Let it be known that no pandemic is going to keep Liam Neeson down, especially when there is yet another batch of prefabricated villainy to deal with. This time it’s a drug cartel set along America’s southern border. This time there’s a young boy to save. This time Neeson has yet another helpful set of ‘skills’. But this time he’s far from the usual gravelly-voiced one-man-army we’re accustomed to seeing. Well, he still has the signature gravelly voice, but he’s not the impervious imposing force from so many of his other action thrillers.

With “The Marksman” Neeson teams with writer-director Robert Lorenz who is best known for producing several Clint Eastwood films including the Oscar-nominated trio of “Mystic River”, “Letters From Iwo Jima”, and “American Sniper”. It’s probably safe to say “The Marksman” won’t be joining those three esteemed films and that’s okay. These sturdy Neeson thrillers are built with a particular fan-base in mind which is both a strength and a weakness. If you’ve watched a number of them you can’t help but notice some similarities. But there’s often just enough nuance to set them apart. And Neeson brings a certain gravitas to these rather familiar exercises that make them somewhat of a guilty pleasure.

Image Courtesy of Open Road Films

In many ways “The Marksman” feels like a movie Clint Eastwood could have made a few years ago (there’s even a funny little reference to the 90-year-old legend that I’ll let you discover). Neeson plays James Hanson, a decorated Vietnam veteran struggling to hang onto his dusty old ranch that sits on the Arizona/Mexico border. James is a lonely man still mourning the death of wife to cancer. Now he spends his days watching over a few scrawny heads of cattle and radioing local border patrol whenever he spots immigrants illegally crossing the border.

Fresh off an encounter with a bank executive who gives him 90 days to pay his loan and save his ranch, James runs into a migrant mother named Rosa (Teresa Ruiz) sneaking through the border fence with her son Miguel (Jacob Perez) and a bag full of money. James’ first inclination is to call border patrol, not out of some cold disdain or political ideology. He’s not that type of character. Instead he’s a broken shell of a man unplugged from society; lost without his wife and self-sentenced to a life of loneliness. So when the frantic mother pleads for his help his first response is more mechanical than emotional.

But things quickly escalate when soldiers from a Mexican drug cartel led by the overtly menacing Mauricio (Juan Pablo Raba) pull up on the other side of the fence. They demand James hand over Rosa and Miguel, he promptly refuses, and gunfire is exchanged. When it’s over Mauricio’s brother is dead on one side of the fence and Rosa is mortally wounded on the other side. In her dying breath she asks James to take her son to a relative in Chicago and offers him all of the money in the bag as payment. Before long James is reluctantly driving the young orphaned Miguel from Arizona to the Windy City.

But if there’s one thing we’ve learned from action movies, it’s that you don’t kill the brother of the main bad guy. It always makes them meaner, madder, and more dogged in their pursuit. That apparent thirst for vengeance is all we get with Mauricio. He’s basically a one-note villain who’s stuck in one gear for the majority of the film. Lorenz tries to open him up a little bit at the end, but it’s not enough to give the meanie any real weight.

Image Courtesy of Open Road Films

The relationship between James and young Miguel is handled better but still has rough spots of its own. There’s almost a natural attraction to the whole ‘sweet young boy bonds with a surly grizzled misanthrope’ storyline. It’s been done countless times and still we find ourselves drawn to it’s inherent charms. It works here in large part because Neeson makes James sympathetic enough that we root for him to rediscover the warmth and inner joy of human attachment. And there’s the unshakable connection as both are grieving souls who find themselves all alone after losing the persons closest to them.

But it’s how their relationship plays out that’s lacking. For example we’re teased with a compelling conflict after Miguel blames James for the death of his mother. It’s a weighty, emotionally-driven charge and there is a lot the movie could have done with it. Instead that animosity just up and vanishes after a few miles and a couple of hamburgers, never to be discussed or touched on again. Their relationship ends up going a much more routine route which actually sums up “The Marksman” as a whole. There’s enough to keep you involved but it’s nothing you haven’t seen before. It leaves you wanting to see it through even though you know how things are going to turn out. In other words, it’s pretty standard, middle-of-the-road fare. “The Marksman” is now showing in theaters.

VERDICT- 2.5 STARS

Writer-director Paul W. S. Anderson and actress Milla Jovovich are no strangers to movies based on video games. The husband and wife first met in 2002 on the set of “Resident Evil”, an action-horror flick based on Capcom’s popular video game franchise. Since then the two have collaborated in some way on five sequels. And while I would never be so bold as to call those films “great”, they are very honest and self-aware and are made with a very particular audience in mind.

