I recently came across the following Kubrick quote, which I thought was very clever:
"How could we possibly appreciate the Mona Lisa if Leonardo had written at the bottom of the canvas: 'The lady is smiling because she is hiding a secret from her lover.' This would shackle the viewer to reality..."
All of Welles' films, I believe, take this in account - even going so far as to examine the nature of reality, both in life and in film itself ("F For Fake"), and in Welles' refusal to use conventional film techniques to force viewers into identifying with a single character or point of view.
All too often though, this so-called "detached" style is perceived as cold. Kubrick was constantly accused of valuing machinery over humanity, yet I believe in his movies he committed some of the truest statements on humanity ever put on film.
"Citizen Kane" is often praised for its virtuosity, but criticised for its coldness and detachment - I have always found it incredibly moving, particularly in its closing passages where Kane is a helpless old man, unable to cope with the consequences of an empty life, a life which he has been ill-equipped to deal with after being brought up in a bubble. It is only through the ambiguity of the presentation that the true tragedy is brought into focus, because we simulatenously see how Kane reacts to situations, as well as secondary characters like Kane's butler - his complete disrespect for Kane by stubbing out his cigarette on the ballustrade while talking to Thompson is a small, but incredibly telling, gesture that speaks volumes, something that could have been lost in a conventional "lots of close-ups, please" style.
Ambiguity is the key to great films, Kubrick seems to be saying in his quote. Leave things open to interpretation.
Who do we identify with in "Touch of Evil"? Quinlan and Vargas are equally repellant, in different ways. Perhaps this is what freaked Universal out in 1958. The entire tone of the picture is ambiguous; from its characters' morals, to its genre - while stylistically a noir, it veers wildly between parody of that genre and psychological thriller.
I believe it is entirely possible to stay faithful, even resolutely so, to your own point of view in a picture without getting out the sledgehammer. Others may get something completely different from the work - if so, you have done your job well.