📽️ Citizen Kane purchase, purchase Citizen Kane movie online , purchase Citizen Kane download , buy Citizen Kane movie, purchase Citizen Kane online, purchase Citizen Kane, Citizen Kane purchase movie 1941, where can i purchase Citizen Kane DVD 📀, Citizen Kane money can buy, Citizen Kane movie 1941 purchase 🎬.
Purchase Citizen Kane (1941) Movie Online and Download - Orson Welles 🎥
Drama, Mystery
IMDB rating:
Orson Welles
Joseph Cotten as Jedediah Leland
Dorothy Comingore as Susan Alexander Kane
Agnes Moorehead as Mary Kane
Ruth Warrick as Emily Monroe Norton Kane
Ray Collins as James W. Gettys
Erskine Sanford as Herbert Carter
Everett Sloane as Mr. Bernstein
William Alland as Jerry Thompson
Paul Stewart as Raymond
George Coulouris as Walter Parks Thatcher
Fortunio Bonanova as Signor Matiste
Gus Schilling as The Headwaiter
Philip Van Zandt as Mr. Rawlston
Georgia Backus as Bertha Anderson
Storyline: A group of reporters are trying to decipher the last word ever spoken by Charles Foster Kane, the millionaire newspaper tycoon: "Rosebud." The film begins with a news reel detailing Kane's life for the masses, and then from there, we are shown flashbacks from Kane's life. As the reporters investigate further, the viewers see a display of a fascinating man's rise to fame, and how he eventually fell off the top of the world.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1480x1080 px 13461 Mb h264 15762 Kbps mkv Purchase
DVD-rip 512x384 px 683 Mb msmpeg4 836 Kbps avi Purchase
iPhone 320x234 px 296 Mb h264 346 Kbps mp4 Purchase
Talk About BORING!!
I watch movies constantly, an i rarely see movies that i have troubles watching all the way through. For one of my classes at school, i needed to watch afi's top 10 movies. This movie was ranked at number one and I have no idea why. This movie was so boring I had to watch it several times because i kept falling asleep and missing certain parts. Fine, it was clever having Rosebud, and the importance of youth, but i felt that this is an example of a movie, that could be told in about 5 minutes, rather than stretching it out into one of the longest and most boring movies that i have ever seen. Now, i was also shocked at the acting. i generally find that acting supports a relatively weak script, however in this movie's case, i felt that the relatively weak script was supporting the awful acting. i personally was not very impressed with the acting strictly because the reactions felt very forced and everything was very overdone. all in all i was not impressed at all with this film, regardless of past ratings.
Has a film ever been more praised and loved by film critics than Citizen Kane?
Has a film ever been more praised and loved by film critics than Citizen Kane? Some people will say The Godfather or Casablanca hold that title, but I think it's Citizen Kane. The praise is certainly deserved, because this is certainly is one of the greatest motion pictures of all-time. Much more fascinating is the fact that it was almost never released and close to be destroyed. Welles had already created controversy with his "War of the Worlds" broadcast that shocked America, but that was nothing compared to what erupt thanks to Citizen Kane. Newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst believed that the film painted an unflattering image of him and was determined to bury the film, along with Welles. Due to Hearst's power of the press and radio waves, the film was barely advertised and flopped on its initial release. It would also lose the Best Picture Oscar to John Ford's sentimental How Green Was My Valley (considered by many to be the Academy's biggest mistake ever). Kane would disappear and only after both the careers of Hearst and Welles fell did it start to gain an audience upon numerous re-releases from the 1950's onward. It was praised by critics as a masterpiece and Welles was put alongside Chaplin and Ford as one of cinema's greatest artists. More and more acclaim is given to Citizen Kane each day and rightfully so.

Millionaire tycoon Charles Foster Kane (Orson Welles) dies one night in his bed at his giant castle, Xanadu with his very last word, "Rosebud." A reporter (William Alland) working on a news reel about Kane is soon asked by his boss to investigate the importance of the word. So, he begins to interview previous colleagues of the newspaper runner, which leads to various flashbacks of his life. After his mother becomes rich, she sends Charles away with a bank owner and he soon grows into a prosperous man, who decides that "it would be fun to run a newspaper." He gains control of The Inquirer, which soon blossoms into a major enterprise. He soon marries the president's daughter and runs for senator. After that breaks off, he meets a young woman who he wants to become a successful singer, but she is not able to hold a tune. Yet, through all of this, does the reporter ever find out what "Rosebud" means?

