Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General MOVIE & DVD Discussions > POLL: Is CITIZEN KANE Really The #1 BEST Movie of ALL Time??
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: CITIZEN KANE
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

CITIZEN KANE

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 8>
Poll Question: Is Welles' 1941 "Masterpiece" The BEST Movie EVER Made??
Vote Poll Choice Poll Statistics
[12.36%]
[61.80%]
[19.10%]
[6.74%]

Author
Message
saturnwatcher View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 14 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2577
Post Options Post Options   Quote saturnwatcher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: CITIZEN KANE
    Posted: September 12 2011 at 9:19am
If one wishes to understand the history of the U.S. in the early years of the 20th century, it is advisable to know about Hearst. He was arguably more powerful than several of the Presidents that served in that era, and his open advocacy of political assassination may well have been indirectly responsible for the assassination of President McKinley.
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2137
Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 12 2011 at 9:23am

Exactly. SuperTeenTopia acts like just because Citizen Kane is perfectly made when it comes to technicality that it's one of the best films of all time. Any film can be well made yet the story may be lacking. On the other side, a film can have a low budget which makes the film appear shoddy, yet the way it executes its story may be the best thing ever.

Originally posted by Vits

1)In order for this discussion to continue, I think we need to use clearer words. If a movie has good entertainment value, you "enjoyed" it. If it has good technical aspects, you "appreciated" it. If it has good art qualities...well, asVheid pointed out, that's subjective. But if it has good entertainment factor and technical aspects,which is how it should be, you "liked" it.
 

Originally posted by Vits

2)MWG,you're right that one isn't obligated to know those things...in general. But you like to review movies (it doesn't matter if it's as a hobby or a profession). Readers expect you to do a proper analysis, unlike a "random 5 year old."


I do do a proper analysis. Does anyone actually read my reviews? I've heard no complaints from people who have read my reviews. In fact, some of them pointed out that I make great points in order to support my opinion. Ok. Let me post my review for Drive and tell me if that's written by a 5 year old. I'll not include my rating since people seem to be focusing only on that:

DRIVE tells the story of Driver (yes, that is his name), played by the wonderful Ryan Gosling. He's a stuntman and a "driver-for-hire" (think THE TRANSPORTER), but above all, he's good at driving. No, he's the best at driving, or at least that's what we're told, but it doesn't take us long to believe that once the film opens with a car chase that is something that should be experienced. The sequence starts off quietly but builds up in nail-biting suspense with each second. If that wasn't enough, the fantastic soundtrack will suck you in. It's wonderfully shot and cleanly edited, nothing like you'd see in a Hollywood action film these days. And it's clear, DRIVE is nothing like a Hollywood film, defying conventions and deliberate in pace. I'd say it's something like an art-house action flick but on with the story.

Driver meets his beautiful neighbor, Irene, played by Carey Mulligan, whose husband is in jail. The two click instantly with a look. Since Driver isn't the talkative type, they don't speak to each other. In a scene when they get to know each other, they just stare into their eyes, one smiling to the other. It's an endearing scene where the actors' expressions seem more important and effective than dialogue. However, Irene's husband eventually does come home, and that's when bad things start to happen. I will not tell you what happens because you should really just watch it. Don't watch the trailer if you don't want anything to spoil you because it unfortunately gives a lot of plot points away. However, I will say it gets very violent and bloody.

DRIVE wants the audience get to know its characters before starting the action, and it's obvious that this is Ryan Gosling's film. Let me just say that I think Gosling is a terrific actor, from his roles in HALF NELSON to BLUE VALENTINE to LARS AND THE REAL GIRL. This guy can surely act, and this doesn't change with his first action role in DRIVE. Even though his character doesn't talk much, Gosling is able to command the camera with a single look. He brings a large presence throughout the film, only talking when he needs to. Carey Mulligan is also very good, and I should say that she is a terrific actress as well and at such a young age! The two definitely have great chemistry with each other.

Bryan Cranston is Bryan Cranston. What can I say? If you've seen BREAKING BAD, you know how good he is. He's just wonderful in here. The remaining major supporting actors do just as a great job in their roles as everyone else, including Albert Brooks, Oscar Isaac, and Ron Perlman. However, the one flaw in the cast is Christina Hendricks and that's just because she isn't in the film that much. I love her in MAD MEN, so I was quite disappointed when she wasn't going to be in the film longer.

