Gary Oldman received his third Oscar nomination for portraying Herman J. Mankiewicz aka the titular character in Mank.
Before watching Mank again, which tells the story of the career of Citizen Kane co-writer, I was filled with some uncertainty as the general opinion towards the film only seemed to degrade. Having watched it again, I enjoyed it again. A flawed film, mainly found within the late Jack Fincher's screenplay which bites off more than it can or needs to chew. The film works as the story of a screenwriter with unlikely connections, it falters more so when it tries to be a closer analysis of the politics of the period and especially when it tries to tack on the Kane authorship controversy. Reading the screenplay, David Fincher is EXTREMELY faithful to his father's work, which while understandable, leaves the film far too scattershot overall where the film could've used a re-write, or at least some reworking, to tighten and focus things, though what's good is good.
Speaking of what's good, let's speak of Gary Oldman, an actor who probably has never been accused of playing himself, or can be seen as playing himself. Always the chameleon perhaps even to his detriment with how long it took for him to be recognized for any film. Funny once one breaks the barrier they suddenly can repeat seemingly with relative ease as Oldman has now earned his 3rd Oscar nomination in less than 10 years time, despite having spent the majority of his career nomination-less. For his third turn, we have what appears to be his least transformative, although I think that itself is also not true. Oldman's performance very much is a creation of Herman "Mank" Mankiewicz, just he created George Smiley and Winston Churchill, it's just a bit different in this regard. This as Oldman seeks to craft Mank, as he always does. Now Oldman, as usual does this really from the top down in crafting a role. This one is no different in that regard even if seemingly at bit less obvious. Oldman always has been adept at American accents, and this one is no different, it is just a given. I think there is a bit more into this though here that Oldman grants a slightly different touch to it. This as he speaks with kind of a slight slur within his speaking making Mank as kind of a man always slightly drunk even when possibly sober. Oldman's vocal choice at the very least both granting a sense of the man as an alcoholic, but also suggesting kind of the wear of his drinking. This is matched by his physical work, where he walks as well with a certain stumbling quality, as again a man who moves as though he is inebriated to some degree at all times.
Now the alcoholism of Mank isn't exactly the focus of the film, it is rather an aspect of the man that Oldman effectively uses to help to define his manner. Oldman's portrayal rather is interestingly a kind of protagonist that he isn't often tasked to portray, this being a more sympathetic sort in being in some ways the guide towards this particular time in old Hollywood. This broken up into different times, where actually Oldman does portray different Manks, if subtly given the time between each of them is relatively brief. The easiest way to broach this is to go in chronological order, against the film's jumbled narrative in terms of time jumping. This as we first run into Mank as he is recruiting other up and coming writers. Oldman is quite good in crafting a kind of different type of confidence in this early scene. This as he doesn't portray Mank as the leaders of the writers, more of the ring leader. Oldman has a playfulness about it, a manner of someone who very much has a kind of fun within the system, or at least some fun. This as Oldman's parts of the delivery of a particular pitch has a panache to it, but just enough of one. His eyes exude this kind of cunning as Mank just as much seems to be understanding of the futility of the pitch, as much as he attempts to sell it as a good writer should. There's a slight bemusement that Oldman has in his little glances, granting a sort of humor within his cynicism. This as he projects Mank both capable of behaving within the studio system, but also showing a man who interacts it with a certain disdain towards it all.
We follow Mank as he seems to wander into the world of William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance) and his mistress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried) by chance, where we get something that Oldman is rarely called upon to project, despite playing so many different roles, which is charm. Oldman is more than game, though this too isn't the charm of the real Oldman, which is distinctly English to say the least, but here Oldman refashions it as something wholly Mank. This as Oldman fashions a style of the man as distinctly the wit. A difficult type to actually pull off given that usually the wit is a bit more of an overtly vicious type, but Oldman is able to find a way around this while also projecting this. This as in his first scene with Dance and more importantly Seyfried, Oldman finds this kind of measured manner within this. This as he kind of always speaks some sort of cutting word to add or throw at some way or another. Oldman's delivery though is essential in articulately this in a way in which Mank kind of fashions his appeal by saying what he means but without exactly saying it as well. This as Oldman manages to mix intentions with this kind of jovial ease that seems to make even his critiques somehow not entirely unappealing despite his state as an obvious drunkard with an opinion that is a near constant. This kind of maneuvering though is so much of the film, and so much of it relies very much on Oldman, realizing the personal style of Mank. This personal style though as the constant wit and critic, much to his own dismay eventually.
