The Godfather

In The Godfather there are a couple of signature quotes, things that are repeated throughout the movie that get the different themes and points across. We often hear members of the Corleone family saying, “It’s business, not personal,” which is one of the biggest sayings in the movie. This quote is repeated numerous times during the movie and makes up a big part of the plot line in The Godfather. From the very beginning we hear this line and it sets the stage foreshadowing events that are to come. It is like a motto for the Corleone family and for the rest of organized crime during this time, but is it really true?

The fact that their business is a “family business” shows that it is personal and not just about work. When it comes to family and someone hurting the people that you love it is hard to keep things separate and in a different sphere of life. When family is involved in business it will turn personal, it is hard to keep emotions out of your judgment and we see this a couple times during the movie.

The very first scene opens up showing the Corleone family’s two different worlds, and as much as they say that it is just about business and not personal, their two worlds collide and interact in many different ways. In this first scene at Don Corleone’s daughter Connie’s wedding his business partners are part of the celebration and are at the wedding. This shows that their business relations are more than just business, they are personal and both lives do interact. They are doing business during the wedding with the different guests. Their whole life revolves around the business.

 If someone messes with the Corleone’s in their personal lives they will fix it by using their business and resources they have from their business endeavors. We see this when Sonny hurts Connie’s husband Carlo and when Michael kills Carlo near the end of the movie. Sonny roughs up Carlo after he finds bruises on Connie and even though this is a personal matter he uses his business ways to hurt him and to get his point across. Business affects their personal lives much more when Michael kills Carlo. Even though he kills him because Carlo told things that he shouldn’t have told about a business related matter it hurts Michael’s family and personal life. Connie, Michael’s sister, is devastated when she learns that her own brother killed her husband. When they react in the business world they don’t think about how it will impact their personal lives. Just because they say it is not personal doesn’t mean it’s really not. This act was personal because they were killing someone who had married into their family, someone who his sister loved deeply.

Their business is separate from their personal lives, or so they say. Multiple times in the movie we see things that are happening in their personal lives end up in the hands of their lives as businessmen such as events at Connie’s wedding and with Carlos’s death. Is it really, “business, not personal,” or do emotions and business interfere?   

-Lauren Trame

Bonnie and Clyde- Melissa Villanueva

When you think of a villain, you probably think of villains who murder their enemies or innocent people that just happen to be in the way, or even villains that plot to steal from enemies and seek revenge in an extreme way. However, in Arthur Penn’s Bonnie and Clyde, Bonnie and Clyde are not your average criminals, in the sense that they do not steal from or murder innocent people but they steal from banks to ensure that they are doing no harm to others.

            In the scene where Buck engages in his first robbery with Bonnie and Clyde, Clyde notices that there is a dollar bill sitting on the counter in front of the bank teller. He looks at the farmer that is standing in front of it and asks if it is his money. The farmer tells him it is, so Clyde tells him that he can keep it as long as it does not belong to the bank. In this moment, Clyde takes on a role that is similar to Robin Hood’s, showing that he does not want to take from the innocent but instead in a way give back to the poor. Clyde is generous with the money that he steals, and it is shown in the scene where he gives Blanche a couple dollars as a thanks for keeping an eye on the bank, in which Bonnie quickly objects. This is also shown when they kidnap Velma and Eugene and spend all day driving with them, even buying them hamburgers.

            Another scene in which Clyde proves that he cares for average people is when he is outside shooting with Bonnie in the abandoned house and the former owner makes a visit. Clyde tells the man to watch him as he shoots the sign that states the bank bought out his house, then hands the gun to the man so that he too can shoot the sign. In this way, both Clyde and the man find relief by shooting the sign of the thing that takes the most from both of them: the bank. The Great Depression caused all of the banks to go bankrupt (as shown when Clyde tries to rob his first bank with Bonnie and the man tells him they have been wiped completely clean), which in turn made banks take properties and other possessions to gain their wealth back. I think that this is why Clyde decides to take from the banks, since he sees other people losing their most prized possessions and in this way sees it as a way to give back.

