Mank

Director: David Fincher
Starring: Gary Oldman, Amanda Seyfried, Lily Collins, Arliss Howard, Tom Pelphrey, Sam Troughton, Ferdinand Kingsley, Tuppence Middleton, Tom Burke, Joseph Cross, Jamie McShane, Toby Leonard Monika Gossmann, Charles Dance, Bill Nye
Running Time: 131 min.
Rating: R 

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

During David Fincher's Mank, drunk, bedridden screenwriter Herman J. Mankiewicz is told by a producer that the assigned screenplay he's writing for young, hotshot director Orson Welles is "too complicated," confusingly jumping back and forth through time and careening out of control as he approaches an impossible deadline. If the script was just a structural mess maybe that could be fixed, but the bigger complaint is its inaccessibility, sure to drive away mainstream audiences. That working draft, titled "American," would eventually evolve into Citizen Kane, and everything turned out pretty well. Or did they?  Definitely for the film, but not so much for those directly involved. Listening to the criticisms of Mankiewicz's script, you can't help but think that without careful planning it could also apply to the movie that's just been made about it. But we also know this is a director who's nothing if not deliberate.

In adapting his late father Jack Fincher's script to the screen, David Fincher makes a noticeable effort to go beyond taking us on a time travel trip through Hollywood's golden age to deliver an experience that looks and feels as if it could have been released during that era. It attempts to appeal to both diehards who will triple-check its accuracy and more casual viewers unaware of the difference, but respectful of the craftsmanship. And there's plenty to admire in that department, with Fincher expertly channeling this period of filmmaking through dialogue, editing, sound and cinematography that invoke some of Kane's more famous moments.  

The deeper we're submerged into this monochromatic world of shattered dreams, lit cigarettes and broken wine bottles, the clearer it becomes that more bubbles under the surface of Mank as it masquerades as a straight biopic of an immensely successful failure. Movies about movies not only need drama that's worth our attention, but also a unique hook that grabs hold. The creative and personal bloodshed over Citizen Kane should be enough, but in the hands of a master like Fincher, it ends up instead being a thorough psychological dissection of the man who wrote it.  

It's 1940 when Herman J. "Mank" Mankiewicz (Gary Oldman) gets a phone call from Orson Welles (Tom Burke) while recuperating in Victorville, California from a broken leg sustained in a recent car accident. Given complete creative freedom from RKO Pictures for his next project, the upstart Welles recruits an injured Mank to write the screenplay, centering around a wealthy, but morally bankrupt main character who shares more than just passing similarities with newspaper publishing magnate William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance). 

With Mank dictating the script from bed, his secretary Rita Alexander (Lily Collins) notices this, as well as other parallels to studio executives and people he knew while he and his younger brother, Joseph (Tom Pelphrey) worked at MGM in the 1930's under Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard). Flashing back, we see how Mank's friendship with Hearst's lover and beneficiary, actress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried) grows, as the writer ingratiates himself and reserved wife Sara (Tuppence Middleton) into the Hollywood elite, entertaining fellow party goers at Hearst's San Simeon estate with his rambunctious personality and outspoken political views. We also see how his alcoholism derailed a successful career, with Welles arriving just in time to offer Mank shot at redemption and a big pay day, if he's still up for it. And doesn't mind forfeiting the credit. 

Those entering this expecting the cold calculation usually associated with Fincher may be surprised to find out that the film's somewhat dark, but not really depressing, moving at a spry, energetic pace that cuts back-and-forth between Mank's latest undertaking and key events in his studio career, most of which are littered with memorable characters and deadpan humor. The familiar device of utilizing screenplay-formatted title cards to indicate the year and location should seem almost too on-the-nose , but it fits exceptionally well here in framing a story about the writer of the most famous non-linear film ever made. 

Considering the feud between Welles and Mankiewicz over credit was historically bitter by even Hollywood standards, this instead mostly focuses on the people and experiences that plant the seeds in Mank to eventually start his greatest creation. In most of his brief appearances, Welles is presented as this deep-voiced, shadowy figure on the other end of the phone, channeling his concerns and demands about the project  through actor-producer John Houseman (Sam Troughton). Because we've had more than enough takes on this side of the Kane fallout before (see 1999's RKO 281 with Liev Schreiber as Welles), this isn't a flaw so much as a choice, and Burke's portrayal of him is sufficient enough given the limited screen time.

