Author: Jonathan Rosenbaum (Film Comment)
Translator: csh
The translation was first published in "Iris"
Basically a rather vulgar concept... the popular melodrama-Freud plus Scandal, a comic strip about Hearst. ——Pauline Kell on "Citizen Kane"
Although Pauline Kyle used this expression to describe "Citizen Kane" in a long article introducing the screenplay, strictly speaking, these words may be more suitable for her own style. After these quotations, she made it clear that "Citizen Kane" is "redeemed vulgarity", but this also applies to her own words: backed by impressive research, full of interesting scandals and society History, and the writing is quite enthusiastic and astute. Her "Lift Kane" is a work with many merits. As a collection of bedside stories, it easily reminds us of Robert Lewis Taylor’s biography "The Last" written by Robert Lewis Taylor for W.C. Fields. A meeting. Most of her comments on Hollywood are very astute and persuasive (for example, "the film industry is always panic, and always praises the movies that praise courage the most"). Her basic point is that the script of "Citizen Kane" is almost entirely the work of Herman J. Mankiewicz, which seems to be fully supported and very convincing-although, for nine years ago (Autumn 1962) For readers who have read Penelope Houston’s interview with John Houston, this is not an overwhelming inference. But as a criticism, "Lift Kane" can be regarded as an obvious failure-for a person regarded as an important film critic, it is a frustrating performance-in this film, The object under scrutiny disappeared before our eyes time and time again.
When Pauline Kyle began to establish her own reputation in the early 1960s, these reputations came mainly from her individualized and powerful satire of other critics. When she wrote for a wider audience in "The New Yorker" (where the essay "Lift Kane" first appeared), she was still making satires, but the subjects were generally celebrities-such as Orson Wells , And critics will be anonymous when they are criticized. This may be due to professional courtesy, but the more likely assumption is that readers of "The New Yorker" will not bother to read other writers' film articles, but this anonymity can sometimes lead to a certain ambiguity. Therefore, some things have to be discovered by ourselves, such as "The Newest Book of Incense About Joseph von Sternberg" from Hermann G. Weinberg. She also ridiculed the "traditional textbook's great interpretation of "Citizen Kane"" and insinuated "Citizen Kane" is a tragedy in the form of fugue, or that its protagonist is an article of time." She is not referring to several articles, but an article written by Joseph McBride in "Stick to the Vision". The opening part of McBrian’s article read: ""Citizen Kane" is a tragedy in the form of fugue; therefore, this is also a negation of the tragedy." After three paragraphs, we still see "Time Itself is the protagonist of "Citizen Kane"." However, as a whole, regardless of the lack of style in McBride’s essay, it may contain more than that of Kyle’s seventy-page two-column essay in terms of "Citizen Kane". Value insights.
Perhaps the best criticism of "Citizen Kane" can still be found in André Bazin’s out-of-print, untranslated little book on Wells ("Orson Wells", 1950 ), although the book still has theoretical limitations and embarrassing factual errors. Kyle once wrote in a book review that Bazin's article is "very hard to read and even a bit brain-burning" in English translation. This can indeed show signs of Kyle's limitations. As her early comments on Eisenstein and Rene (and others) have shown, a brain that is easily burned may not have the ability to deal with intellectual subjects to some extent. For her, "Ivan the Terrible" is "so inhumane, we might even stare at it angrily. Of course, every picture looks great... but as a movie, it is Static, exaggerated, and often ridiculous. Well-designed lens angles, excessively stitched photography, and highly nervous, rolling eyes, jumping up and down the actors constitute a unity... There is no doubt, despite the extremely experienced Eisen Stan, deliberately turned all this into an unrealistic style, but for everyone, this is just a heavy sculpture-except for those who are really obsessed with his movies.". And "Last year in Marienbad" for her was "the kind of typical, so-called supernatural movie. There was "Spirit and Flesh" in the 1940s, and this was just a "higher" version-but now People call it "Jungianism" movies." The basic feature of these two reactions is that they refuse (or are unable to) respond to these self-consistent art in their own way. They reflect a certain impulse to reduce the work to a specific scale—or try to accept it. Before they were cut into fragments. In Kyle's rare best state, she can see a movie as an organic whole, just like her sensitive review of "Hana Village" last year. But at more moments, the film becomes fragmented, divided into countless pros and cons of information. Those loose fragments are usually discarded, unless they can reflect a certain pattern or humor, and in the end we can only see the remnants. Corpse. Of course, many movies are wreckage. Few critics can accurately explain the way some movies have fallen sharply like Kyle-this complex (or simple) gesture is often hidden in the appearance of mediocrity or incoherent. behind. However, when Kyle faced the depth of "Citizen Kane", he could only praise it as a "superficial masterpiece."