            Bonnie and Clyde spend a lot of their time trying to convince others that they are completely harmless, and they make this evident in the scene where they first encounter ranger Frank Hamer and Bonnie takes a picture kissing him. Even after Frank spits on her, Clyde does not shoot Frank but instead handcuffs him and sends him off in a boat. In fact, every time Clyde accidentally shot someone he almost had a panic attack. I think that this proves their “innocence” in wanting to give back in a way, which for them means benefit themselves without causing any harm. 

Psycho

 In the movie Psycho, Hitchcock does a good job portraying obsession. At the beginning of the movie we see how Marion is head over heels in love with her soon to be divorced “boyfriend” Sam. Since Sam is getting a divorce money is tight, since Marion is so in love with Sam she is willing to go long measures to show her love. How Hitchcock portrays obsession with Marion is how far she will go to prove her love. For example, when Marion steals the 40,000 dollars from her employer’s client this shows her obsession with Sam.

Another way that Hitchcock shows obsession is by the police officer, when Marion is stopped by the police officer for sleeping in her car, the police officer automatically becomes suspicious of her. With the police officers suspicions he became obsessed with coming down to the bottom of her. He follows her down the highway and to the car dealership. With all of his hard work to find what Marion was doing in Arizona he was unsuccessful with her disappearance.

Lastly, Obsession is portrayed through Norman Bates. When Norman Bates is first introduced in the movie he seems like a kind and calm individual but we shortly find that he is not all what he seems. Hitchcock shows the first sign of obsession with Marion through his spying on her before she is about to take a shower. At first it looks like Norman is obsessed with Marion’s looks and wants to be with her but in reality he is obsessed with being in control. When we are introduced to this obsession is when Norman murders Marion. Murdering was a way for Norman to feel like her was in control and had full power.

Even though Hitchcock showed many different ways of obsession, they all tied everything together in this movie. This movie showed that obsession can be driven by love, suspicion, and the need for power. When first watching this movie, I did not see all the examples of obsession but when watching it a second time I found that there were multiple examples of this. I believe that Hitchcock wanted to show how there are many different reasons for obsession.

Jordan Venard 

The Seventh Seal -- Ryan Winstead

     Antonius Block, upon discovering that he will soon die, lives the remainder of his life trying to escape or understand death; his only reason for living is to remain alive.  This hysteric fear of death is highly significant in the era of the black plague.  That is, people were highly afraid that on any particular day they would contract the plague and die, and so, death loomed on the fringe of everyone’s conscious.  Moreover, this constant fear of death can be seen as a parallel to the widespread fear of nuclear destruction during the time this film was produced (1950s), tying the film to a modern context and making its commentary relevant.  By buying into hysteria and living life solely to avoid death, Antonius Block shows the audience the repercussions felt by living in constant anxiety of death, ultimately sending the message that because death in inescapable, one should not live in fear but try to enjoy what time you have left.

     

     The Seventh Seal is built on a foundation of imminent death; the first thing the audience learns is that Antonius has been approached by death and will eventually die.  By being the bedrock of both the movie and our lens to the life of Antonius, death is shown to the play a central role in life, being the ultimate result.  As such, death is anywhere and everywhere, an idea also furthered by the movie.  In the strawberry and milk scene, the mask of death is palpably hovering in the background of the sequence, illustrating that even in some of the happiest times of Antonius’s life, death is still weighing on his mind.  Death’s omnipresence is more obviously supported by the frequent appearance of death himself during the movie.  Despite Antonius’s travels and struggles, death is always waiting just one step ahead, as he is in the chapel, posing as a priest.