The backbone of the film lays in its flashbacks, transporting us into a wild, sepia-tinged world of wealthy, eccentric wheelers and dealers like MGM chief Mayer, who's delightfully played by Arliss Howard as the king of carnival barking studio con-men. He and producer Irving Thalberg (Ferdinand Kingley) tolerate and even like Mank to an extent, until it becomes apparent his best days have passed, and his drunken outbursts threaten the studio's cozy arrangement with Hearst. His eventual script will threaten it more. 

As Hearst, British actor Charles Dance gives the enigmatic publisher the treatment most probably expected would be expected for Welles, conveying a towering but curious presence that in only a few scenes me ets the complicated expectations that drew Mankiewicz and the young, meglomaniacal director to his story, however true or slanderous it ended up being. Mank was 42 when he wrote Kane, and while Oldman is noticeably older, it hardly matters since nearly everyone in this era looked a good fifteen to twenty years past their actual age anyway. Compound that with the fact that Mank was already drowning in the bottle for decades and you could argue the 62 year-old might actually seem too young for the role, especially considering the script's emphasis on him being so far past his prime. 

Anyone who loves that great sub-genre of movies about writers will find a lot to appreciate in Oldman's performance, which severely deviates from the usual trope of introverted writers getting lost inside their own heads. That very well may have been the case if Mank wasn't a self-destructive trainwreck, but he's undeniably the life of the party. And knows it. Two such highfalutin Hearst parties are at the centerpiece of the picture, with the the first memorably deteriorating into a political debate about author and socialist gubernatorial candidate Upton Sinclair (briefly played by Bill Nye the Science Guy). Mank also drunkenly crashes a second one a few years later, leading to an embarrassing display where he basically pitches the Kane story to Hearst's face. 

Self-deprecating enough to be extremely likable, though not entirely oblivious to the damage he leaves in his path, it's hard not to respect the nuance Oldman bring to a real-life figure many know little about aside from his famous writing credit. And some may not even be aware of that since Welles, as director, will always be most closely associated with Kane's success. Keeping Mank in check is his secretary, Lily Collins' Rita, a young woman undeterred by her boss' bluster, or crankiness, steering him on course whether he wants to be or not. Collins leaves a sizable mark, holding together the portion of the film that most centers on his actual writing of the script in between beverages.  

Movie star and Hearst companion Marion Davies is played by an enchanting Amanda Seyfried, who's unquestionably the best thing in this, stealing every scene, nearly all of which are opposite Oldman.  From the moment she appears, Seyfried subverts all expectations of how we'd expect this well known and unfairly maligned celebrity figure to be portrayed. Witty and observant right out of the gate, she plays Davies as a force of nature justifiably tired of being overlooked and underestimated by an "old boys club" that will only ever see her as a ditzy blonde actress. 

Almost instantly on the same wavelength, what's so special and engaging about Mank and Marion's friendship is that it seems real and not put on, breaking that tired cinematic rule that there always has to be romantic strings attached. There are none here and the movie's better for it, regardless of what did or didn't happen in reality. With her expressive eyes and unmistakable facial features Seyfried really looks and talks this part of a classic old Hollywood starlet, nailing a certain rapid-fire style of speech and mannerism that seems pulled out right out of the 30's or 40's. She also gets off one of the film's best lines when trying to convince Mank not to go ahead with a project so obviously taking jabs at her relationship with Hearst. The reasoning behind the objection isn't what you'd think, but perfectly in line with the fair, pragmatic outlook this character demonstrates throughout. 

While it wouldn't exactly be fair to classify this as geared entirely at a niche audience, an argument can be made that Mank isn't the kind of picture that would be considered a huge thrill ride by most, even as some of the best efforts often aren't. But despite the irony of its protagonist having actually won an Academy Award, it definitely isn't calculated enough to be criticized as Oscar bait, mainly because Fincher's incapable of pandering to anyone. For fans of this period and setting there's a lot to revel in with the story of this man's professional and emotional downfall racing by at a almost a breakneck pace, before he's afforded a kind of redemption that ultimately comes too late for him.  

