Very very mediocre. If it wasn't for this cast, I wouldn't have watched this movie at all. When I was young, I didn't understand movies and thought that David Fincher was synonymous with good movies. Now, watching the films made by this big Hollywood director, I can only describe it as a typical American self-obscenity. Although the film scolded the director + starring of "Citizen Kane" as worthless, but Kane's director, the narrative shot is full of artistic elements, and the shot of David Fincher's "Mank", even if you tell For a mentally retarded person, a camera is placed in front of each person's face, and when editing, whoever speaks will have his face cut. This is the scene of "Manke". A formal attempt to imitate "Kane" but in fact using blunt flashback subtitles to tell the next scene, chaotic, clueless, almost irrelevant.
Compared with the close connection between the clues and the clues of "Kane", and the scenes and scenes are also seamless, "Mank" is simply a poor imitator, no different from most domestic bad films. Look at the scene of "Kane" being taken away when it snows, the content of the three-layered set metaphor, and then look at the shallow focus shot of David Fincher's face, you can see a little connotation, it is really evil.
If you don't believe me, I found a group of people sitting in the hall in "Mank", talking about communism and Hitler's group scene. You have no idea, even just watching this boring drama, you can tell who is the protagonist.
David Fincher also deliberately paid homage to the long table scene from Citizen Kane. This time, I finally have a normal montage clip, and finally I have a dislocation clip where the sound and picture are out of sync, and the content of the expression is clearer. But compared to the short-focus lens of "Kane" with the long lens and the long table, the tension has been checked for hundreds of thousands of miles, which is really over the top.
For this kind of fragmented narrative that has almost no logic, it is not even formalism, it can only be said to be rotten. Formalism just looks at Nolan's fragmented narrative. Although the story has little content, it is excellent in form.
Because of the large amount of waste in the film, the characters are very vague, there are too many characters, and there is almost no introduction. Many people are only fleeting and have no practical significance. Perhaps it was through these characters that they portrayed the face of Hollywood at that time. But it's too bloated, and it's not what the movie should look like at all. The script can be said to be very general, but it is estimated that Americans seem to think that it is unfathomable, and in fact, even the protagonist is not well portrayed, let alone the supporting roles.
Netflix this year's Olympic film, also wants to imitate last year's "The Irishman", almost the same, biographies of famous people, a large number of characters, super lineup, well-known directors, think they can create greater glories? ridiculous. The king of Netflix's bad movie is really sitting here.
View more about Mank reviews
