Search
Search results
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated In Search of Darkness (2019) in Movies
Aug 19, 2020
The 80's Were The Best
In Search of Darkness- is a excellent horror documentary that goes through the 80's and takes about horror movies that were released each year and how their impacted today's horror. In this 4hr and 30min documentary it takes its time which each year and the movies that their talked about. I got to mention the interviews. Horror Icons like: Tom Atkins, John Carpenter, Doug Bradley, Jeffrey Combs, Joe Dante, Kane Hodder, Tom Holland, Heather Langenkamp, Don Mancini, Bill Moseley and more. I love the interviews and the movies that their talk about, their have the love for them, even though some were bad their still liked them. Thanks to these horror movies we have these modern horror movies. The 80's inspered these modern horror films. And you can tell by just watching a mordern horror film. The 80's were the best times for horror films. Their was so much that came out in 80's. I highly recordmend watching this documentary.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated In Search of Darkness (2019) in Movies
Aug 12, 2020
In short, In Search of Darkness is a must watch for any horror fan.
It's 4+ hour runtime is a gushing love letter to 80s horror, covering the decade year by year, with interviews from an impressive cast of genre icons - John Carpenter, Larry Cohen, Joe Dante, Barbara Crampton, Doug Bradley, Tom Atkins, Lori Cardille, Nick Castle, Jeffrey Combs, Kane Hodder, Tom Holland, Heather Langenkamp, Don Mancini, Cassandra Peterson, Caroline Williams, Brian Yuzner, and many more!
The documentary doesn't break any new ground, truth be told, but it's hard to not to appreciate all of these films being covered in one place. The sheer amount of titles discussed is pretty vast.
It's put together nicely as well. Old grainy film trailers tend to set the tone of each entry, but all of the footage shown is crystal clear and HD. The graphics are eye catching, with classic one sheets on display throughout, and it's all set too a great synth soundtrack courtesy of Weary Pines.
Really worth checking out - I split my viewing over a few nights and was honestly gutted when I had none left to watch. Director David A. Weiner did a great job with this documentary, and has a second one coming next year entitled In Search of Tomorrow, focusing on the Sci-Fi films of the 80s, and I can't wait to see it!
It's 4+ hour runtime is a gushing love letter to 80s horror, covering the decade year by year, with interviews from an impressive cast of genre icons - John Carpenter, Larry Cohen, Joe Dante, Barbara Crampton, Doug Bradley, Tom Atkins, Lori Cardille, Nick Castle, Jeffrey Combs, Kane Hodder, Tom Holland, Heather Langenkamp, Don Mancini, Cassandra Peterson, Caroline Williams, Brian Yuzner, and many more!
The documentary doesn't break any new ground, truth be told, but it's hard to not to appreciate all of these films being covered in one place. The sheer amount of titles discussed is pretty vast.
It's put together nicely as well. Old grainy film trailers tend to set the tone of each entry, but all of the footage shown is crystal clear and HD. The graphics are eye catching, with classic one sheets on display throughout, and it's all set too a great synth soundtrack courtesy of Weary Pines.
Really worth checking out - I split my viewing over a few nights and was honestly gutted when I had none left to watch. Director David A. Weiner did a great job with this documentary, and has a second one coming next year entitled In Search of Tomorrow, focusing on the Sci-Fi films of the 80s, and I can't wait to see it!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Mank (2020) in Movies
Jan 7, 2021
Good companion piece to CITIZEN KANE
Orson Welles’ 1941 masterpiece CITIZEN KANE is truly a remarkable work of art (especially for the time it was created) and it regularly lands in either the #1 or #2 spot on my list of all-time favorite films (battling back and forth with THE GODFATHER - the one that ends up at #1 is usually the one I have watched most recently), so I am a sucker for films that are about (or around) the making of this classic.
And…the Netflix film MANK does not disappoint in this regard.
Starring Oscar winning actor Gary Oldman (he won the Oscar for portraying Sir Winston Churchill in DARKEST HOUR), Mank tells the tale of the writing of the screenplay of CITIZEN KANE by screenwriter Herman Mankiewicz. It is an intriguing story of a self-destructive, alcoholic artist (is there any other kind in this kind of film) that (ultimately) produces one of the best scripts in Hollywood history, despite (or maybe because of) his condition and the people he interacts with along the way.
