David Mamet is a well-known playwright who has been half a century old, with many themes, obsessions, patterns, rhythms and tics running in his work, so it's easy to investigate and simply categorize it as "Mametesque". Continuity is there.

However, when I look at the chronology of Mamet's career, I was shocked by a huge and overwhelming split - a hue, philosophy, style and definition of his identity. In dramas that put him on the map, such as “Buffalo in America” and “Sexual Perverts in Chicago,” he tries to approximate the way ordinary people speak, which is why these words appear on the half spire of jagged blasphemy, characters step on each other’s percussion thoughts. It all reaches Mamet's 1983 masterpiece, Glengarry Glen Ross, a timeless celebration/prosecution of small partner salesmen, turning the deceptive language of the fraudster into Crookback Backback Poetry. He continued to use Hollywood sarcasm with the attitude of "Plastic Speed" (1988).

The split arrived in 1992, when Mamet wrote two things about sexual harassment in an academic setting as "Oleanna". In hindsight, the play tells him/her the fixation of the Battle of Wells is ahead of the times. However, "Oleanna" sounds like it was written by Chatbot Mamet, as the character shows his own performance in fragments of Herky-Jerky sentences, or often not revealing - or often not.

Mamet no longer reflects the voice of words. He is deconstructing it over-answer. Critics often compare him to Harold Pinter, like Pinter Anti-Patus - Words that shoot like minimalist shrapnel without adding up. The spectacular reality of "Glengarry" is its glory. (That's why the 1992 film version is the greatest Martin Scorsese film ever shot.) But Mamet seems to be trying to move toward some kind of stylized word game cubism. Looking into the future, his dramas become increasingly airless, mysterious and dogmatic. He no longer captures human nature. He fixed it like a butterfly and illustrated it.

"Henry Johnson" is the 2023 film version of Mamet Play that premiered in Los Angeles (the first film he directed in 17 years), and in at least its first third film, it brings you back to your space, without the voices of two people on stage or on stage or using shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield shield and shield shield and shield and shield and ships back to that space. In this case, the People are Henry (Evan Jonigkeit), the film’s main character is a small executive in the owl way and Paul Thomas Anderson and Paul Thomas Anderson’s convention, whose boss Barnes is played by Mamet’s ordinary Chris Bauer, who reminds me of many of my Tim McIntire in the late 70s and late 80s (once being once overwhelmed), who was once overwhelmed (once being once overwhelmed). Bauer, with jowly's baby face and burst into tears, became the role of a controversial senior company official who was so active that we realized he was interrogating him soon after.

While they stand in an office with traditional traps (capped lamps, whiskey cabinets), Barnes wants to know about Henry’s relationship with his scandalous friend who was guilty of manslaughter. When we hear about crime, it is dark and disturbing. A friend asked someone to get pregnant and hoped she would terminate her pregnancy. When she refused, he caused a miscarriage through violence. Early on, you’ll have a bitter taste for neoconservative Mamet, because this crime seems to be a potential provocation by the playwright on abortion. But the real theme of the conversation is the real theme of the friend of Henry, a psychopath, which can be traced back to being a college woman, and even then, Henry is the kind of soft trusting soul that might be his mark.

"Henry Johnson" consists of three behaviors, each in a different environment, each revolving around a monologue as a dialogue. Henry is the character that appears in every scene. This is a reflection on how human manipulation is, in a twist: accusation of crime, and the revelation that Henry is closer to his friends. In the next scene, Henry is in prison, wearing a yellow prison fool, and our first thought is: How will this fool survive there for five minutes?

His roommate, Gene (Labeouf), asked the question. Henry seems less clever than the streets, let alone the prisons are clever. And genes seem to be the smartest criminal you've ever met. He is one of the outstanding violent sociopaths, cunning sociopaths, such as Jack Henry Abbott, who lives on him with awesome beliefs. Gene's eyes are always studying you (they are like radars), his meaning for the fairytale princess (he said the villain and the prince are the same) to how to avoid everything to be killed in the prison yard.

However, as good as Rabbov, Gene's aggressiveness and advice began to be a little more. He is obviously Mamet's mouthpiece, but the movie starts to lose its content. Evan Jonigkeit (Mamet's son) makes Henry a passive, grumpy naivety that we never have much interest in. He is a liar in both ways: everyone around him is manipulating him, and Mamet seems not too interested in what happened to him. "Henry Johnson" is a gorgeously conceited parade that never quite becomes a drama. The film starts off track when we learn that Henry has been flirting with his prison counselor. Everything about this - the fact that Gene wants Henry to use the relationship to make himself a gun - feels so deadly that Mamet is reluctant to even fill it.

Then, in the last scene, Henry gets the gun. He has taken the prison librarian (Dominic Hoffman) hostage and everything that happens seems totally untrue, but Mamet doesn't care because he has another monologue for you to listen to. This is from the librarian and it doesn't work at all. This movie deflated before your eyes.

But, in fact, as you recall, you realize it has been deflated for a while, even during Labeouf’s powerful performance, as David Mamet no longer writes drama and can pass the test of reality’s scent. In his mind, he has surpassed this. He is writing drama, which is the delivery system of his "ideas" playing system. "Henry Johnson" should have a poster with the following sign: "Three monologues. One liar. One damn lengthy playwright." Looking at it, you will feel the depth of Mamet's talent. Never left him. But you also feel his current contempt for entertainment. He wanted to take us out of our comfort zone. The problem is that he creates his own rare discomfort, which is important.