With a tight direction by Nicolas Winding Refn, wonderful performances from a knock-out cast, and tense action scenes, DRIVE is quite something. Even though the story may feel familiar, the art-house style of the film makes it refreshing. I can guarantee that not everyone will like it, but it should be seen.


Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7088
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 12 2011 at 11:07am
A tip? You take the below from your review, and you've got yourself a proper review.  

Originally posted by moviewizguy

However, the one flaw in the cast is Christina Hendricks and that's just because she isn't in the film that much. I love her in MAD MEN, so I was quite disappointed when she wasn't going to be in the film longer.
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2137
Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 12 2011 at 11:52am
While we're on the subject of editing, directing, and such, here's a link on a deep analysis of a famous action sequence in The Dark Knight, which proves to be an editing fiasco, breaking the rules of continuity and the 180 degree axis:      

     http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2011/09/in_the_cut_part_i_shots_in_the.html

Now we know why that scene was so confusing and disorienting to watch.
Back to Top
SuperTeenTopia View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: August 18 2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 304
Post Options Post Options   Quote SuperTeenTopia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 12 2011 at 4:39pm
MWG, for the 4th or 5th time now, there are people who I am willing to talk to here, and there are people I am not willing to talk to. I wish to discuss movies with people who can tell what is a good movie and what is a bad movie based on their knowledge of the subject. People like SchumacherH8ter, who watches past and present Razzies movies, lists what is exactly good or bad about them, and grades them accordingly with Cs, Ds, and Fs. People like saturnwatcher, who understands my stance about classic movies and replied to me like a wise and mature MAN with worldly life experiences. And even Vits, who although I don't agree with most of his reviews of classic movies, he is at least a published critic. You, however, are a little boy who runs around playing critic because it's a fun activity that grown-ups do, as you hand out 6s and 7s to Razzie targeted movies like candy on Halloween, and then after you offended me with your ignorant comment about what is or is not required to judge a movie, you offered me a lame excuse for an apology that featured such comments as "Ebert said this, Roeper said that" and "if this were a classroom and I was 7 and you were 17" ... that is how a little boy replies to an adult's argument, rather than replying like a man as saturnwatcher did. The fact that you don't understand or respect even an ounce of my stance as a film critic and historian proves even more how you're a little boy playing grown-up among real grown-ups, even if you are a college student (it's called being a man-child).
 
Since you like the classroom as an example so much, I will use it as well so that you have a better understanding. I spoke as a college professor with a Masters or Ph D. in Film, discussing what I have learned over the many years of my studying ... only to be mocked by you, the young and immature student who is just out of high school and barely managed to get his GED, and yet didn't learn very much during his one course of Film History, telling me how everything I have learned or taught is wrong and any schmuck off the street can proclaim which movies are good or bad just as well as professional critics do. When I say people need to have a profound knowledge of film, both in its history and its art in order to be a creditable critic and judge of film, I meant it. You, on the hand, spat in my face and told me that ideal was "stupid". What I find stupid, is when a little boy comes to a forum full of older and more knowledgable men, and speaks down to them, and then has no idea why he and his opinions are not being respected when he gives undeserving grades to Razzie movies, which are suppose to be viewed as the worst of the worst. You have proven time and time again, that you have no taste or quality filter whatsoever, and are quite socially awkward when trying to understand why people are offended by what you say (probably due to a lack of real life social experiences outside of the classroom). I have no idea why you think a critic (professional or otherwise) should be taken seriously if he hands out the same high grades (or even higher grades) to Razzie movies as you do classic masterpieces. It screams of ignorance and poor taste, but again, you do not comprehend this, like a little boy.
 
And that is why I call you a little boy, because you spoke to me like a little boy, you use the logic of a little boy, and you make the agruments of a little boy trying to prove his theories true as if he's writing a book report. While you may be 20 or so years in age, you are still behave socially like a 12 year old among grown men. I am seeking a profession as a film historian, where as you are just a "kid who watches and reviews movies as a hobby", and you do a piss poor job at it as well. As such, you have NO RIGHT to tell me what is and is not required to be a good movie critic or judge. But I have probably wasted my time writing these paragraphs, as I'm sure you will glaze over all of them and will still continue to wonder why I don't respect you or accept your weak apology, yet again, like a little boy would. Good day to you.
"People say 'It's all about the story’. When you're making tentpole films, bull$hit." -Andy Hendrickson (Disney Animation Studios' Chief Technical Officer)
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7088
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 12 2011 at 5:31pm
I really don't wanna be that guy, but SuperTeenTopia, you didn't say anything to HeadRAZZ for hating (not just not liking) AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS. Not to mention he didn't gave any reason at all. 