Directed by David Fincher (FIGHT CLUB) - who is one of my favorite Directors working today - MANK starts slow but brews to a satisfying conclusion as Fincher focuses on the man and the relationships he has with the people around him, rather than the circumstances, which then draws to a forceful conclusion.
Gary Oldman is, of course, stellar as Herman “Mank” Mankiewicz, the writer at the center of the story. This film hinges on this performance as the titular Mank is in almost every scene of this film - and at the beginning I was worried that Fincher was going to let Oldman revert to his “hammy” ways (a very real possibility with Oldman if he is left unchecked by a Director), but Fincher reels Oldman in just enough for him to bring a portrait of a troubled man, who has sold his soul to work and alcohol. This character needs to find that soul if he is to succeed. Since Mank won the Oscar for his screenplay - and I’ve already stated that I think the CITIZEN KANE screenplay is one of the best written of all time - you know how it will turn out, but it is fascinating (and satisfying) to watch Oldman on this journey.
Fincher, of course, is smart enough to surround Oldman with some very good Supporting Actors, most notably the always evil Charles Dance (Tywin Lannister on GAME OF THRONES) as William Randolph Hearst (the inspiration for Charles Foster Kane). Dance spends most of the film observing Mank but in the final “confrontation” scene between the two, the screen sparkles as two wonderful thespians throw down.
Others in the Supporting cast - like Lilly Collins, Tom Burke (as Orson Welles), Jamie McShane and, especially Arliss Howard (as Louis B. Mayer) bring heft and the ability to go “toe to toe” with Oldman, not a small task.
Special notice has to be made of the work of Amanda Seyfried as Marion Davies - Hearst’s mistress and a character that is used as a “throw away toy” in Citizen Kane. Davis and Mank form an interesting bond and the platonic chemistry between Seyfried and Oldman is strong. I gotta admit that when Seyfried first burst on the scene in such films as MAMA MIA and MEAN GIRLS, I figured she was just the “pretty young Rom-Com girl of the time” and would come and go quickly, but she has rounded into a very impressive actress and I can unequivocally state that I was wrong about her. She can act with the best of them.
The Cinematography by Erik Messerschmidt is also a very important part of this film - as he (and Fincher) attempt to recreate in this film the look/feel of CITIZEN KANE and they pull this off very, very well.
If you can get through the slow start of the film - and if you can stomach a protagonist that is not a very nice person in most of this film, than you’ll be rewarded by a rich film experience.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And…the Netflix film MANK does not disappoint in this regard.
Starring Oscar winning actor Gary Oldman (he won the Oscar for portraying Sir Winston Churchill in DARKEST HOUR), Mank tells the tale of the writing of the screenplay of CITIZEN KANE by screenwriter Herman Mankiewicz. It is an intriguing story of a self-destructive, alcoholic artist (is there any other kind in this kind of film) that (ultimately) produces one of the best scripts in Hollywood history, despite (or maybe because of) his condition and the people he interacts with along the way.
Directed by David Fincher (FIGHT CLUB) - who is one of my favorite Directors working today - MANK starts slow but brews to a satisfying conclusion as Fincher focuses on the man and the relationships he has with the people around him, rather than the circumstances, which then draws to a forceful conclusion.
Gary Oldman is, of course, stellar as Herman “Mank” Mankiewicz, the writer at the center of the story. This film hinges on this performance as the titular Mank is in almost every scene of this film - and at the beginning I was worried that Fincher was going to let Oldman revert to his “hammy” ways (a very real possibility with Oldman if he is left unchecked by a Director), but Fincher reels Oldman in just enough for him to bring a portrait of a troubled man, who has sold his soul to work and alcohol. This character needs to find that soul if he is to succeed. Since Mank won the Oscar for his screenplay - and I’ve already stated that I think the CITIZEN KANE screenplay is one of the best written of all time - you know how it will turn out, but it is fascinating (and satisfying) to watch Oldman on this journey.
Fincher, of course, is smart enough to surround Oldman with some very good Supporting Actors, most notably the always evil Charles Dance (Tywin Lannister on GAME OF THRONES) as William Randolph Hearst (the inspiration for Charles Foster Kane). Dance spends most of the film observing Mank but in the final “confrontation” scene between the two, the screen sparkles as two wonderful thespians throw down.
Others in the Supporting cast - like Lilly Collins, Tom Burke (as Orson Welles), Jamie McShane and, especially Arliss Howard (as Louis B. Mayer) bring heft and the ability to go “toe to toe” with Oldman, not a small task.