Citizen Kane has been looked into and analysed by many critics (including one providing a commentary for the DVD) and almost everybody has a different interpretation. I, for one, view it as a story of a man who despite gaining a lot of money, never really became happy and that one word is Kane realising that his death is probably the best thing to have ever happened to him. Kane becomes so insanely wealthy and successful, that he forgets what life is all about, which explains why he just melts away in Xanadu for all the years after his second wife's divorce. Kane may not be the kindest gentleman, but he certainly is fascinating, which is probably what adds to the everlasting appeal of Citizen Kane. Orson Welles set out to tell the story of one man and made a masterpiece and a classic motion picture history. His performance, direction and screenplay are all perfect in every way. His supporting players, which he brought to Hollywood with him from the Mercury Theatre are all impressive as well. Gregg Toland, the cinematographer, also deserves heaps of praise for his brilliant camera work and lighting effects.
There are two periods of film history: Before-CK and After-CK.
I'm not in the habit of granting gold, silver and bronze. In this case I'll make an exception for this is an exceptional experience. I watched this film many times. Lately, I found myself crying for no apparent reason while watching it. It must be the Stendhal syndrome has dawn on me I guess. There are two periods of film history: Before-CK and After-CK.

My guess is it still is ahead of its time just as Van Gogh was 100 years ahead of his time. Nowadays, his painting he could never sell himself are breaking record prices at auctions.

Years from now, the general public will demand to be taken beyond this milestone. As of now, it still is "art-house" stuff for students and intellectuals.
What Makes A Film A Masterpiece?
Is Citizen Kane a masterpiece? The results of the British Film Institute 2002 poll of major directors and critics found Kane to be rated the best film of all time, and Orson Welles the greatest director. Do the intelligentsia of film have the exclusive right to determine which film is or is not a masterpiece? Certainly not. However, the use of the term "masterpiece" is being thrown around so casually today as to render the word virtually meaningless. If you look at IMDb's user rating, you would find Citizen Kane ranked #23 and The Shawshank Redemption #2. This is a rating by us common folk, not people who have studied film or make their living from movies. Does this give rise to the contention that The Shawshank Redemption is a masterpiece also? One may argue the point, and if you read through the user comments, many, many people use the term to describe that movie. I'm sure if you read through the user comments for, say, Pulp Fiction, that ol' word "masterpiece" will be there again and again. Check out Forrest Gump. I haven't, but my money says you see that "m" word quite a few times there also. After all, it DID win six Academy Awards. If all these movies are considered masterpieces by enough people, does that make it so? I really don't know. I do have my opinion and the privilege to state it, everyone else like it or not. You may disagree with my view, but you shouldn't absorb it and react personally. A masterpiece in film is no different from any other art form. Painting, music, sculpture, literature; some works are great; others mediocre. Greatness must stand the test of time. It doesn't matter how many times you've seen that Dali, listened to Wagner, or read Shaw's play. Each time is the first time. There's a wondrous quality there which fascinates always. A sense of immortality. So, is The Shawshank Redemption a masterpiece on the same level as Citizen Kane? Not even close. Kane meets my criteria as do many others. In fact, in my opinion, Citizen Kane is not even Welles' best movie, so I must think highly of him as a filmmaker. Kubrick, Bunuel, Wilder, Ford, Fellini, Fassbinder, Lang, Ozu, Truffaut, Kurasawa, Hitchcock, Altman, maybe Goddard, maybe Herzog, look out for Tarr, Visconti, the list of great films by great filmmakers is long enough, but not so long that every GOOD film we see is a masterpiece. Let's collar that word and hold it in a safe place before it becomes completely superfluous. I'm sure Welles would approve.
i hate to say this but i was underwhelmed by this movie
OK,i'm certain i'm in the minority here,but whatever.i did not like Citizen Kane.first off,i didn't think it was profound at all.i also didn't think the look of the film was that great.many people say it has a great visual style,but i disagree completely.how this movie is number one all time on some lists is beyond me.to say this movie was a drag is understating things.there was and is too much hype for this movie.so it's directed by and stars Orson Welles.even worse is Welles is widely regarded as a genius as a result.big hairy deal.i was bored out of my skull.considering this movie is considered sacred and any negative comment is blasphemy,i'm glad nobody knows where i live,otherwise i fear i may be hunted down and killed.not too many people are likely to pay attention to this comment,but i don't care.this is how i feel about Citizen Kane.maybe i'm a complete idiot,or maybe i'm just missing something.either way,this movie rates a 3/10 at best.
The Melville of Cinema
The careers of Orson Welles and Herman Melville are eerily similar...there is the great early work that is thought by some to be the alpha and omega of their respective forms (Citizen Kane and Moby Dick), there is the long eclipse, there is the great late work rediscovered (Touch of Evil or (the yet to be rediscovered and absolutely flabbergasting) Chimes at Midnight and Billy Budd, sailor), and there is the irrepressible mindf**k (F for Fake and The Confidence Man). But even more than that, Welles and Melville were the two most disillusioned artists America ever produced, which goes a long way toward explaining why average people interested in the arts as mere "entertainment" don't like their work. Both Kane and Ahab are singularly unpleasant individuals who are crushed by the cosmos in one way or another in spite of their indomitable defiance. These are not pleasant archetypes in the least...but they are infinitely more valuable than all the "heroes" of popular fiction. Welles and Melville take a speculum to the human condition by testing these characters to destruction. Citizen Kane has one of the most difficult structures in film. Its fractured narrative prevents the viewer from truly understanding Kane--but this is the point of the movie...why else would the film conspicuously leave out one crucial viewpoint (Kane himself)? In this respect, Citizen Kane is also a lot like Hamlet, which is similarly impenetrable. Anyone who demands identification with the "hero" is going to be sorely taxed by Kane--this separates the men from the boys, so to speak.

