Touch of Evil vs. Citizen Kane

[Tristan H]

Well I watched both of these films on DVD yesterday. It was my first viewing of Touch of Evil and the first time I've seen Citizen Kane from start to finish.

My personal opinion was that A Touch of Evil was the better film and I found it to be much more fun, similar in style to a Hitchcok picture but with less fantasy and more of a cold reality. The direction absolutely blew me away, especially the opening shot of the car with the bomb driving through the streets of the Mexican town. It also managed to balance very dark themes with some highly amusing comedy moments, mostly emanating from the bloated Welles. It's one of the few films where the story simply didn't sag for one minute and it was generally a delight to watch.

Citizen Kane on the other hand almost seemed to be too much to digest in one sitting. The story and array of camera tricks were very dense and I tended to find myself staring at the film very carefully and trying to absorb all of the trickery and relatively complex script. This seemed to detract slightly from the film as a pleasurable experience and I found myself feeling rather tired at the end of it. However, I think that Kane was undoubtedly a more innovative and technically masterful achievment. I also think that it's the sort of film that may well take a number of viewings before it can be fully appreciated as a masterpiece.

So, does anyone else have an opinion on which of these two Orson Welles films are better or more enjoyable as a viewing experience?

[Narshty]

On a sheer entertainment level, I prefer Touch of Evil as well.

Perhaps only Douglas Sirk succeeded as well in creating high art out of B-movie fare.

[John Hodson]

Is your Touch of Evil , the 'directors cut' special? I must say that I rather liked Henry Mancini's excellent score played over the tracking shot at the beginning and wished they'd included the original cut on the DVD. Shame.

Nevertheless, an excellent film dominated in every way by Welles; apparently he loathed the casting of Heston as Mexican (I understand why), but Dennis Weaver overacts shamelessly in the 'reefer madness' scene. The ending is as magnificent as the opening, but in some ways it *is* a very '50s movie.

Kane is a masterpiece with no jarring moments, touches of great humour, and flashes of blinding brilliance. And yes, it does get better with repeated viewings. The new SE is stunning in every way, and for me it's a movie that time cannot harm.

BTW a few years ago, it was recut by film students in chronological order - a missed opportunity on the DVD don't you think?

---
So many films, so little time...

[Mike]

I like both of them as much as each other; they're very different types of film I think and both are hugely entertaining.

I have to say though that I find "The Magnificent Ambersons" just as fascinating, for what it fails to be as much as for what it is - and what Welles achieves in this stunted masterpiece is pretty damned incredible. I think I've probably watched this more than either "Kane" or "Evil", although I wouldn't necessarily put it on the same level of achievement. I just find it incredibly moving, perhaps the most moving film ever made and I keep coming back to it again and again.

Incidentally, I will echo what others have said by repeating that the new "Citizen Kane" is absolutely stunning and a must-buy for anyone even remotely interested in film.

[adamvbarker]

I received the new R1 SE of Kane today, and it is vastly superior to the R2 version that I have (and which was one of the first dvds I bought). There were a large number of serious scratches on the old version (and at one point what looked like a big hair in the gate) that are entirely absent on the new one, which is also much crisper.

I like both Kane and Touch of Evil a lot, but Kane , once you're used to its structure and its techniques has so many wonderfully rich moments. It also has a lot of fabulous performances from people not necessarily very experienced in film (a lot of them had worked with Welles in theatre and radio before) and they bring a freshness and a bravura that gives the movie a great deal of energy.