Mankiewicz's standing as a forgotten figure of cinematic history has only increased since this project was first supposed to go in front of the camera for Fincher in the late '90's so its release now feels especially fortuitous. And while any film set in Hollywood during this time would have to address the political backdrop, it holds more relevance now than it otherwise would, made all the more potent by discovering how little has changed beyond the nastiness of the discourse. 

Perceptions have also evolved about the contemporary utilization of black and white photography, as it's been justifiably re-embraced since skepticism surrounded silent throwback The Artist's Best Picture win a decade ago. Those suspecting potential gimmickry should know this looks great and represents one of the better uses of this format, reserved for a story where it feels more like a requirement than a creative choice on Fincher's part. So not only could the timing not be any better for Mank, the movie world seems to have caught up, proving it to be more than worth the wait. 

10 Movies That Could Be Re-Released in 3D

Note the title of this piece. The key word is"could," not necessarily "should." With the 3D craze in full swing with the recent successful re-release of The Lion King, and Titanic and Star Wars still on the way, more studios are jumping on the bandwagon, releasing and re-releasing every other film in three dimensions because they smell cash. And now even acclaimed directors like Steven Spielberg and Martin Scorsese are dipping their feet in the water (with The Adventures of Tintin and Hugo respectively) and and in the process maybe trying to lend the format more legitimacy. I have little doubt their motives are pure and the films may even be good, but what about us? We have to pay $15 to see it. I could care less if these guys are having a great time experimenting with the technology. It has to be worth it for audiences. At that steep price you REALLY have to show me something and even then I'm still not sure I'd be interested.

To date, I've only see one 3D movie in theaters, Tron: Legacy, which I enjoyed immensely for reasons that had more to do with its story and visuals. Re-watching it on blu-ray recently further solidified that opinion, but even when I first reviewed it I conceded the use of 3D technology was "defensible" due to the immersive nature of the story (i.e. being sucked into a computer program). This got me thinking what past titles could benefit from a 3D re-release. Of course, this still doesn't mean I'd consider seeing them, especially when I could just pop in the DVD at home, which is cheaper, not to mention a whole lot more comfortable. But in the following cases below (some obvious, others not) I can see where a 3D conversion and re-release in the format is more than just a cash grab, and even somewhat excusable for one reason or another. There's probably many more, but it's a start.

10. Citizen Kane (1941)
Though I've strangely never met a single person who holds this view, Orson Welles' Citizen Kane is widely regarded by many as "The Greatest Film Ever Made." Much, if not all, of that adoration comes from its groundbreaking technical achievements. With its deep focus photography, details in the foreground and background would really pop out in 3D, making it seemingly the perfect fit for the format. A re-release could also help shake its stodgy stigma as a homework assignment. It won't happen though. Supposedly Welles' dying wish was that his film not be colorized or tinkered with. This definitely qualifies as "tinkering." Even a full fledged remake seems likelier.

9. Crank 2: High Voltage (2009)
If ever a film was made for the format it's this. That's not to say the 2006 original (a superior effort) isn't, but the sequel takes everything the first did and jacks it up (remember the race track sex scene? the guy's head being kept alive?). It's more over-the-top, more nonsensical and more ridiculous, thus making it an even better fit for 3D. For some reason when I think back on the movie I remember it in 3D, which has always been the gift of the Crank series. So they may as well just go ahead and do it. With Crank 3D already in the works they should convert the first two and roll the trilogy into theaters together. That's something I might actually pay to see.  

8. Jurassic Park (1993)
Here's a no-brainer. Given the technology kick Spielberg's been on lately it wouldn't surprise me if it's the works already. Supposedly there are already plans to film the impending JP4 in 3D so a re-release of the 1993 original in this format is a definite possibility. And I'll admit it isn't a half-bad idea when you consider a T-Rex getting right in your face. As a theater experience it couldn't get much better than this. It's basically what 3D was created for.

7. Twister (1996)
Another no-brainer. I remember seeing this in the theater opening week and thinking nearly all of its impact would be diluted if seen on the small screen at home. As a story there really isn't much there (a bunch of scientists chasing tornadoes) but there doesn't need to be. A big effects movie of the highest order that would benefit immensely from a 3D conversion, literally taking you into the storm with debris, houses, trucks and cows flying right at you.