Special notice has to be made of the work of Amanda Seyfried as Marion Davies - Hearst’s mistress and a character that is used as a “throw away toy” in Citizen Kane. Davis and Mank form an interesting bond and the platonic chemistry between Seyfried and Oldman is strong. I gotta admit that when Seyfried first burst on the scene in such films as MAMA MIA and MEAN GIRLS, I figured she was just the “pretty young Rom-Com girl of the time” and would come and go quickly, but she has rounded into a very impressive actress and I can unequivocally state that I was wrong about her. She can act with the best of them.
The Cinematography by Erik Messerschmidt is also a very important part of this film - as he (and Fincher) attempt to recreate in this film the look/feel of CITIZEN KANE and they pull this off very, very well.
If you can get through the slow start of the film - and if you can stomach a protagonist that is not a very nice person in most of this film, than you’ll be rewarded by a rich film experience.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Dean (6921 KP) rated the Xbox One version of Friday the 13th : The Game in Video Games
Feb 16, 2019 (Updated Feb 16, 2019)
Good graphics (2 more)
Shows the love for the films
Easy to play
So young, so pretty.... Kill them all Jason!
A very good game based on the film franchise that came about via the kickstarter website. You can tell this was created by fans of the franchise, one of the biggest backers is a playable character in the game. The attention to detail is great. I've watched the first 4 films again recently and the layouts for the maps are the same as the films. Little details like the look of the cabins and interiors are true to the films as well.
I've read that Kane Hodder did some motion capture for the Jason character and SFX expert Tom Savini had an input on some of the kills.
The game is simple survive and try to escape as a counsellor or kill them all as Jason. The graphics are good with the moonlight and thunderstorms at night looking realistic. As with the film the music adds great tension, even better on surround sound during the storm!
There are a few offline challenges, closely taken from the film scenarios. Also a virtual cabin which acts as a museum of sorts with details about the films.
There are a couple of flaws, wait times for a lobby can be annoying, quitters, time it takes to level up and unlock some items. Also sometimes getting stuck on scenery when shifting. All these are quite minor though.
Overall you can sense the love and detail that has gone into this game, a great achievement for a crowd funded venture. Time to go camping... Think I'll take this old hockey mask with me.
I've read that Kane Hodder did some motion capture for the Jason character and SFX expert Tom Savini had an input on some of the kills.
The game is simple survive and try to escape as a counsellor or kill them all as Jason. The graphics are good with the moonlight and thunderstorms at night looking realistic. As with the film the music adds great tension, even better on surround sound during the storm!
There are a few offline challenges, closely taken from the film scenarios. Also a virtual cabin which acts as a museum of sorts with details about the films.
There are a couple of flaws, wait times for a lobby can be annoying, quitters, time it takes to level up and unlock some items. Also sometimes getting stuck on scenery when shifting. All these are quite minor though.
Overall you can sense the love and detail that has gone into this game, a great achievement for a crowd funded venture. Time to go camping... Think I'll take this old hockey mask with me.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Avengers (2012) in Movies
Sep 17, 2020
The first Avengers movie is a real treat - it was at the time of the release and it is now. In 2012, the culmination of the first handful of MCU movies was just glorious, seeing all these heroes together for the first time. Now in 2020, we've become accustomed to that, spoilt by the more recent Infinity War and Endgame, it's easy to forget just how special Avengers is in it's comparative humbleness, especially for people who grew up reading these stories in comic books.
The main bulk of the cast, comprised of Robert Downey Jr, Chris Hemsworth, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Mark Ruffalo (in his first appearance as Bruce Banner/Hulk), Samuel L. Jackson, and Jeremy Renner all bounce off of each other so naturally. The balance of dramatic moments and back and forth humour on display laid the blueprint for many MCU films to come, most notably Guardians of the Galaxy.
Tom Hiddleston steps up his game from the first Thor film and gives us an instantly iconic villain in Loki, one that has only been rivalled since by Thanos in terms of character development and story.
The set pieces are fantastic as well, most memorably, the Hulk and Thor battle on the Helicarrier, and of course the huge and ridiculous final show down in Manhattan, and the CGI still looks great 8 years down the line. A big event movie such as this was only made possible by introducing the individual characters slowly over a number of years, and it's proof that patience pays off. A formula that Marvel Studios have since mastered.
