Mank

Name: Mank
Genre: Biography, Drama, Comedy
Released: November 13, 2020
Duration: 131 min
Rating: 79
Cast: Amanda Seyfried, Arliss Howard, Charles Dance, Gary Oldman, Jamie McShane

2020

METASCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 52 Critic Reviews

See All

USER SCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 258 Ratings

See All

6.3

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.3	Your Score
6.3	User Score Generally favorable reviews based on 258 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Play Sound

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

Mank (Teaser Trailer 1)

Now Playing: Mank (Teaser Trailer 1)

Movie Details & Credits

Netflix | Release Date: November 13, 2020 | R

Starring: Amanda Seyfried, Arliss Howard, Charles Dance, Gary Oldman, Jamie McShane, Joseph Cross, Leven Rambin, Lily Collins, Monika Gossmann, Sam Troughton, Toby Leonard Moore, Tom Burke, Tom Pelphrey, Tuppence Middleton

Movie Facts:

Led all 2020 films with a total of 10 Academy Award nominations.
Led all 2020 films with a total of six Golden Globe nominations.

Summary: 1930s Hollywood is re-evaluated through the eyes of scathing social critic and alcoholic screenwriter Herman J. Mankiewicz as he races to finish the screenplay of Citizen Kane for Orson Welles.

Director: David Fincher

Genre(s): Biography, Drama, Comedy

Rating: R

Runtime: 131 min

See All Details and Credits

Watch Now

Stream On

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

100

Phil de Semlyen

Jan 26, 2021

The arguments over whether Citizen Kane is the greatest film ever made will rage on forever. But the greatest film about Citizen Kane – and just about any other movie – has definitely arrived. David Fincher’s eleventh film is a lavish love letter to old Hollywood in all its glory, cynicism and wild extravagance. Read full review

100

Jamie Graham

Nov 6, 2020

After 30 years of gestation, Mank emerges one of the great films on the machinations of Hollywood Read full review

Ty Burr

Nov 19, 2020

Mank is one of the year’s best movies if you’re the kind of person who genuinely loves movies and damn close if you’re not. Read full review

A.O. Scott

Dec 3, 2020

David Fincher’s Mank is a worthy, eminently watchable entry in the annals of Hollywood self-obsession. That it is unreliable as history should go without saying. Read full review

James Berardinelli

Dec 23, 2020

Mank may be Fincher’s most technically challenging production to-date but it suffers from what some might consider to be the director’s Achilles heel: his laser-focus on perfection results in a tepid emotional temperature. It’s hard to feel much of anything for (or about) any of the characters, even the title one. Read full review

RogerEbert.com Glenn Kenny

Nov 6, 2020

I think the most productive way to look at Mank, a new film about Hollywood in the 1930s and ‘40s, and about the screenwriter of a particularly famous and iconic work, is to understand it as Fincher’s most playful work. Read full review

The Film Stage Nick Newman

Nov 6, 2020

The exposition-mountain screenplay leaves little to feel just as a devotion to the written word leaves scant room for anything to look at. I’m slightly unsure what anybody involved was hoping to get from the experience, much less what’s the takeaway sans basic admiration for baseline craft. Read full review

SEE ALL 52 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

tarqs

Nov 19, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Amazing film! Fincher delivers another masterpiece. Definitely in Oscar conversation.… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

Gieson

Dec 8, 2020

"[...] How wealth and influence can crush a man" can be the exact description not only of the masterpiece that Mank created but also of the writer himself. A great entry from David Fincher: nevertheless, the ending does not quite land, it feels uninspired and hurried, but the performances"[...] How wealth and influence can crush a man" can be the exact description not only of the masterpiece that Mank created but also of the writer himself. A great entry from David Fincher: nevertheless, the ending does not quite land, it feels uninspired and hurried, but the performances (Oldman, Seyfried, and Dance in particular) and the splendid cinematography can make it up for it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

MattBrady99

Dec 11, 2020

‘Mank’ is absolutely mankificent! A movie centered around the golden age of Hollywood that felt so classy, and yet very timely. Timely in terms of communism and how film studios were struggling to find new ways to attract audiences back to the cinema’s. I found the political and economic‘Mank’ is absolutely mankificent! A movie centered around the golden age of Hollywood that felt so classy, and yet very timely. Timely in terms of communism and how film studios were struggling to find new ways to attract audiences back to the cinema’s. I found the political and economic undertone of the story were the best part about the movie. It shows why Mank and Wells were so passionate about making "Citizen Kane", and it allows us to appreciate the film not only from a technical stand point, but for themes the creators were exploring in it. It makes you look at ‘Citizen Kane’ more differently and hopefully helps us recognize the power of political narrative in popular media.