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I didn't give "any reason"?  I called the 1956 80 DAZE "a widescreen travelogue with big name movie stars constantly getting in the way" -- This is not giving "any reason at all"?? 

Originally posted by SuperTeenTopia

What I find stupid, is when a little boy comes to a forum full of older and more knowledgable men, and speaks down to them (...) You have proven time and time again, that you have no taste or quality filter whatsoever, and are quite socially awkward when trying to understand why people are offended by what you say.
 

What I find stupid is how you thinking that because you've entered the Inner Sanctum you're like us. You're not. Like you keep saying a lot of learning time is required to appreciate movies, you also needed to be on this forum for a certain amount of time to see the evolution MWG has gone through. You keep talking to us as if you know us like HeadRAZZ and the other regulars do. You think I'm wrong? Well, if you had spent real time here you'd know you don't get to decide who leaves and who stays here. I also find upsetting that you moan about him speaking down to others when he did it only to you, and when, in fact, you started it by doing it to both him and me. Also, as someone who has read his posts for a year and a half, he used to not get why his grades were different to the rest of the world,but now he does. 

Originally posted by SuperTeenTopia

I have no idea why you think a critic (professional or otherwise) should be taken seriously if he hands out the same high grades (or even higher grades) to Razzie movies as you do classic masterpieces. It screams of ignorance and poor taste, but again, you do not comprehend this, like a little boy.

I don't think anyone argues(not even MWG himself)that he has bad taste. However, since you seem to be the kind of person who thinks you've figured out our entire selves,I'd expect you to say that he treats classics the same as bad movies.He doesn't.Particularly this year,his opinions has become closer to the rest of the world.Does he still have bad taste?Well,he won't change the grades he gave before...not that he has to.

Originally posted by SuperTeenTopia

But I have probably wasted my time writing these paragraphs, as I'm sure you will glaze over all of them and will still continue to wonder why I don't respect you or accept your weak apology, yet again, like a little boy would. Good day to you.

Let's see: Personal insults? Check! Pretending the insulted party started with the personal insults? Check! Desperately trying to end the debate with no subtlety at all knowing the other party wants to continue? Check! All you need is bad spelling, and you could be labeled a troll.
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2137
Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 12 2011 at 5:57pm
Well, what's good and bad is all subjective. If you want the entire world to have one opinion on a certain film, like Citizen Kane, it would be boring. It's more fun to have people that have different opinions. You may find Citizen Kane to be good, but others may not. You may find The Village to be bad, but people, like myself, see it to be a modern classic that will be loved and appreciated in the future just like how The Shining was critically lampooned at the time of its release.

Originally posted by SuperTeenTopia

MWG, for the 4th or 5th time now, there are people who I am willing to talk to here, and there are people I am not willing to talk to. I wish to discuss movies with people who can tell what is a good movie and what is a bad movie based on their knowledge of the subject.
 

Well, actually, you conveniently brought up the fact that you were studying film history in the middle of the conversation. Also, I was simply giving my opinion that one should not have to learn film history to give their opinions on films.

You, however, are a little boy who runs around playing critic because it's a fun activity that grown-ups do, as you hand out 6s and 7s to Razzie targeted movies like candy on Halloween, and then after you offended me with your ignorant comment about what is or is not required to judge a movie, you offered me a lame excuse for an apology that featured such comments as "Ebert said this, Roeper said that" and "if this were a classroom and I was 7 and you were 17" ... that is how a little boy replies to an adult's argument, rather than replying like a man as saturnwatcher did. The fact that you don't understand or respect even an ounce of my stance as a film critic and historian proves even more how you're a little boy playing grown-up among real grown-ups, even if you are a college student (it's called being a man-child)


Any person can proclaim which movies are good and bad like professional critics. Even kids can claim if a movie is good or bad. The difference is how credible the people who's giving their opinions are. Also, I didn't say what you were learned and taught was wrong...I don't see why you have to make things up!  

Since you like the classroom as an example so much, I will use it as well so that you have a better understanding. I spoke as a college professor with a Masters or Ph D. in Film, discussing what I have learned over the many years of my studying ... only to be mocked by you, the young and immature student who is just out of high school and barely managed to get his GED, and yet didn't learn very much during his one course of Film History, telling me how everything I have learned or taught is wrong and any schmuck off the street can proclaim which movies are good or bad just as well as professional critics do.
 

