-
Katrine 2022-04-21 09:02:46
In recent years, the movie with the highest threshold for watching movies is so high that it is difficult to digest it if you sink your heart and savor it carefully, but if you are a loyal fan of David Fincher, this movie will definitely make you fall in love with it. From the set props to the old-fashioned texture of black and white tones, returning to the Hollywood era at that time, the use of symmetrical composition, few words and no nonsense dialogue, montage of drunken fans in the bar,...
-
Jordi 2022-04-21 09:02:46
Not Fincher's best work, but still sincere and infectious. Not only lighting photography, but also the narrative structure pays homage to the original work. In choosing to be a biography of Mankell, Finch may have seen the real idealism in him, a man who is arrogant and domineering but tries his best to be friendly, a great and remarkable person. There's Herman J. Mankiewicz behind "Citizen Kane," and there's a David Fincher behind...
-
Pearlie 2022-04-21 09:02:46
50/100, the trivial incidents of shady splicing failed to restore Mankiewicz, not like "Citizen Kane" has a strong drive, nor like "The Social Network" to compose a suite of the times, but from the film itself to the content, it fully satirizes Hollywood. industrial system. Does David Fincher, who has never experienced it, love that era? As if he just loves his father. Efforts to do old is not a grand reminiscence, otherwise why would you use a 2.2:1 format? It's just a more personal paranoia,...
-
Sunny 2022-04-21 09:02:46
The threshold for watching movies is extremely high, and it is strongly recommended to watch Citizen Kane and behind the scenes of Citizen Kane first. The audiovisual level is worthy of the obsessive-compulsive Finch, which should be the most realistic digital photography that imitates the texture of film I have ever seen. The film grain has been done almost as if it were real, but unfortunately it still lacks the smooth texture of the emulsifier of the film image because the sharpness of...
-
Greyson 2022-04-21 09:02:46
I don't understand, but I'm blown...
-
Jasmin 2022-04-20 09:01:59
Formally intertextualizing with Citizen Kane is foolishness, and the repeated typewriter sound effects with the words flashback are simply incomparable to the time images presented in that masterpiece. At first, I thought it was a strict imitation of the old Hollywood format. After watching it for a while, I gradually realized that I just used the extravagance and exaggeration of the production level to fill the dry and boring script. This mediocre book is more of a knot than a long-cherished...
-
Marion 2022-04-20 09:01:59
92/100. I don't know Mankiewicz, and I haven't seen Citizen Kane, but David Fincher gave me a window into this eternal monument of cinematic history. Thanks to the perfect coordination of all aspects of the whole film, even though the first half has a large influx of unfamiliar characters, as I gradually immersed myself in this theme, I gradually felt a bright light in the dust of Hollywood of that era. Mankiewicz, he's an alcoholic, he's a geeky guy, maybe someone who can never be understood...
-
Stephon 2022-04-20 09:01:59
If the restoration of "The Other Side of the Wind" is a victory for "Netflix takes over the traditional author theory", then "Mank" means that the streaming media platform can also reproduce a "hyperreal" film through lens language and digital technology. Effect. It is full of exquisite archaism and the "Hollywood Modernism" structure that self-deprecates as "requiring the help of a roadmap", and it forms some kind of isomorphism and reference to some real events. Of note is a series of...
-
Melvin 2022-04-20 09:01:59
A super boring movie. I wanted to confront and exchange texts with Citizen Kane, but I failed. Formally, "Citizen Kane" guides the audience to piece together the truth, and "Mank" throws the audience into the abyss of the labyrinth. In terms of content, "Citizen Kane" changes postures to make people climax, "Mank" slaps people from head to toe, not a single hole is found, and finally a drop is squeezed out of the shriveled core, but there is fluid and no sperm....
-
Jaden 2022-04-20 09:01:59
Like "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood", this kind of film recalling film history is really ugly! ! Long and boring. white...
Mank Comments
-
Aurelio 2022-01-03 08:01:40
We need a Mank, but no longer need a "Mank"
The black-and-white film "Mank" directed by David Fincher has recently been officially launched on the streaming media platform Netflix. The director who has directed many masterpieces such as "Zodiac", "Seven Deadly Sins", "Fight Club" and "Social Network" has previously stated that "Mank" should...
-
Clarabelle 2022-04-19 09:02:22
A tedious and laborious viewing experience
Mank is to David Fincher what creed is to Nolan. That's right, the director and team's thought can be seen in every scene. There are indeed a few scenes that were very well shot and touched me. But put them together and it's a true Mexican jumping bean—a bland, albeit extremely neat and delicate...