It’s less about the making of ‘Citizen Kane’ and more about the screen writer himself, Herman J. Mankiewicz and the ever-changing hardships that Hollywood faced in the 1930’s, way before “the great depression”. This is not 100% a true story nor do I believe Fincher was aiming for that, as he instead chooses to focus more on Mankiewicz perspective, an unreliable alcoholic that blurs the line between what is true and isn't. David Fincher is somebody that I admire both as a filmmaker and as a human being. With ‘Mank’, it’s a complete departure from Fincher's other work in terms of tone and everything else. However, it’s not to say his visual style, extreme attention to detail, and humour isn’t present. This is not just a love letter to Hollywood, but a critical one as well. Still, it’s a bittersweet to see his late father, Jack Fincher, who wrote the screenplay for this movie, get screen credit at the beginning, all these years after his death.

I was completely blown away on my first watch when there is a screen transition; all the lights, natural or from lamps, will slowly dim out first, while the actors are the last ones. Erik Messerschmidt's cinematography is absolutely stunning in black and white. The clean cuts really made the dialogue scenes have a certain flow to it. Not forgetting the top-notch audio work in the movie, which sounds very echoey. Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross' score is terrific and effectively uses every authentic period instruments of that era, delivering a sharp and old-fashion score that evokes ‘Citizen Kane’. Gary Oldman is phenomenal as the title lead. A comical yet grounded portrayal to the uncredited alcoholic, as he looks so bloated and mentally absorbed that it’s a miracle he is always on schedule with work. Gary Oldman is so slick and charming in the role that I can understand why people put up with Mank’s unprofessional behaviour. People seem to be bothered with Oldman’s casting, as apparently he is “too old to play the role”, since in the movie Mank himself states he is 43 years old, while Oldman is 62. Well, if you look at any photos of Mankiewicz, he looked so much older than his actual age. There was one photo of him when he was 44 but looked mid-60. All thanks to alcohol and smoking that aged him like sour milk, because back then nobody took care of themselves, as health and mental wellbeing was the last thing to think about, and Mank did no favours for himself. So yeah, this whole age thing is completely pointless and can be easily justified. And besides, Oldman is brilliant in the role. Amanda Seyfried also delivers an excellent performance as Marion Davies, Aka “Dulcinea”, nick named after the fictional character in the two-part novel ‘Don Quixote’. Her golden hair, rosy cheeks, coral lips, her neck alabaster, her bosom marble. Ivory her hands and whiteness her snow. ‘Dulcinea’ means sweetness in translation. Seyfried is the type of actor that has been around for quite a while now, and yet hasn’t had a breakout role. In ‘Mank’, Seyfried finally gets her time to shine and it is glorious to watch. The other cast members all did a fantastic job in the supporting roles. Arliss Howard is great as the tactful and emotional movie producer Louis B. Mayer. Charles Dance, man what a presence and he left such an impression on me despite the small screen time as William Randolph Hearst. Lily Collins, Tom Pelphrey, and Tuppence Middleton all did a great job and stood on their own next to Gary Oldman. While there are loads of characters, but I still found them all quite interesting and equally had compelling arcs.

Tom Burke’s portrayal as Orson Welles is nothing short than amazing. His voice and mannerism are so on point its kind of terrifying. While it’s a shame his screen time is tiny, even so, I can see why that decision was made. We all know about Orson Welles, but little on Herman Mankiewicz. In this movie, we see a lot of Hermie, and see little of Welles. The movie is not for everyone. I can totally understand why somebody may find the movie boring. However, I am the complete opposite. So if you are going to check it out, then I recommend going in and form your own opinion rather on what other people have said.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

HerickDiener

Dec 4, 2020

"Mank" é carregado pela ótima intepretação do Gary Oldman e sua parte técnica impecável. Mas, no final do dia, talvez ele seja apenas um filme extremamente nichado, feito para os cinéfilos que exaltam, com razão, "Citizen Kane".

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

Panchogul

Apr 27, 2021

Una decepción viniendo del gran David Fincher, primero destacando lo bueno, a nivel técnico es una odisea, tanto el sonido como la imagen dan la sensación de ver una película de la época en la que está ambientada, a nivel actoral está bien pero no excelente, ahora lo malo, es aburrida,Una decepción viniendo del gran David Fincher, primero destacando lo bueno, a nivel técnico es una odisea, tanto el sonido como la imagen dan la sensación de ver una película de la época en la que está ambientada, a nivel actoral está bien pero no excelente, ahora lo malo, es aburrida, fastidiosa, vacía y monótona.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

lipino

Dec 29, 2020

A chore to get through. I was hoping for a realistic depiction of events, but it's just a bad impression of old movies. The dialogue is ridiculous witty drivel, devoid of the charm of the golden era. If I wanted to see a classic movie, I'd watch one. This is like watching a Beatles cover band.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

corinthians

Dec 18, 2020

Just a boring oscar bait...................................................

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

SEE ALL 56 REVIEWS

67	#67 Best Movie of 2020
41	#41 Most Discussed Movie of 2020