Over six years after 2014's Gone Girl, David Fincher returns to the big screen with Mank, directing a screenplay written by his late father. Centring around Herman J. Mankiewicz and his development of the screenplay for Orson Welles' Citizen Kane, a film frequently considered to be one of the greatest of all time, do the Finchers manage to extrapolate enough interest to compel audiences almost eight decades after initial Citizen Kane's debut?
Herman J. Mankiewicz races to finish the script for Citizen Kane, for which he is given total creative freedom. But in the midst of the Great Depression and with World War II quickly approaching, the increasingly bitter, scathing and drunk Mankiewicz evaluates 1930s Hollywood through cynical eyes. Leading the way is Gary Oldman in the titular role, with Amanda Seyfried, Lily Collins and Charles Dance just some of the supporting names propping up the expansive ensemble.
While many that turn to Old Hollywood do so with nostalgic affection, there's a notable cynicism running throughout David Fincher's Mank - one that provides a rare critique of the bygone Tinseltown's problem with power and the ruthlessness of the Golden Age studios. With these pointed, skewering thematic undercurrents providing the most interesting ground to cover, it is, therefore, a disappointing decision that Jack Fincher's screenplay decides to focus more squarely on Mankiewicz's life, indulging in biopic cliches that means it comes as close to a box-checking exercise as (David) Fincher has ever come in his impressive career.
Without a narrative hook, Mank is a film that meanders for the majority of its overlong 131-minute runtime. Perhaps it is the monochromatic visuals that lead to a distance, creating a perceived coldness that removes any sense of warmth, but Fincher goes on to hold his audience at arm's length, giving them little to feel connected with emotionally. While his now-infamous attention to detail is reliably meticulous, allowing the film to dazzle on a technical level, with further thanks to stunning work from the production and costume department, particularly when combined with Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross' terrific score, it is disappointing that the film's style is so at odds with the substance.
Not helping matters is the lacklustre performance brought in from Gary Oldman, who grumbles and stumbles his way through the role. Despite an armful of caustic one-liners, Oldman fails to find much of a personality in the character; he is totally miscast and fails to provide the magnetism a dialogue-driven film greatly needs. Thankfully though, Amanda Seyfried is on hand to enliven proceedings. Alongside a small handful of supporting players, Seyfried playfully injects Mank with a spirit that brings it to life intermittently, making her Marion Davies one of the only figures in Mank to truly feel alive.
Immediately there is a sense that Mank is a film that will reward with subsequent viewing - but it also offers the audience little reason to be enthusiastic enough to actually return to it at any stage down the line. Making an inaccessible picture needn't be a criticism but Mank frequently feels like a film so limited in its reach and appeal that, for the majority of audiences at least, it plays out like a director crafting a very expensive and extensive passion project. While it can at least be appreciated from a technical standpoint, the story fails to hook audiences in and creates a distance between audiences that it unfortunately never recovers from.
Summary: Visual splendour and a wonderful Amanda Seyfried cannot salvage a rare miss for director David Fincher, whose passion project Mank is slow, difficult to engage with and, most damningly, just not very interesting.