Mank is neither love letter nor ode to Old Hollywood. Acclaimed director David Fincher’s newest film, written by his late father Jack Fincher, is an homage to Citizen Kane and the films of that era to be sure, but not to Old Hollywood itself. As well it shouldn’t be; Mank offers a refreshingly critical reassessment of 1930s and ‘40s Hollywood through the perspective of screenwriter Herman J. Mankiewicz (Gary Oldman), known by all as Mank. The corruption and destructive influence of wealth and power among Hollywood’s elite serve as the backdrop and larger contextual understanding for how Mankiewicz came to write the iconic Citizen Kane.
Of course, there is much debate surrounding the authorship of Citizen Kane, a film considered by many to be the greatest of all time. Officially, Herman Mankiewicz and Orson Welles share the screenwriting credit, but many dispute this claim, arguing Mankiewicz wrote the screenplay alone. The Finchers actually spend little time on the authorship debate, simply operating under the position that Mank wrote the script; in the film’s first few minutes, Orson Welles (Tom Burke) calls an injured and bedridden Herman Mankiewicz with instructions to write the first draft within 60 days. Mank agrees to deliver. Over the next couple of months, interspersed with flashbacks, Mank writes the script while recovering at a ranch from a car accident that left him with a broken leg.
Mank leaves the issue of credit largely alone until the end of the film, choosing instead to focus on Mankiewicz himself. The film details his life as a screenwriter in 1930s Hollywood and explores the relationships and experiences that influenced his creation of Citizen Kane—notably, his introduction into the world of newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst (played by a richly imposing and calculating Charles Dance) and his mistress, actress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried in a melodic performance). It was no secret in Hollywood that Mank based Citizen Kane’s titular character on the influential Hearst, although many also assumed (falsely, according to Mankiewicz) that the character of Susan Alexander, a terrible singer and Kane’s mistress-turned-wife, was based on Marion Davies.
While Mank develops a fast friendship with Davies, his relationship with Hearst is somewhat complicated, made more so by Hearst’s relationship and political activities with MGM studio head, Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard). Mank despises Mayer so much, he tells his typist Rita Alexander (Lily Collins), “If I ever go to the electric chair, I’d like [Mayer] to be sitting in my lap.” And it’s easy to see why, as Mayer’s sleazy nature and corruption are on display throughout the film: fake tears that dry up the moment his back is turned. A theatrical plea to crew members to accept a substantial cut to their salaries with a promise to pay it back—he never does. Taking “donations” from employee salaries to finance his political campaign against Upton Sinclair, the Democratic candidate running for governor of California.
The film uses California’s political battle and the destructive power of MGM’s influence to draw eerie parallels to today’s political climate. In Mank, MGM runs a series of what are essentially “fake news” reels, shown to the public under the guise of interviews with real people who are actually hired actors. Cynical reminders of the “magic of movies” caution us about the ability of influential people to create false narratives the public will buy into. In one particularly dark scene, Mank issues a clear warning: “We have to be vigilant [in regards to] people sitting in the dark, willingly checking their disbelief at the door.”
Despite some of the sinister themes, Mank is often a playful film. It has many nods to Citizen Kane and was designed to look and sound like an authentic Old Hollywood film someone dug up in the archives. Beyond it being in black and white, the film’s softened resolution, compressed audio, and inclusion of cue marks (or “cigarette burns” as they were coined in Fincher’s Fight Club) complete with their tell-tale crackle contribute to the recreation of a 1940s era film. The Citizen Kane references and similarities are expectantly plentiful in a movie documenting the creation of that famous film. Some, like Hearst’s “Xanadu” palace and zoo, serve as material for Mankiewicz to draw from as he builds his Hearst-inspired character, Charlie Foster Kane. Other references are playful choices on the part of the Finchers, such as the close-up shot of Mank dropping a liquor bottle in an echo to Kane dropping the snow globe upon his demise.
The filmmaking style and structure also parallel Citizen Kane’s in the way it uses flashbacks to form a narrative that “is one big circle, like a cinnamon roll, not a straight line pointing to the nearest exit,” as Mankiewicz describes it. This is an effective strategy in Mank. By giving us a winding narrative instead of a straight path to the somewhat expected exit point, the film is able to find and maintain an energy in its pacing it might otherwise have lacked—although this energy is due in part to the film’s superb writing and some great performances.
Oldman is utterly delightful as Herman Mankiewicz. From the moment we are introduced to Mank as a washed-up, self-destructive alcoholic screenwriter, he nonetheless captures our hearts thanks to his dry humour, good nature and Oldman’s brilliant embodiment. With the hint of a mischievous smile about his mouth, Oldman affects a wry charm that complements his sharp but playful delivery of the wonderfully written satirical wit that Mankiewicz was known for.
By bringing Jack Fincher’s script to life onscreen and heralding the importance of screenwriters through the story of Herman Mankiewicz, David Fincher celebrates his screenwriter father in a touching tribute.
Score: B+