Their latest video game-to-big screen venture is “Monster Hunter”, yet another popular Capcom franchise but one lacking the movie genre allure of something like “Resident Evil”. Still it caters to the same audience and will likely live or die based on how that group turns out for it. That’s because there’s simply not much there for those with no connections to the games or for anyone in need of the slightest bit of depth. “Monster Hunter” is far more interested in cranking up a new franchise than creating relatable well-conceived characters and giving them a good story to tell.

Photo Courtesy of Screen Gems

Jovovich stars as Captain Natalie Artemis, a US Army Ranger and head of a United Nations joint task force. She leads a team of interesting faces but dull and forgettable personalities who sport macho military handles like Axe, Link, Dealer, and Dash. And if you’re interested in learning more about them, don’t be. “Monster Hunter” certainly isn’t. Instead all we get is some laughably bad soldier banter. Nothing of substance. Even Jovovich’s Artemis, the clear star of the movie, is paper-thin and woefully underwritten. All we’re allowed to learn about her is that she’s tough, she can fight, and she can adapt. That’s it.

Stationed in some unidentified desert country, Artemis and her unit are sent out to find Bravo Team who never reported back following their last patrol. During their search they encounter a sandstorm that’s actually hiding a mysterious portal. In a snap the team is sucked in and transported to another dimension. One with a considerably vaster desert and one massive creature who doesn’t like trespassers. The outmatched soldiers quickly learn they don’t have the firepower to fight such a beast so they hightail it towards a lone rocky island in the ocean of sand with the mammoth monster nipping at their heels.

As they tend to do in movies like this, the team members are picked off one by one. Meanwhile on the rocky refuge (yea right) is Tony Jaa playing a character simply called the Hunter. He spends the first half of the movie jumping from boulder to boulder watching Artemis and her team in various states of peril and shooting the occasional exploding arrow at a monster. When Artemis is the only one left, the Hunter (who has been stranded there for who knows how long) reveals himself, not with a handshake and a “help me get off this rock.” Instead his first impulse is to attack her which leads to a pointless series of fight scenes that just delay their inevitable come-together moment. That’s the only way to kill the sand monster and to find a way home. Oh, and there’s that ominous tower in the distance that’s sure to have some part in all of this, right?

Sarcasm and snark aside, “Monster Hunter” actually delivers exactly what it promises and criticizing it for not delivering more seems a little unfair. It’s silly, bombastic, get-away entertainment. Nothing more, nothing less. Anderson and his effects team put together some really impressive set pieces and visually there are a lot of interesting things going on. And later the film opens up some intriguing new environments. Also Anderson seems to have a real reverence for his source material. His film drips with fan service from the sets, the monsters, the weapons, the attire. And can we take a quick second to appreciate Ron Perlman who shows up later with the most hilariously dreadful wig I’ve ever seen in a movie (and yes, I’m counting that as a plus).

Photo Courtesy of Screen Gems

But I also can’t begrudge anyone who wants interesting characters or some semblance of a coherent story. There are a few decent moments between Jovovich and Jaa when the film briefly turns into a buddy survival adventure. But otherwise the story leaves nothing worth talking about. And you can bet its eye-rolling non-ending will leave some feeling annoyed and unsatisfied. And while the creature effects and bigger set pieces range from good to great, some of the more up-close action must have been hacked to pieces in the editing room. The frantic quick-cuts make the scenes borderline indecipherable.

While I am an unapologetic player and appreciator of video games, they don’t exactly have a glowing track record when it comes to big screen adaptations. I don’t think “Monster Hunter” will do much to change that. But honestly I don’t think Anderson and company care. They’ve set out to make a certain kind of movie for a certain kind of moviegoer. If nothing else, some people will enjoy it just for the non-stop action and CGI spectacle. But that doesn’t hide the glaring lack of story and character development. Or the frustrating non-ending that seems much more interested in teasing a future movie rather than finishing this one. “Monster Hunter” is now showing in theaters.

VERDICT- 2.5 STARS

No one can doubt George Clooney’s celebrity status nor can they reasonably throw dirt at his work in front of the camera. A quick scan of the Oscar winner’s acting credits shows a career many would envy. It’s when you mention his directing that things get a little shaky. He has hit his mark a few times namely with “Good Night and Good Luck” and “The Monuments Men” (that’s right, I’m an actual defender of that movie. Nice to meet you.). But his misfires have been pretty pronounced with “Leatherheads” and the abysmal “Suburbicon” instantly coming to mind.