6. Inception (2010)
There were supposedly studio discussions with director Christopher Nolan about shooting this in 3D but he rejected the idea. While I can't say I disagree with his decision and the finished product was amazing, it could have worked. Would it have enhanced the experience? I'm not sure but down the line if they converted and re-released it the decision would at least make some sense. Like that year's Tron: Legacy, the narrative revolves around being transported into another world and you can't help but wonder how that extended sequence with Leonardo DiCaprio and Ellen Page would have played with those buildings and streets unfolding in your lap.

5. Enter The Void (2009)
Here's the only selection on the list where 3D technology can actually draw attention to an overlooked, difficult film that wouldn't get it otherwise, perhaps even improving its mainstream prospects. I'm betting very few people have even seen it and those who have are probably too traumatized by the experience to talk about it. Challenging and inaccessible beyond belief, Gasper Noe's 2009 psychedelic nightmare defies any sort of formal explanation. I still don't know what I think of it, but I do know it would look incredible in 3D. It's 2001's trippy Stargate sequence stetched over 2 hours, boasting some of the most awe-inspiring visual effects produced on an independent budget, and a first person P.O.V. that throws you head first into life, a death and beyond. A 3D conversion would only complete the process, taking you all the way in.

4. Speed Racer (2008)
While it has its few supporters, anyone who was able to sit through 2008's underwhelming Speed Racer will have to admit it got one big thing right: The visuals. 3D can give this critical and commercial flop a new lease on life with a fresh presentation that plays to its biggest (only?) strength. When watching it at the time I thought a 3D release was more than justifiable and still do. The question is whether it'll still be a mind numbing bore. There's no way to know for sure but this is the film's best chance at survival.

3. The Matrix (1999)
You knew this would show up on here. It had to. Of the films listed it's the most likely to happen. And I'm betting soon. As someone who's no fan of The Matrix at all and thinks it only offers impressive visual effects, it's of little surprise I'd offer it up as the perfect 3D conversion candidate. And if we're lucky maybe everyone will be so dazzled they'll forget how awful its two sequels are and they'll can convert those too. 3D will never fix the huge story flaws in the trilogy but it could get us so lost in the Matrix we'd at least maybe temporarily forgive them. Going in this direction could only result in improvement. 

2. The Wizard of Oz (1939)
Speaking of twisters. The wicked witch, the yellow brick road, flying monkeys, falling houses. It says a great deal about the quality of a film released in 1939 that it could be re-released today and the images and effects would benefit--and perhaps be enhanced-- by 3D. And that's not even taking into account the story, which also seems to be the perfect fit for this technology. It's yet another example of the viewer being transported to another world, making the use of the format defensible. The unforgettable transition from Kansas to Oz can now not only go from black and white to technicolor but from 2D to 3D. There's also that added bonus of getting to see a classic film we've experienced many times over in a whole new way. Should they do it? Of course not. But if they did, I'd have to at least acknowledge they picked the right movie to experiment on.

1. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
The ultimate trip indeed. We absolutely shouldn't do this but there's no denying the temptation. And as much as I hate to admit it, there's no question this would work. Among films considered classics you're unlikely to find one that inspires as divisive a reaction. People either love this or hate it, and while I consider myself firmly in the former camp, it's possible what supporters appreciate most about Kubrick's classic will only be enhanced in 3D while naysayers' complaints (such as its pacing) would likely diminish. It doesn't "need" it since it's an  experience either way, but it would be nice if a glorious 3D presentation that accentuates even more of the film's visual strengths could sway those who never got on board. The Stargate sequence alone justifies the idea.

Reaction to the AFI 100

Well, it's over. The American Film Institute has announced their 100 greatest movies of all-time and updated their previous decade old list to reflect "a changing cultural perspective." The expression "the more things change the more they stay the same" has never been more applicable than now because this list is practically identical to the one they put out a decade earlier with some minor changes, mostly negative. The good news is outside of two or three selections I thought were disgraceful, and one actor's mental breakdown, the show went better than I thought. But that's not saying much.

If one thing stood out it's that the AFI needs to move into the 21st century (or even late 20th). Some of their picks (especially toward the back of the list) were dated and the rankings were predictably all over the map, but that's the AFI for you. Overall, it wasn't horrible. The list skewed older, which I expected. That's why I used my last blog to highlight some newer titles I thought were worthy and unworthy of making it. I knew the classics I liked would be on there so I guess now is my chance to give you my opinion on some of those. So here's their "updated" 2007 Top 100 list. An asterisk indicates a new entry. My analysis follows.