    

      Because death is imminent, it is foolish to live life in constant terror; rather, one should recognize death as a force in life and continue with a focus on enjoying what life you have.  This social critique is supported by two main characters: first, the anxiety and torture felt by Antonius Block, and secondly, the innocent carefree attitude displayed by Jof.  Because Antonius has allowed death to become such a prominent role in his life, all he can see in the world is death.  By focusing on death, Antonius fails to appreciate life as he should, only seeking answers to morbid questions that torture him.  He often ponders the existence of God, trying to find strength in religion but rejects it, and is left, as death claims him in the end, crying and begging for mercy because he cannot accept death.  His inability to accept death is indicative of an unsatisfied life.  Because Jof can only see death in his visions and does not allow death to consume his life in importance, Jof can escape death and be happy.  He does not waste his life trying to escape death or looking for answers; Jof lives a satisfying life of simplicity despite the rampant death of the plague around him.  The audience then sees the two divergent paths between Jof and Antonius.  We can live as Antonius does, understanding the death will eventually get us and be consumed by that sentiment, or live like Jof, and look at the face of death from afar, appreciating what life has given us.   

Nights of Cabiria - Mary Walker

Federico Fellini's Nights of Cabiria depicts the story of a streetwalker named Cabiria living in Rome. The film illustrates the idea of the cliché golden-hearted prostitute, but Cabiria exceeds this idea in her own way. She has an innocent soul, but on the outside she is callous and ill tempered. Despite this, the events of the movie prevent her from having the typical happy ending we see in these movies.

A typical golden-hearted prostitute in a film is a good person with a rough past who often becomes a love interest for another main character. Cabiria fits this role in that she is sweet and believes in love. This is shown during the magic show scene when Cabiria is hypnotized and thinks she is talking to a man named Oscar. She talks about her youth when she was eighteen and how she wishes he had met her then before she became a prostitute. She obviously believes in love and wishes she could find true love, but back in reality when she is not hypnotized she would never share these feelings. Cabiria has developed a tough exterior to avoid those feeling and getting hurt.

Even though Cabiria fits the idea of the golden-hearted prostitute, she meets men who are not like the typical love interests. At the beginning of the film we see Cabiria and Giorgio. It’s easy to assume they are a normal couple in love. When he steals her purse, pushes her in the river, and runs off we realize that this is not a typical love story. Cabiria realizes what happened after she is revived, and from then on she is very cautious with the men she encounters.

She meets the famous actor named Alberto Lazzari who picks her up and takes her out to a nightclub, but ends up treating her poorly. He hides her in the bathroom when his girlfriend comes back and then has to sneak her out in the morning. Cabiria is cautious with him, and doesn’t know what to expect that night. She doesn’t seem to be too upset about the events of the night because of this.

Cabiria also meets Oscar. At first, he seems like the typical love interest that she’s been waiting for. She is also cautious with him and keeps wondering what he wants from her. He is loving and affectionate and convinces her that he loves her. He doesn’t want to know about her past or how she earns her living. He fools everyone, however, and turns out just like Giorgio. Once she realizes it has happened again, she decides to change her own life, instead of waiting for a miracle or for the Madonna to do it for her.

In the end, the golden-hearted prostitute exceeds the cliché and walks away without a man. She is still the tough, callous woman from before, but now she is able to decide her own fate. It is not the typical happy ending love story that is expected, but it shows that things doesn’t always end up perfect, and we have the power to decide our own lives.

The Searchers

            The movie The Searchers was an American vision of how the Native Americans were viewed by settlers who were moving across the country claiming land from the Natives.  The movie is shaped by racism toward the Native Americans.  From the opening scene of the movie to the end one can see how racism shapes the main character, John Wayne, and the other characters around him.

            From the opening scene of the movie, when the whole family is reunited with uncle Edwards return, the whole family is eating dinner and then Martin comes in late to dinner.  At this point the first thing Edwards says to him is, “I could mistake you for a half breed.”  This starts the movie off and shows how the main character, Ethan Edwards, views Native American people as the scum of the earth.  Later in the opening scene we find out that Edwards actually rescues Martin, the one eighth Indian, from under a wagon while the rest of his tribe was being massacred.  After finding this out Edwards says, “it just happened to be me no more to make more of it.”  This shows his resentment toward Martin even though he was the one that rescued him from under the wagon. 