I know that none of these films are The Shawshank Redemption or Citizen Kane, but fuck me, films like Avengers Assemble (it's UK title) are so stupidly entertaining, and everything a kid who grew up reading comics could possibly want.
The main bulk of the cast, comprised of Robert Downey Jr, Chris Hemsworth, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Mark Ruffalo (in his first appearance as Bruce Banner/Hulk), Samuel L. Jackson, and Jeremy Renner all bounce off of each other so naturally. The balance of dramatic moments and back and forth humour on display laid the blueprint for many MCU films to come, most notably Guardians of the Galaxy.
Tom Hiddleston steps up his game from the first Thor film and gives us an instantly iconic villain in Loki, one that has only been rivalled since by Thanos in terms of character development and story.
The set pieces are fantastic as well, most memorably, the Hulk and Thor battle on the Helicarrier, and of course the huge and ridiculous final show down in Manhattan, and the CGI still looks great 8 years down the line. A big event movie such as this was only made possible by introducing the individual characters slowly over a number of years, and it's proof that patience pays off. A formula that Marvel Studios have since mastered.
I know that none of these films are The Shawshank Redemption or Citizen Kane, but fuck me, films like Avengers Assemble (it's UK title) are so stupidly entertaining, and everything a kid who grew up reading comics could possibly want.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Alien (1979) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: It would be fair to say when this came out it was brilliant and stand alone on the type of film. Now the story has been copied, pinched from and used to the death. This paved the way for the truly trapped horror films because the space mission means it’s the ship of nothing. The twist that comes half way through offers a surprise and of cause the mood of the film changes drastically when the alien makes its first appearance. (10/10)
Actor Review: Sigourney Weaver – Ripley, just part of the crew really but steps up when the alien starts wreaking havoc. In a role that will be remembered as one of the best and most iconic in sci-fi history this performance will never be forgotten. Breakout Performance Award, Iconic Performance Award, Star Performance Award (10/10)
ripley
Actor Review: Tom Skerritt – Captain Dallas puts the team together to investigate the planet but has to step up when they don’t come back alone. Good performance showing leadership in time of panic. (9/10)
Actor Review: Ian Holm – Ash the science officer who is very distant as well as keeping a big secret from the rest of the crew. Good performance from Holm that opened a door for a twist in films that people actually have to think about. (9/10)
holm
Actor Review: John Hurt – Kane gets a creature stuck on his face before looking like making a full recovery only to make film history. This character has one of the most iconic sci-fi horror deaths in history. Unluckiest Character Award (9/10)
hurt
Director Review: Ridley Scott – Creates a world that no one saw coming and shows brilliant direction to create atmosphere throughout. (10/10)
Horror: There is no escape from a creature you have never met. (10/10)
Sci-Fi: Redefines the sci-fi genre to use true horror. (10/10)
Special Effects: Stunning special effects that even after 30 plus years still haven’t dated. (10/10)
Believability: We don’t know what is really in space until we go deeper enough. (5/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Settings: When it comes to horror you need great location isolation is the best as we know the characters have nowhere to run, this offers that making the setting perfect. (10/10)
Suggestion: Most films can come and go and gain a few fans, this is not one of them it is one of the first films people will say when you say sci-fi. This makes it a must watch and when you do you will be reward but I expect most of you have already seen it so watch it again. (Watch)
Best Part: Alien first reveal.
Kill Of The Film: Kane
Trivia: The original title was Space Beast.
Oscar Chances: Won for Best Effects.
Chances of Sequel: Has three direct sequels and a couple of versus films.