1. Citizen Kane
2. The Godfather
3. Casablanca
4. Raging Bull
5. Singin' in the Rain
6. Gone with the Wind
7. Lawrence of Arabia
8. Schindler's List
9. Vertigo
10. The Wizard of Oz
11. City Lights
12. The Searchers
13. Star Wars
14. Psycho
15. 2001: A Space Odyssey
16. Sunset Boulevard
17. The Graduate
18. The General*
19. On the Waterfront
20. It's a Wonderful Life
21. Chinatown
22. Some Like It Hot
23. The Grapes of Wrath
24. E.T.
25. To Kill a Mockingbird
26. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
27. High Noon
28. All About Eve
29. Double Indemnity
30. Apocalypse Now
31. The Maltese Falcon
32. The Godfather Part II
33. One Flew Over the Cuckoo Nest
34. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs
35. Annie Hall
36. The Bridge on the River Kwai
37. The Best Years of Our Lives
38. The Treasure of the Sierra Madre
39. Dr. Strangelove
40. The Sound of Music
41. King Kong
42. Bonnie and Clyde
43. Midnight Cowboy
44. The Philadelphia Story
45. Shane
46. It Happened One Night
47. A Streetcar Named Desire
48. Rear Window
49. Intolerance*
50. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
51. West Side Story
52. Taxi Driver
53. The Deer Hunter
54. M*A*S*H
55. North by Northwest
56. Jaws
57. Rocky
58. The Gold Rush
59. Nashville*
60. Duck Soup
61. Sullivan's Travels*
62. American Graffiti
63. Cabaret*
64. Network
65. The African Queen
66. Raiders of the Lost Ark
67. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?*
68. Unforgiven
69. Tootsie
70. A Clockwork Orange
71. Saving Private Ryan
72. The Shawshank Redemption*
73. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
74. The Silence of the Lambs
75. In the Heat of the Night*
76. Forrest Gump
77. All the President's Men*
78. Modern Times
79. The Wild Bunch
80. The Apartment
81. Spartacus*
82. Sunrise*
83. Titanic*
84. Easy Rider
85. A Night at the Opera*
86. Platoon
87. 12 Angry Men*
88. Bringing Up Baby
89. The Sixth Sense*
90. Swing Time*
91. Sophie's Choice*
92. Goodfellas
93. The French Connection
94. Pulp Fiction
95. The Last Picture Show*
96. Do the Right Thing*
97. Blade Runner*
98. Yankee Doodle Dandy
99. Toy Story*
100. Ben-Hur

90-100: So far, so good. It feels right for Toy Story (99), Blade Runner (97) and Do The Right Thing (96) to be where they're at. I'm glad The Last Picture Show (95) made it. I really like that film. But wait…why the hell is Pulp Fiction only ranked 94th?!!! And why is M. Night Shayamalan being advertised in the opening credits. Oh no. Oh...no.


80-90: Everyone will be upset Goodfellas is at 92. I'm not that big a fan so I don't have a problem with it. What follows I do. In a move that likely sent everyone who read my blog Tuesday into hysterical laughter (or tears) The Sixth Sense (89) not only made the list, IT RANKED HIGHER THAN PULP FICTION!!! Shayamalan must have some very incriminating photos of AFI jurors. But hey, at least we got our huge injustice out of the way early and they didn't spoil its twist ending. Don't wory though, they'll take care of that with another film later. I'm sorry but I do think Titanic (83) deserves a spot and it is ranked low (but also higher than Pulp Fiction!) so no one can complain…at least too much. I will admit their video package made Titanic look silier than I remembered. In the clips DiCaprio looks really young and I have to say Winslet looks much better now. Just an observation.


70-80:I had a feeling All The President's Men (77) would be showing up around now even though it's a new entry. Sorry again, but I think Forrest Gump (76) belongs on the list, even if its placement is way off. The clip reminds us how great Alan Silvestri's score for that film was. However The Shawshank Redemption (72) and A Clockwork Orange (70) should be ranked WAY higher than they are. You could make a case for top 20 or 30 for either. I'm not a huge fan of Saving Private Ryan (71) but I recognize its historical significance. They get a pass from me on that one.