            Another way the movie displays racism toward the Native American people is whenever the shot is about to show a Native American their shadow is shown first then the camera pans up to show their face.  This is seen in the scene where the Native American Tribe captures little Debbie.  Right after the scene where she is captured we see Ethan riding back to the ranch and Martin is running with his saddle to find Ethan.  When he calls to Ethan he just rides by without stopping or saying anything the Martin leaving him to run back to the ranch while Ethan is on horse back. 

            The movie displays many different forms of racism, as shown above, such as when they show the Native Americans as shadows first.  However, the most noticeable way the movie dehumanizes Native Americans is when you see them they never talk in the movie.  This is shown when they Native Americans are surrounding the rescue group and they are just following them waiting for the rescue group to take off in fear.  This shows how the Native Americans hunting style mimics a group of lions stalking its pray waiting for their pray to make its first move.  The Native Americans also a few scenes later after the rescue party has been chased across the river.  The Native Americans stay on the other side of the river making war cry sounds rather than talking normal.

            The final way the movies dehumanized the Native Americans is by having the Native American chief, Scar, played as a white American.  This just goes to show that even in the movie Native Americans still weren’t respected enough to play the lead role as chief.  This could also, show that throughout the Wild West that Native Americans were never in charge, and that white Americans were always in charge because they had the better weapons and basically took advantage of the trust Native Americans had in other people.

Eric Shacklette

Singin' in the Rain- Lauren Trame

In the movie Singin’ in the Rain, a new way of making movies is shown. The lives of black and white, silent movie actors such as Don Lockwood and Lina Lamont are changed due to this advance in technology. The movie shows a lot of behind the scenes information about actors and the movie business. A lot of things that were happening behind the scenes back in 1952 in this movie are things that are still going on today.  Even though Singin’ in the Rain is an older movie it is still relevant to this day. Actors don’t always tell the truth, people in charge are always looking to make money for themselves and keep their company ahead of the game, and movies use special effects to make their movie better.

In Singin’ in the Rain we see that the actors aren’t always telling the truth. They make up things in order to keep fans coming in and to make their image look the best in can. In the very beginning of the movie when Don and Lina are walking the red carpet we see how Don doesn’t tell the truth about how he and Lina met and their lives together. Don says that they hit it off instantly and leads the fans to believe that they are a couple in real life when really we see that this is not true. In the flashback of how Don and Lina really met we see how the two stories are very different. Today in Hollywood the same thing happens. Actors have publicists that make sure their image is always positive and upright. They tell the public enhanced stories of themselves to look better than they really are.

In today’s world, the people in charge of production are always looking for ways to make money. They have big premiers and release dates trying to make their project as successful as possible and this is what R.F. Simpson in Singin’ in the Rain does also. He is always worried about doing new and different things because he doesn’t want the fans to react the wrong way. When Lina Lamont tells R.F. Simpson that she will sue if he doesn’t oblige by her he does what it takes to keep her happy so he doesn’t lose any money.  R.F. Simpson is very concerned with his company’s image and how people will react to his movies.

In Singin’ in the Rain we see the use of different special effects and behind the scenes work that they used in their movies to make them the best. They realized that they could record Kathy’s voice to play over Lina’s voice in the actual movie. This is a very big deal because it takes a lot of work to make the voice and the movement of the mouth match up perfectly in the theater. We see special effects like this all the time in movies today. In 1952 when this movie was made these effects were a big deal and they still are today.

Even though the movie Singin’ in the Rain was made in 1952, we see how it has a lot of similarities with Hollywood today. It shows the different things that actors, producers, and special effects workers do to make movies great and present the best image possible to the fans.