Overall: Masterpiece classic must see
https://moviesreview101.com/2014/02/12/alien-1979/
Actor Review: Sigourney Weaver – Ripley, just part of the crew really but steps up when the alien starts wreaking havoc. In a role that will be remembered as one of the best and most iconic in sci-fi history this performance will never be forgotten. Breakout Performance Award, Iconic Performance Award, Star Performance Award (10/10)
ripley
Actor Review: Tom Skerritt – Captain Dallas puts the team together to investigate the planet but has to step up when they don’t come back alone. Good performance showing leadership in time of panic. (9/10)
Actor Review: Ian Holm – Ash the science officer who is very distant as well as keeping a big secret from the rest of the crew. Good performance from Holm that opened a door for a twist in films that people actually have to think about. (9/10)
holm
Actor Review: John Hurt – Kane gets a creature stuck on his face before looking like making a full recovery only to make film history. This character has one of the most iconic sci-fi horror deaths in history. Unluckiest Character Award (9/10)
hurt
Director Review: Ridley Scott – Creates a world that no one saw coming and shows brilliant direction to create atmosphere throughout. (10/10)
Horror: There is no escape from a creature you have never met. (10/10)
Sci-Fi: Redefines the sci-fi genre to use true horror. (10/10)
Special Effects: Stunning special effects that even after 30 plus years still haven’t dated. (10/10)
Believability: We don’t know what is really in space until we go deeper enough. (5/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Settings: When it comes to horror you need great location isolation is the best as we know the characters have nowhere to run, this offers that making the setting perfect. (10/10)
Suggestion: Most films can come and go and gain a few fans, this is not one of them it is one of the first films people will say when you say sci-fi. This makes it a must watch and when you do you will be reward but I expect most of you have already seen it so watch it again. (Watch)
Best Part: Alien first reveal.
Kill Of The Film: Kane
Trivia: The original title was Space Beast.
Oscar Chances: Won for Best Effects.
Chances of Sequel: Has three direct sequels and a couple of versus films.
Overall: Masterpiece classic must see
https://moviesreview101.com/2014/02/12/alien-1979/
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Mank (2020) in Movies
Dec 10, 2020
Cinematography - glorious to look at (1 more)
A fabulous ensemble cast, with Oldham, Seyfried, Arliss and Dance excelling
"Mank" is a biopic slice of the career of Herman Jacob Mankiewicz (Gary Oldman), the Hollywood screenwriter who was the pen behind what is regularly voted by critics as being the greatest movie of all time - "Citizen Kane". "Citizen Kane" was written in 1940 (and released the following year) and much of the action in "Mank" takes place in a retreat in the Mojave desert when Mank, crippled by a full-cast on the leg, has been 'sent' by Orson Welles (Tom Burke) to complete the screenplay without alcohol and other worldly distractions. Helping administer to his writing and care needs are English typist Rita Alexander (Lily Collins) and carer Fraulein Freda (Monika Gossmann). However, although Mank produces brilliant stuff, his speed of progress exasperates his 'minder' and editor John Houseman (Sam Troughton). (Yes, THAT John Houseman, the actor.)
In developing the story, we continuously flash-back six years - - nicely indicated by typed 'script notes' - - to 1934 where Mank is working at MGM studios for Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) and mixing in the circles of millionaire publisher William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance) and his glamorous young wife, actress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried). Allegedly, the "Citizen Kane" script was based on Hearst. But what souring of the relationship could have led to such a stinging betrayal during those six years?
Mank has an embarrassment of acting riches. Mankiewicz is a fascinating character: charismatic, reckless, passionate and the definition of a loose cannon. Basically, a dream for a great actor to portray. And Gary Oldham IS a great actor. After doing Churchill in "Darkest Hour", he here turns in a magnificent performance as the alcoholic writer. Never more so than in a furious tirade at a dinner table late in the film, which will likely be the equivalent to the Churchill "tiger" speech come Oscar time. Surely, there's a Best Actor nomination there?
Equally impressive though are some of the supporting cast.
- Tom Burke - so good as TV's "Strike" - gives a fine impersonation of the great Orson Welles: full of confidence and swagger. It's only a cameo role, but he genuinely 'feels' like the young Welles.
- Amanda Seyfried: It took me almost half of the film to recognize her as Marion Davies, and her performance is pitch perfect - the best of her career in my view, and again Oscar-worthy.
- Arliss Howard for me almost steals the show as the megalomaniac Mayer: his introduction to Mank's brother Joe (Tom Pelphrey) has a memorable "walk with me" walkthrough of the studio with Mayer preaching on the real meaning of MGM and the movies in general. Breathtakingly good.
- But - I said "nearly steals the show".... the guy who made off with it in a swag-bag for me was our own Charles Dance as Hearst. Quietly impressive throughout, he just completely nails it with his "organ-grinder's monkey" speech towards the end of the movie. Probably my favourite monologue of 2020. Chilling. I'd really like to see Dance get a Supporting Actor nomination for this.
The screenplay was originally written by director David Fincher's late father Jack. Jack Fincher died in 2002, and this project has literally been decades in the planning. Mankiewicz has a caustic turn of phrase, and there are laugh-out lines of dialogue scattered throughout the script. "Write hard, aim low" implores Houseman at one point. And my personal favourite: Mank's puncturing of the irony that the Screen Writers Guild has been formed without an apostrophe! A huge LOL!