Well, they aren't the worst of the worst. Only a handful of films will be considered the worse. Out of an entire century, films like Troll 2, The Room, Birdemic, Showgirls, Battlefield Earth, etc are remembered as being the worst. Everything else is forgotten. I don't think people would be putting films like Sucker Punch and Lady in the Water in that list in the coming future.

What I find stupid, is when a little boy comes to a forum full of older and more knowledgable men, and speaks down to them, and then has no idea why he and his opinions are not being respected when he gives undeserving grades to Razzie movies, which are suppose to be viewed as the worst of the worst.


 So SuperTeenTopia isn't implying that you're a teen?  

And that is why I call you a little boy, because you spoke to me like a little boy, you use the logic of a little boy, and you make the agruments of a little boy trying to prove his theories true as if he's writing a book report. While you may be 20 or so years in age, you are still behave socially like a 12 year old among grown men. I am seeking a profession as a film historian, where as you are just a "kid who watches and reviews movies as a hobby", and you do a piss poor job at it as well. As such, you have NO RIGHT to tell me what is and is not required to be a good movie critic or judge. But I have probably wasted my time writing these paragraphs, as I'm sure you will glaze over all of them and will still continue to wonder why I don't respect you or accept your weak apology, yet again, like a little boy would. Good day to you.


Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7088
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 13 2011 at 9:29am
According to his/her rules, apparently SuperTeenTopia thinks it's "no reason." But I'm not saying it's wrong.  

Originally posted by Head RAZZberry

I didn't give "any reason"?  I called the 1956 80 DAZE "a widescreen travelogue with big name movie stars constantly getting in the way" -- This is not giving "any reason at all"??
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
saturnwatcher View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 14 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2577
Post Options Post Options   Quote saturnwatcher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 13 2011 at 9:39am
"What's good and bad is all subjective" ???  MWG, that's just not true. What an individual likes and dislikes is subjective. But in every art form, there are works that stand above others for a variety of reasons: The inherent talents of the artists, the ability of the work to evoke certain emotions in large numbers of people and other less tangible qualities. To suggest that all levels of individual appreciation are subjective is a huge cop-out. It provides everyone with the excuse to claim that if they like a particular work that is generally not considered very good, they can offer themselves the excuse that they are right and everyone else is wrong. To even suggest that all appreciation of art is purely subjective would imply that Mozart stands on the same level of artistic achievement as, say, Benny Goodman. The former has produced work that people have loved for centuries, and will probably still be appreciated 2 centuries from now. The latter was extremely popular 50 years ago, but how many people listen to him now?
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken
Back to Top
GTAHater767 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: October 25 2009
Location: I shall not say
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1433
Post Options Post Options   Quote GTAHater767 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 13 2011 at 11:05am
I don't see how Citizen Kane is better than Gone With the Wind (1939), Casablanca (1942), West Side Story (1961), The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly (1964), or just about any pre-1970 all-time-classic super-film that's this well-remembered today.
 
But looking at my Retro Best of 197X, I can understand how most classics from the 1970's would stand out... barely.
Back to Top
ITbeast View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 526
Post Options Post Options   Quote ITbeast Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 13 2011 at 2:13pm
Have Not Seen Citizen Kane myself so can not comment on the movie itself. However, one thing I know is that usually the Blu-Ray process tends to bring out a movie of that era it's faults, and clearer images of out-dated props tend to undermine the "fantasy" of the picture.
 
This happened to me when I brought the Blu-Ray of the "Wizard of OZ" last year. The Blu-Ray Process did the job but it showed very clearly the movies tremondous faults by todays standards.
 
As with when Ted Turner was trying to take his "Crayons" to all the black and white classics back in the 1980's, The Movie Companies are now doing similar with Blu-Ray Technology with "super-imposed" the original classics. 
 
Bottom Line, Like with Ted "Colorizing" our classics, there are some movies that should not be "Super-imposed" with the Blu-Ray process.
 
Not Related to the subject at hand but.....it looks like SuperTeenTopia has hit her fill of MovieWizGuy (Shocking to know one!Wacko) and that Saturnwacher and Vits have been elevated to the rank of Supreme subject matter overlords in the world of movie critism, Lets give them a handClap.
The "Networking IT" Movie Buff!

Words to live by:
"Money doesn't make you happy. I now have $50 million but I was just as happy when I had $48 million." - Arnold Schwarzenegger
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7088
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 13 2011 at 2:31pm
Oh,my! I don't know what to say -- It's all so sudden.I think I'm gonna cry! This has been my dream ever since I grew up in the South, and my momma told me "Don't worry, you is gonna be the strongest black woman in history!"

