How come Vertigo replaced this as #1 on the Sight & Sound poll? - Citizen Kane (1941) Discussion

[–] frantruff 9 years ago

A few reasons:

1. The voting took place either during or shortly after the BFI (no, not that one) had hosted a massive Hitchcock retrospective.

2. Citizen Kane fatigue, by which I mean CK had been topping the list for 50 years straight, and some people just wanted to see something else take its place for a change. This one seemed to affect Battleship Potemkin, too, since it dropped out of the top 10 in favor of Man With The Movie Camera.

3. I've read a few articles that argue film critics are more likely to relate to the characters in Vertigo than in CK.

Strangely enough, even though Hitchcock is considered the ultimate film director by quite a few people, Vertigo didn't do as well in the directors' poll, which was topped by Tokyo Story. Interestingly, Kane was #2 on both lists.

BTW, no film was mentioned by more than a third of the voters, so even the #1 film isn't considered one of the top 10 greatest films by a majority.

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

It's quite an insightful comment, frantruff. I did not know much of it. I do have quite a bit to say about these things, though.

The BFI retrospective does make sense as a reason, but I am also quite puzzled Vertigo's #2 spot on 2002's poll. What led critics put it over, say, The Rules of the Game (Which, if you ask me, is the film that deserves the top spot if you must dethrone Citizen Kane) or Tokyo Story?

I know that it almost became a cliche that Citizen Kane is the greatest film of all time and that it had to be replaced, for lack of predictability. But again, why Vertigo?

(I must mention that I think Vertov's film is better than Eisenstein's. It's aged much better and it carries much more value nowadays than Potemkin. Perhaps MWMC is less influential, but it exhibits the art of filmmaking at least as well).

I can't see how can critics find more to relate to with Vertigo than in CK. Maybe it's the fact that CK is dealing with newspapers and the critic gets fired? This makes little sense, but I can't think of any other reason.

reply

[–] marcshank-388-582372 7 years ago

It really is quite simple. Citizen Kane is a remarkable achievement, yes, and I agree with you about The Rules of the Game being a worthy alternative, although I do think Casablanca is a better alternative than another great one, The Tokyo Story.

But let's face it. It's the story behind Citizen Kane that confirms it's number one status. Fans and students of film are usually stunned when they read about it origins, from the invasion from Mars to Hurst and Davies' crazy parties that gave Herman Mankiewicz the idea to begin with, to Greg Toland's breakthrough cinematography to Bernard Herman's remarkable score (interesting how he also did the score for Vertigo).

When all of that is taken into consideration, the story behind Vertigo, or for that matter Tokyo and Rules pales by comparison.

Also remarkable is my ultimate Citizen Kane trivia question (no cheating please): How many times did Charles Foster Kane say the word "Rosebud" in the movie? You are required to precisely describe the number of times and the scene, or scenes, where he said it. Reply to marcshank@gmail.com.

reply

[–] theuserformerlyknownasfrantruff 7 years ago

Yep, it's the ultimate story of artistic integrity vs pressure form the producers. Sometimes it's overromanticized to the point it's almost impossible to separate the "Orson Welles Narrative" from his films. The man was hardly the only one to find difficulties in getting funding for his films. One thing I'm glad about CK being "dethroned" is that it might led to the hagiography around Orson's "unfulfilled potential" decreasing and people finally praising him for his actual accomplishments. Though that's probably wishful thinking. In the wider critic-aproved narrative, he'll probably forever remain "the guy who did 'CK' and then saw the producers destroy 'Ambersons' and 'Touch of Evil'", rather than the guy who did extraordinary and innovative films like "Othello" and "F For Fake" after Kane.

By the way, Casablanca and Rules both have their own fairly interesting narratives. The first one is "the exception to the Auteur theory" and "basically made itself", while the second one is almost always seen as a prelude to WWII, was banned by the Nazis, was the last (before exile) and least-succesful picture of a man who had spend the previous decade making highly succesful ones and offended the French society so much someone tried to burn down the theater it was playing in its opening night (I think Renoir described all of this as "Dancing on a volcano").

