Mank (2020)
Posts: 55632
Joined:
May 2010
Posts: 8437
Joined:
August 2012
This movie is still cooking in my brain for a bit, but I guess one thing that is worthy of being said is the fact that Marion Davies, and both Herman and Sara Mankiewiczes were born in 1897. Yet, while Amanda Seyfried was cast age appropriately, there’s a really odd age gap between Gary Oldman and Tuppence Middleton (almost 30 years, in fact, she portrays a character a decade older than herself). Mank is supposed to be in his 30s to early 40s throughout the film. Sure, he’s a severe alcoholic, yet still...
Look, normally this wouldn’t even be worthy of discussing. It’s only acting. And yet, to me at least, this speaks more as a same old ageist problem Hollywood has towards women who aren’t in their 20s or 30s. I could never imagine a 60 year old woman being able to play someone in her 30-40s. In the grand scheme of things (regarding this film), it’s not really something to be fussed about since the performances are incredible all across the board, but still it’s a little saddening to know.
Look, normally this wouldn’t even be worthy of discussing. It’s only acting. And yet, to me at least, this speaks more as a same old ageist problem Hollywood has towards women who aren’t in their 20s or 30s. I could never imagine a 60 year old woman being able to play someone in her 30-40s. In the grand scheme of things (regarding this film), it’s not really something to be fussed about since the performances are incredible all across the board, but still it’s a little saddening to know.
This does essentially happen in season 3 of The Crown, for what it's worth.Ruth wrote: ↑December 9th, 2020, 9:23 pmLook, normally this wouldn’t even be worthy of discussing. It’s only acting. And yet, to me at least, this speaks more as a same old ageist problem Hollywood has towards women who aren’t in their 20s or 30s. I could never imagine a 60 year old woman being able to play someone in her 30-40s. In the grand scheme of things (regarding this film), it’s not really something to be fussed about since the performances are incredible all across the board, but still it’s a little saddening to know.
My updated Fincher rankings:
1.) Zodiac
2.) The Social Network
3.) Seven
4.) The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
5.) Gone Girl
6.) Mank
7.) Panic Room
8.) The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
9.) Fight Club
10.) Alien 3
-Vader
I didn't hate Mank, but I was underwhelmed by it.
I wonder if watching it in a theater would be better instead of in an Indian household where everyone is so fucking loud for no fucking reason.
I wonder if watching it in a theater would be better instead of in an Indian household where everyone is so fucking loud for no fucking reason.
I wish I could say it was better in a cinema, but I would prefer to actually follow the dialogue with subtitles on. I can't honestly say that this movie has stayed with me the way I wanted it to.
Posts: 55632
Joined:
May 2010
Mank does emotion like no other film I've seen in recent years. Razor sharp, focused and economical, it manages to deliver powerful emotional blows where you least expect them.
Example, after scenes of quiet understanding but mostly distance in favor of professionalism between two Mank brothers, the younger one finally throws an off-hand remark: 'It' s the best thing you ever wrote', just before leaving the scene in his car. The camera lingers on Oldman's face just long enough to feel the power of such moment.
'The white wine came down with the fish' sequence might be the best example of Fincher's approach here because in it, frankly, you're getting several such precious moments one after the other, all of them culminating, well, all over the floor.
Example, after scenes of quiet understanding but mostly distance in favor of professionalism between two Mank brothers, the younger one finally throws an off-hand remark: 'It' s the best thing you ever wrote', just before leaving the scene in his car. The camera lingers on Oldman's face just long enough to feel the power of such moment.
'The white wine came down with the fish' sequence might be the best example of Fincher's approach here because in it, frankly, you're getting several such precious moments one after the other, all of them culminating, well, all over the floor.
Ah yes, that scene with his brother was so good. For me the film also hit the emotional marks at precisely the right moment, when you least expect it lol so you got that right m4.
The picnic scene with Marion as well
Posts: 8437
Joined:
August 2012
@Vader, I don’t think this one example against negates my entire point though. Sexist ageism is one of HW’s most sore points. Doesn’t impact my thoughts on the film however.
Anyway. The more I think of this film, the more I am honestly in awe. I think it’s highly inaccessible (something something Tenet, but they’re near polar opposites), and VERY easy to dislike, but it offers so much, right there on the screen and beyond, should you delve into the history of that era. While everyone’s arguing on whether it’s bad, nonsensical or if it even had a point, I cannot help but bask in how much of this entire story and Mank himself are enshrouded in tragedy.
Anyway. The more I think of this film, the more I am honestly in awe. I think it’s highly inaccessible (something something Tenet, but they’re near polar opposites), and VERY easy to dislike, but it offers so much, right there on the screen and beyond, should you delve into the history of that era. While everyone’s arguing on whether it’s bad, nonsensical or if it even had a point, I cannot help but bask in how much of this entire story and Mank himself are enshrouded in tragedy.