...hang on. Something's wrong about what I just said. What is it? Oh, right! That's my speech for when I win a Razzie after winning an Oscar! LOL    


RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I am unclear what it is you think you are "riffing" on here (GONE WITH THE WIND? Halle Berry??) but I do think you may need to give the above some context since, as it is, it appears to be coming out of the blue and could be perceived as being tinged with racial insensitivity...  




You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
ITbeast View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 526
Post Options Post Options   Quote ITbeast Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 13 2011 at 2:50pm
As you know, this could actually happened! Now if you can top off winning a Razzie AND a Oscar for the same calander year, or better yet the same day of the calendar year (will have to talk to John about moving Razzie Night back to the same day as the Oscars) it could just work.Approve
 
Thanks Vits for keeping it real!Cool
 
(By the way, Are you Really a Black Woman from Chile?Wink)
The "Networking IT" Movie Buff!

Words to live by:
"Money doesn't make you happy. I now have $50 million but I was just as happy when I had $48 million." - Arnold Schwarzenegger
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2137
Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 13 2011 at 6:51pm
Yes, yes, Vits is "Really a Black Woman from Chile" -- And I have proof!
Back to Top
OLIF View Drop Down
Berry Special GUESTS
Berry Special GUESTS
Post Options Post Options   Quote OLIF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2011 at 6:43pm
When it comes to “greatest movies of all time”, it’s really, really based upon the viewer’s personal tastes, as well as how the film reacted to the same viewer’s emotional appeal.

I first saw Citizen Kane around 1972 when I was a “pre-teenager” (now called a “tweener”). I didn’t see the flick on TV, but at a screening held on a college campus. A family friend suggested that I go along with her and a sibling on mine to see the film. I knew of Orson Wells as some fat guy who appeared quite a bit on The Tonight Show as well as many comedy/variety shows, usually playing some sort of genus turned buffoon, Many people at the screening were in their 20’s. (Grad students?) Anyway, I found the movie to be just another old 1940’s feature with the same creakiness and hokeyness as many of the other movies from this era I would see on TV. I didn’t see this flick again until five years ago on a pre-recorded VHS cassette when the flick was distributed from The Nostalgia Merchant in the early 80’s. This flick itself was amusing, told a good story, but I found it far from great and wouldn't be a movie I would want to see again right away, if at all!

Again, one’s “best movie(s) of all time” is based upon the viewer’s emotional appeal to the film, including in what environment the movie was first seen (in a theater full of people, from a tired looking 16 mm print airing on TV with too many commercial breaks, etc.), as well as how the film holds up over the test of one’s time. When I was less than ten years old, I found The Wizard of Oz to be the greatest film of all time. As I got older, the greatness started to fizzle out. When I saw The Godfather for the first time, it was when NBC first aired this flick in 1974--edited of course! When Frank Coppola introduced the film, he gave a slight disclaimer on how it portrayed Italians and one should not find it as offending. (“Not every person of Italian decent is connected to the mob” is what he was attempting to say!) I saw the same film many years later, and it was much better than I remembered!

My favorite film of all time? It all depends on my mood! One of my personal faves is a nearly forgotten British film called Summer Holiday, a 1963 release starring Cliff Richard. It has a silly plot, appealing musical numbers, an amusing cast, and that’s about it! It plays like a 1950’s MGM musical where everyone sings and dances out from nowhere and has a happy ending! It this movie the greatest? Hardly! But it still has a place in my “gotta see it again” movie pile!

As to blaming MTV for short attention spans? Go back a few more years linking it to another show: Sesame Street! Although it was one of the better show ever produced in the 1969-70 TV season, a number of “experts” noted that the show’s pacing was fast--perhaps a little to fast where kids could be exposed to such hyper activity that may affect them later in their developing lives! Then again, the only competition that Sesame Street faced for very young kids was Captain Kangaroo. That show was rather slow paced and the only energy it had is when it featured a Lariat Sam or Tom Terrific cartoon! Captain Kangaroo is long gone, but Sesame Street has been around since the time Citizen Kane was pushing 30 years!

-Bah!
Back to Top
saturnwatcher View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 14 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2577
Post Options Post Options   Quote saturnwatcher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2011 at 7:51pm
Blaming Sesame Street for short attention spans is a bit unfair. Most toddlers don't have long attention spans to start with. The SS people managed to get them to focus on a show for an hour. Not a bad accomplishment, that.
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 8>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down