His latest film “The Midnight Sky” sees Clooney as both lead actor and director, his first dual-duty role since 2014. The story is adapted by screenwriter Mark L. Smith (“The Revenant”) from Lily Brooks-Dalton’s 2016 debut novel “Good Morning, Midnight”. It’s an interesting choice for director Clooney, bigger in scale and more ambitious than anything he has helmed before. Here he has made a movie that wears its inspirations on its sleeve which may push away demanding viewers hungry for something completely original. But “The Midnight Sky” is no stale uninspired rehash and reducing it to such ignores the film’s more personal aims.

This moody dystopian drama is set in 2049, three weeks after an unspecified global catastrophe (referred to only as “the event”) caused deadly levels of radiation to begin spreading across the earth’s surface. Clooney plays Augustine Lofthouse, a renowned astrophysicist and the last remaining soul at the Barbeau Observatory deep in the Arctic Circle. His colleagues and their families have evacuated, heading south to hole up in underground safehouses. But Augustine stayed behind, unconvinced that leaving was the best course of action and content to live his last days alone with his terminal illness.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

Augustine passes his time monitoring the radiation’s rapid spread and attempting to establish communication with the rest of the world. The thick-bearded, gravelly-voiced Clooney gives one of the best performances of his career portraying a somber tormented soul wrestling with feelings of deep-rooted regret (three short but well-handled flashbacks reveal a squandered relationship, the source of his melancholy). He’s the embodiment of loneliness, a man self-condemned and resigned to his fate. But then two unexpected twists change his course.

First he notices the crew of the planet’s last active space mission Operation Aether are returning to earth following a survey mission to a potentially habitable moon. If Augustine doesn’t re-establish contact with the unaware space station and warn them of the earth’s status the five-person crew will be arriving to their own deaths. Second he discovers a little girl named Iris (bright-eyed newcomer Caoilinn Springall) left behind during the evacuation. It sets up the well-worn father-figure/daughter-figure dynamic that actually works thanks to Clooney’s wounded sincerity and Springall’s quiet and unadorned presence.

Meanwhile aboard the Aether the crew carries on their daily duties despite growing concerns about losing contact with earth. The diverse and talented group of Felicity Jones, David Oyelowo, Kyle Chandler, Demián Bichir, and Tiffany Boone make up the team of home-sick scientists, some more fleshed out than others but each believable in their role. The visual effects pop off the screen from the imaginative ship design to the simple but foreboding way the movie contrasts the darkness of space with the blinding white of the Arctic tundra. And then there’s the film’s biggest set piece, a stunning spacewalk to repair a communications array that clearly borrows from “Gravity” but packs its own quiet white-knuckled intensity. There is a musical number to Neil Diamond’s “Sweet Caroline” that I could have done without but be that as it may.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

The story jumps back-and-forth between the Aether‘s crew pushing through unforeseen dangers and Augustine setting out with Iris across the frozen wasteland to a remote weather station with a stronger antenna. It sounds action-packed, something akin to summer blockbuster material. But while it has its genre moments, this is a much different film. At its core “The Midnight Sky” is reflective and tragic, even poetic; a bleak meditation on humanity’s last days. Some are sure to push back on Clooney’s unrushed approach, but it’s exactly what this type of story needs. Even DP Martin Ruhe’s extraordinary cinematography and Alexander Desplat’s elegant yet aching score support the film’s contemplative framing.

One of the biggest mistakes you could make with a movie like “The Midnight Sky” is falling into the comparison trap. Sure, if you look for it you can see a few story beats from “Interstellar”, a set piece inspired by “Gravity”, and the occasional ruminative rhythm of “Ad Astra”. At times you may be reminded of “The Martian”, “Moon”, “2001”, and “Arrival”. In other words it does what so many sci-fi movies do at this stage in the genre’s history – it embraces its inspirations. But it also has its own story to tell about loss, love and the yearning for what we leave behind.

“The Midnight Sky” is destined to be a divisive movie. For some it will be emotionally cathartic and fitting for a year like 2020. Others will find it to be shallow, derivative and lacking its own identity. For me its issues are considerably smaller. It splits so much time between earth and space that some of its characters get shortchanged. And as a result some of the big emotional moments don’t quite have the punch they should. But thankfully “The Midnight Sky” doesn’t hinge on a scene or two. And I like the fact that George Clooney, both the actor and director, sticks to his vision while tipping his hat to many of his important influences. “The Midnight Sky” is now showing in select theaters and will premiere on Netflix December 23rd.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

When we first see Chadwick Boseman as the ambitious young trumpeter Levee in “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom” it’s both a smile-inducing moment and a stiff punch in the gut. As most know, Boseman passed away this past August following his private battle with colon cancer. He was just 43-years-old. “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom” marks his final film appearance which unavoidably brings extra attention and emotion. But don’t think that’s the reason Boseman’s performance has been so well received. This may very well be the best work of his career.

