Features Jun 24 2008 @ 04:21 pm
REVIEW: Citizen Kane…which sucked, by the way
America, and like…1989, I think?
Directed By: Probably Steven Spielberg. He’s a director, right?
Written By: Not those guys who wrote the Pirates movies. So I don’t care.
Starring: Some dude who sounds like that mouse from Animaniacs
Running Time: Too friggin’ long.
Rated PG…for boring-ness.
(out of 57 rectangles)
Note: This was written for the Bizarro Blogathon at Lazy Eye Theater.
Okay, so I was just, like, hanging out, when this guy Evan says to me, “Why don’t we watch this movie?” and I’m all like “What movie is it?” and he says “It’s called Citizen Kane.” I say, “Citizen Kane? Is that one new? I’ve never heard of it.” And he’s all like “No, I think it’s been around a while now.”
“So it’s like, 80’s? Does it have Patrick Swayze in it?”
And he’s all like, “Patrick Swayze? Like in Dirty Dancing? That’s barely even a movie!” and I’m all like, “Whatever,” so he pops it in the DVD player, and it starts up.
OMG, it sucked.
Okay, so like first off, they must have been using some weird new digital effect or something, because the colors were, like, missing. I mean, I don’t get it. Everything was in, like, shades of gray, or something. There was just black…and white. Um, excuse me? Maybe it was supposed to be like that other movie, Sin City? OMG, Jessica Alba was sooo hot.
Yeah, that kid in the window? Totally distracting.
So, it opens with this shot of an old guy. Yeah, like I want to see an old guy????? And I’m totally serious: the camera was, like pointed straight up his nose! Ew! And then he said some word that I didn’t understand, so I’m all like, “What did he say?” and Evan’s like “Sssh!” but I’m like, “Whatever, I want to know what he said,” and he’s like, “Let me watch the frickin’ movie,” but I’m like, “Please just tell me,” and finally he goes, “Rosebud! He said Rosebud, okay?! Just watch the movie!” so I’m all like, “Where did that come from? Chill.” And he just glares at me. What did I do?
So because Evan was talking I missed most of the next part. I think it was like a news show, or something? But they were, like, watching it in a movie theater. Why would they do that? I’m like, is that supposed to be funny? Where’s the joke? I mean, I’m sorry, but a movie that wants to make me laugh needs to try a little harder than that. Like that new movie with the guy from Austin Powers. That movie was good. And also, I totally got to make out at it.
So anyway, the news show ends and there’s some people in the theater and they’re all like, “What does Rosebud mean?” and I’m like “Duh! That’s what I’ve been asking Evan for the last ten minutes!”
And he’s like “Ssshh!”
And I’m all like, “Just tell me what Rosebud means! I hate movies that are hard to understand. This is like that time I tried to watch Knocked Up and I was like, why is everyone fighting? I thought this was a comedy! Hello!” And so Evan tells me to shut up again, and I tell him I can’t follow this movie cuz I don’t know what “Rosebud” means.
This movie sucks.
So then there’s this guy who’s, like, going around, and um, talking to people. So I’m like, “I don’t get it. Was that the old guy from earlier?” and he’s like, “No, this is a reporter.” OMG, what??? Why do they keep giving me new characters?
Um...seriously. I don't watch movies to see girls wearing clothes.
So, then my friend Chris totally texted me, and I had to have this way-important conversation with him because he can’t find the tap for our kegger, and I’m trying to solve his crisis, and then when I look up, there’s this kid on a sled or something. Whatever. Then later on, I guess, this guy gets a newspaper company, and—seriously—those girls aren’t even hot. What are they doing in a movie???
Yeah, so I finally avert this crisis with Chris, and I have, like, no idea what’s happening. What good is a movie if you lose the plot the second you take out your cellphone? Who likes garbage like that?
Okay, so I guess later on, there’s some sort of scene in a tent, or something? And this guy totally slaps his wife, which is so not cool. This is why this movie sucks—it has a guy slapping his wife. I’m just so totally against domestic violence, and everything it, like, stands for, and, like, any movie that has it, and stuff.
Then Old Dude throws a temper tantrum, and then he dies again. So like, what? They think that, like, when I watch a movie, I like, wanna see a guy die twice? Oh, and then they burn a sled. Like, who burns a sled? I guess that part was supposed to be funny, again. This movie was total crap.
Yeah...People do not stand on stacks of newspapers. This movie blows.
So, like, I don’t even know what Hollywood was thinking when they made this movie. First off, when you make a movie, it needs to make sense, okay? Like, if there’s a guy and girl, they need to fall in love. And if there’s a car, it needs to explode. And if you want to be funny, you can’t have characters that just sit around and talk, without ever wearing funny underwear. This isn’t that hard, okay people? Also, it was way too unrealistic. Like, people don’t die twice. The world has more than two colors. And Xanadu is so not some mansion in California. It’s an Olivia Newton-John movie, okay???
How people can be so totally dumb…it just makes me…um…y’know…mad.
on Jun 24 2008 @ 4:57 pm 1. Cinexcellence said …
Yeah, what a piece of crap. (That first caption is brilliant)
on Jun 24 2008 @ 5:15 pm 2. Phillip Johnston said …
I had Kane sitting on my desk one time and someone came over to me and said, “That movie is dumb … it doesn’t even have a good story.” I asked them for a better choice and they submitted Paycheck (yeah … that one) as the better movie.