CFK says Rosebud twice. The first one at the very beginning of the film and the second one during the butler's flashback, after trashing Susan's room.

reply

[–] Moviemadness2012 8 years ago

It was not a surprise to many because in past S&S polls, Vertigo had been gaining on CK in votes. In the 2002 poll, Vertigo only trailed by a few votes. So many people including myself actually predicted a Vertigo victory in 2012. Maybe the newer generations of critics have different tastes. In the coming years or decades, Vertigo will likewise be overtaken by another film.

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

Depends on who the subjects were. Perhaps a different age group, maybe more/less women, etc. than in the other poll.

~~
💕 JimHutton (1934-79) and ElleryQueen 👍

reply

[–] frantruff 9 years ago

Yep, forgot about that one. Last poll had a much, much bigger number of voters than previous ones, including online critics.

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

Besides, some folks might be a bit tired of seeing Citizen Kane in the number one spot. Maybe they figured that it was time for a change. I don't know.

~~
💕 JimHutton (1934-79) and ElleryQueen 👍

reply

[–] DanMetsFan 9 years ago

I personally like Vertigo slightly more than Citizen Kane, but that's always up for change.

How was Casablanca not in the top 50 movies on that list?

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

Personally speaking, I think Vertigo has no place at the top spot. I know that many people don't like Citizen Kane, but it simply deserves the #1 spot. It is the most important film ever made, and it comes as close to perfection as human art can.

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

I like Vertigo, but I think that it's not one of Hitchcock's very best. I prefer Rope.

Given a choice between Citizen Kane and Who's Minding the Mint (1967), I'll take Who's Minding the Mint in a second (along with the adorable leading actor). 

~~
💕 JimHutton (1934-79) and ElleryQueen 👍

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

I do think Vertigo is one of Hitchcock's best, but not the best (No. 1 is Rear Window, No. 2 is North by Northwest, Vertigo is a solid No. 3). It is his most radical and perhaps even the most personal, but not the best.

And I thought I'm the only one who has seen that obscurity, Who's Minding the Mint. From what I can remember (which is not much), it was a caper-comedy of sorts, I think, with the actor that appears on your signature. I caught it on TV (as I did with CK), and I didn't really like it. I didn't find it funny at all. But hey, if you love it that much, more power to you!

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

Each to his/her own. The more anti-elitist it is, the greater the chance that it will appeal to me. I love early 1930s whodunits, for example...

~~
💕 JimHutton (1934-79) and ElleryQueen 👍

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

I've never been much into old Hollywood (or its modern counterpart, for that matter), other than exactly those kinds of films that get film snobs like myself a massive erection. I don't remember when was the last time I watched a Golden Age obscurity, one that wasn't released by The Criterion Collection and/or made by Welles/Capra/Wilder/Wyler/Sturges/Mankiewicz/any of the other big ones.

I am generally more acquainted with French cinema of the time, and even in that field I'm sure few of these films approach obscurity. Simply put, I still haven't watched all the classics so I can move on to stuff less well-known.

reply

[–] thomas-begen-194-976045 9 years ago

Personally, I think Hitchcock messed the bed on "Vertigo." Stewart and Novak were miscast as far as I'm concerned. Not unlike many of his films, Hitchcock doesn't seem to know how to end "Vertigo." The ending ruined an already poor film for me. I take very little away from "Vertigo" in the way of meaning or a moral.

Since you're a Hitch fan, what about "Rebecca" and "The Birds"? Personally, those are two of my favorite Hitchcock films. I like "North By Northwest," but I feel "Psycho" and "Rear Window" are probably the his overrated.

reply

[–] snsurone 9 years ago

Am I correct in guessing that you'd cast Veronica Lake in VERTIGO??
LOL

reply

[–] thomas-begen-194-976045 9 years ago

Since this question is hypothetical, I'll try to answer it as best I can and briefly. By the time of "Vertigo," Veronica was no longer relevant. She ceased to be relevant with the end of the 1940s. Since you mention it, if it were possible, I think Lake in her prime would've been much better than Kim Novak, who I am adamant was miscast. Come to think of it, I wonder why Lake was never cast in a Hitchcock film, given she was a beautiful Hitchcockian blonde. Perhaps it was her height or due to contracts. I think she would have done fine in one of his films.

