Classic Movies: Citizen Kane(1941)

Citizen Kane(1941), in many aspects, is a movie that can be analyzed and deconstructed as a totalitarian allegory.

The movie is showing that an obsessive figure who has a very powerful tool that is media and he controls and influences the masses with this powerful tool.

While many focuses on the plot understandably, the cinematography of Citizen Kane(1941) is also a reveling experience.

Especially shots and camera movements during transitions shows a new technique of storytelling in cinema.

Framing in Citizen Kane

In this scene, particularly, the angle and the framing shows also the power and the people who are in control.

Two people in the front are the decision-makers while the person on the left has his opinions and his voice is heard but, he has not in control.

In the same frame, it is also shown that Kane is in fact on the topic, he is not even in the discussion/room.

Time of Citizen Kane(1941)

The rise of the Nazi Party and Adolf Hitler is one of the most significant events in history.

Between  1930 and 1945 Nazi ideas and policies were dominant in Germany. It was so dominant that there were no significant protests or Anti-Nazi movements in that era. To maintain power, manipulation was one of the core aspects of Nazi propaganda. Hitler used very efficient manipulation techniques. For example, he is generally known as a good speaker, a demagogue.

Released in 1941, Citizen Kane even shows how Kane was friendly with the regime and even declared it as friendly and peaceful in his newspaper. Yet, it also shows a parallel of what happened in Germany can very well happen everywhere.

The symbolism of Totalitarianism in Citizen Kane(1941)

While watching the movie, I realized that the character Charles Foster Kane seemed familiar, the way he uses his newspaper, his obsession with control and public approval when connected with the release date seems very much similar to a historical figure.

The rise of Adolf Hitler can be connected to many things. When we think about what he promised and what he did very much similar to the character of Charles Foster Kane. In the scene where he and Mr.Thatcher talks about the story that the newspaper is running, Kane claims that he will always protect the rights of the common over the rich. When we look at the promises and the posters of Nazi Germany under Hitler, we see a similar claim was made by Hitler, to protect the rights of the working class. Furthermore, the similarity becomes more obvious when Kane gets older and when we witness the hypocrisy of this idea. He abandons the ideal he declared before and rather protects his own power and manipulates the truth when he seems necessary.

Kane controls the narrative through media 

When Kane and his first wife were talking about the news and also the scene where Kane threatens the vocal teacher with the power of media and influence, I automatically thought about the power of propaganda that Hitler and Nazi Germany used perfectly to gain power and to remain that power.

Even the meaning of power defined as the flow of information and to influence masses showed in the movie, supports the message of, this is how a person can be powerful and influential over others. Kane before owning the newspaper is not known by others, masses even though he is rich. The rise of Charles Foster Kane symbolizes the fast rise of the Nazis and Adolf Hitler. Director is showing that this is the power of media and propaganda and it is that easy for someone to rise into power.

Moreover, the resemblances continue.

The scene where Kane makes the election speech to be a governor. The scenery is very interesting, a very, unnecessarily big poster of Kane along with a speech which is not a very rational and serious one. People generally laugh and applause even when Kane says he will order to arrest the current governor and again justify this aggressive action by saying defending the poor/working class. 

The big symbol(photo) at the back with selected people listening closely between the man and the background

The big symbol(photo) at the back with selected people listening closely between the man and the background

Following this, we see that Kane rejects blackmail even though he knows that it will affect his campaign and election.

He once more chooses to go his own way which is, we can say again, another characteristic of Adolf Hitler who knew if he pushes for Poland, the Allies powers(UK and France at that time) will declare war on Germany which means war on both sides of the country. Again, we can see the parallelism here.

Overall

I constantly thought about these parallelisms, and when we think thoroughly and even analyze more scenes and similarities. Certainly, movies can be deconstructed in many different ways and it is easy to connect these scenes to certain similar topics in real life. Yet, in the last 80 years, there is no other movie that shows the power of the media this precise and in a way simple.

It is not far-fetched that the power of media enables politicians and power figures to control the narrative and maintain their power. In fact, if you look at many countries today, the reason why some politicians are still in power is that they control the media and feed the people with their own narrative.

Kane’s newspaper manipulates the election

While this more plot-related, a written post is not enough to show the real cinematography behind Citizen Kane, particularly the framing is a huge part of the movie and also it reflects the plot. The audience can understand who is in control, who is powerful, and who is not.

Therefore, this movie is one of the classic gems.

Sources:

Bazin, Andre.  Orson Welles: A Critical View, trans. Jonathan Rosenbaum, New York:
Harper and Row, 1978: “Citizen Kane,” pp. 53-59; “The Technique of Wide Angles,”
pp. 74-75; “Construction in Depth,” pp. 75-80; and “A Style That Creates Meaning,”
pp. 81-82.

Gear, Matthew Asprey. At the End of the Street in the Shadow: Orson Welles and the City. Columbia University Press, 2016.

Hamilton, Richard F. “The Rise of Nazism: A Case Study and Review of Interpretations: Kiel, 1928-1933.” German Studies Review, vol. 26, no. 1, 2003, pp. 43–62.