I contemplated never talking to them again. Ever.
on Jun 24 2008 @ 7:30 pm 3. stephanie said …
your review is amazing, i really connected with it.
on Jun 24 2008 @ 7:32 pm 4. Cinexcellence said …
Phillip, I think I heard the Paycheck argument before. Probably from the same person?
on Jun 24 2008 @ 7:57 pm 5. Phillip Johnston said …
Definitely from the same person.
on Jun 24 2008 @ 8:32 pm 6. Luke Harrington said …
Honestly, I just had to look up Paycheck now. If I’d heard of it, I definitely hadn’t thought about it in years. Sorry, but any movie that involves Ben Affleck and John Woo can’t possibly be good.
I do think that Tokyo Story is better than this one, however.
Just for the record.
on Jun 24 2008 @ 9:44 pm 7. Evan Derrick said …
Yeah, I do remember watching this with you, ya jerk. I swear, last time I try to give you culture, you inbred swine.
on Jun 24 2008 @ 11:48 pm 8. Rick Olson said …
Tokyo Story … now THERE’S a piece of crap. Ozu was a talentless hack, who couldn’t even afford a dolly for Pete’s sake. Michael Bay: now there’s a genius. HIS camera moved all the time.
on Jun 25 2008 @ 7:57 am 9. Rachel said …
I’m with you, Luke. I tried watching this crapfest one night and the entire time I thought “I could be doing my nails, instead of watching some bloated old fart whine about life.” I mean the lead guy wasn’t even hot! How is the movie suppose to hold my attention with this Orson Welles windbag, who’s far from being the next Sexiest Man Alive.
Whatever. I’m going to watch Grey’s Anatomy.
on Jun 25 2008 @ 1:22 pm 10. Scott said …
“And Xanadu is so not some mansion in California. It’s an Olivia Newton-John movie, okay???”
I KNOW! I totally tired to tell my professor this but. he. would. not. listen.
He also didn’t listen to my “BLACK&WHITE” equalls “BORING&WIRED” arguments.
on Jun 25 2008 @ 1:30 pm 11. Evan Derrick said …
Tragedies, Scott. Tragedies all around.
on Jun 26 2008 @ 4:40 pm 12. Fox said …
Right on Luke! I’m so glad you’re talking about this.
I rented it from Blockbuster one time (NOTE: they gave me TWO (!!) discs, and I was like “Dude! How long is this movie? It’s on TWO dvds!! UGH!”…anyway…) and for some reason that fat dude with glasses, Gene Siskel, was all talking over the movie and explaining everything. Anyways… he got to the part about how Citizen Kane was important because of “deep focus”? Um… ok. Like, I’ve seen movies that came out before Citizen Kane and they were totally in focus. GAWD… what an idiot. Movie obsessives are so lame.
on Jun 28 2008 @ 8:44 am 13. Luke Harrington said …
Yeah, I know - like, some people even have “blogs” where they do nothing but talk about movies. Those losers need to get girlfriends.
on Jul 03 2008 @ 10:12 am 14. James said …
This is my first time posting on this website, so I better make it a good one.
However, from reading the other comments, it’s easy for me to get very intimidated by the sheer intellect and passion of not only the contributors, but the ordinary patrons as well. For the past few days, I’ve been listening, browsing around, and taking in the atmosphere. Now, I have finally decided that this site will be my resource for films.
Sad to say, that this article was one of the reasons that I want to stay here.
I hope you feel proud of yourselves.
Aloha,
James
on Jul 03 2008 @ 11:04 am 15. Luke Harrington said …
Well thanks, James…I have to say I’m flattered. I agonized over this piece for days, trying to get at what was really the essence of Citizen Kane (turns out that it was an old dude dying…hmmm).
Seriously though, welcome. We’re still young here, and still building an audience, so it’s always fantastic to get a compliment as nice as that one ^. Feel free to leave your thoughts anytime.
on Jul 03 2008 @ 11:07 am 16. Evan Derrick said …
James, you are more than welcome my friend. I cannot tell you how honored I am that you think MZ would be a good place to get your film fix. At the expense of sounding totally lame and schmaltzy, people like you are the reason we began this site - to connect with people online, build a community of folks interested and passionate about film, and hopefully learn as much from them as they might learn from us.
And to be honest, we really don’t know what we’re talking about…we just read IMDB all day and make a bunch of stuff up.
No need to be intimidated, James. Your opinions will always be welcome. And remember, if you don’t think you have anything interesting to say, just make a monkey joke. We love monkey jokes. 
on Jul 03 2008 @ 12:20 pm 17. Ivette said …
This review really makes me sad… You really didn’t like this film? Ya sure it’s B&W, but then again I hope you didn’t miss the part that said it was made in 1941.
BTW, how the hell did your friend come around to finding this?
on Jul 03 2008 @ 12:44 pm 18. James said …
@ Ivette:
I think you might be missing the point of the article… This piece is what you would call, “satire.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the article is written from the point of view of a teenage movie-goer who has never heard of Citizen Kane, but is wrangled into seeing it anyway.
Sad to say, I know a few people like this, and I thankfully cannot claim them as friends.
But perhaps that could’ve been understood a bit earlier if the following statement had been a bit more prominent:
“Note: This was written for the Bizarro Blogathon at Lazy Eye Theater.”
Just one fellow’s opinion.
Aloha,
James
on Jul 03 2008 @ 6:11 pm 19. Luke Harrington said …
I thought about making it more prominent (there were even banners I could have used), but I kind of wanted to see if anyone would take me seriously.
Heh…though the idea of someone that writes for a movie blog, and has never heard of Citizen Kane (or even black and white) is a pretty absurd one, though.
So, sorry if I offended you Ivette…and be sure to come back.
on Jul 14 2008 @ 2:16 am 20. Flickchart - Finding the Best Movies » Coffee and Celluloid said …
[…] Yes, AFI tried to answer that question. But Citizen Cane? Really? It was his stupid sled. […]