While Boseman is sure to get most of the attention this really is an movie with rich, magnetic performances throughout. It starts with Viola Davis playing the eponymous Ma Rainey. Davis offers up a fierce portrayal, capturing the classic blues icon’s tough and abrasive exterior. The film shows Ma to be a surly hard case, fiery and combative, willing to use her clout to push back on all of the era’s oppressive establishments and frankly anyone else who ticks her off.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

Set in 1927, the bulk of the story takes place during one scorching hot afternoon at a recording studio in downtown Chicago. By this time Ma Rainey had already been christened the Mother of Blues and she had learned the hard way how the game was played. She knows her agent and the record producer (both white) only want her for her voice and the money it will bring them. That’s why she doesn’t mind making them squirm, wondering if she’s actually going to show up. Meanwhile her band arrives on time and sets up in the basement to practice.

Most of the movie takes place in two rooms, the basement where the band warms up and the recording room. While Ma’s name is stamped in the title, it’s in the basement that we see the film’s star. When Boseman’s larger-than-life Levee arrives he comes with enough charisma to fill the entire room. He’s a force of personality brimming with self-confidence; a bit impetuous and headstrong which stands out most when he playfully butts heads with his older bandmates. There are some terrific dialogue-rich scenes in the basement where generations and philosophies clash. They even differ on music. Levee wants to pep things up while the others keep reminding him “You play Ma’s music when you’re here.”

By the way, those older bandmates are played by the exceptional trio of Colman Domingo, Glynn Turman, and Michael Potts. They cut through the dialogue with a sparkling chemistry and each are given their own scenes that reflect on their experiences as black men in 1920s America. But it always comes back to Levee played by Boseman with a wild-eyed vigor. Levee is far from one-dimensional and as his layers peel away the late actor is given a couple of meaty moments including one big “Hey Oscar!” monologue and a later scene that seems ready-made for awards season consumption. Yet Boseman nails both, unearthing his character’s deep-rooted pain and anger. It’s a stand-out performance.

The focus shifts a bit when Ma and her entourage finally arrive at Hot Rhythm Recordings. A snarling whirlwind of indignation, Ma immediately ups the temperature in the already sweltering studio, locking horns with her antsy agent (Jeremy Shamos) and challenging the patience of the studio head (Jonny Coyne). Even the band gets a taste of Ma’s ire, especially Levee who can’t quite get in line with her strict ways of doing things. It all sets up a combustible third act ending with a final scene that hits like a ton of bricks.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

While Boseman gets to dig deep into his character’s psyche, Davis is mostly restricted to Ma’s tough-as-nails exterior. She gets to let loose in portraying Ma as an ill-tempered force of nature, but only gets a few lines that hint at who she was underneath. The rest is vaguely implied or expected to be known from history. So it may not hurt to read Ma Rainey’s Wikipedia page before watching. For Davis’ part it’s a fearless and fascinating performance, but the script leaves so much buried within her character and ultimately untapped.

The film is based on August Wilson’s 1982 play which was the second part of his Pittsburgh Cycle series chronicling the black experience in America during the 20th Century. Director George C. Wolfe doesn’t stray from the story’s stage roots but the doesn’t strictly adhere to them either. There are a handful of scenes that pull us out of the studio and energizes the setting. And Ann Roth adds to the period detail with her magical costume design that could have been plucked right out the Roaring Twenties. Yet despite its efforts, chunks of the movie still feel considerably more stagey than cinematic. But that’s hardly a deal-breaker especially when screenwriter Ruben Santiago-Hudson fills his scenes with rich soulful dialogue and you have such flavored performances from a stellar ensemble. And none are better than the late Chadwick Boseman. “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom” premieres on Netflix December 18th.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

One of the most exciting and talked about features from this year’s Sundance Film Festival was Lee Isaac Chung’s “Minari”. The film won two of the festival’s top awards and earned high praise for its lead Steven Yeun. A star on the rise, Yeun followed up his well received television run on “The Walking Dead” with several impressive big screen supporting roles most notably 2018’s critically-acclaimed “The Burning”. In “Minari” the 36-year-old Yeun teams with a superb cast to tell a tender slice-of-life story that leaves an unforgettable mark.