Since what you're asking was basically impossible because Lake was no longer relevant in the early- to mid-1950s, I have a few other suggestions. On IMDB's "Vertigo" page it states Hitch wanted Vera Miles for the part. I believe she would have been a much better fit. However, a better Hitchcock blonde may've been Tippi Hedren, who would star in "Marnie" and "The Birds" only a few years later. He also remarks that James Stewart was too old for the part, which I agree. I don't have any suggestions except that I definitely wouldn't want Cary Grant in another movie making out with a woman half his age.

All that said, these casting choices weren't the only thing wrong with this movie. I believe much of it was poorly executed, especially the ending, which people either love or hate. Originally, "Vertigo" got slammed. It's only recently that it's been considered one of Hitch's great films. I'm more of a classicist and I have to disagree. I don't think very highly of "Citizen Kane" but if the battle for first on Sight and Sound's list of great films is between these two films I would have to side with "Citizen Kane."

By the way, Veronica Lake is in no way my favorite actress or the one I find most beautiful. I just like the picture. I'll change it soon enough.

reply

[–] HEYitzED 9 years ago

While I don't like Rope more than Vertigo, I will say I like your opinion. Rope is so criminally underrated and ahead of its time.

reply

[–] frantruff 9 years ago

It is the most important film ever made

"Birth of a Nation" says hi.

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

I was just thinking about that (Even without your comment). I was quite tired when writing that. Sorry. Yes, I guess you're right. But Griffith's film is one that has aged atrociously. The length, the racism, and pretty much everything else in it prevents me from recommending it to anyone but people who are interested in the history of cinema. It is a relic, a monument. Its sole worth nowadays is historical (And I'll be damned before saying such a thing about Citizen Kane). It's (rightly) accused of racism, and its reputation perhaps made people forget that there have been feature films way before it (The Story of the Kelly Gang), and even in America (The Squaw Man, anyone?). But yeah, BoaN is a more important film than CK.

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] HotDogBox 8 years ago

"It is the most important film ever made,"

The most important film ever made is The Horse in Motion, being the first film and predating the motion camera, followed by the actual first recorded movies. Neither Vertigo or Citizen Kane would exist without them.

"and it comes as close to perfection as human art can."

How is Kane a bigger achievement than the music of great classical compositors? Than the best of the best sculptors?
Heck, is it even bestter than the best sequential art magazine ever made(or in lesser words, a comicbook?).

You can't compare art like that, not across lines. Thinking you can only makes it look silly when you try to prop up something as the be all end all of everything.

reply

[–] GuenniBraunsten 8 years ago

""and it comes as close to perfection as human art can."

How is Kane a bigger achievement than the music of great classical compositors? Than the best of the best sculptors?
Heck, is it even bestter than the best sequential art magazine ever made(or in lesser words, a comicbook?).

You can't compare art like that, not across lines. Thinking you can only makes it look silly when you try to prop up something as the be all end all of everything."

His quote doesn't say it's better than all the things you said, just that it's not worse. And that's only if you equate greatness in art with perfection, which I wouldn't do anyway.

reply

[–] Liz01219 9 years ago

I am a big Hitchcock fan but maybe I'm the only one who really didn't care much for "Vertigo" or for that matter "Marnie".

Anyway I've never heard of the poll you cited, but on the AFI top 100 from 2007, "Vertigo" placed #9.
I can't believe that Jimmy Stewart said supposedly this was his favorite film.

AFI puts out their poll every 10 yrs so we'll see where all of them place next time especially the top 10.

