MANK

US, 2020, 131 minutes, Black-and-white.
Gary Oldman, Amanda Seyfried, Lily Collins, Tom Pelphrey, Arliss Howard, Tuppence Middleton, Monica Gossman, Joseph Cross, Sam Troughton, Toby Leonard Moore, Tom Burke, Charles Dance, Ferdinand Kingsley, Jamie McShane?.
Directed by David Fincher.

The title, Mank, will not make an immediate impression on the potential audience. Which means that a review needs some kind of preliminaries.

Probably the first thing that should be said is that it is very much a specialist film. It presupposes its specialisation rather than explaining it to an unfamiliar audience.

For an audience very familiar with Orson Welles’ classic, Citizen Kane, it is a must. It presupposes that audiences know Orson Welles, making this film classic in his early to mid-20s, his collaboration (?) with the writer, Herman Mankiewicz, the Mank of the title. It also presupposes that audiences know something about media empire baron of the first half of the 20th century, William Randolph Hearst. And that he is the target of Citizen Kane.

And the film also presupposes that audiences are interested in the Hollywood of the 1930s, the studio heads and their ruthless administration, their reliance on talented producers, the list of prominent writers who contributed to the films, rivalries and disappointments, the casts. And, a section of the film also highlights political antipathies in California, 1934, after Franklin D Roosevelt became President and Hollywood opposition to the New Deal.

Of course, it may be worth the risk for somebody unfamiliar to venture into Mank, find it interesting and be prepared to do some follow-up study.

Having said this, this reviewer enjoyed Mank very much.

It is filmed in black and white, reminiscent of the visual styles of Citizen Kane, has something of a circular structure, action in the present, flashbacks to the past (all indicated on screen as they are on a screenplay page), a mosaic building up the portrait of Mank, his process of writing the screenplay for Citizen Kane, the pressures, his alcoholism, and an increasing conflict with Orson Welles. (Over the decades there has been an attempt to rehabilitate Mank and play down Orson Welles’ contribution – however, Mank was well aware, and expresses it in the film, that the writer contributes a screenplay which is then worked on by producer and director; he would not have been expecting his turned-in screenplay to be the actual finished product.)

Gary Oldman plays Mank most persuasively. The film fills in his past as a journalist, his role in contributing to movies, his acquaintance with Hearst (played by Charles Dancye), his friendship with Hearst’s wife, actress Marion Davies (played by Amanda Safefried), his antipathy towards Louis B Mayer (Arliss Howard), a strained relationship with his wife (Tuppence Middleton), a growing reliance on his secretary (Lily Collins), pressure from the celebrated producer, John Housman (Sam Troughton), a good friendship with his younger brother (and much more successful writer and director from the 30s to the 60s), Joe Mankiewicz (Tom Pelphery).

As indicated, this is a top cast. While Orson Welles appears in only a few sequences, he is well embodied by Tom Burke (who would be ideal for a full-length film on Welles). It is rather singular that key characters in this very American story are played by British actors: Oldman,, Burke, Troughton, Collins, Middleton.

While a lot of the action takes place in the studios, significant sequences take place in Hearst’s elaborate mansion, San Simeone, dinners and guests, dramatic talk, political conversation – at which, ultimately, Mank disgraces himself and is ousted.

So, this is a recreation of Hollywood history, the Hollywood personalities in the studios of the 30s, the pre-production of Citizen Kane, a portrait of Mank, talented but alcoholic with something of a death-wish, with personal drama. Ultimately, after his clash with Welles, Citizen Kane received many Oscar nominations, winning for Best Screenplay, Mank’s scene at the end of the film shows him accepting his award – without Orson Welles.

1. A specialist film? For those who Citizen Kane, its origins, making? Knowledge of the film and its style, of Orson Welles, his role, the writing of the screenplay? The Mercury players?

2. Audience knowledge of Hollywood, the 1930s, the studios, the studio heads, the producers, the writers, the writers pitching their themes? Cast and performers? The ethos of Hollywood?

3. Audience knowledge of William Randolph Hearst, as a person, his role in American history, his origins, his newspaper empire, his influence, political? The mansion at San Simeone? His relationship with Marion Davies? His hosting dinners, his guests?

4. The background of US politics in the 1930s, Roosevelt, the Depression, the New Deal, California, the race for governor in 1934, Upton Sinclair, novelist, socialist, the studios in fear of communism? The use of film and movie propaganda for elections?

5. Mank, the story of Herman Mankiewicz, as a person, as a writer, his role in Hollywood, with Citizen Kane, his Oscar, the older brother of Joe Mankiewicz – and the contrast of his successful career over the decades in Hollywood?

6. The style of the film, the parallel with the styles of Citizen Kane, the structures, the narrative, the flashbacks (and the screenplay information detail)? Black-and-white photography, stylish photography, experimental?

7. The portrait of Mank, Gary Oldman and his performance? Age, his experience, the opening accident, going to the ranch, laid up, the medical attendant, Rita Alexander as his typist, producer John Housman? The deal with Orson Welles and RKO? Mank a drinker, his reputation? References to his wife, Poor…? His children?

8. The character of Mank established through the flashbacks, his presence in Hollywood, past journalism, with the prestigious writers, the meeting, their gambling and drinking, gathering to pitch the scene one after the other with the producers? His meeting Marion Davies on set, her flirtatious manner? Hearst driving by, Mank talking with him? His political stances, his working with Shelley, Shelley‘s his ambitions to direct a film, the interviews and propaganda for the election, suicide threat, Mank going to see him, getting the bullets, going to his wife, not saving him? The night of the election, the parties, Louis B Mayer and his behaviour? The exaltation about the Republican candidate? Mank and his witnessing Mayer and making the speech to the MGM lot to reduce the salaries? His tears? Mank’s disgust? Mank’s behaviour at Hearst’s party, drunk, his speeches, vomiting, the guests leaving, Hearst staying, Mank being ousted?

9. This background reason enough for his animosity towards Hearst and the tone of the screenplay?

10. The writing, his being creative, dictating the sequences, his imagination, the structure, the mosaic? The number of pages? The time limit, the pressure from Housman? His knowing that Orson Welles would have the final say? The experience of writing, his medical assistant, her presence, allowing him to drink, the story of his bringing the whole village as refugees to the US? Rita, the initial tension, British, her husband, Mank’s mockery, the news of her husband missing in action? (His comfort when she received good news about her husband?) John Housman, prissy, pressure? Orson Welles on the phone calls?

11. The glimpses of Welles, his reputation, youth, Tom Burke and his impression of Welles? On the phone, the final visit, the tantrum?

12. The character of Joe, his relationship with his brother, his coming to persuade Mank not to proceed? Marion Davies and her arrival, the discussion about making the film or not? Mank, his wife, her pressure?

13. The ultimate result, the Oscar for best screenplay, Orson Welles and his acceptance, Mank and his acceptance – without Orson Welles?

14. The aftermath and the classic status of the film? Assessments and reassessments about Orson Welles and the screenplay, Mank and the screenplay, the contribution of each?