It's always perplexed me as to how people who managed the estate would consider a sled in the THIS IS FROM MY FAMILY HOME section crap worthy of burning.
Well, to be fair, interest in Kane seemed to be waning a lot. Obviously he was important enough to devote a large part of a newsreel to, but at the same time I suppose the assumption might have been that ephemera that is only valuable as a relic of his life--not valuable in and of itself--might not be worth much.
And at the same time, they had a lot of stuff to get through--I guess they could have just found it expedient. The likely answer, of course, is that they wanted the shot of it burning.
Do do you think that Kane's problem really was that he had too much money, and that he was taken from his mother? Because I've always wondered that. The movie seems to be telling us that, for sure. But his principles seem in place as a young man, even if his habits are already extravagant--do you think he was corrupt even then, or was the corrosive action of money and power still working?
no subject
Well, to be fair, interest in Kane seemed to be waning a lot. Obviously he was important enough to devote a large part of a newsreel to, but at the same time I suppose the assumption might have been that ephemera that is only valuable as a relic of his life--not valuable in and of itself--might not be worth much.
And at the same time, they had a lot of stuff to get through--I guess they could have just found it expedient. The likely answer, of course, is that they wanted the shot of it burning.
Do do you think that Kane's problem really was that he had too much money, and that he was taken from his mother? Because I've always wondered that. The movie seems to be telling us that, for sure. But his principles seem in place as a young man, even if his habits are already extravagant--do you think he was corrupt even then, or was the corrosive action of money and power still working?