough transforming robots to keep some peoples' attention. The don't have to transform. They could just be robotic floor vacuums.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2010 04:36
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Also CITIZEN KANE rules, sorry it didn't have enough transforming robots to keep some peoples' attention. Is Megan Fox in it? Because I will watch it if Megan Fox is in it. Also, she should be working on a motorcycle in a sexy manner. And it would be awesome if that motorcycle turned into some kind of cool robot or something. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2010 06:20
|
|
|
Citizen Kane is great and this strip is an entirely accurate representation of it, particularly the review of Susan's singing. Also not only is Citizen Kane a tremendous achievement in filmmaking, but when you consider that it was Welle's first ever movie and he just came up with this stuff himself, holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2010 06:40
|
|
|
both Megan Fox and Orson Welles have worked on the Transformers IP.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2010 07:01
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:both Megan Fox and Orson Welles have worked on the Transformers IP. Broadly speaking, she's worked on the same IP with Marlon Brando, too. On topic: I couldn't stop laughing at the 13th panel.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2010 07:21
|
|
|
Between Téodor's smug expression, the review of Susan's singing, and the (as far as I can tell) completely random jab at Edith Wharton, this one had me rolling. I only wish it'd been my birthday strip (i.e., posted yesterday).
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2010 07:24
|
|
|
I love how someone has to help the Roomba up into the fireplace. It's like an outtake that wasn't removed from the final edit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2010 11:00
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Citizen Kane is great and this strip is an entirely accurate representation of it, particularly the review of Susan's singing. He didn't really come up with the techniques himself, he was just ballsy enough to use them inside the Hollywood system. However, the people who did come up with them are either not american or are gigantic racists so I suppose its okay to sweep them under the rug. bhlaab fucked around with this message at 17:38 on Aug 25, 2010 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2010 17:34
|
|
|
bhlaab posted:He didn't really come up with the techniques himself, he was just ballsy enough to use them inside the Hollywood system. I'd be happy to know more about this! I was always under the impression that many of the revolutionary techniques used in Citizen Kane were a result of him wanting to transfer certain techniques from stageplays over onto film and he (and his crew, I would assume) nutted out how to make it work using the technology of the time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 00:29
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I'd be happy to know more about this! I was always under the impression that many of the revolutionary techniques used in Citizen Kane were a result of him wanting to transfer certain techniques from stageplays over onto film and he (and his crew, I would assume) nutted out how to make it work using the technology of the time. Okay, I've never heard that before but it would explain his heavy use of deep focus. Neat. In general Citizen Kane owes a lot to the likes of Von Sternberg, Sergei Eisenstein, Buster Keaton, John Ford, DW Griffith, and the expressionism movement in general. Basically expressionism had fallen somewhat out of vogue partly because of the Hollywood machine/indifferent American public and also because it was really hard to do a lot of that poo poo and also record newfanlged things like sound. This isn't to detract from Welles or Kane at all because keep in mind this was an era where most cinematographers were more worried about making the lead actresses look like shiny white dinnerplates than they were about creating meaning or art with their shot setups. Not to try to act like Hollywood or even B-movie genre stuff was an artistic wasteland or anything... Welles admits to watching John Ford's Stagecoach some 40 times before starting on Citizen Kane.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 06:09
|
|
|
Thanks for the info, other than his watching Stagecoach a million times before I'd never really heard any of the other influences on the way he approached film making.bhlaab posted:Okay, I've never heard that before but it would explain his heavy use of deep focus. Neat. In particular I've heard that the deep focus log cabin sequence was a direct result of him wanting to be able to approach the scene in the same way he would have done on the stage, and as far as I know (feel free to correct me) it was the first time it had ever been done in the movies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 07:01
|
|
|
Like most monumental works within a medium, Citizen Kane was the first major work to combine several different emerging techniques while taking them all to the next level.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 07:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:18 |
|
|
Can one of you guys explain the alt text for dumb ole me? I've seen Citizen Kane but it's been over 10 years and gently caress if I remember it all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 18:36
|
|