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

The Sight & Sound poll is perhaps the most well-known ranking list in the world. Basically, the British magazine takes a lot of critics and directors from all around the world every ten years, and creates a list for both the critics and the directors, based on 10 films every director/critic votes for.

Vertigo is a great film, but I have two problems with it:

1) The romance is quite unconvincing, but this works in the film's favour.

2) The ending-what a cop out! It seems like Hitch was trying to be poetic and forgot he isn't good at that. The ending does not work in the film's favour. It simply blows.

reply

[–] Beau_Buffet 7 years ago

One of the best endings in the history of cinema for me. Chills down my spine every damn time.

reply

[–] theuserformerlyknownasfrantruff 7 years ago

When I first saw "Vertigo", I felt outraged by that ending ("You have got to be kidding me. Death by nun??! And so *beep* suddenly?"). Now I like it a bit more, but I always remember that first impression. Perhaps it would have worked better for me if Judy had been established as being paranoid or having halucinations.

reply

[–] Beau_Buffet 7 years ago

It's more complicated than that.

Here's something I wrote on the Vertigo board.

*********SPOILERS FOR VERTIGO*************************

(English is not my native language, so I'll keep it simple.)

The nun did not "spook" Madeleine.

My understanding is: when Madeleine saw the nun she experienced two things.

First, the guilt of being accessory to a murder.

Second (and that not so much on the nun, but on the scene that just preceded it, and all her affair with Scottie), she realized that whatever she would do, she would never be loved for who she really was. And she couldn't live with that thought.

So she jumped to her death.

reply

[–] frantruff 9 years ago

I can't believe that Jimmy Stewart said supposedly this was his favorite film.

I thought he said "It's a Wonderful Life" was his favourite film where he acted.

BTW, AFI has only put out two such lists, so I don't think it's accurate to say they put them out every ten years.

reply

[–] Liz01219 9 years ago

I'm nearly positive I read it was Vertigo.

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

Nope, it was It's a Wonderful Life. Possibly the best feel-good film ever.

reply

[–] thomas-begen-194-976045 9 years ago

It's encouraging you actually criticize "Vertigo" but I really hope you're not dumping on "It's a Wonderful Life." It's the first classic film I watched as an adult and it's easily among Stewart's best films.

I don't know how people can dismiss it as simply a "feel-good film" when it deals with the very serious existential issue of nihilism in some fasion, and suicidality.

It's too bad there are not more American films like it; though, European filmmakers probably do existentialism better.

I guess America never really caught on given we didn't experience WWII and the Holocaust in the way Europe did?

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

I'm certainly not criticising Frank Capra's masterpiece. The message is ultimately feel-good, but there are also some rather dark undertones to it. There's obviously a place for this kind of movie when done right (and It's a Wonderful Life is about as right as they come).

reply

[–] Liz01219 9 years ago

frantruff

I read that it was every 10 yrs (AFI) either on their website or wikipedia.

Whatever site it was they even showed what had been taken off the list, and the new ones that were added.

reply

[–] thomas-begen-194-976045 9 years ago

I agree with you on both Hitch films you mention. Don't care for either one. If anything I'd rather rewatch "Marnie" than "Vertigo."

reply

[–] thomas-begen-194-976045 9 years ago

I agree "Vertigo" isn't "as important and innovative" as "Citizen Kane." Then again, just how important and influential has "Citizen Kane" been? As least I can say there are a few people who, regrettably, tried to pawn off Hitchcock's style as their own. But Welles? Well, Welles' style is far less distinct and less desirable than Hitch's.

In any case, I don't care for either film. There are easily several films which are more influential and important than both of these examples and which Welles or Hitchcock had no part of. If I named Hitch's more important film I would have to reluctantly say "Psycho." I believe it's also his most overrated film, but it's the film that Hitch and the entire cast is chiefly remembered by.

Hitch easily has five films better than "Psycho." But as far as film is concerned, there is before "Psycho" and after "Psycho," in the same way as the movie "Halloween" revolutionized horror films.