60-70: Here comes the second batch of fireworks for the evening with Tootsie coming in at 69, or should I say coming in at all. I was going rant about how bad a selection it would be in my last blog but I figured it was a thankless cause. They put it on last time and I thought they'd do it again. I was right, but hey at least it dropped 7 spots. That's not the bad part though. The bad part was Dustin Hoffman's "interview" which saw him burst into tears over the film's importance and deep message. Yes, this on a show that contains films like Schindler's List. I respect Hoffman a lot as an actor, but this weirded me out. Raiders of the Lost Ark at 66-applause. Network at 64-more applause.


50-60: I love Robert Altman's Nashville (59) and M*A*S*H (54) and I wouldn't complain if they were higher. No one will like Rocky coming in at 57 but I say it's lucky it made the list at all. Is it me or have the visual effects and in North by Northwest (55) not aged well at all? Now here's where we're starting to get some really big titles. Taxi Driver (52) is ranked too low and should be the highest Scorsese picture on here. Higher than Raging Bull which makes a way too high appearance later. Stay tuned for that one. The Deer Hunter (53) could also be bumped up a little, not much. Jaws feels about right at 56.


40-50: We have our first 21st century appearance on the list with The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring at 50. It figures they picked the recent film that has the oldest Hollywood feel to it. It doesn't seem out of place though. Next is the oldest with Intolerance at 49. This is what I'm talking about when I said they need to move forward and some of their picks are dated. Is this movie from 1916 even available anywhere? There have been better movies since the early 1900's, AFI. It's okay to admit it. Rear Window (48) is my favorite Hitchcock film. Midnight Cowboy (43) you could argue is top 10 or 20 material. Halle Berry is interviewed for Bonnie and Clyde (42). Speaking of numbers, I can't believe she's 40. Wow. And she's right it's is an awesome movie. Anyone who hasn't seen it should.


30-40: Dr. Strangelove (39) really fell from last time. 13 spots. I guess something had to, but I could think of others on here more deserving of that huge a drop. Annie Hall, though dated by today standards, was really the first romantic comedy and a huge influence but it's still too high at 35, refecting the AFI's safety first policy. The Godfather Part II held steady at 32 but for some reason I remember it being higher the first time around. I love Apocalypse Now (30) and I really wanted to see it crack to top 10. And this coming from someone who isn't a big fan of war films.


20-30: Remember my complaint about dated picks? Well, To Kill A Mockingbird (25) is NOT one of them. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't have liked anything else I mentioned to take its spot. I kind of get my wish as Cameron Crowe appears for an interview, but unfortunately it's to talk about the overrated Some Like It Hot (22). Is the AFI obsessed with cross-dressing films? Everyone will think E.T. is ranked too high at 24, and while I think certain films below it should be ranked higher, I'm glad it came in where it did. It's my personal favorite Spielberg film and this is the kind of pick I wish there would be more of on this list. After watching the clip of it I became even more convinced. Which begs the question: Why can't Spielberg make imaginative films like this anymore? I had to write an essay on The Grapes of Wrath (23) in high school, which was difficult since I fell asleep in class during the film.


10-20: I would say Chinatown (21) should be higher but we're in the top 20 now so it's tough to make that argument anymore. The field's crowded at the top and competition is fierce. On The Waterfront (19) dropped 11 spots but I don't think it's top 20 material and wouldn't mind if it fell further. Some people (Roger Ebert included) think The Graduate (17) is massively overrated. They may be happy it dropped out of the top 10. I think it's slightly overrated and still ranked too high. In the AFI's defense, if 2001: A Space Odyssey was number 2 I'd still say it wasn't ranked high enough. That said it should be in the top 5 and Star Wars (13), would have never been made if not for Kubrick's masterpeice. And hey, where's The Empire Strikes Back? Spielberg is interviewed and compares Psycho (14) to The Sixth Sense. Excuse me while I throw up.