-
[a drunken Herman Mankiewicz sits at the corner of a large dinner table at an elaborate costume party, hosted by William Randolph Hearst and Louis B. Mayer. Instead of tinking on a glass to get the guests' attention, he slashes his glass with a knife. Gasps fill the room as he rises from his seat]
Herman Mankiewicz: I've got a great idea for a picture, Louis. A picture I just know you're gonna love. It's a modern day version of Quixote!
[Mank realizes his voice echoes through the room, but he continues, circling the table full of silent guests]
Herman Mankiewicz: Now I know none of you read, but you know what it's about. A deluded old nobleman, who tilts at windmills. So how might we update this story?
Butler: [whispers to Hearst] Do you want me to get someone?
William Randolph Hearst: No.
Herman Mankiewicz: How about we make our Quixote... a newspaperman? Who else could make a living tilting at windmills? But that's not enough... no, he wants more than readership. He wants more than adulation, he wants love. So, he runs for public office, and because he's notably rich, he wins... no, w-w-w-wait a minute. Notably rich and powerful, can't win over an audience unless notably rich and powerful sees the error of his ways in the final reel. Notably rich and powerful and making no goddamn excuses for it is only admirable in real life. Isn't that right, Louis?
[Mayer glares at Mank as he drunkenly attempts to light his cigarette with the massive fireplace at the end of the room, unsuccessfully. Marion Davies takes a swig of her drink]
Herman Mankiewicz: So what do we do? Anybody? We give him ideals! Ideals that any dirt-poor, depression-weary audience can identify with. Our Quixote is against crooked trusts, he's for the eight-hour workday, fair income tax, better schools. Why, he's even for government ownership of railroads. And you know what we call those people?
Male Guest: Communists!
Female Guest: Anarchists!
Herman Mankiewicz: No, our Quixote, he's a two-fisted muckraker. In fact, someone predicts that he will one day win the presidency and bring about, get this...
[laughing uncontrollably]
Herman Mankiewicz: ... a socialist revolution!
Louis B. Mayer: What a bunch of bullshit.
Herman Mankiewicz: Is it? Tell him, Willie. Tell him.
[Silence]
Herman Mankiewicz: Upton Sinclair used exactly those words to describe a young William Randolph Hearst.
Louis B. Mayer: [leaping from his seat] You miserable bastard!
Herman Mankiewicz: [bowing] How do you do?
[Some guests begin to leave the room, but Hearst's and Mayer's eyes stay on Mank]
Herman Mankiewicz: Our Quixote, he hungers, he thirsts, he lusts for the voters to love him, love him enough to make him president, but they won't. And they don't. How do you suppose that could happen? Could it be because, in their hearts, they know he values power over people?
[More guests leave as Mank approaches Hearst, still seated]
Herman Mankiewicz: Disillusioned in Congress, he authors not one single piece of legislation in two terms. Can you believe that? That'll take some writing. Placed in nomination for president... it's too radical for the boys in the back, his bid goes nowhere! But we're doing something. We're building sympathy!
[Even more guests leave]
Herman Mankiewicz: Rejected, he flees to lotus land, where his faithful troll, Sancho, has prepared a mythical kingdom for...
[Mank eyes Davies, stopping himself totally]
Herman Mankiewicz: Wait a minute. I forgot the love interest! Her name: Dulcinea.
[Every remaining head in the room turns to Davies]
Herman Mankiewicz: Funny, adventurous, smarter than she acts. Ah, she's a... she's a showgirl! Beneath his social stratum, but that's okay because true love on the big screens, we all know is blind. And she... well, she loves him, too. So he takes her away to his m-mythical kingdom,
[to butler]
Herman Mankiewicz: can I get a bicarb?
[back to the guests]
Herman Mankiewicz: Now, along comes nemesis, that's Greek for any guy in a black hat, nemesis runs for governor, and he's a shoo-in to win. Why?
[points to Hearst]
Herman Mankiewicz: Because he's EXACTLY what our Don used to be! An idealist, ya get it? And not only that, nemesis is the same guy who once predicted that our Quixote would one day preside over a socialist revolution. Our Quixote looks into the mirror of his youth and decides to break this glass, a maddening reminder of who he once was. Assisted by his faithful Sancho
[pointing to Mayer]
Herman Mankiewicz: and armed w-with all the black magic at his command, he does just this. Destroying, in the process, not one man... but two.
[Hearst is clearly furious, but maintains his composure]
Herman Mankiewicz: Well, what do ya think, Louis? Hm? Do ya think it'll play?
[Mank finally belches onto the floor. Any guest who hasn't already left does so]
Herman Mankiewicz: Don't worry, folks. The white wine came up with the fish!
-
Herman Mankiewicz: Irving, you are a literate man. You know the difference between communism and socialism. In socialism, everyone shares the wealth. In communism, everyone shares the poverty.