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

The less people mention Psycho near me, the better.

reply

[–] Citizen41 9 years ago

I have only watched the first hour of Vertigo and I had decided to stop watching it right when Kim novak is seemingly possessed by some spirit - it seemed like a cheap entertainment trick- .

Something which I find much more disturbing is the fact that Vertigo ranks as number one and Welles's "The Trial" is nowhere to be found. Apart from Hitchcock's alternating use of shallow/deep focus and the beautiful take of Stewart's car following Novak's car before she jumps into the sea there is barely anything worth remembering in the first hour.

On the other hand "The Trial" starts rather quickly with low-angle, slight canted framing -shot of the door- and then proceeds with some wonderful lighting and an indelible long take. The trial does not have the memorable shots that citizen kane has but its storytelling is much more multi-layered than that of citizen kane.

Which movie do you prefer, "The Trial" or "vertigo" and why?

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

I like both films quite a bit. My complaints about Vertigo have to do with an overall lack of polish, the odd way characters move in and out of the plot, and the ending. Overall though, I think its successes far outweigh its failures, and I could easily see it as top 100, top 50 material even (not even close to No. 1 though). It really grew on me since, and while I'm still convinced it's flawed, I might even agree that it's Hitchcock's best.

As for The Trial, that film is great. I'm not sure what else I can say. Greatness in spades. I don't know why it didn't crack the top 100 (there are films in it that I cannot stand - see Blade Runner), but it isn't exactly the most well-known film out there. I do not feel comfortable comparing Vertigo and The Trial, the latter shows more polish obviously, but I don't think they have enough common ground to compare them on.

reply

[–] Citizen41 9 years ago

You have mentioned Vertigo's successes; would you mind elaborating?

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

Well, you don't need me to explain to you why Vertigo is great - a whopping 98% of RT critics can do that ;)

But if my opinion interests you so much, then fine. James Stewart's performance is essentially career-best. The way the film utilises subjectivity (it's never exactly in the head of any of the characters, but you can definitely see their way of perceiving the world) is nearly unmatched. The cinematography is stunning, and some of the best use of colour in the history of film. And overall, I think it strikes a nearly-perfect balance between Hitchcock's earlier, simple thrillers and his later, formally aware films (Psycho never stroke a chord with me precisely because its formal tricks are obvious and distracting). The pacing is great, and even the driving scenes don't bore me.

Yes, it ain't flawless, and it sure as hell ain't Citizen Kane, but I'm convinced of its greatness nonetheless.

reply

[–] Citizen41 9 years ago

I doubt that any movie can match Citizen Kane. Mainly because of the contract Welles got and his exceptional directing skills. I watched "Touch of evil" recently and a little bit of "The lady from Shanghai" and I was rather disappointed. Touch of evil doesn't even come close to CK but then again I might watch it again since I might have missed some 'spectacular' shots or subtext within the movie.

I generally use movies like "Psycho" when I feel like taking a break from analysing editing, photography and subtext.

Seeing that you probably know much more than I do about movies; which Tarkovsky do you suggest? I tried watching "Solaris" but at times it felt like unnecessary material was added. (If you want specific examples, you could view my post on the Solaris board)

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

Well, if you want to expand your horizons on cinema with my help, I'd be happy, but know that I have the reputation of a professional contrarian among people who know me :)

But in case of Tarkovsky, I am not. I absolutely adore the man and his films. Though I disagree that "pointless things were added" to Solaris (did you approach it with the book in mind?), I do think it's one of his weaker efforts. Tarkovsky's most accessible is Ivan's Childhood, though I'd also argue it's his worst (poorly integrated subplots, uneven pacing, etc.), and that it barely feels like a Tarkovsky film (thus not a good entry point). My favourite is Mirror, but if anything it's the most difficult of the bunch. Well, to ease yourself in, why not watch Andrei Rublev? It's one of the undisputed great achievements in cinema, and it actually has some semblance of a plot. Do not do my mistake and start with Stalker; I was bored out of my mind (nowadays it's one of my absolute favourites, so whaddaya know?). At worst, Tarkovsky may simply not be for you, but I hope it won't be the case. I could give many practical tips to watching the films, but I'll limit myself to one - don't resist the pacing; let it draw you in.

reply

[–] Citizen41 9 years ago

Yes, I would gladly accept your help.