This is the fifth film from Chung and easily his most personal so far. Inspired by the birth of his daughter, Chung began writing down memories from his own childhood in Arkansas, most of them were from when he was around 6-years-old. He then began building a narrative arc, full of autobiographical nuggets but with its own distinct story to tell. The results are sublime. With “Minari” Chung has made a quietly affecting film, one of such understated beauty and with a soothing intimacy that stirs the soul.

Image Courtesy of A24

Jacob Yi (Yeun) and his wife Monica (Yeri Han) came to America in the early 1970s, working briefly in Seattle before settling in California. There they had two children while making a living chicken sexing (for the uninformed like me, that’s when you separate male and female chicks). Tired of barely scratching by, Jacob moves his Korean-American family from California to rural Arkansas. That’s where Chung settles in and patiently unfolds his gentle yet bracingly authentic immigrant/family drama.

The film opens with Jacob driving a moving van and Monica close behind in their station wagon with the kids. They travel along several miles of gravel roads before finally arriving at their new home – a mobile home sitting on five acres of rugged Ozark farmland. All Jacob sees is potential and a chance at some version of the American Dream. Monica’s doubt is evident from her first startled look at the house trailer. “That’s not what we agreed on.” This sets up a crucial family conflict that simmers throughout most of the story.

As their parents struggle to plant their feet in their new life, the children offer a unique and unvarnished perspective. Their pre-teen daughter Anne (Noel Cho) seems mature beyond her age and you get the feeling she has a better idea of their situation than she lets on. Their 7-year-old son David (played by captivating newcomer Alan S. Kim) has a heart murmur but you’d never notice. Bright and precocious, David has a lively and mischievous spark and his childlike honesty offers up some of the film’s funniest moments. He has a scene-stealing charm that’s sure to leave people talking.

Image Courtesy of A24

Feeling overwhelmed, the couple invite Monica’s mother Soonja (Yuh-Jung Youn) from Korea to help with the kids. The arrival of the abrasive and unrefined grandma creates an entertaining shift in the family dynamic. Youn is an absolute treat especially when paired with Kim. Their characters have a wonderfully combative relationship that inevitably softens over time. Soon Youn is teaching her grandson how to play cards while he introduces her to the simple joys of pro wrestling and “mountain water” (which is actually Mountain Dew). “It’s good for you“, he earnestly explains.

Even wackier is Will Patton’s Paul, an eccentric yet strangely endearing local who spends his Sunday’s dragging a life-sized cross down miles of dirt road. But he also knows how to work the land and when he’s not exorcising evil spirits from the Yi family’s property he’s helping Jacob jump-start his Korean vegetable garden. But it proves to be hard work (ask the property’s former owner) and it begins to eat into the family’s limited funds. And as Jacob is digging a well, buying a used tractor, and courting potential buyers of his produce, Monica is at home growing more and more disillusioned with her husband’s dream.

Perhaps Chung’s most powerful creative choice comes in his consistent focus on the personal moments. “Minari” is all about relationships: a struggling husband and wife, a puckish young boy and his crass grandmother, two community outsiders building a garden together. Big things do happen but often off screen or in the background. Instead Chung relishes the intimate interactions which are so often found in the minutiae of everyday living. And while the film does deal with a Korean-American family’s assimilation into a white rural community, Chung’s beautifully realist lens is much more focused on the personal things that bring us together and sometimes tear us apart.

Image Courtesy of A24

I can’t help but mention a quiet but meaningful scene where Soonja takes her grandson to a creek on the edge of the family’s property. There she takes some seeds brought from Korea and plants minari along the bank (minari is an East Asian herb that can grow almost anywhere). Over time the foreign plant takes root and flourishes in the fertile Arkansas soil. It’s a small piece of story so sweetly told and ripe with meaning. It ends up being one of the film’s most poignant metaphors while highlighting one of its many thoughtful themes.

