Take the following as truth: It's no wonder that Robert McKee, the spiritual father of something like Rounders , reserves a special place in hell for Welles and Citizen Kane , in which the exhibitionistic auteur incessantly upstages his own narrative.
Then the following statement: "Rounders, while deserving of its own place in cinematic history, does not hold the same significance as Citizen Kane." is true, false, or inconclusive?