Gary Oldman plays Herman Mankiewicz in ‘Mank’ which released on Netflix Dec. 4. Credit: Courtesy of Netflix via TNS
Old Hollywood nostalgia meets the classic silver screen feel in hopes to recreate the magic of “Citizen Kane” by way of a story about the very man who wrote the iconic film.
“Mank,” released on Netflix Friday and is the latest collaboration between Netflix and all-star director David Fincher — known for films such as “Gone Girl,” “Fight Club” and “Se7en” — following his original serial killer drama “Mindhunter.”
“Mank” follows alcoholic, bed-ridden screenwriter Herman “Mank” Mankiewicz (Gary Oldman), as he struggles to cobble together the script to what is often hailed as the greatest film ever made: “Citizen Kane.” Mank is given 60 days to finish the script by the film’s director, Orson Welles (Tom Burke).
Where “Citizen Kane” was able to take a narrative structure and make something greater than the sum of its parts, this film falls a bit short.
As Mank writes the script, the film jumps back in time to 1930s Hollywood, known as “The Golden Age.” Here the audience is introduced to some stars of the time, but more importantly, Mank is able to get in good graces with the people running Hollywood and — to some extent — the state of California. These tycoons are Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard), co-founder of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, and William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance), sensationalist news publishing magnate and one of the most influential men of the time. From Mank’s interactions with them, he is able to weave the narrative that becomes “Citizen Kane,” a storyline that closely follows Hearst’s life.
Ultimately, “Mank” is a niche film made for an audience of film lovers and those with knowledge of the happenings of the time. I recommend prospective viewers watch “Citizen Kane” prior to “Mank” to understand this film at a deeper level. Since this is a film that is so entrenched in the minutiae of the 1930s Hollywood Golden Age, I did find myself lost at times. It asks that the audience know a lot of minor details with literature, language and film name drops aplenty. I was often stopping and pausing the movie to look up things characters said online. There are minor things you can get by without knowing, but they start to compound and take away from the viewing experience.
With that being said, this is clearly a labor of love for Fincher. The aesthetics perfectly match those of the time with a slight modern revamp. The black-andwhite cinematography is excellent with artificial film grain and celluloid burn effects — black burnt circles that appear occasionally and match damage that would happen to a real celluloid film roll.
The soundtrack is stellar and composed by Fincher’s frequent collaborators Atticus Ross and Trent Reznor, from the band Nine Inch Nails. It is able to match the era perfectly without ever going into caricature. All the performances are stellar as well, with John Houseman (Sam Troughton) acting as a script advisor and nurse for Mank, and Dance as Hearst stealing the few scenes that he is in.
Overall, I can’t recommend “Mank” for everyone. It is a niche film that may require some homework before viewing. However, “Mank” still manages to be a good enough time through the performances, soundtrack and visuals if you are willing to look past its flaws. Odds are you will be able to tell if you are interested in this film from the synopsis alone, but if you have any interest in the Golden Age of Hollywood or “Citizen Kane,” it might be for you.
Rating: 3/5
