Orson Welles (Liev Schreiber), all charisma and stubborn vision, is signed to direct films for RKO Pictures with a startling amount of creative freedom. Welles decides to make production number 281 a disguised biopic of media tycoon William Randolph Hearst (James Cromwell), a film which would come to be known as "Citizen Kane." But Welles doesn't understand just how much clout Hearst yields. When he gets word of the unflattering production, Hearst does everything in his power to stop it.The power of this film is how "Money and Power" can crush art which makes this scary. The main focus of the film is what "Is Right" what is "Wrong"! This film reminds me when Universal had a fight with religious groups about the film "The Last Temptation of Christ" What is also "Said without being said" is "You Can Win the War" but there is also a price! You pay the price but so does your opposition

Orson Welles (Liev Schreiber) comes to Hollywood at 24 hailed as a boy genius after 'World of the Worlds'. He is struggling to come up with his first feature film with RKO studio head George Schaefer (Roy Scheider) and screenwriter Herman J. Mankiewicz (John Malkovich). He goes to a dinner party hosted by William Randolph Hearst (James Cromwell) and Marion Davies (Melanie Griffith) at Hearst Castle. He creates 'Citizen Kane'. Hearst aims to destroy the movie. This is a fascinating subject for a TV movie. Schreiber is great and quite frankly, so is everybody else in this movie. I just find it so interesting as a film fan to see an interpretation of the behind-the-scenes story.

Orson Welles (Liev Schreiber) produces his greatest film, "Citizen Kane" (1941), despite the opposition of the film's de facto subject, William Randolph Hearst (James Cromwell).This HBO film has great casting, to say the least. Sure, Schreiber may not necessarily look like Orson Welles, but he does the voice pretty well, and is a great actor. James Cromwell never disappoints, and then you have a wonderful ensemble, as well (not least of which is John Malkovich).Of the parts showing the filming of "Citizen Kane", the scene of tearing out the floor is best. This event (even if it did not happen as portrayed) is what made this film iconic for many, and really made Gregg Toland a god among cameramen. Having Toland appear here was a wise decision.What is somewhat confuses is the film's portrayal of racism and antisemitism. Not that these were not bigoted times, but what was the overall point? How did it relate to Welles? This is unclear.

Very interesting movie about the battle to get Citizen Kane made has carved out a tricky niche for itself; the movie is going to be most interesting to fans of Welles and Kane, and those people are going to have such specific expectations about what the movie should be that they can't be satisfied. I see a number of reviews here complaining that this movie doesn't show why Kane was a great movie, but that's not the movie that was being made. It is a short movie about a specific struggle, with brief glimpses into the filming, and unless it had been titled, "RKO 281: The Making of Citizen Kane," you can't fault it for not spending an hour on Welles innovations. The film is entertaining, Schreiber is a good Welles and Malkovitch is also quite good. I note people also complain that the movie isn't all that accurate. I do wish the film had done a better job with Marian Davies, as one hears her described as fantastically charming and loved by Hollywood (it has been said that Welles' flaying of Davies did more to bring out the knives of the Hollywood press than his portrayal of Hearst). But come on, how can one complain about liberties taking with reality in a movie made about Welles, who loved taking liberties with reality?