Is Citizen Kane THE greatest film of all time? Of course not. To declare that any film holds that honor is ludicrous. After all, once a certain level of craftsmanship is attained, once a certain level of insight is expressed, these distinctions become meaningless. Star Wars lost the best picture Oscar to Annie Hall in 1977--is one better than the other? The experience of watching either of them is so radically different that the comparison is absolutely invalid...they have nothing in common except their relative excellence. Kane's hold on the honor stems from the fact that it invented more of the language of sound filmmaking than any other movie, but no one claims that the other contender based on that criterion is the greatest film of all time (that would be the extremely controversial Birth of a Nation). Dont get me wrong...Kane is ONE of the greatest films...but no film could or should be asked to stand as the alpha and omega of the art.

Even so, Kane is a harrowing aesthetic experience.

And Kane IS massively entertaining. I resent the notion that a film has to elicit some knee-jerk emotional response to be considered entertaining--having the eye engaged and having the mind challenged ARE entertaining...but I sometimes forget that we as a people more and more value feeling over thought...God help us all.

(If anyone is interested, I also reviewed Cat People (1942)
Don't see it before you mature
I was wrong in seeing the film for the first time as a teenager (14-15). I wasn't mature enough to grasp the meaning of the movie and the entire plot. Because of that first view, I've been under the impression that the film is strange and alienated.

Yesterday I decided that it deserves a second view, now that I'm a little bit older (22) and have seen more than enough films, compared to when I was younger.

I just finished watching it and it left me with teary eyes and a lump in my throat. I was moved - and didn't even see it coming.

When I first saw the film I couldn't relate to Charles Foster Kane, and it wrecked the film for me - until I decided to watch it again.

