David Fincher's Battle and Persistence as Seen in 'Mank'

"If film history could only tell one story, I would definitely choose Orson Welles' 'Citizen Kane' because its arrival seemed to propel the art of cinema forward by ten years overnight." A film critic once made such an evaluation.

What I never expected was that David Fincher's film, 'Mank,' would be about the context in which Herman Mankiewicz wrote the script for 'Citizen Kane.'

The story of 'Citizen Kane' is quite simple: the film begins with American media mogul Kane dying alone in his mansion, leaving behind the word 'Rosebud' on his deathbed. Through the interviews of several individuals closely related to Kane by reporter Thompson, the film explores various aspects of Kane's life, including his childhood, career, love, marriage, power, friendship, and later years.

The story starts with a flashback, presenting the main character in episodic memory segments. Kane, hailed as a media tycoon and a winner in everyone's eyes, has a longing for 'Rosebud,' a toy sled from his childhood that represents the innocence and freedom of his youth.

After 'Citizen Kane' was released in 1941, newspaper magnate Randolph Hearst, whom it was believed to be loosely based on, protested and attempted to buy the film for $800,000 to prevent its screening.

Fortunately, this did not affect the film's later success, even though its box office performance fell short of expectations.

The success of 'Citizen Kane' undoubtedly came from the film's exceptional quality, but it was also influenced by the social context of the time. America was in the midst of an economic crisis, and people couldn't afford movie tickets. Film studio executives had to find ways to attract audiences back to the theaters.

Prominent film studios at the time included the wealthy Paramount, star-studded MGM, the Western-themed 20th Century Fox, the underrated Warner Bros., and the adventurous RKO. While these studios seemed distinct, the capitalist moguls who regarded films as commodities were gradually standardizing filmmaking, creating an artificial reality, and revealing their hypocritical nature.

The director of 'Citizen Kane,' Orson Welles, was under RKO's banner. He broke up with the traditional Hollywood narrative style, visual language, and aesthetic conventions in this film. He drew a clear line between modern and traditional cinema, becoming the "rebel" of Hollywood and astonishing film industry magnates who attempted to profit from it.

The film won nine nominations at the 14th Academy Awards, and Orson Welles and Herman Mankiewicz (Mank) jointly won the award for Best Original Screenplay. However, after this, almost no one mentioned the co-writer of the film, Mank. The only piece of news that remained was that 'Citizen Kane's' script was actually written independently by Mank, but due to money and contracts, he had to share the credit with Orson Welles.

Now, let's talk about David Fincher and his 'Mank.'

Anyone familiar with David Fincher knows that color plays a crucial role in his works. However, in 'Mank,' the director resolutely used black and white, forsaking the visual effects that color could have brought to the film. This decision showcases a commendable audacity. A friend who respects David Fincher's work commented after watching the film that David Fincher, who had actively chosen to make a black-and-white film, seemed to be metaphorically cutting off his own arms. But you would also understand him because there's no better way to portray 1930s Hollywood than in black and white.

Understanding this history might help you better grasp David Fincher's work, 'Mank,' which comes six years after his previous film. It's an atypical David Fincher film. In addition to his characteristic sardonic style and meticulous audio-visual language, he seems to consciously take Mank's side in this story, ruthlessly exposing the hypocrisy of the upper echelons of the five major film companies, their pursuit of fame and fortune, their trivialization of politics, and even including director Orson Welles.

Fastidious as David Fincher is, he must have put in a lot of effort when creating this film. In 'Mank,' the director creatively uses the screenplay's format to divide the scenes and intervals between them.You can find the director's clever touches of irony in each scene. Audiences familiar with David Fincher will certainly find endless enjoyment.

Building on this foundation, the director cleverly employs dual narrative threads. One narrative focuses on Mank, who is bedridden due to a car accident while writing the script for 'Citizen Kane.' It portrays a particular aspect of Mank through the perspectives of the 'maid,' 'wife,' and 'self-expression.' He is portrayed as an alcoholic gambler, but also as a helper of Jews and a sympathizer with the lower class.

The other narrative appears trivial but, in reality, offers multiple perspectives on the upper echelons represented by the five major film companies. It exposes their hypocrisy, the staged performances arranged to cut employees' salaries, the coercion of screenwriters for competitive purposes, and the political conformism in conversations.

It is the presence of these people that makes Mank's character so multi-dimensional, his writing so valuable, as he uses a single story to cry out against the era. All of this is reminiscent of the flashback segments in 'Citizen Kane,' conveying a similar message.

I had some doubts before understanding the relationship between these two narrative threads. What makes Mank unique?

What are we really watching when we watch this film?

At the end of the film, when Mank holds his award and delivers an acceptance speech, the following captions appear:

Eleven years later, Mank died from alcohol poisoning and complications. He never collaborated with Orson Welles again, never wrote an original screenplay again, and never fought for script credit.

He once confided in a friend, 'I seem to be more and more like a trapped rat, stuck in a cage of my own making. As long as the slightest opening appears to offer an escape, I promptly seal it.'

Suddenly, I seemed to understand. 'Mank' is certainly a challenging film. I believe David Fincher anticipated this challenge when he made it. In an era of rapid information dissemination, where convenience and simplicity are key to human consumption, making a film like this is swimming against the current.

But just as Mank fought against the hypocrisy of the upper echelons of society with his lone voice, attempting to showcase the essence of humanity through a story, David Fincher also chose to go against the tide. He abandoned color and adhered to a certain era of Hollywood, resisting something and upholding something. While the film may not be easy to understand, it is not impossible to comprehend. If you are willing to approach it and explore it further, you will undoubtedly find a renewal of your soul and a resonance in your spirit.

"David Fincher's Struggle and Persistence as Seen in 'Mank'

All it takes is patience. All it takes is remembering your original intent. This may be the mark that 'Mank' has left in my life. I cherish it greatly."