Sunset Boulevard- Melissa Villanueva

In Sunset Boulevard (1950), a film by Billy Wilder, Joe Gillis narrates his death and how it came to be about using a flashback. He first starts out floating in the pool, then goes back six months before his death. We are shown how he is an unsuccessful screenwriter and how he unfortunately ends up at Norma’s house. The fact that Gillis is narrating his life throughout the film is ironic in the sense that he was unsuccessful in creating any movies, but was able to create one with his death using narration, flashbacks, and his own experiences with Norma.
Narration in this movie is key, not only because it tells the entire story but because it also seems that Gillis did not embellish on how Norma truly was. We know this because in the final scene after he dies, she slowly goes down the stairs, claims that she is ready for her close up, and thinks that she is really headed to the movies. This is significant because Gillis had wanted his movie to be a hit with a big movie star, and in the end it turns out that he did get one, things just did not turn out his way. It almost takes a weight off of the audience because it is known that despite his death, he did finally reach success with this movie.

The flashbacks are also an important part in the film because they give background on Gillis’s struggle in writing screenplays and how desperate he was to write one that would make the big screen. He was so determined that he even cheated on Norma (if you actually consider him to be with her) and defied his best friend Artie in order to secretly work with Betty. It is clear that Gillis is guilty about this, hence why he tells her when they are walking along Paramount Pictures at night that she needs to stay at least two feet from him. He also invites her over to the mansion to see how he is truly living to let her know that they cannot be together. Norma confuses this with Gillis wanting to stay with her and when Gillis gives her a sense of reality, she shoots him. His determination to write is what got him killed.

Lastly, Gillis’s experiences with Norma are important to this film because we get an idea of who Gillis truly was through first-hand account. It is interesting that the audience sees Gillis and also hears his narration because it helps to connect with him and hope that he can publish a screenplay and also find a way to get away from Norma. The audience sides with Gillis despite his wrongs and is angry with Norma for the way that she treats him. The narration and his role in the film make him into a real person, versus just a character or just a voice.

Gillis’s narration is essential to this movie because of the irony that it demonstrates. It is unfortunate that Norma put his life to an end, but from this loss he gained the story that he had always been hoping for.

Rashomon

In the movie Rashomon, we see how the character the Woodcutter is the root of all the lies. Throughout the movie we see the bandit, the wife, and the samurai, and the woodcutter all having different stories on what happened to the Samurai who was found dead. With all of these different stories we are left guessing on who is telling the truth.

            Deceit is the whole theme throughout this entire movie, throughout the whole movie we look at the Woodcutter and believe that he is telling the unbiased truth about what has happened to the Samurai and about his finding of the body. But we see that the woodcutters’ story often changes leading us to question if he is telling all of the truth. For example, when the woodcutter gets out of the trial he tells the commoners that the Samurai’s story was a lie and that he witnessed the rape and murder but did not want to become involved.  He then continues to tell the commoner a new story explaining that Tajomaru wanted to marry the wife but she instead wanted to free her husband and wanted them to fight for love. The woodcutter proceeds to tell the commoner that Tajomaru took the dagger with him and fled the scene.

            Then the story takes another turn, during a discussion with the priest, woodcutter and the commoner they are interrupted by the sound of a crying baby. As the commoner picks up the baby, the woodcutter reapproaches the commoner because he believes that he is stealing the baby. The commoner makes a remark to the woodcutter saying “a bandit calling another a bandit" because it has been discovered that the woodcutter had stolen the dagger from the murder scene. This comes to show that the woodcutter had been lying throughout the whole movie.

            The woodcutter showed how lying and deceit can leave you guessing what the next turn is in a movie. Without the woodcutters stories and a turning plot this movie would have not been as strong. One thing I did not like about this movie is that there are so many different characters telling lies and stories that it make the movie very hard to follow and the plot confusing. Also with the scene with the baby I thought that it was thrown into the movie and did not go along with the other things going on in this film.