In my opinion, the early and final years of Charles are those that make the film get under your skin and into your heart.
most important film of the 20th century
the reason this film is so revered is not because it is an outstanding story with awesome special effects and lots of guns n stuff. true, it is to be appreciated for its morals and storytelling, but if you look at how it was filmed and compare it to other movies of and before its time then you can really see just how impressive "Citizen Kane" is. It uses a lot of deep focus, which required a decent amount of skill and was an out-of-the-box thing to do. one indoor scene stands out particularly for its beauty and play with light. the only light coming into the room is natural sunlight streaming in to a dark, smoky room from small windows high on the wall. other scenes were shot from ground level, also an unusual way of filming. "Citizen Kane" is really different, really clever, and and excellent film to watch for those who appreciate more than just an interesting story.
Why Is "Citizen Kane" the Best Film of All Times?
Anyone who sees "Citizen Kane" (1941) for the first time today does so because he or she has heard that it is the greatest film ever made. One simply doesn't come across the film by accident on TV, watching it "for what it is," so to speak. The common approach of seeing it to believe it can be at best exhilarating and at worst hostile. Unfortunately, the latter is usually, although quite understandably, the case. For how can one do anything but look down at a film that elitist snobs have praised for years and years? One simply must prove oneself right by falsifying the critics' claims, leaving the theater or the living room with a shrug and a condescending comment: "it was okay." This will not do. It is a great tragedy if "Citizen Kane" suffers from these kinds of incidents since it ought to be treated with the same kind of respect as Shakespeare's "Hamlet" or Beethoven's "9th Symphony". In order to make this happen, or perhaps enhance someone's viewing experience, I would like to try and explain not why "Citizen Kane" necessarily is the best film, but rather why people have considered it to be. There are over a thousand reviews of the film on this site, and mine will probably drown in the vast sea with them, but hey what can I lose, and who doesn't love talking about Welles and "Citizen Kane"?

One might begin with the basic fact that "Citizen Kane" wasn't immediately praised and considered the best film that has blessed the silver screen. It was a financial risk for the RKO studios to give free hands to the novice prodigy Orson Welles, who had gained quite a reputation with the radio show of H. G. Wells' "War of the Worlds", and not surprisingly it didn't pay off. Despite the praises of a few critics, "Citizen Kane" was soon forgotten, and the film wasn't, for example, screened at American cinemas during the late 1940's and early 50's. In France, however, the film was just discovered after the war, and the leading critic of the country, André Bazin hailed it as a masterpiece of the postwar stylistic tendency he characterized as spatial realism. Bazin's disciples, who we all know now as the nouvelle vague directors, followed and adored Welles' masterpiece. François Truffaut proclaimed that "everything that matters in cinema after 1940 has been influenced by 'Citizen Kane'." Thus the film's reputation grew and its new found reputation slowly found the other side of the Atlantic as well. But why did this happen? Why wasn't "Citizen Kane" forgotten, and why, for one, did it arouse the interest of Bazin?

First, it ought to be highlighted that the story of "Citizen Kane" is excellent. Loosely based on the life and times of media mogul William Hearst, "Citizen Kane" tells the story about a lonely giant who conquered the American media. It's a story about a man who dedicated his life to possession, but tragically became to be possessed by it himself. As one might have noticed, I am using the past tense, and such is the nature of Welles' narrative in "Citizen Kane". The film begins with the protagonist's death, and then portrays the attempts of a journalist trying to figure out the meaning of his last words -- "Rosebud" -- by interviewing people who knew the man. "It will probably turn out to be a very simple thing," he supposes. This kind of structure was not considered the done thing back in the day. Although the basic structure of finding out a person's past goes back to Sophocles' "Oedipus Rex" as well as numerous detective stories, the uniqueness of "Citizen Kane" lies in the use of different perspectives, creating a non-linear narrative that has echoes from ancient drama and epistolary novels.

Yet it wasn't really the intricate story that most fascinated Bazin. What Bazin emphasized was the film's style. Although all scholars have given up on the phoenix myth of "Citizen Kane" and its innovative use of various cinematic means, it is simply a fact that the film made the style public, thus standardizing it for Hollywood. The aesthetic features of the so-called spatial realism, which Bazin adored, supported by the technological innovation of the BNC camera, include deep-focus cinematography, sequence shots, and deep-space composition. These had been used before, but hardly with similar, dare I say, philosophic unity. This stylistic tendency is enhanced by Welles' relentless use of heavy low-angle shots and dynamic montage sequences. There are innovative cuts that spark imagination and soundtrack solutions that open the story and its characters to new dimensions. "Citizen Kane" is often celebrated as a bravura of the art of mise-en-scène since it puts a lot of emphasis on pre-filmic elements such as setting and lighting, but the real gist of the film's brilliance lies in the unity of these together with cinematographic and post-filmic elements.