Aside from the witty dialogue, the script has a nuance to the storytelling that continually surprises. A revelation from Freda about Mank's philanthropic tendencies brings you up short in your face-value impression of his character. And the drivers that engineer the rift between Mankiewicz and Hearst - based around the story of the (fictional) director Shelly Metcalf (Jamie McShane) - are not slapped in your face, but elegantly slipped into your subconscious.
In addition, certain aspects are frustratingly withheld from you. Mank's long-suffering wife (a definition of the phrase) Sara (Tuppence Middleton) only occasionally comes into focus. The only reference to his kids are a crash in the background as they "remodel" the family home. Is the charismatic Mank a faithful husband or a philanderer? Is the relationship with Rita Alexander just professional and platonic (you assume so), or is there more going on? There's a tension there in the storytelling that never quite gets resolved: and that's a good thing.
Mank also has an embarrassment of technical riches. Even from the opening titles, you get the impression that this is a work of genius. All in black and white, and with the appearance of 40's titling, they scroll majestically in the sky and then - after "Charles Dance" - effortlessly scroll down to the desert highway. It's evidence of an attention to detail perhaps forced by lockdown. ("MUM - I'm bored". "Go up to your room and do some more work on that movie then".)
It's deliciously modern, yet retro. I love the fact that the cross-reel "circle" cue-marks appear so prominently... the indicators that the projectionist needs to spin up the next reel. I think they are still used in most modern films, but not as noticeably as in the old films... and this one!
A key contributor to the movie is cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt. Everything looks just BEAUTIFUL, and it is now a big regret that I didn't go to watch this on the big screen after all. Surely there will be a cinematography Oscar nomination for this one. Unbelievably, this is Messerschmidt's debut feature as director of cinematography!
Elsewhere, you can imagine multiple other technical Oscar noms. The tight and effective editing is by Kirk Baxter. And the combination of the glorious production design (Donald Graham Burt) and the costume design (Trish Summerville) make the movie emanate the same nostalgia for Hollywood as did last year's "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood".... albeit set forty years earlier. Even the music (by the regular team of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross) might get nominated, since I had to go back and check that it actually HAD music at all: it's subtly unobtrusive and effective.
The only area I had any issue with here was the sound mixing, since I had trouble picking up some of the dialogue.
Although I can gush about this movie as a technical work of art, I'm going to hold off a 10* review on this one. For one reason only. I just didn't feel 100% engaged with the story (at least with a first watch). The illustrious Mrs Movie Man summed it up with the phrase "I just didn't care enough what happened to any of the characters". I think though that this one is sufficiently subtle and cerebral that it deserves another watch.
Will it win Oscars. Yes, for sure. Hell, I would like to put a bet on that "Mank" will top the list of the "most nominations" when they are announced. (Hollywood likes nothing more than a navel-gazing look at its history of course). And an obvious nomination here will be David Fincher for Best Director. But, for me, this falls into a similar bucket as that other black and white multi-Oscar winner of two year's ago "Roma". It's glorious to look at; brilliantly directed; but not a movie I would choose to readily reach for to repeatedly watch again.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/10/mank-divines-for-oscar-gold-in-a-sea-of-pyrites/. Thanks.)
In developing the story, we continuously flash-back six years - - nicely indicated by typed 'script notes' - - to 1934 where Mank is working at MGM studios for Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) and mixing in the circles of millionaire publisher William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance) and his glamorous young wife, actress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried). Allegedly, the "Citizen Kane" script was based on Hearst. But what souring of the relationship could have led to such a stinging betrayal during those six years?
Mank has an embarrassment of acting riches. Mankiewicz is a fascinating character: charismatic, reckless, passionate and the definition of a loose cannon. Basically, a dream for a great actor to portray. And Gary Oldham IS a great actor. After doing Churchill in "Darkest Hour", he here turns in a magnificent performance as the alcoholic writer. Never more so than in a furious tirade at a dinner table late in the film, which will likely be the equivalent to the Churchill "tiger" speech come Oscar time. Surely, there's a Best Actor nomination there?
Equally impressive though are some of the supporting cast.
- Tom Burke - so good as TV's "Strike" - gives a fine impersonation of the great Orson Welles: full of confidence and swagger. It's only a cameo role, but he genuinely 'feels' like the young Welles.
