Citizen Kane Emily Wingfield (sorry its so long)

Emily Wingfield

Film Analysis

Dr. Permenter

21 June 2012

Blog #2 – Citizen Kane

            Citizen Kane is thought to be one of the most prestigious films of all time; it continues to rein at the top of the list. But not for its storyline, instead it is Orson Wells’ cinematography that continues to amaze people. The camera angles, lenses and use of light all change the perception in which people watch this film. Wells’ used a lighting technique that always led the viewers’ eyes exactly where he wanted them. The viewer was not able to interpret their own ideas throughout this film – as viewers normally do – but instead Wells showed viewers the story exactly how he wanted them to see it. Although, his lighting technique was not the only method he used to tell a story. His use of camera angles are so deep and demanding that the audience doesn’t feel anything else than what Orson Wells wanted them to feel. We will talk about examples a little later. And finally, the use of camera lenses and deep focus was his lethal weapon; it is what set him apart from the others.

            The lighting techniques used throughout this film are non-stop and there could be an entire full length paper explaining what Orson Wells might have been thinking in his head at the time, and why he decide to light his film the way he did, so I will explain a few scenes that stood out to me the most. Wells’ lighting technique can be seen from the very beginning of the Citizen Kane– the scene in which the nurse enters to cover the deceased body of Charles Foster Kane, by use of the lighting in the background directly behind Kane impulses our eyes to only focus on him. Although, we can still see the nurse and what she is doing, our main concern is that Charles Foster Kane is dead, not on the nurse – and that is exactly what Wells was attempting with the lighting.

            Another scene in which lighting is used to deter our eyes (although, that is in every scene) is when the reporter is interviewing Leland about Kane. Leland is sitting to the left of our screen –a comfortable and normal position to be in since our eyes read left to right – the light in the background leads a straight line directly to Leland, and the reporter is sitting in the shadows in front of him – which we see him on the right of our screen in the foreground. This technique is to make sure the viewers are paying attention to Langley, and although there are two people placed in the lit background, they are used for equalizing the shot and making it more comfortable than just a shot of the two men and nothing else. Each of the two people in the background reflects the two men in the foreground.

            Wells’ use of camera angles goes far below the ground, literally. In one scene the lowest camera angle was not good enough; Wells wanted it lower. Tomlan even told him to get a different angle, but Wells stuck to his guns, well almost. He picked up an axe and began digging up the ground. He proved Tomlan wrong and got his much lower angle. There were many different types of camera angles used throughout this film, but many of them were deep camera angles like the previous I described. Lengthy takes goes along with setting the right camea angle. Wells’ use of mis en scene and the placement of this characters defines this movie and how we perceive it. It was fascinating watching the film this time around and notice how long the majority of his scenes were shot in and how they all seem to contain the use of foreground, middle ground and background. There were two scenes in particular that stood out to me that included both length and mis en scene. The first scene was when Mr. Bernstein and Mr. Thatcher were sitting at a desk with Kane. The scene opened with Mr. Bernstein reading a document then he pulls the document down and we (the audience) see who it appears he is reading the document to, Mr. Thatcher. But then, whilst still reading, we hear the voice of Kane and the camera then includes him in the picture by moving slightly to the left. We then have a full scene from one camera angle with Mr. Bernstein in the foreground, Mr. Thatcher in the middle ground and Kane in the background. And interesting enough, towards the end of this scene, we notice there is light on Mr. Thatcher and Mr. Bernstein but when we look at Kane, there is still light, but it only seems to be lighting one side of his face, therefore we only know the half of him, if that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=1uOaqa79iJg (link to that scene).

The other camera angle that I wanted to explain was the scene in which Kane is a young boy playing in the snow. This was a lengthy shot as well, but here, we have Mrs. Kane and Mr. Thatcher in the foreground while Mr. Kane is in the middle ground and we see young boy Kane in the background through the window. I eyes are to be directly averted to the young boy Kane outside, because he is in the direct center of the shot – therefore he requires all the attention, plus the conversation is about him.

            And finally a few things about Wells’ use of camera lenses; Wells was very fond of using deep focus lenses. An example of the use of this kind of lens is in the scene that I last described. When that scene is first opened, the first thing we see is Kane, as a young boy, playing outside in the snow. It then pulls back and bring the mother watching him into the cameras shot and further back until all four people are seen and how the shot takes place.

Something that stuck out to me through this entire film is how much is resembled live theater. After considering that he might have pictured every shot in that film as if it were on Broadway helps me to understand the ideas behind Wells’ lighting techniques. With theater, lights are used constantly to deter where we (the audience) are supposed to be looking, for example, the spotlight. But, it was almost like he used it in the opposite way. Instead of always having the spotlight on the star, he surrounded area around the star (Kane) leaving him in darkness. In this film, Kane was not a ‘star’ he was a distraught man who was caught in the darkness of the light surrounding him. He even states in the film, “If I hadn’t been very rich, I might have been a really great man” (Citizen Kane).