Cindy Prascik's Review of Mank

 

My dearest reader(s): One of the sad casualties of 2020 has been what I will snobbishly call "cinema-worthy" movies, that is, movies that don't feel like they were made for TV. Sure, there have been some, but the pickings have been slim. I am pleased to report that last week Netflix threw a solid entry into the skimpy awards season fray with its original picture, Mank, the reasonably true story behind the writing of Citizen Kane.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailer or if you're familiar with actual events, which, I assure you, I am not.

Disclaimers, away!

Folks, I hate old movies. That may seem like a weird thing to hear from someone who spends three-quarters of her free time watching movies, but it is the gods' honest truth. If it was made before 1970 and it's not the Wizard of Oz or something with the Marx Brothers, no thank you. Citizen Kane is frequently cited as one of the greatest — if not *the* greatest — films of all time. I couldn't be less interested. Mank is made in the style of those classic, old, black-and-white movies, and that certainly didn't help me warm to it.

On the flip side, Gary Oldman remains my favorite actor in the known universe, and my life has been way too short on Gary Oldman lately. Heck, for the last two years I haven't even had time to make my (in?)famous Gary Calendar; instead I've had to buy premade calendars, and I can assure you, those don't come in "Gary Oldman." A new Gary Oldman movie definitely represents one of 2020's few bright spots.

Art is, by nature, subjective, but, by any objective criteria I can mark, Mank is a pretty good movie. The story is interesting and well-told, jumping from Herman Mankiewicz toiling over the film's screenplay while recuperating after an automobile accident to flashbacks (always notated as they would be in a script) that give us the backstory: Who is Mankiewicz, and how did he end up where he is? Gary Oldman is nothing short of brilliant (she says with maybe a hint of bias), and I think Oscar buzz around his performance is well founded. The supporting cast is very much up to snuff as well, with solid work from Amanda Seyfried, Lily Collins, Tuppence Middleton, Sam Troughton, Tom Burke (yay!), and the always brilliant Jamie McShane. Directed by David Fincher, with a score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, Mank also represents a little reunion of some people who helped create the film that *I* consider the greatest of all time: the Social Network. Other than running a little longer than it needs to, there's nothing practical I can call out as a negative, BUT...I struggled to get through Mank all the same. I was bored enough that at one point I had to put my phone in a drawer I couldn't reach to keep from goofing off instead of paying attention. If you're reading this, I guess you're interested in my honest opinion, so there it is: Mank is a good movie that I didn't like very much, but Gary Oldman makes it worth watching (as he always does).

Mank clocks in at 131 minutes and is rated R for "some language."

Give Gary Oldman another Oscar now, please and thank you. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Mank gets seven.

Until next time...