- Amanda Seyfried: It took me almost half of the film to recognize her as Marion Davies, and her performance is pitch perfect - the best of her career in my view, and again Oscar-worthy.
- Arliss Howard for me almost steals the show as the megalomaniac Mayer: his introduction to Mank's brother Joe (Tom Pelphrey) has a memorable "walk with me" walkthrough of the studio with Mayer preaching on the real meaning of MGM and the movies in general. Breathtakingly good.
- But - I said "nearly steals the show".... the guy who made off with it in a swag-bag for me was our own Charles Dance as Hearst. Quietly impressive throughout, he just completely nails it with his "organ-grinder's monkey" speech towards the end of the movie. Probably my favourite monologue of 2020. Chilling. I'd really like to see Dance get a Supporting Actor nomination for this.
The screenplay was originally written by director David Fincher's late father Jack. Jack Fincher died in 2002, and this project has literally been decades in the planning. Mankiewicz has a caustic turn of phrase, and there are laugh-out lines of dialogue scattered throughout the script. "Write hard, aim low" implores Houseman at one point. And my personal favourite: Mank's puncturing of the irony that the Screen Writers Guild has been formed without an apostrophe! A huge LOL!
Aside from the witty dialogue, the script has a nuance to the storytelling that continually surprises. A revelation from Freda about Mank's philanthropic tendencies brings you up short in your face-value impression of his character. And the drivers that engineer the rift between Mankiewicz and Hearst - based around the story of the (fictional) director Shelly Metcalf (Jamie McShane) - are not slapped in your face, but elegantly slipped into your subconscious.
In addition, certain aspects are frustratingly withheld from you. Mank's long-suffering wife (a definition of the phrase) Sara (Tuppence Middleton) only occasionally comes into focus. The only reference to his kids are a crash in the background as they "remodel" the family home. Is the charismatic Mank a faithful husband or a philanderer? Is the relationship with Rita Alexander just professional and platonic (you assume so), or is there more going on? There's a tension there in the storytelling that never quite gets resolved: and that's a good thing.
Mank also has an embarrassment of technical riches. Even from the opening titles, you get the impression that this is a work of genius. All in black and white, and with the appearance of 40's titling, they scroll majestically in the sky and then - after "Charles Dance" - effortlessly scroll down to the desert highway. It's evidence of an attention to detail perhaps forced by lockdown. ("MUM - I'm bored". "Go up to your room and do some more work on that movie then".)
It's deliciously modern, yet retro. I love the fact that the cross-reel "circle" cue-marks appear so prominently... the indicators that the projectionist needs to spin up the next reel. I think they are still used in most modern films, but not as noticeably as in the old films... and this one!
A key contributor to the movie is cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt. Everything looks just BEAUTIFUL, and it is now a big regret that I didn't go to watch this on the big screen after all. Surely there will be a cinematography Oscar nomination for this one. Unbelievably, this is Messerschmidt's debut feature as director of cinematography!
Elsewhere, you can imagine multiple other technical Oscar noms. The tight and effective editing is by Kirk Baxter. And the combination of the glorious production design (Donald Graham Burt) and the costume design (Trish Summerville) make the movie emanate the same nostalgia for Hollywood as did last year's "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood".... albeit set forty years earlier. Even the music (by the regular team of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross) might get nominated, since I had to go back and check that it actually HAD music at all: it's subtly unobtrusive and effective.
The only area I had any issue with here was the sound mixing, since I had trouble picking up some of the dialogue.
Although I can gush about this movie as a technical work of art, I'm going to hold off a 10* review on this one. For one reason only. I just didn't feel 100% engaged with the story (at least with a first watch). The illustrious Mrs Movie Man summed it up with the phrase "I just didn't care enough what happened to any of the characters". I think though that this one is sufficiently subtle and cerebral that it deserves another watch.
Will it win Oscars. Yes, for sure. Hell, I would like to put a bet on that "Mank" will top the list of the "most nominations" when they are announced. (Hollywood likes nothing more than a navel-gazing look at its history of course). And an obvious nomination here will be David Fincher for Best Director. But, for me, this falls into a similar bucket as that other black and white multi-Oscar winner of two year's ago "Roma". It's glorious to look at; brilliantly directed; but not a movie I would choose to readily reach for to repeatedly watch again.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/10/mank-divines-for-oscar-gold-in-a-sea-of-pyrites/. Thanks.)