No, I didn't read the book. The opening shots of Solaris seem unnecessary, such as : Kris washing his hands, Kris walking along the woods, horse galloping. Even though these were only a few seconds long, when they are added together in one viewing it becomes cumbersome to watch. I am sure that there are other shots which seem out of place but then again I might have not understood Tarkovsky's intentions. (The famous driving scene could have easily been reduced)

As regards to what I am looking for; I am searching for another CK. By another CK I mean the same intensity that, that movie has. Every scene is either filled with wonderful photography or character study or social commentary or emphasis of particular character traits or relationship between characters.

When it comes to pacing; I do not mind a slow paced plot as long as the viewer is provided with other material to analyse - Photography, themes, character study, social commentary-.

I'll watch "Andrei Rublev" sometime and I'll ask you what you think about certain shots or scenes.

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

You again commit the high critical fallacy of thinking that form should be in the service of content (i.e. narrative, characters or themes). This is an incredibly close-minded critical approach that essentially dictates how a work should be made, without much rhyme or reason for it to exist. Why can't it be the other way around, why can't content be in service of form (like Last Year at Marienbad, and Jeanne Dielman)? Why can't there be films that seamlessly integrate both, to the point where they're indistinguishable (as in Suspiria)? I've elaborated upon this on my response to your Solaris post, so I don't want to repeat myself too much, so forgive me if I come off as condescending here.

Not every film has as tight a narrative or as deep characterisation as Citizen Kane. Not every film *needs* to be Citizen Kane, or even be influenced by it in any way. It can work in an entirely different manner, and be just as effective (I am not shortchanging CK; hell, if I need to single out my favourite film, I typically do so for Kane).

Finally, I'd highly recommend you to read the following essay, by Susan Sontag. It almost singlehandedly shaped my entire current understanding of film. It is long, and some of it is quite blunt, but it is one of the greatest and most satisfying essays on art I've ever had the pleasure of reading.

http://www.coldbacon.com/writing/sontag-againstinterpretation.html

reply

[–] slikarskasolabs 9 years ago

Hitchcock's best movie is Psycho. Vertigo is perfect, but you can feel freshness in a directing a part of a shower scene. That close up on Marion eye is work of magic alone.

reply

[–] thefly50 9 years ago

I suppose this is blasphemy, but I don't like Psycho at all. For one, I find its formal tricks (the perspective shift, for example) to be very obvious and visible, so I don't really feel any suspense. The ending is just awful (I've seen people defending it as emulating the style of trashy exploitation pics, but the difference being that trashy exploitation pics aren't typically considered to be some of the best films of all time), the acting isn't very good even for the time (remember, we already had Marlon Brando by then, not to mention some more traditional actors like, among others, James Stewart), and it all reeks of being just so damn self-consciously clever. Cluzot's Les Diaboliques is much better and more suspenseful, as is Powell's Peeping Tom from the same year. Psycho is influential, sure, but it hasn't aged well in the slightest.

Vertigo is Hitch's best. Rear Window is a close second.

reply

[–] steelysunshine 9 years ago

Citizen Kane is a great movie on every level. It's easy to cite the movie as the greatest movie ever made. In fact I rate it higher than Vertigo, IIRC. However, I still like Vertigo better. There is a shift in how people rate movies. Now it's about how a movie makes them feel if they are entertained or not. It's more about subjective feeling. Vertigo has the advantage of being subjectively great and objectively great. So, I think it deserves to replace Citizen Kane as being more entertaining. I like it slightly better, but objectively I would have to say Citizen Kane is done better, it's just not as entertaining or as pretty to watch.

reply