1-10: Morgan Freeman tells us only one film in the top 10 is in the same spot it was a decade ago. Gee, what do you think that could be? My problems with the top 10 are minimal (I mean they're all at least worthy, except Singin' in the Rain) but I have one question: Did Raging Bull (4) take on some new kind of cultural significance this past decade and I missed the memo? It's a great film but its 20 spot jump into the fourth position is laughably extreme. I also think Schindler's List (8) is too high, but that's at least understandable. It's an important film. I do question whether all this praise for Citizen Kane (1) is doing more harm than good to the movie at this point. It's giving the film an intimidating reputation, which may drive casual viewers away. That would be a shame because it is really is good. It also doesn't help that the AFI feels obligated once again TO SPOIL THE ENDING OF THE FILM for those who haven't seen it. And that's more people than you think. They won't be rushing out to buy it now.

So what's the key to getting your film on the AFI 100? Make sure it's not made within the past 2 or 3 decades. I appreciate that they want to expose the audience to older films, and as expected the special was well done, but it wouldn't hurt if they took a broader, less snobbish view toward films. The Sixth Sense isn't a bad film at all but its inclusion came off even more ridiculous than I thought it would because outside of Saving Private Ryan and The Lord of the Rings it was the only fairly modern movie on the list. However, I don't think it was the worst choice overall (that prize goes to Tootsie). Some films that made it 10 years ago that were wrongfully excluded this go around were: Dr. Zhivago, Fantasia, Rebel Without A Cause, Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, Fargo, Patton, The Manchurian Candidate.

But really…it's tough to get too upset. This isn't a definitive list of any kind. No list is. It's just their opinions and questionable ones at that. We all know our favorite films and we'll always have them whether they show up on the AFI 100 or not.

Greatest Twists in Movie History

In my recent review of Smokin' Aces I wrote the film contains "a twist ending that actually seems like it required some thought because it does make a lot of sense, is surprising, and I'd imagine it makes the film look better on repeated viewings."

This got me thinking about some of my favorite twists in movie history. For a twist to really be effective and work for me it has to accomplish a few things:

1. It can't cheat and must play fair. No "it was all a dream."
2. It can't be a one-trick pony (i.e. "He was dead the whole time").
3. Of course, it must hold up to logical scrutiny and make sense.
4. It must be shocking, but not done just simply for shock value.
5. The twist must make a larger important thematic point within the film and take the motion picture to another level it wouldn't have reached without it.

The films I'm about to list, as far as I'm concerned, represent the cream of the crop as far as twists. The twist doesn't have to come at the end of the film, but most here do. Originally I was going to do a top 10 list but realized there really aren't 10 I feel are worthy and I didn't want any crap on here. So we have 9. I'm also going to attempt to explain why they're so great without revealing any of them. No spoiler warnings here. I wouldn't dare ruin these surprises for anyone.

9. The Rules of Attraction (2002)

Over four years ago when a friend recommended this film (Roger Avary's adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis' 1987 novel) to me he said it should be required viewing for every incoming college freshman across America. I was wondering what he could possibly be talking about until midway through when we find out who's been putting those letters in Sean Bateman's mailbox. We and the characters in the film couldn't see what was right in front of our faces the whole time. It's at this point the movie mines territory a whole lot deeper and darker than we thought it could. This is the only twist on the list that's actually difficult to watch. Harry Nilsson's "Without You" hasn't sounded the same to me since.


8. The Village (2004)


Okay, let the hate mail pour in. I'm probably the only person in America who not only enjoyed this film, but consider it Shyamalan's best. Did he steal the twist from an episode of The Twilight Zone? He sure did, but if you're going to steal ideas from someone, Rod Serling is a damn good choice. Plus, he was able to take that twist and plug it into his own compelling story in a fresh and original way. I saw that Twilight Zone episode, but still couldn't telegraph this ending coming from a mile away. You can have your Sixth Sense, but I'll take The Village. Ask yourself this question though: Did the twist in The Sixth Sense work as a social commentary and deep meditation on the world we live in?

7. Oldboy (2003)


This one's a sensitive subject for me because this twist was actually ruined for me before I saw the film. Putting that aside however, I really hate it when a movie writes a check its ass can't cash. Oldboy doesn't do that. It creates a mystery: Why has Oh Dae-Su been locked up for 15 years? Then it delivers on its promise and that revelation not only meets, but exceeds our expectations. But that's not even the twist. That comes when he opens that mysterious box. What's inside cruelly reminds us that revenge is a dish best served cold.