            Overall I found that the main focus of lying and deceit in this movie made it confusing and hard to follow. 

The Gold Rush

            Due to the lack of technology audio could not yet be attached to films. Therefore movie production in the early 1900s adopted an over-exaggerated style of display. The characters had to use signs and symbols to communicate with the audience. For example, to explain to the viewers that Black Larson was a wanted man, the camera panned to a shot of a wanted flier clearly depicting Black Larson.  The movie also used quote scenes for the audience so they could see what the characters were saying when there wasn’t a lot of movement in the scene.  The clips of quotes were most often seen when there was a party going on at the bar.
            Since there wasn’t sound, the characters could not speak, body movement and facial expressions were over-exaggerated. As shown in the scene where the Lone Prospect, Black Larson, and Big Jim Mckay first meet in the cabin and they begin to wrestle with the gun. It is clearly seen by the audience that the Lone Prospect is in fear for his life, from his facial expression and exaggerated movement, as the gun is being waved in his face.  This can also be seen at the bar when Jack gives the Lone Prospect the note Georgia wrote for him.  In the next scene, the Lone Prospect reads the note and starts to run around the bar looking for Georgia.  In this scene Charlie Chaplin does a perfect job acting as if he is head over heals in love with Georgia running around franticly looking for her.  His movements and facial expressions really shows how much the Lone Prospect loves Georgia.  When he finally sees her he climbs the wall to her and begins to express his love for her with out saying anything.  Chaplin uses arm gestures, kisses Georgia’s hand over and over again, and he also grabs at his heart to show that he loves her too.   These minor details such as facial expressions are often missed or over looked in current movies.  Many movies made today use words and the voices tones to express emotions such as love or anger.  However, seen in The Gold Rush emotions can be expressed using body language. This is because people are more focused on what the actors are saying and not what they are doing.  
            With the lack of sound, Charlie Chaplin was able to avoid a movie full of dialog frames by isolating the main character away from large groups of people. Such as, when everyone was in the bar celebrating New Years Eve, the Lone Prospect was off in a cabin by himself preparing for Georgia and her friends to come visit.  The Lone Prospect also dreams about having Georgia and her friends over.  In the dream when they ask for him to make a speech rather than talking or using dialog frames he does a dance with two rolls stuck to the ends of forks.  The only time in the movie when dialog frames were used was when all the towns people were in the bar celebrating. Other than those scenes Chaplin was able to make a movie people could watch and understand without the use of current audio technology. 

Eric Shacklette

The Maltese Falcon -- Ryan Winstead

     While often symbolic of freedom, aspiration, and bravery, the falcon can be used as an antithesis to these concepts when darkly utilized.  John Huston in his film, The Maltese Falcon, uses the statuette falcon to symbolize society’s never ending greed while complicating this argument by highlighting the complexities of knowing another person’s true self.  As a result, the falcon ultimately establishes a parallel between its own nature and that of Brigid O’Shaughnessy. 

     The connection between the falcon statuette and greed is a fairly intuitive one.  That is, the monetary and cultural value of the statuette is the driving force behind the entire film, causing the murder and betrayal of multiple people.  The characters, Gutman and his minions especially, make it clear that they are not working under the premise of ethics but the attainment of money and power.  After declaring that Wilmer is like a son, Gutman then says, “Well, if you lose a son, it’s possible to get another.  There’s only one Maltese Falcon,” and thoroughly betrays Wilmer.  Huston’s critique of society is clear; society, Huston is saying, operates solely under a quest for endowment, often sacrificing human life or relationships to acquire it.  Because the falcon is never actually ascertained, we can be sure that this unhealthy greed bears no fruit.