Because of this, she was confused or flinched by many of the contents of the film. First, she tried to connect the film with the biography, public image, and (presumed) psychological state of Wells, Mankiewicz, and Hearst ("Floydgar Scandal"), as much as possible "Explain" the movie. When some parts of the film seem to be inconsistent with her "real" plot, she still tries to link them together: "The scene where Wells was eating at the newspaper was obviously captured by the film crew. He must Use this to make "a good thing". However, if we find that the script has described the eating scene in detail, what is the conspicuousness and even believability of this fantasy?
When Kyle faced the specific techniques of the film, her brushwork was the weakest. For example, the film uses a partially invisible reporter as a narrative tool—adjusting our attention so that we focus on what he sees and hears instead of what he is like—which obviously confuses her. In evaluating a completely functional performance, she criticized William Orland. She believed that "he is completely empty as a reporter Thompson. This faceless idea is not really understood. You may not be able to recognize it. The intention behind "Citizen Kane", but you only need to think about it. The scene of "March News" is so weak that Thompson is obviously a major character in the film, but there is no such thing in his lines or performance. Characterization, he is such a secret existence, you can hardly even remember his appearance..."
Putting aside her comments on the "March News" scene, just watching her take one of the film’s most ingenious and successful strategies as a burden, and it’s also a heartbreaking thing-unfortunately, this is not her abnormality. status. In fact, how can we find this "weakness" in this wonderful screening room passage? In this beautiful passage with neat composition and beautiful sound and picture arrangement? Except for her misunderstanding? Kyle uses the second person here, just like she uses the first person plural on other occasions. This is after all a political and rhetorical strategy. This is a counter-analytic strategy: we were invited to a weird party. , Here only narrow taste prevails.
Those viewers who have never experienced the transition (from silent films to sound films) can hardly realize how pathological and unpleasant those "art" silent films are—how much you want to erase all the fog and emotions.
If you (Kyle) can't cite a movie as evidence-is it "Sunrise" or "New York Shipyard"? There are many fogs and emotions in both; or is her sharp knife pointed at something else? ——This is really difficult. But if you (Kyle) don't mind strengthening the prejudices of those amateur audiences, it's not too difficult. They may also wish to erase those "silent films "poetry"," and producers who had similar prejudices at the time would often provide them with this service.
Kyle found that when facing "Citizen Kane", she also encountered similar difficulties:
Mysteries...most of them are false. The atmosphere of the Gothic thriller and the gimmick of the rosebuds (albeit funny) are such obvious, exploitative and fearful popular dramas. They are no different from the false mysteries hyped in Hearst's "U.S. Weekly"—haunted castles, realized curses.
In this way of appreciation, even her most lofty compliments will seem like ironic compliments or condescending style practice, just as she did when she rebelled against nostalgia. After determining that we should not take "Citizen Kane" seriously, she became fanatical: "At this time, this film summarized and sealed an era, and the young overturned was sealed in all the novelty— -Even the most mediocre novelty.”
However, not only did Kyle fantasize about the past, he also described his doubts about the movie, saying that it was a "night voyage into the sea of unconsciousness." In Bunuel’s words, “Most film dream theories treat the audience as passive dreamers, but this does not apply to people’s reactions to silent comedies—when they are good enough, the audience will remain high. State of consciousness". However, dreamers are always passively associated with their own dreams—not to mention the dreams of others? Then, "dream" and "high state of consciousness" are really opposed
The beauty of "Citizen Kane" and Wells' overall style are largely related to dynamic changes, lyrical expressions and intuitive reactions. If you just think of "Citizen Kane" as the "peak" of the comedy in the 1930s or "a collection of dizzy textures", or even a series of satires on Hirst, then you will miss most of its thrills, Wonderful and touching. When the camera passes through the dark window frame, from the child surrounded by snow, back to the mother's face, people will realize that the realm of freedom is framed and fate is restricted. No matter whether it is a plot change or an analytical ability, Conceptualize it. Susan Alexander ends her monologue all night, and the camera rises from the skylight, and the picture passes over her fading words ("Come over and talk to me about your life"). The extraordinary moving qualities of this passage are too sudden and too complicated to be summed up as superficial enthusiasm: it is the relief of staying up all night to meet the dawn, the satisfaction that transcends the focus of the narrative, it is the end of a confession, a gesture of friendship , A reversal from bottom to top, a touch of dramatic texture, a joyful exhaustion. It is like a great poem, dense and direct. In Wells's work alone, this kind of marvelous art at its peak is enough to outline the graceful curves of an era. At the grand ball of "The Great Amberson", we may be able to see the greatest achievement of his career, a push-track shot and a fusion shot, leading us through the front door of the mansion, a short breeze Flicking past, we spin into a magical continuum, into the past of a family and a community, the past and the future revolve and slide in front of our eyes-the flow of voices, faces, history and individuals is so fast, we I can never expect to keep up with them.
