Mank | Why David Fincher Embraced Old Hollywood Artifice

[@Andy97K]

Still trying to wrap my head around as to how this thing got made. It's a surreal experience to say the least, and although I can see a lot of negative comments below this video - Mank is really a unique piece of work and demands your attention and knowledge on the subject and period. I personally found it very rewarding, both in style and content. Great video as always!

[@sahidshaikh1601]

I actually really like this movie

[@TheDiscardedImage]

I didn't mention it, but deserves credit - the Trent Reznor/Atticus Ross score. The Bernard Herrmann style pieces were one thing, tonally different from anything they had done before, and more than just a pastiche. But I was shocked they did the big band jazz stuff too. More power to them.

[@bhotaling1]

Welles is dressed as The Shadow in the Hospital - a character he played on Radio

[@WayTooClose]

Mank is fantastic (watch Citizen Kane first). Fincher's best movie since Fight Club and probably the best of last year. Thanks for another great video.

[@loveforeignaccents]

Love his work on Mindhunter and Gone Girl, just outstanding!!

[@JacksKraftt]

One of those films you’ll have chills the whole time, such an amazing motion picture.

[@cinemaunitestheworld]

Great review! What a picture. I loved especially the sound design; mono one-channel sound echoed through the surrounds to make it sound like it would have in a 1940's theater.

[@lw3646]

The film is wall to wall music though, a 1930s film never did that, its such an obvious sign you're watching a modern film.

[@daverizz]

Great video as usual. Haven't watched Mank yet, but been meaning to. Might watch that, and then Benjamin Button right after? See if I feel that contrast in Fincher's hand?

[@dianekurtz7238]

I thoroughly LOVE this movie and would say I’m obsessed with it! So happy to come across this video-very well done.

[@MoreMovies4u]

Great video. Very interesting content.

[@javiernavas8120]

definitely have a better understanding of Mank. thanks

[@Glimax]

Worst Fincher film? Don't know how to feel about it yet, i will rewatch it for sure.

[@pdzombie1906]

I guess they haven't seen Benjamin Gump... I mean Button

[@Jimmy1982Playlists]

The whole premise that Orson Welles didn't have much of anything to do with writing _Citizen Kane,_ and was a credit-stealer, is total rubbish, and has been thoroughly debunked. Other than that, it's beautifully made. 😆 ...and I usually love Fincher's work.

[@xunkownedx]

The worse Fincher film (and it's not even a bad film by any means because all his movies are very good) is arguably "Panic Room".

[@murdockfiles9406]

I enjoyed the film, but it's honestly disappointing to see Fincher drag Orson Welles' name through the mud

[@TheDiscardedImage]

I don't really think he did. He's barely in it. He said his father's first draft was a lot more inspired by Pauline Kael's Welles takedown, 'Raising Kane' - but not the eventual film. He obviously could have spent more time detailing Welles' contribution to the script - but that's not really what the film was about.

[@rsfilmdiscussionchannel4168]

It's less of a dragging him through the mud and more of a "Yeah Welles made the movie, but give Mankowitz some credit too!"

[@altairglendeocampo]

hope the script was engaging...

[@Jimmy1982Playlists]

I _do_ think Fincher portrays this as how events truly happened, unfortunately. The whole premise that Orson Welles didn't have much of anything to do with writing _Citizen Kane,_ and was a credit-stealer, is total rubbish, and has been thoroughly debunked. Other than that, it's beautifully made. 😆 ...and I usually love Fincher's work. If it was made clear that this was an incredibly biased portrait of events, it might be ok, but Fincher's father wrote a hit piece on Welles (how original!) But I do love your channel/analysis!

[@adikravets3632]

It a good movie! If you are a cinema lover and especially if you a Orson Welles fan and just curious to find out more about the making of "Kane" it a great movie to watch especially since it focuses on the other guy that wrote it and it interesting. At least for someone who really likes to know to about those things

[@leonardosomma4196]

Clever trick the movie uses. Most of the movie despite the old Hollywood presentation is shot on a modern aspect ratio. It's only at the end when we see the 1942 Oscars and Mank giving his acceptance speech (which he really did give) that it uses an aspect ratio accurate to the time, as if this is real historical footage. This is clever because in Citizen Kane the opening of the movie is Kane's obituary in the news laying out all the major events in his life which are all factual. The rest of the movie however is the subjective perspective of the different characters' flashbacks and how they remember these events with their accounts being potentially unreliable. Mank doing something similar where only the ending is what we know as factually true whilst the rest of the film Is just a screenplay being written from Mark's own half-truth POV for dramatic effect shows how like the attempt to know more about Kane, in trying to learn more about the movie's true writer, we've only come away knowing even less.