     Furthermore, Huston creates a startling comparison between Brigid and the falcon to show that Spade’s search for love is just as hopeless as Mr.Gutman’s crusade for wealth and power.  Much like the falcon, Brigid is shrouded in mystery and concealment from the beginning of the movie.  As the falcon’s location is constantly changing, so is the identity of Brigid.  Brigid attempts to appear innocent and victimized to Spade, but as the details of her situation leak out, she is forced to make concessions regarding her true person.  This process of pealing back the layers of Brigid also relates to the falcon.  Indeed, the falcon has a “black enamel” that makes it appear to be worthless, hiding an encrustation of jewels underneath.  Only by whittling away this coating can the audience understand the character of Brigid.

     By comparing Brigid to the falcon, we see that Brigid is likewise unattainable for Spade.  Indeed, the audience is left truly wondering if the falcon is real or not, additionally pondering if Brigid’s love for Spade is existent.  It is this inability to know the truth that drives Spade to turn Brigid into the police.  Huston displays the difficulty of knowing the true self of others, and the impossibility of living with the consequences of insecure trust.  With swirling ulterior motives, Spade could never truly know Brigid’s feelings, as is shown in his quotation: “I’ve no earthly reason to think I can trust you…All we’ve got is that maybe you love me and maybe I love you.”

     And thus, a dichotomy of people is formed: those who lust after uncertain power and wealth, and others who lust after chimerical love.  Both are guilty of the same crime, and both fall into the same pitfall of fixation over something that is not truly there.  Finally, Huston’s theme becomes clear: amidst all the deceit and lies, there is only one thing happiness can be derived from, the real and hard truth.  After all, the falcon is only the things “dreams are made of”.

Posted by: Ryan Winstead

Citizen Kane - Mary Walker

Due to the thematic significance of memories in Citizen Kane, this blog post will critically analyze the use of flashbacks and its effectiveness as a story-telling device in the film.

While the use of flashbacks in films was not particularly new, the quality and smoothness of their implementation into Citizen Kane was truly avant-garde.  Indeed, the flashbacks allowed the weaving of two stories into one; the primary of which taking place in the present, the secondary existing solely in the past.  The interviewing processes in which the flashbacks primarily take place create a link to this past.

Each individual flashback is subject to bias by the person reminiscing, highlighting the fragility of the past and how we analyze it.  For example, when Susan was being interviewed about her time with Kane, she describes when she walked out on him and the events leading up to that instance.  One scene shows a giant, open room where Kane and Susan are talking, which demonstrates the distance she felt was between them.  In the scene where she leaves him, she describes herself as the victim and is proud of her actions.  This exhibits the idea that each interviewee’s flashbacks are subject to bias and describe how each of them remembers Kane.

Furthermore, Welles may also be suggesting that people are only what people remember us to be, shown by the differing opinions of the interviewees and their role as the primary source of information about Kane.  In each flashback he is portrayed as a different kind of person.  As the movie progresses, the audience realizes that Kane is all of those people, depending on who he’s with.  To each person he was remembered as something different, and after he dies, he became only what those people remembered him to be.

This theme produced by the flashbacks is reinforced by the quest behind the meaning of “rosebud”.  In hopes of encapsulating the identity of Kane into his last dying word, the reporters were denying the enigmatic nature of people.  Their attempts to disregard the past as a complicated mechanism strictly conflicts with the theme of the flashbacks.  That is, the flashbacks show how complicated an individual Kane is, while the reporters want to simplify him to one word.  Welles shows that the past (and thus, a person) can be more complex through the film’s ending.

Thompson’s final words, that Rosebud is simply a puzzle piece, and not the puzzle, finalizes the significance of the flashbacks.  Hence, the viewer realizes that the flashbacks are the true gateway into Kane’s life, the true story-telling of Kane’s life, not just an instance or word.  Welles is critiquing the way that we view people, especially in retrospect.  Often times we label people based off of one thing he/she did in their life.  Christopher Columbus is known only due to his genius in exploration, but nothing is left of his humanity.  His hobbies, love interests, and favorite foods, for example, are forgotten in history.  Should the reporters found a satisfactory answer to “rosebud” Kane’s existence would have been labeled into that explanation, his humanity forgotten.