More remains to be said, but space is running out. The end of the matter is, I guess, that none of the individual elements of "Citizen Kane" are, precisely, individual. They have not been distinguished from one another, but rather resonate luminously together in a unique fashion. Technological innovation goes hand in hand with aesthetic inspiration and both support the whole of story, theme, and style. Such unity may not have been present in Hollywood before 1941. From the groundbreaking use of the BNC camera to themes of power, loneliness, and defeat, which are reflected on the level of style, using setting and editing, for one, to reflect the emotional distances between the characters or their existential experience of emptiness, "Citizen Kane" remains a gem to any lover of cinema. It's up there with immortal works of art from poetry, music, and painting. It is, like all great art, a tightly and beautifully sealed original whole which is why (instead of one big nameable innovation) the film has been considered to be of such magnificent proportions.
Most important movie ever made
Kane "Citizen Kane" (1941) was Orson Welles' film debut, and in it he created an enduring masterpiece that is considered by many to be the greatest movie ever made.


Shortly after "Citizen Kane" opens, we see aged newspaper tycoon Charles Foster Kane (Welles) softly drawl the word "Rosebud" and die. Sensing that there's a story behind Kane's dying word, a magazine editor shows a reporter a newsreel obituary that chronicles how Kane created a business empire, married a U.S. President's niece, ran unsuccessfully for Governor of New York, divorced his first wife and married a second, collected art, built a fabulous estate called Xanadu, and divorced his second wife. The reporter is then assigned the task of ferreting out the significance of "Rosebud." As the reporter's investigation progresses, fascinating details about Kane emerge.

My opinion:

Citizen kane is maybe for a lot of people (myselve not included) not a real entertaining movie, But there is no doubt about it that aws one of the most important movies ever made.

The visual style of "Citizen Kane" looks stunningly fresh and inventive even today, and the unconventional narrative structure of the Oscar-winning screenplay still seems daring. Welles' portrayal of a character who gradually ages from 25 to old age is unexcelled, and the movie's supporting cast, most of whom had worked previously with Welles on stage and radio productions, is superb. In short, everything came together in "Citizen Kane" to make it one of the greatest character studies ever captured on film.

Citizen kane is also one of my favorites and is listed in my top 5 of all time: 9.5 / 10 Masterpiece !!!
📹 Purchase Citizen Kane movie online, Citizen Kane HD 720p download, Citizen Kane the movie, Citizen Kane download, characters in Citizen Kane, Citizen Kane budget, Citizen Kane movie download, Citizen Kane Bluray purchase online, Citizen Kane HD full movie online, Citizen Kane HD online, Joseph Cotten, Dorothy Comingore, Agnes Moorehead, Ruth Warrick, Ray Collins, Erskine Sanford, Everett Sloane, William Alland, Paul Stewart, George Coulouris, Fortunio Bonanova, Gus Schilling, Philip Van Zandt, Georgia Backus, Harry Shannon Citizen Kane, Citizen Kane 1080p, Citizen Kane 720p, Citizen Kane direct link download, Citizen Kane purchase download, Citizen Kane full movie, Citizen Kane full movie download, Citizen Kane full movie free download, Citizen Kane purchase movie 1941, Citizen Kane full movie online, Citizen Kane 1941, Citizen Kane Drama, Mystery online, Citizen Kane purchase DVD 📀, Citizen Kane USA, purchase Citizen Kane, Citizen Kane download 720p, Citizen Kane dual audio, Citizen Kane HD Orson Welles, Citizen Kane good movie to purchase, purchase movies and download, Citizen Kane movie 1941 purchase, Citizen Kane movie available for purchase, purchase Citizen Kane movie, Citizen Kane real life, Citizen Kane Joseph Cotten, Dorothy Comingore, Agnes Moorehead, Ruth Warrick, Ray Collins, Erskine Sanford, Everett Sloane, William Alland, Paul Stewart, George Coulouris, Fortunio Bonanova, Gus Schilling, Philip Van Zandt, Georgia Backus, Harry Shannon 📼, Citizen Kane actors names, Citizen Kane HD digital copies of movie, Citizen Kane movies unlimited 🎞️.