[@aza7040]

Great video! Very insightful. I think many people focused on the debate over the screenplay credit and missed the point. It seems to me that Fincher's films are often misinterpreted and finally better appreciated over time.

[@lw3646]

The cigarette burns looked digital and fake. He should have shot it on film if he really was serious about creating a 1930s film look 🎥 Also 1930s films weren't wall to wall music either like today's. It was used more sparingly. Check out the Elephant Man 1980 to see a real homage to old school filmmaking. There's no narrative either just random flashbacks, the main character is just doing the same drunk act while delivering witty dialogue as if he's Oscar Wilde or something. 2 hours of my life I'll never get back. If you enjoyed this film that's okay, we all have different taste. But I really didn't like it.

[@TheLight965]

This gonna be good

[@ahahaha3505]

Because it'll seriously hurt your channel if you don't watch out for it, I'm going to mention that there are a couple of malapropisms in the vid (which otherwise is informative and a great analysis). "'Ascetic" means spartan or acidic; *aesthetic* was the word you were looking for. "Different *tack*" means "different approach" or "different angle" and derives from sailing terminology, where "tacking" is a zig-zag pattern sail vessels use to make headway against the wind.

[@bickneller]

"Slick" and "Flashy"? I'm not sure I would describe any of Fincher's work that way. Mank is in Black and White, but other than that it is very consistent with his aesthetic

[@JiveDadson]

Rotten Tomatoes scores - 83% critics, 61% audience

[@Nikeel_A.W]

That's why cinema is dying.

[@Nikeel_A.W]

@Human Bean It really is. Its not just cinema. But come on man, you havent noticed the massive decline in quality when it comes to everything? Everything looks nicer, incredible even now. Clean and professional looking. But 80 percent of it is just beautifully polished turds. There are only a handful of great directors left and most of them are almost on their way out the door. Studios wont give the rest enough money unless they are legends. Ans the worst part is, the masses fund garbage and keep buying garbage. You one of those people that thought starwars 8 was good?

[@jakethet3206]

I REALLY enjoyed this video (I’m a Fincher fan,) however... Putting an ACTUAL Starbucks cup in nearly every scene is NOT satire. It’s just straight up commentary. IN MY OPINION.

[@richardlopez2932]

What's happening? I'm a good writer, have an excellent memory, and have a life that has been remarkably and irresistibly rewarding in what by most reasonable accounts can be described as confusingly underwhelming times. Selah.

[@movedmindpoRUSZonyUMYS]

A lovely essay.

[@CineRanter]

The movie was unfortunately quite mediocre and dull in my opinion

[@jamesward3859]

I disagree is a great moviw

[@neburarieiv]

I thought it was alright. But it is in my opinion, one of the ugliest black and white films I have every seen, the contrast is terrible. Feels really synthetic.

[@dickthebirthdayboy2132]

That's an unfortunate view to have.

[@jamesward3859]

@@neburarieiv I get why you think the story is boring, but don’t you dare go on these comments and say that this movie is ugly

[@neburarieiv]

James Ward this movie is ugly. And it has nothing to do with it being black and white. I like black and white movies. This one was just emotionless.

[@samuraijacques952]

I thought it was great

[@АлексМарт-ю9я]

Nice ! But why without subscription?

[@Sirrajj]

You make great videos as always but I think you need to work on your thumbnails, in a way that it'll attract more viewers!

[@pdzombie1906]

1:12 Mank is the only other film that's based on real people...? Unlike The Social Network whose characters are all invented by Aaron Sorkin? I guess Zuckerberg is a robot after all?

[@sclogse1]

I believe he made a big mistake with the lack of light in this.

[@driziiD]

but reality is boring...

[@madphantom92]

I don't like Fincher anymore he never finishes his series or movies.

[@username1939]

What movie he never finish? U talking about the millennium trilogy? That not his fault tho

[@dickthebirthdayboy2132]

Oh my god are you lot still bitching about Mindhunter?

[@rixx46]

an interesting exercise in style, BUT what a dull, pointless nosebleed of a movie.

[@jamesward3859]

Why

[@Glimax]

@@jamesward3859 Watch it

[@rixx46]

@@jamesward3859 Extrodinarily SLOW, long and confusing with timelines all over the map. The sound is purposely recorded in mono so I had to turn on subttitles to sort out the dialogue. It doesn't work as a bio-pic or as an exploration of that period in Hollywood - both of which I was hoping to see. Very disappointing and self-indulgent.

[@luisfaraudo2953]

I think he just wants an Oscar lmao, because Mank is Oscar bait at its finest.

[@Andy97K]

it's really not though

[@alexATG9]

I don't see how? It is mostly critical of Hollywood and its politics.

[@JiveDadson]

It seems derivative of Charles Kaufman's writing. I wonder if it's as good.