6. The Usual Suspects (1995)


Like many great twists this one begins with a mystery that's solved by the end of the film: Who is Keyser Soze? Is he real or just a myth? Alright so this one breaks rule #1 a little bit and the ending admittedly does kind of negate the entire film. But it does make sense and provides an excellent showcase for Kevin Spacey, who's performance in this film led to a well deserved Oscar for Best Supporting Actor. When the smug, smart-ass Detective Kujan thinks he has it all figured out he drops that mug to the floor and realizes…well, let me stop there. A shocking movie moment. Effectively spoofed in Scary Movie.


5. Saw (2004)


Sure Saw II and III had effective twist endings but neither worked as well as this, the original that set it all in motion. The Saw franchise is often credited as being just a blood and gore exercise, and while that may be true for the latter films, the original never really gets the credit it deserves for being a smart thriller. This is demonstrated in the big twist at the end which not only holds up to logic but accomplishes the rare feat of being completely guessable yet nearly impossible to see coming. When it does finally come in the final minutes we're introduced to one of the most memorable and complex modern horror movie villains in Jigsaw. I'm convinced part of the reason this franchise still going strong and is showing no signs of slowing is because of the clever execution of this twist in the first film. It's nice to shock (especially in a horror movie), but it's even better if you have a great story to support it.


4. The Planet of the Apes (1968)

Here's one of those twists that everyone seems determined to spoil. The shocking final image was even plastered on the VHS and DVD releases of the film. Rod Serling came in to write the twist ending, which remains to this day one of the most enduring closing images in cinema history. Like The Village it adheres strictly to my #5 rule and gives you something to think about when it's over. It's not just shocking to be shocking. Serling's specialty was social commentary and he was at the top of his game with this one.


3. Citizen Kane (1941)


You're probably thinking this isn't a twist ending, but it is, and in the most literal sense. It takes a seemingly minor detail earlier in the film and rewards the viewer at the end for paying attention to it. This is fitting because so much of what make Citizen Kane special are the little details, technical and otherwise, that are buried just beneath the surface. It's in the film's final moments that one of those little details become supremely important in answering the infamous question: What is "Rosebud?" The answer suggests that in the end the Charles Foster Kane that everyone thought was long gone was actually still there, if just barely.

While Welles' picture may be considered the greatest film ever made, its final twist is criminally underrated. It always boggles my mind that all the critics feel it's their duty to spoil this twist since they assume "everyone knows it anyway." Even worse, they hide behind the film's lofty reputation as if it affords them the right to spoil it. Even worse, they're probably keeping audiences, who are already intimidated by it, away. I love the film but would I have loved it more had I not known the big secret going in?


2. Fight Club (1999)


How deep is the twist at the end of David Fincher's Fight Club? I once wrote a 10- page thesis paper on it for a psychology course in college and I probably could have gone on for 10 more. This is one of those twists that so perfectly fits into the theme of the film and is so multi-layered I can't even get into it without giving it away. Let's just say everyone was rejoicing when Edward Norton was named as the new Bruce Banner for the upcoming Incredible Hulk film largely because of the work he does here in a tricky role. Maybe the quintessential film of the 90's.


1. The Game (1997)


This is the closest I'll get for now to reviewing a film that on any given day could compete as my all-time favorite. It's easily the best thriller I've ever seen. Much of this has to do with what unfolds in the final 10 minutes. Sure I've heard all the complaints about it not holding up logically. Well, it does. Without giving too much away, it's important to remember due to the nature of the story we couldn't be shown all the strings that were being pulled.

The twist is so simple, yet unbelievably complex. It takes a movie that up until its final minutes was a way above average thriller and turns it into a harrowing, devastating tale of redemption. When the curtain was finally pulled back on the who and the why behind Nicholas Van Orton's birthday present, my heart was in my throat, and it works just as well on repeated viewings. After watching it once go back and marvel again at the supporting performances (particularly Sean Penn's) and John Brancato and Michael Ferris' Rubik's cube of a script, that helped pull it all off.

The biggest twist of all may be that this film came from the notoriously bleak David Fincher, one of our darkest directors (just see number 2 on this list). The most unlikely director to be behind a morality tale. It's never given credit as his best film or as one of the best thrillers of the modern era. This is the very definition of a perfect twist ending.