We see this as we see him showing his brother, the eventually more successful Joseph Mankiewicz, the ropes in dealing with tyrannical studio chief Louis B. Mayer. Oldman's reactions are very much the heart of this scene in reacting to every bit of Mayer's ridiculousness. Oldman carries a certain satisfaction of man all too knowing of the situation, though reacts towards it with just it as a big joke that he must exist in rather than trying to directly do too much about it himself. Oldman's reaction portray a kind of acceptance of his own inferiority in accepting the situation while also projecting a bit of superiority in his bemused grin. This in being amused by the game, even within a glint of disgust within the game all the same. This though Oldman shows as the weapon of the man in a way who seems to hold nothing too importantly, therefore his jabs can exist mostly without exception. This as we see in one of the best scenes of the film, this being a gathering at Hearst's impressive estate. Mank coming into the affair with little jabs and jives for all the sycophants, while also directly commenting on politics. Every little thing a kind of witticism though spoken by Oldman as these sort of standard asides for Mank. This presenting this as a kind of ease in allowing himself to be both cutting while also in this seemingly almost falsely affable way. Oldman speaking the words as though Mank is making a joke for everyone to enjoy, even though it is still very pointed to particular individual's expense in the room. Oldman making a proper kind of dance about the whole thing as the man always speaking his mind, but doing in a way that he gets away with it, for now.
This leading to what is really the best aspect of the film which is started by a quiet walk between Mank and Marion, leading to a kind of platonic romance of sorts. Oldman is great in managing to realization this kind of specific manner in these moments. This as he reacts to Marion and her words, with a genuine sense of affection in appreciation someone else who in some way shares a mutual spirit with one another. There his most direct charm in his reactions to her that are still witty, though now more than anything so often encouraging and supportive. His reactions though with a man still very much listening, and often in his eyes just truly appreciating the woman for who she is. His delivery of everything to her with a kind of more genuinely loving tone. This making his suggestions with this kind of actual grace to him while he praises Marion's best qualities and seems to create a genuine friendship with her. Each one of these scenes between Mank and Marion are the best within the film. This as both actors are able to capture a natural chemistry between the two, while also not really simplifying the relationship in any way. It isn't quite familial, it isn't quite as a romantic relationship. There is something rather idiosyncratic about it, as the two seem to just inspire each other, and understand each other in their own special way. They craft the sincerity of two friends with an appreciation for exactly who they are rather what it is they are meant to be. It is something that wholly works within the film, and a large part is the actors absolutely deliver on the idea of the friendship being just simply a given.
Now this is where the film gets kind of all over the place, as it explores Mank trying to do something involving Upton Sinclair's run for governor of California, though the real Mank was an anti-fascist conservative, not an anti-fascist socialist, I only mention this as it gets such devotion the film despite having little to do with the real Mank so the inclusion seems somewhat curious. Anyway, as much as I question the swerve, I have to say I think Oldman navigates it incredibly well in making Mank this sort of downtrodden hero of sorts to explore this aspect. This as again Oldman's quiet moments of reaction do say a lot. This in this quiet anxiety in seeing the studios machinations against Sinclair, that builds up to a kind of despondency and urgency to do something. Oldman conducting so well as internalized within a state of the man that becomes increasingly downtrodden. These moments of Oldman trying to fight against it he conveys the certain more upfront desperation of it, and direct venom at times making his act as Lear's fool fall apart a bit. This leading to his downfall. This as like the film I'll flash forward to the man writing Citizen Kane, now as an outcast of the system and seeming to make his attack on those who banished him. As much as the framing device frankly should've been reduced, I think Oldman acquits himself incredibly well by tempering some elements of Mank and accentuating others. This as his attacks are still there however a bit less charming. What is more evident is the self-loathing and depression within the situation. Oldman finding a quiet vulnerability now within the man who can't quite as easily amuse himself, though that gear is still there. I still found these scenes watchable, due to Oldman who is true to giving life to this man even when the scenario isn't the most inspired.
The film, jumbled as is, ends on two separate notes. The first where Mank comes to a Hearst party fully drunk. Oldman portraying the always drunk man drunker, effectively in my view as he just heightens each element a bit more though very much shows that his act of cutting wit becomes a bit more obvious and far too aggressive for his crowd. This with no longer the timing for jokes, making the jabs all the more obvious. Oldman though delivers the man fully going at the prize though in this messy haze of an ad hominem attack. This as his words all more hateful towards those he's speaking to, the derision on display, yet in Oldman's manner showing a sloppy man who can barely hold himself together. This in by speaking the truth, also speaking the truth of presenting himself to be the fool he's been playing the whole time, just now lopsided. This is put parallel against his argument with Welles over credit for the screenplay of Kane, which has no business to be in the film. I like the scene for Oldman's performance. This as he suggests a man who has gained some agency through being humbled a bit. This now the sort of manner of the man is confident and direct in his stance. Oldman exuding not a man hiding his truth within a haze of jokes, rather just speaking what he knows, as he knows it. Oldman frankly makes sense of this scene better than the film does which just makes it a kind of gear shift that feels so poorly connected to the rest. Oldman though makes the connection through his presentation of Mank's kind of determination between the way faces Hearst and Mayer, against the way he faces Welles. It seems I'm suppose to criticize this performance, however I find myself unable to. This is committed and articulate work. Oldman understands and realizes his character artfully and with ease in a style that is in some ways not typically his own. Oldman delivers on the part, highlighting all the merits the film does contain, and more than anything I don't see any other actor capable of better job than Oldman does here. This as much as Oldman's film is the least of the nominees, Oldman does deliver a great performance, though with the least in terms of material, which actually is an achievement that is all his own.