So, what does Kyle have to say about "The Great Amberson"? Oh, this is a "feeling, imaginative, and remarkable work...but Wells (as an actor) did not appear in this film, and it was too flat, like an empty, An uninhabited house." Anyway, she gave Wells an "A" for her efforts, which was great.
Throughout the entire "Raise Kane", Kyle presented a grand performance, and she wanted to "clarify" the public's misunderstanding of Wells. But in my own experience, the most common misconception is not that Wells wrote "Citizen Kane" (although this is still common), but that he "created" and even "directed" "The Third Man." The worst thing about Kyle’s comments is that they don’t even fully appraise his style as a director, and they don’t distinguish it from Carol Reid. She recorded Wells' vanity so carefully that the movie ended up looking like a secondary thing. Behind the myth of "The Great Wells", there seems to be a remnant of rubbish, and many of his best achievements have been denied.
When commenting on "Citizen Kane" again recently, she said that "most newspaper office scenes still seem to be as bleak as ever" (without giving reasons or explanations). Waving her arms, she erased the rich complexity and evil texture of "Miss Shanghai" from people's vision: "His later thriller shows a viciousness, and there is nothing predictable in it. , There are only illusory, sensational, entertaining thriller images. Generally speaking, they are just thrillers." (Like the James Bond series?) After a page, she pointed out that in "Citizen Kane" There are many elements and tastes that have nothing to do with Wells's other works. She takes care of these factors and adds: "Ordinary activities and social content are not his strong points." I still don’t understand what she means by "ordinary activities" when she evaluates "Citizen Kane" or other films, but she thinks any of Wells' later movies (including those adapted from Shakespeare) There is no interesting social content, so I must have watched different movies.
In my opinion, the influence of Mankiewicz and Toland on Kane continued to a certain extent in Wells’s later works, for better or for worse: this is particularly evident in "Mr. Arkadin" . It not only embodies the clumsiness of the branch plot of "Citizen Kane", but also embodies the beauty of its in-depth photography. But when Kyle worked to overthrow Wells’ reputation as a director, Kyle seemed to have found more unity in Mankiewicz’s career as a producer (rather than Wills as a director). . Although she has long focused on the struggle of will between Mankiewicz, Wells, and Hearst, all she says about the sentence in the following Mankiewicz letter is: "This shows that in any case, he ( Mankiewicz) admires Hirst and Wells.
I always think justice is my outstanding characteristic. I told Orson that in any case, Mr. Hirst is a great man in many ways. Orson said that he was a bastard no matter what he did, no matter what he did, he was wrong without exception.
Let’s put it this way, when we define their creations, perhaps we need to realize that they are at different stages: After all, Wells is (almost) in the early stages of his career, while Mankiewicz is (almost) in the early stages of his career. end. Because of this, it’s difficult for us to agree with Kyle’s view of Mankiewicz. She said that he "wrote a grand film without sentimentality, without any hypocrisy, without scenes of piety, abuse or regret, without " the truth"". On the contrary, "Citizen Kane" has all these elements. What's more important is that it admires Kane as a "great man", and in the process of condemning this, it presents the worship of primitive power. The peculiar irony is that for Kyle, the most powerful advantage of "Citizen Kane" lies in the charm of Wells as an actor-and it is this charm that makes the corruption in the script and the wealth The reverence of power (and the ensuing self-hatred) becomes pleasing to the eye. It is believed that the uniqueness of "Citizen Kane" in Wells's works largely depends on the fact that it looks at corruption from the perspective of corruption, while other works look at corruption from the perspective of innocence. Wells abandoned the "charismatic instigator" and "lovable bastard"-this is a typical character that commercial Hollywood relies on, presented in a series of works from "The Wild Iron Man" to "General Patton" ——This made him lose most of the audience. But I think he actually obtained some kind of justice in this process.
The overwhelming emotion conveyed in the last moments of "Citizen Kane" is an extravagance that encompasses the universe: an empire and a life that has been turned into rubbish are turning into smoke. If we compare these smokes with the smoke that rises at the end of The Trial, we may be aware of some of the experience, wisdom and feelings that Mankiewicz brought to Citizen Kane. However, although people may thank Kyle, after all, she finally brought Mankiewicz some of his due rewards, but people still hope to find some "Citizen Kane" in her tribute to Mankiewicz. "The despair and horror at the end. Perhaps, if, as Kyle said, "Citizen Kane" "is not a particularly in-depth film, nor is it a subtle and beautiful work", then its ending may be just what she said, "This Another joke in "A Gothic Comedy"-the final burlesque performance. But somehow, when I watched the end, I didn't really want to laugh.
View more about Citizen Kane reviews
