For many, David Finch's new work on the topic of "Mank" may be a boring movie.
The black-and-white film (or mono) takes the birth of the script of the classic film history "Citizen Kane" as the main clue of the story, with a parallel two-line narrative, many characters with dense dialogue, and a large number of American history and film history allusions.
In short, the threshold for watching movies is quite high.
Although perhaps for fans familiar with or revered Citizen Kane, Manke is an exciting puzzle: this great film history classic, in terms of text, has little to do with the genius prodigy Orson Wells who directed and starred in it, and it comes more from the man in the title, Herman Mankelly, nicknamed "Manke".
Orson Wells and Herman Mankelly
But after watching the whole film, no matter how much you know about "Citizen Kane", you will understand that "Mank" is not keen on film history gossip to some extent, and what it wants to portray is actually how a tragic character extracts a tragic story of a famous film history from self-tragedy and the tragedy of the times.
In short, "Mank" can be seen as a confrontation between small people and big people, but the understanding of the intensity of the confrontation depends on how well you know citizen Kane itself and behind the scenes.
But if you do a necessary grooming, it's like this—
In 1941, "Citizen Kane" with a unique narrative and pioneering film technique, brilliantly and profoundly showed the tragic nature of the newspaper king Kane, in fact, alluding to the life of William Randolph Hirst, the king of the American newspaper industry, including his relationship with his mistress Marion Davis.
Citizen Kane
Regarding "Citizen Kane", there are two major gossip, one is the key line in the film, "RoseBud", which was once considered to be Hearst's name for Davis's private parts, and the other is that Hirst hates the film to the bone and tries to completely ban it. However, he did not succeed.
And all of this, on the other hand, originated with Manke.
Who is Mank? Why dare to challenge Hearst?
In fact, the whole film of "Manke" is a process of definition of "who is Manke". He was once a Hollywood gold-medal screenwriter, a slurred drunkard, as Mank opened, and, as he later, an incorrigible gambler, or, as the film always does, an astonishingly intellectual observer and insight.
Because of his witty humor, Manke inadvertently gained Hearst's favor and became his guest of honor, as the Hollywood movie tycoon Meyer said in the climax scene of the film, "He likes the way you talk", and even half of his salary is the pocket of The Boss.
Manke also gets along well with Hearst's heart-and-liver baby, Davis. The conversation between the two in the famous "Hurst Castle" in the film is both classical and elegant, interesting and vivid.
However, after several years of getting along, Manke decided to fight with Boss He and began to write the script of "Citizen Kane". Why did Manke choose to make enemies of the Giants, or, as his brother Joe put it, "humiliate himself"? He didn't even just humiliate himself, he killed himself.
In another main line of the film, the so-called "flashback paragraphs", this reason is explained bit by bit.
After witnessing a series of lies, deaths, and betrayals associated with Hirst and Meyer, Manke decides to raise his sword to them— pen and paper.
One factor could be decisive was the 1934 California gubernatorial election.
Representing the Democrats was Upton Sinclair, and if anything, he was "rich-hating," so Hearst and Meyer tried their best to beat him, and one of the tricks was to use documentaries, fake documentaries to be exact. Manke witnessed the process and decided to stop it.
As you can imagine, he failed, he not only failed, but also lost a good friend.
In a way, Manke had been confronting what Hirst represented in his own way, and before the 1934 election, he was probably more cynical, but on the night meyer and others celebrated the election victory, he began to "lose" his sanity.
The most moving thing about "Mank" is that it presents a powerful empathy through a cynical but unwilling drunkard who "sells his righteous soul for a high position", and his guilt, pity, anger, and timidity are expressed in two extremely heavy "night feast" scenes.
At the first dinner party celebrating the election, Mank launched a "suicide attack" on Meyer and made a big gamble. In this scene, Gary Oldman completes the shaping of Manke's heart at the moment with almost one look: he is lonely, sober and hesitant, but also reveals madness.
The second was the Hearst House Dinner in 1937. In this scene, Oldman and director David Finch proved themselves to be great actors and directors, respectively. A drunken Manke, in front of the guests, tells Hearst and Meyer a story that is so thrilling (especially if you've seen Citizen Kane) and that its people don't know if they're alive or dead.
Seeing this, if you still know that as Manke himself said, he has begun to "run out of talent", then writing the script of "Citizen Kane" is undoubtedly a dying struggle and a final struggle. Yes, it is the crystallization of madness and glory, the product of alcohol and conscience, a mixture of cowardice and talent.
In the end, Mank got what he wanted, gave up money to choose to sign, completed the singing of his career, and his blood and tears were burned by alcohol;
Gary Oldman, more relaxed and comfortable with the interpretation of a complex character than In the Darkest Hour;
David Finch, while turning his father's script into a movie, completed the Hollywood past belonging to the Finch father and son through accurate and powerful layout control and the most mellow black and white light and shadow creation in recent years, although it seems trivial, scattered and ambiguous.