With its emotionally textured story, captivating performances, and lived-in production design, “Minari” takes us on an immersive personal journey firmly anchored in the human experience. It’s a thoughtfully subdued film yet one bursting with naturalistic beauty. Within minutes I was caught up in Lee Isaac Chung’s clear-eyed true-to-life perspective and swept away by the aching rhythm which moves us from one scene to the next. I can’t quit thinking about it. Like I said, it really leaves its mark. “Minari” is scheduled for a limited release on December 11th ahead of its full release February 12, 2021.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

In 1939 24-year-old hotshot wunderkind Orson Welles was heavily courted by a struggling RKO Pictures. The studio signed Welles to a two-picture deal and gave him complete creative control including final cut privilege, something unheard of in the studio era. Welles began putting the idea together for what would become “Citizen Kane”. To help with the script Welles hired Herman J. Mankiewicz, a boozy, self-destructive and self-defined loose cannon believed by many in Hollywood to be washed up. Mankiewicz ended up winning an Academy Award for what many argue is the greatest film ever made.

In David Fincher’s “Mank” the acclaimed filmmaker both celebrates and admonishes Hollywood’s Golden Age through the character of Herman Mankiewicz, honing in on his time wrestling with his version of the “Citizen Kane” script. Fincher uses the same time-hopping techniques as Welles’ 1941 classic to visit key moments from Mankiewicz’s past which helped inspire and form pivotal elements of “Kane’s” story. “Mank” was originally conceived by David Fincher’s late father Jack Fincher who was inspired by Pauline Kael’s 50,000 word essay “Raising Kane” published in 1971.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

The opening shot feels plucked straight out of old Hollywood. It’s 1940. Two cars speed down a dusty California highway on their way to North Verde Ranch near Victorville. There Herman Mankiewicz (Gary Oldman), bed-ridden with a broken leg following a car accident, sets up shop. He is given sixty days (originally 90 until Welles cut off a month) to complete his draft under the supervision of John Houseman (Sam Troughton). Helping is Rita Alexander (Lily Collins), a lightning fast British stenographer with a boatload of patience and a husband serving in the war effort overseas.

Fincher never stays in one place very long. The scenes at the ranch are frequently broken up with rapid-fire flashbacks that can be disorienting until you get a grasp on what the director is going for. We get a scene from 1930 where Mank (as Mankiewicz is affectionately called) meets and impresses newspaper mogul William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance), the inspiration for the Charles Foster Kane character. He also meets Hearst’s carefree and endearing mistress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried), a young actress who immediately takes a liking to Mank. In many ways their relationship is the heart of the film and its a really good turn from Seyfried.

Later Fincher takes us back in time to Paramount Studios to witness a hilarious brainstorm session in the writer’s room. Then we swing by MGM where blustering studio head Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) waxes not-so-eloquently about his movie philosophy before duping a group a employees with a ‘times are hard‘ speech. Fincher makes several of these studio stops through flashbacks landing some firm shots at their top-heavy structure but also admiring their vibrant creative energy. Each studio scene is richly textured, full of period detail and ambiance, and exquisitely captured through Eric Messerschmidt’s black-and-white cinematography.

More flashbacks show Mank giving himself over to booze and self-loathing, steadily losing his goodwill with studio heads and straining close relationships. Look no further than his exasperated wife Sara who is played by a terrific Tuppence Middleton working at just the right temperature. And then you have his unique friendship with the powerful Hearst which in many ways makes his eventual “Kane” script feel like something of a betrayal on top of being controversy. History tells us Hearst was enraged by “Citizen Kane”. Mankiewicz’s friendship with the mogul soured and Mank was tossed from Hearst’s social circles.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

Fincher also uses Mank’s eyes to observe the 1934 California gubernatorial race between socialist Upton Sinclair and the conservative Republican incumbent Frank Merriam. Again we see many nuggets that not only influenced aspects of “Citizen Kane” but that also cut with a sharp present-day relevance. Backdoor politics, yellow journalism – its all here. Eventually everything meets at a combustible dinner party scene where Mank’s off-putting drunken monologue screeches things to a halt. It’s a big performance moment for Oldman who throughout the film captures every facet of Mankiewicz’s brilliant yet self-defeating personality. But the scene draws out too long and is too showy even for a movie as showy as this one.

“Mank” offers a very particular point-of-view on the longstanding debate over who wrote “Citizen Kane”. Much like Kael’s controversial and since discredited essay, Fincher is clearly sympathetic towards Herman Mankiewicz. He highlights Mank’s work while Orson Welles (portrayed by Tom Burke) mostly exists on the periphery of his story. But Fincher wisely doesn’t discount Welles’ contribution and ultimately his film is about more than just authorship. It’s an ambitious ode to a bygone Hollywood era. It’s a story about damaged genius and self-destruction. Above all it’s an applause-worthy celebration of the art of cinema – a visual and performance-rich delight. I was amazed yet unsure of it after one viewing. I was captivated and convinced after a second. “Mank” premieres today on Netflix.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS