Allegedly he is so disliked by his peers that he lost the Oscar and the DGA. does anyone know why? Nikki finke has alluded to his arrogance but many filmmakers are arrogant. I wonder if anyone has heard any stories.
David fincher''s reputation
|by Anonymous||reply 148||08/24/2015|
We always got along well.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||03/01/2011|
I don't have any stories but... I just listened to his audio commentary on The Social Network a couple weeks back. He stuck me as self involved and somewhat of an a-hole. Definitely has some anger and rage issues.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||03/01/2011|
Fincher is not unliked. He is just hard to work with with his penchant for one hundred takes a shot. You are thinking of David O Russell the director of "The Fighter". As Lily Tomlin or George Clooney. Fincher lost simply because Tom Hooper won.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||03/01/2011|
*chuckling at Miss OP's naivete in addressing a lump of hefty, Cheeto encrusted, homebound unemployed queens on the status of an esteemed director's reputation*
|by Anonymous||reply 4||03/01/2011|
Being an asshole didn't hurt me!
|by Anonymous||reply 5||03/01/2011|
|by Anonymous||reply 6||03/01/2011|
Fincher's asshole reputation comes from marketing and production people mainly.
He's very patronizing and dismissive of people. He apparently doesn't have a lot of respect for those professions' day to day realities.
Mike Medavoy worked on Zodiac and basically said if you think producers (Rudin & Weinstein) are bad, Fincher is worse. This was during an Oscar roundtable.
A few actors have publicly criticized him, but that's rare. (Robert Duvall dismissed his working methods and Lee Ermey (sp?) also disliked him personally.)
Russell is an evil scumbag; whole other level of dysfunction than Fincher. I read a couple of books that suggested he was emotionally disturbed.
People on sites like deadline, who are usually in the industry, allude to violence, and sexual misconduct but are never specific (other than the Clooney incident, which went public).
He supposedly put Christopher Nolan in a headlock years ago at an industry party. Considering Nolan is rumoured to have a bit of a temper, I'm surprised Russell didn't get his ass kicked.
I'd love to know the real truth from anyone who has interacted with any of them.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||03/23/2011|
I had to kick him in the nuts a couple of times to get his attention on set.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||03/23/2011|
He is uninterested in the publicity machine. He refuses to kiss ass or suffer fools. Therefore, by Hollywood standards, he is "difficult".
God forbid someone just wants to make the best movies he can and not deal with the managers and the agents and the ass kissing and the schmoozing.
Very similar to Stanley Kubrick, who was branded a loon because he didn't want to play the Hollywood game and just wanted to be left alone to make movies. And if you sign up to work for him you understand what you're getting into. I think Jake Gyllenhaal made the mistake of thinking he would be treated like a star on "Zodiac" and got a rude awakening.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||03/23/2011|
Jake Gyllenhaal had problems working with him on "Zodiac". Fincher is incredibly demanding of his actors; some love it, others hate it. Here's an article about the making of "Zodiac" that discusses his methods, and terrible temper.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||03/23/2011|
"Fincher's asshole reputation comes from marketing and production people mainly.
He's very patronizing and dismissive of people. He apparently doesn't have a lot of respect for those professions' day to day realities."
They don't deserve respect. Especially the marketing people. They fuck up more things than not.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||03/23/2011|
I don't totally buy the whole 'uninterested & above it all' argument.
If he was, he wouldn't have done all the awards circuit and press for The Social Network. He even did a round of interviews for fanboy sites, FFS (collider.com, etc.)
Kubrick was branded a loon because he was eccentric, especially towards the end of his life.
OK, marketing I can see. ;)
Although, I do think he comes in loaded for bear with people who are just trying to keep their jobs. His default is anti-authority for its own sake.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||03/23/2011|
he cut off Gwyneth's head and put it in a box
|by Anonymous||reply 13||03/23/2011|
Fincher should sample some humble pie. He has no right to be arrogant. Except for The Social Network, all of his movies are junk.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||03/24/2011|
Fincher is clearly trying to be the next Kubrick, with a plethora of takes for each scene - it's nothing but a power trip. And I'll bet most of it is unnecessary. There are a lot of talented directors who make very fine films on low budgets with few takes, and they're as interesting as anything Fincher has ever done.%0D %0D I know people lionize Kubrick, but IMO he's one of the most overrated directors of the last century.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||03/24/2011|
I agree R15. Kubrick's later films are torture to sit through. The Shining doesn't hold a candle to Carrie. Is it true that the ordeal of making The Shining pretty much destroyed Shelley Duvall's interest in acting?
|by Anonymous||reply 16||03/24/2011|
When 'The Shining' first came out someone close to Kubrick (daughter?) was permitted to show a behind-the-scenes documentary. I remember seeing it on TV (I'm old) and being startled at how Kubrick shouted at Duvall, told her the whole set was waiting, she needed to deliver, now. A harangue to that effect. (Maybe it was when Torrance was axing the door and Kubrick was trying to create more fear, but still.) Anyway, after the director died I saw the documentary again on a DVD extra. The bullying shouting had been cut.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||03/24/2011|
I was thinking it was Kubrick's wife who shot that doc, R17, but I'm too lazy to look it up. I remember how awful he was, but I also remember how everyone excused him for being an asshole because he was an artist. Even as a young kid, I realized that was completely bogus. But that mentality still reigns...hell, look at all the hollywood pricks who give Polanski a pass to this day. For such a "liberal bastion", Hollywood is awfully chauvinistic, xenophobic and racist to this day.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||03/24/2011|
I don't think Fincher is that bad, R14, especially if you compare him to the American films out today. Zodiac was gorgeous, but the acting, ironically, was horrible. RDJ just phoned it in, and Gyllenhaal was out of his league. In fairness, I think Fincher fought with the suits over casting it. Haven't seen The Social Network yet, but I hated The West Wing, so I'm not getting my hopes up.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||03/24/2011|
Fincher should simply go back to directing music videos, which is exactly where he belongs!
Though, he was even arrogant back then, he's always been a douchebag.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||03/24/2011|
Which music videos is he most famous for?
|by Anonymous||reply 21||03/24/2011|
David Fincher is ugly.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||03/24/2011|
I wonder how well he'll get along with Angelina Jolie? He's rumored to be directing Cleopatra.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||03/25/2011|
He's not rumored to be directing Cleopatra. He is in discussions to direct. If Jolie wants him he can have the job.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||03/25/2011|
Vogue, Express Yourself, few Paula Abdul's videos, Rolling Stones "Love is strong" with giant people, Only for Nine Inch Nails. He was a great director of music videos, and he is great director of movies. Se7en and Fight Club are incredible movies, and while I didn't like some aspects of The Social Network, I think as a director he did amazing job.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||03/25/2011|
I don't know about Ermy, Fincher said some good things about him in commentary for Seven, but Duvall criticised directors who shoot a lot of takes, not him personally.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||03/25/2011|
He directed Freedom 90.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||03/25/2011|
I never saw FIGHT CLUB - no interest in the subject matter, but SE7EN is really not that much better than many other serial killer films in story and acting. I liked SOCIAL NETWORK a lot, but I don't know that a few other directors couldn't have made just as good a film of that script. ZODIAC's problems were more with the script than the acting, though Gyllenhaal was certainly miscast as the lead.%0D %0D However skilled Fincher is as a director and visual craftsman, his films in general are not all that remarkable as a whole. %0D %0D Much like Kubrick's films, many of which are all about the formal elements of filmmaking at the expense of everything else. You can see the skill, but it's a very cold sort of achievement.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||03/25/2011|
or perhaps he lost the oscar for other reasons, a lot of love for The King's Speech for instance
|by Anonymous||reply 29||03/25/2011|
[quote]Zodiac was gorgeous, but the acting, ironically, was horrible. RDJ just phoned it in, and Gyllenhaal was out of his league. I thought Gyllenhaal at least tried to give a performance. RDJ was awful. And the movie was well-made, but nothing extraordinary.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||03/25/2011|
He was also being very deprecating about THE SOCIAL NETWORK during awards season, saying it was not one of his best movies and didn't get why people were all over it. I remember thinking, "Why are you pulling a Katherine Heigl or Megan Fox?" Dissing your movie when you're supposed to be promoting it.
So that may also have been a factor.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||03/25/2011|
He sounds like an ass from that NY Times article. All of the actors were pretty negative about Fincher, Jakey was just less smooth about it.%0D %0D I am a fan of both of their work but I have a hard time understanding how he and Aaron Sorkin ever got together. Hard to believe their egos fit in a room together.%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 32||03/25/2011|
There was a profile piece in W magazine about Fincher. The Social Network was supposed to be Sorkin's directorial debut, but when Fincher jumped on board, that went out the window. Sorkin didn't really seem bent out of shape about it.%0D %0D I'm really interested to see what he does with The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. I've heard they completely changed the ending, which I'm not sure was the best idea. I think it will be a big hit though, just because the book is so popular.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||03/25/2011|
Does Angelina has the patience to deal with Fincher's temperament for Cleopatra? She knows what she is dealing with if she decides to work with him. Brad could give her the inside scoop after filming 7even with Fincher.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||03/25/2011|
R32, R33 Scott Rudin was the power behind the throne for this; he brought Sorkin in as a writer. Rudin figured he'd just get a good, but modest script, like Sorkin's TV work.
When he saw it, he realized that there was money to be made and no way a first-time helmer, especially one with Sorkin's problems, could make it.
In return for stepping aside and playing ball, he got unprecedented set access/input.
I think Fincher was a poor choice for this movie-style over substance. Rudin picked him to generate buzz and because he would not fuck with the script and cause problems with Sorkin, unlike say Aronofsky.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||03/25/2011|
Fight club is his best film hands down, and I like thrillers in general, saw many-many thrillers in my life, and Se7en is among best, if not best movie of this genre. It's a question of personal taste, of course, but I think he is remarkable director, but he needs good scripts to create something very good. Well, same can be said about any director.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||03/25/2011|
Jake Gyllenhaal in 'Zodiac' seemed a bit mousy and not very manly. Throughout the film I wondered if he did it intentionally - you know, acting. Or if he was just letting his true self shine through.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||03/25/2011|
[quote]Jake Gyllenhaal in 'Zodiac' seemed a bit mousy and not very manly. Throughout the film I wondered if he did it intentionally - you know, acting. Or if he was just letting his true self shine through.%0D %0D %0D %0D I've never seen a movie where Jake acted manly. I don't think he has it in him.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||03/25/2011|
The only actor who can calmed him down is Brad Pitt:
"...Fincher also is known for being a tortured filmmaker. "If he doesn't get the shot he wants, he's physically pained," Henson says. "His shoulders hunch. He gets sweaty and flushed. He'll say things like, 'I'd have the perfect shot if that (expletive) extra would stop looking in the camera.' "
About the only thing that relaxes him, she says, is Pitt.
"He's David's muse, partly because he's so easygoing," she says. "He'll crack a joke, or they'll start ripping on each other, and everything is relaxed again."
|by Anonymous||reply 39||03/25/2011|
Don't forget Aerosmith's "Janie's Got A Gun" and Madonna's best video, "Bad Girl."
|by Anonymous||reply 40||03/25/2011|
He also directed Vanilla's "No Way No Way" video, but doesn't take credit for it as he did it as a favour for a friend.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||03/25/2011|
Some people here don't seem to understand that just because they personally don't like a film that means it's not a good film.%0D %0D David Fincher is so obviously one of his generation's greatest directors. Whether or not some dizzy queen likes his work doesn't really matter.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||03/25/2011|
"About the only thing that relaxes him, she says, is Pitt."
Hell, Pitt would probably definitely calm me with his deep voice and would probably relax anyone, gay or straight, male or female, straight or gay. Of course, getting an erection in his presence probably doesn't count as calming.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||03/27/2011|
[quote]"About the only thing that relaxes him, she says, is Pitt."
Or is it Brad Pitt's weed stash?
That said, Fincher seems to be the only director who can actually get a half decent performance out of Brad.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||03/27/2011|
Thank you for the find R39.
Muse, eh--really? Is that what they're calling it now?
Hmm...I wonder if I'm projecting or not.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||03/27/2011|
Here's a cute photo of David and Brad
|by Anonymous||reply 46||03/27/2011|
Considering the real gossip threads are gone, I'm going to take that as an answer to my projection question. ;)
|by Anonymous||reply 47||03/27/2011|
|by Anonymous||reply 48||03/30/2011|
David looks really into Brad in that photo...funny that Brad has that effect on David.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||03/30/2011|
"funny that Brad has that effect on David."
I think Brad has that affect many.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||04/01/2011|
the Fincher/Jake Gyllenhaal combo was a disaster from the start. I remember reading an Ang Lee article where he stated that Jake can't take direction very well, he's more of a freestyle actor.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||04/01/2011|
If you can't take direction very well, you're not a good actor. Isn't that sort of the definition of a good actor? You can do what is asked of you?
|by Anonymous||reply 52||04/01/2011|
I like Seven but only noticed, after a few viewings, that Pitt was pretty bad in it. From what I've seen, his range tops out at pretty decent and bottoms out at laughably bad. Troy...give me strength. I thought he was decent in Benjamin Button but he was more beautiful than great in it. It's obvious Fincher loves the camera on him. I was surprised Pitt got an oscar nom for it. There wasn't another performance more worthy that year?
|by Anonymous||reply 53||04/01/2011|
When were the words 'worthy' and 'Oscar' mutually inclusive, R53?
Gyllenhaal really isn't an actor to me in the first place. I'm not being sarcastic.
He was a well-connected guy the studios tried to promote to fill the vacuum of male leads in the late-twenties to mid-thirties age range.
I'd disagree slightly with that R52. A lot of good actors need specific cues/direction in order to give a good performance. A classically trained Brit and an American method actor could be equally good, but need different instructions to bring out what a director is trying to capture.
That's why Fincher is not a top-tier director to me because he can't direct actors. My way or the highway is fine for MTV gloss, but it doesn't produce rounded films.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||04/01/2011|
"Zodiac" is my favorite Fincher film. I like "The Game" too.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||04/01/2011|
Brad was excellent in The Assassination of Jesse James. I actually preferred his performance over Casey Afleck's. That was directed by Andrew Dominick who's directing Brad right now. %0D %0D I think Fincher is hot. I like that he's not a kiss ass and kind of curmudgeony.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||04/01/2011|
He's extremely hot, if not conventionally handsome. He and Pitt do make a cute couple.
I wish he wasn't in the closet, though. I lose respect for him a bit, especially now that he's established.
He could've just been a curmudgeon and not talked about his private life at all instead of bearding.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||04/01/2011|
"That's why Fincher is not a top-tier director to me because he can't direct actors."
Oh please. He's near the top of the peak you silly cow.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||04/01/2011|
Why would a director stay in the closet? There have been so many gay producers but not as many gay directors.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||04/01/2011|
If you mean top of the heap in Hollywood, yes he is. So are a number of directors like Spielberg, Scott and Howard who haven't had a good film in years, if ever (Howard).
As I said, *to me* he's not. To each his own (but he's still bad with actors.)
As he said himself, a film's quality/relevance is not decided immediately, it takes years.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||04/01/2011|
[quote]As I said, *to me* he's not. To each his own (but he's still bad with actors.)
He is very good with actors. I don't remember really bad performances in his movies. Some are weaker than others, of course, but overall, he is very good. Pitt in Seven and Fight Club was amazing, and I am not fan of his, Norton in Fight Club, Eisenberg in The Social network - those are amazing acting performaces.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||04/01/2011|
Are you talking about Fincher? Wow, I had no idea he is gay. Where did you heard it?
|by Anonymous||reply 62||04/01/2011|
I appreciated reading the many interesting posts in this thread - thanks!
And one wonders why R4 felt so smug about trying to play sphincter to the conversation here. Control issues, hon?
|by Anonymous||reply 63||04/01/2011|
It is a testament to Edward Norton that Fight Club wasn't completely stolen by Pitt. Pitt's role was born to steal that movie but Norton's magnificent performance kept things evened out.
WHET Norton, btw? He should be in a lot more projects, given his acting ability.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||04/01/2011|
Norton is too busy kissing his own ass to work.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||04/01/2011|
Se7en is his best movie, for me. Better than Fight Club. Pitt, however, was the weak link in both.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||04/01/2011|
Norton INSISTS on having final script approval, as well as the 'option' to do rewrites. No one wants to deal with his arrogant ass anymore.
Other than a possible co-lead in the next Wes Anderson film, he has nothing lined up. He's going to end up as a producer, or doing television unless he gets his shit together.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||04/01/2011|
I haven't seen The Social Network yet, only on-line clips.
I have seen Jesse Eisenberg interviewed, and I don't know how much he's acting and how much is good casting. (Seriously, I'm not being a smart ass.)
Fight Club I saw, but ages ago. I do remember being surprised at Pitt's performance.
Zodiac is the one I saw recently. RDJ playing his public persona took me out of the movie. That role is pivotal to the case; Avery knew a lot more than he revealed. I think a stronger director would have put the screws on Downey.
Gyllenhaal was ridiculous. The wide-eyed stunned look got tired. I loved Ruffalo and Koteas (sp?) though.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||04/01/2011|
If David decides to direct Cleopatra..I doubt him and Angelina will get along..
There had been reports of Angelina and the director of Mr and Mrs Smith butting heads during filming of the movie..
she's not as easy going and down to earth like Brad Pitt so I can't wait for the DRAMA!
|by Anonymous||reply 69||04/01/2011|
[quote]have seen Jesse Eisenberg interviewed, and I don't know how much he's acting and how much is good casting
I really don't see anything in common between Eisenberg and Zuckerberg, except social awkwardness - and actor Eisenberg is ironically much more awkward. Besides it, they can't be more different. Eisenberg gave brilliant acting performance in this movie.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||04/01/2011|
Norton was terrific in Fight club (and before that in his first movie with Richard Gere, can't remember the title now -I think he was nominated for Oscar for that role). Also 25 hours and American History X - but after several incredible roles he sort of went downhill, which is upsetting, because I think he is phenomenal actor. Bad reputation, course, but he is not the only arrogant person in Hollywood. I always liked him, but none of his works since Fight Club got me excited, and it was more than a decade ago.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||04/01/2011|
Jesus Christ, R67, if he's that rigid I doubt producer is in the cards either.
Does he make those demands on an A list project, say with a major director?
I know he was fired from the superhero movie for that reason, but that makes more sense. I could see his ego taking over a genre movie, like Christian Bale's on T4.
That's a shame because he's a good actor, one of the few versatile lead/character actors.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||04/01/2011|
[quote} saw many-many thrillers in my life, and Se7en is among best, if not best movie of this genre.
Gee, I wonder if The Silence of the Lambs folks should chime in here.
[quote} I think he is remarkable director, but he needs good scripts to create something very good.
Then he's really not so remarkable, is he?
I've never met him, but know people who worked with him (and Michael Bay) during their Propaganda days. Spoiled brats was the description. And if you've read interviews with Fincher, it's not just marketing people he has little regard for.
Maybe I'm jaded because much like most of his films. Se7en. Aliens 3, and The Game were all basically cold and nasty pieces of work, that seems to reflect that type of personality. So while there were signs of maturity with Zodiac and Social Network (and Benjamin Button), technique always trumps emotion.
Unfortunately his major revamp of Dragon Tattoo has all the makings of a self absorbed disaster - simply because the massive changes are from someone who thinks he's always the smartest guy in the room. Even when he's not.
As for needing a good script to create something remarkable - I'd say Coppola and Scorsese (before he sold out) can refute that.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||04/01/2011|
[quote]Gee, I wonder if The Silence of the Lambs folks should chime in here.
Is it some sort of rule that every person in the world should consider Silence of the Lambs best thriller in history of cinema? People express their opinions, that's all. I also like Se7en more than Silence of the Lambs, by the way.
[quote]I've never met him, but know people who worked with him (and Michael Bay) during their Propaganda days. Spoiled brats was the description. And if you've read interviews with Fincher, it's not just marketing people he has little regard for.
So you don't like his personality or him as a director? Because you talk about his personal qualities, not about his directing talent.
[quote]Then he's really not so remarkable, is he?
I guess his problem is that he doesn't write his own scripts, like Scorsese or Coppola or many great directors. So he is in some way dependent on finding a good script. It doesn't make him lesser director. And NOBODY can create a great movie out of pathetic script.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||04/01/2011|
[quote] So you don't like his personality or him as a director? Because you talk about his personal qualities, not about his directing talent.
I thought I was clear: Both. I truly think the coldness/nastiness of his personality is very clearly reflected in his films. There's no question he's a great technician, but that doesn't mean he's a great director.
[quote] And NOBODY can create a great movie out of pathetic script
Rumble Fish Avatar Gangs of New York As well as Kubrick and Welles. Just to start...
|by Anonymous||reply 75||04/02/2011|
There's a saying, "You can make a bad movie from a good script, but you can't make a good movie from a bad one"... spouted off by screenwriters (who are usually pretty low on the film making totem pole) to remind others that they actually are an important part of the process.
Fincher is the only director I know of who's come close to proving this wrong. Regardless of what you may think of the finished product, the script for Alien 3 was hundreds of times worse than the film that Fincher delivered. It was a Frankenstein patchwork thrown together by the producers from the revolving door work of numerous writers. A little bit from this version, a little bit from that and tied together with chase scenes. There are literally sections of the script that say, "Chase sequence here to be figured out later".
I've never been fond of Alien 3 but, after reading the script, I had much more respect for the work that Fincher did on that film. He gave the producers and the studio the absolute best film they could have gotten with the script they gave him, and still that film nearly killed his career before it even started. It wasn't till years later, when he got to make Se7en, that things started to turn around.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||04/02/2011|
R74, Scorsese and Coppola don't entirely write their own scripts. They have co-writers, uncredited script doctors and outside source material.
It doesn't make Fincher a lesser talent, but it puts him in another category. Tarantino made that observation in a Charlie Rose interview, and I think he's right.
If a director is also a writer, s/he can in fact create a great movie out of a crappy writer's final draft. Mike Leigh can even create great movies with virtually no script at all. It's not the norm, I agree.
I don't mind if the films are cold and nasty if that's a consistent aesthetic that serves the film. Giving the audience the middle finger for its own sake is bullshit.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||04/02/2011|
I've never understood how much creative power a director has with a film. Does he/she had the ability to actually change the script or the dialogue? It seems that power directors like Scorsese, Spielberg and Nolan have complete authority over their films.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||04/02/2011|
[quote]Anyway, after the director died I saw the documentary again on a DVD extra. The bullying shouting had been cut.
Is that the same documentary that has Kubrick forcing Scatman Crothers to do something like 100 takes of the scene in the hotel pantry area? It would be interesting to know if that part was cut from the DVD extra, too.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||04/02/2011|
I listened Fincher's commentaries for Se7en, The Social network and Fight Club, and I was suprised by how soft-spoken he sounded. I liked him a this commentaries a lot, he is obviously very clever, puts a lot of thoughts in his work, I think his commentaries are my favorite, and I am kind of sucker for those.
Also, maybe it's just me, but I really don't see any problems with him being considered arrogant in Hollywood. In Se7en commentaries he and Pitt blasted marketing people a lot, but judging by what they said, they had serious reasons to be unhappy with those people. So Fincher doesn't want to play Hollywood games, or bow down to Oprah, or walk red carpets - and so what? I actually respect him more for that.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||04/02/2011|
I know it%E2%80%99s not highly regarded, but I liked Panic Room. The special edition has a lot of behind the scenes documentaries, which are very interesting.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||04/02/2011|
Wow, Fincher is so hot in this video. Never considered him attractive before, but he definitely is.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||04/02/2011|
[quote]I've never been fond of Alien 3 but, after reading the script, I had much more respect for the work that Fincher did on that film.
That's an interesting perspective. Did he actually rework the script, or did he change it as he was shooting?
I've read that it wasn't a huge priority for the studio at the time, which probably didn't help.
He also was probably too young for a tentpole; he fought a scorched-earth campaign over everything on it. I've often wondered if the ending wasn't just the idealistic spitefulness of youth.
I agree about screenwriters. Writers in general get no respect anymore.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||04/02/2011|
Considering Norton's last film was straight to cable, maybe he'll finally get the ego in check.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||04/02/2011|
I think he's hot as hell R81, but to me he got hotter as he got older.
R57, there were 2 great general gossip threads the evil WM deleted; one of them had a couple of posts mentioning it. I also remember a post on the Hollywood Reporter implying it.
Plus, he does have serious gayvoice and his BFF is Brad Pitt, which is also fucking hot.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||04/02/2011|
Oops, referenced posts are R82 and R62.
Sorry, too much coffee.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||04/02/2011|
I can't imagine Fincher is any more of an asshole than Michael Bay (whom I've witnessed yelling at crew members), but even if he was, I wouldn't care. Fincher makes great movies and more than enough cast and crew members have been able to work with him to great success.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||04/02/2011|
I didn't appreciate Norton until Kingdom of Heaven. He wore a mask and managed to dominate every scene he was in. I loved him best in the Illusionist, though.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||04/02/2011|
Anyone who spells "Seven" as "Se7en" is a douche of the highest order.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||04/02/2011|
I don't know. I've heard he is rude, a know it all and hard to get along with. I've never worked with him.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||04/02/2011|
[quote] Scorsese and Coppola don't entirely write their own scripts. They have co-writers, uncredited script doctors and outside source material.
I never said that they did, and IMHO, Scorsese jumped the shark with The Aviator... Now he's just a Warhol-like sellout.
My point was that while I know it's rare, that there are a select few directors who CAN make remarkable films from a bad script. I'd also add James Cameron as another example: Avatar being a film that's both 3 dimensional and 1 dimensional at the same time - but memorable nonetheless.
FWIW, since I'd hated his films until Zodiac (never saw Fight Club), once I heard first hand that Fincher was a bit of a prick, it was fairly easy to create a rationalization... Maybe the arrogance comes from everything being handed to him without him having to struggle.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||04/02/2011|
[quote]once I heard first hand that Fincher was a bit of a prick, it was fairly easy to create a rationalization... Maybe the arrogance comes from everything being handed to him without him having to struggle.
He struggled a lot in his career. I follow his career, he is not my favorite director, but one of them, and his career is full of up and downs and struggle against sistem of Hollywood. I don't know how anyone who knew even little bit about this sad story with Alien 3, can say he got everything without struggle.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||04/02/2011|
You are right, it was pretty amazing. I wish Norton's career recovered, always liked him.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||04/02/2011|
[quote]Anyone who spells "Seven" as "Se7en" is a douche of the highest order.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||04/05/2011|
It's a title of the movie, what's the problem?
|by Anonymous||reply 95||04/05/2011|
I know it's the title, but the fact that he didn't change the 7 to a v is the problem. It's pretty cheesy.
|by Anonymous||reply 96||04/05/2011|
David is a virgo..and you know how virgos are..
|by Anonymous||reply 97||04/05/2011|
No I don't R97...and I don't know what to make of the fact that you do. ;)
A lot of his struggle was his own fault because he was apparently so difficult R92. Industry people who were able wouldn't make anything easy for him because he was so arrogant.
I've read a few more interviews and he is a dismissive smart-ass. He toned it down for the Oscar push for TSN. In longer form and older interviews, the attitude comes out.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||04/08/2011|
I think he is well on his way to being considered the true heir to Hitchcock, and years from now, "Zodiac" will be his "Vertigo"
|by Anonymous||reply 99||06/15/2011|
R99, the heir to Hitchcock, apart from a lack of concision, humor, self-conscious artfulness, and clarity of vision? With such an heir, Hitch should demand a DNA test, darling.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||06/15/2011|
R100 I think he has all of those things, and if you think for a second Hitchcock wasn't self-conscious, you aren't very aware of what makes Hitchcock Hitchcock
|by Anonymous||reply 101||06/15/2011|
[quote]That said, Fincher seems to be the only director who can actually get a half decent performance out of Brad.
Yeah, I thought Pitt was terrible in Fight Club, but it was still miles ahead of his performances in other films. He didn't actually ruin Fight Club.
Edward Norton was amazing in it and every other film I've seen him in. I wish he wasn't so arrogant and worked more because I want to see him in movies.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||06/15/2011|
r99 I think of Christopher Nolan as Hitchcock's heir.
A very good, but ultimately B movie director.
Very interesting comments from Nolan regarding integrating narrative and visual style (re: Malick). He just described why he'll never be a true A list director.
Fincher has a better sense of visual style than Hitchcock. I loved the murder recreations in Zodiac. They did a lot of seamless CGI in that movie.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||06/15/2011|
Has anyone seen any footage from the Dragon Tattoo?
He's also on a short list for Cleopatra. I'd love to see him direct Jolie.
He seems to move closer to mediocrity as he gets more commercial.
I wish he'd stop pandering and make another Fight Club. He must have some kind of lower level fuck you money by now.
|by Anonymous||reply 104||06/15/2011|
[quote]Fincher has a better sense of visual style than Hitchcock. I loved the murder recreations in Zodiac. They did a lot of seamless CGI in that movie.
Contemporary directors have a far greater flexibility in creating visual styles. All Hitchcock had to work with were big heavy cameras, rear projection and matte paintings. Visual stylization came from lighting and editing rather than elaborate camera movements, which were technically difficult to pull off. In addition, there is a bigger choice in negative film stock today and digital medium allows for even more image intervention.
[quote]He seems to move closer to mediocrity as he gets more commercial.
I have to agree. I love Fincher, but I am more fond of his earlier films. They do seem more personal. I wonder what this remake will be like.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||06/15/2011|
Fight Club is nothing but a pity party for white men.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||06/15/2011|
[quote]Contemporary directors have a far greater flexibility in creating visual styles. All Hitchcock had to work with were big heavy cameras, rear projection and matte paintings. Visual stylization came from lighting and editing rather than elaborate camera movements, which were technically difficult to pull off.
Fair enough, but I think half the battle working with any contemporary technology is knowing when not to use it.
Fincher knew exactly how it would look, and was meticulous about it. I didn't think it was obvious; I didn't realize how much he did until I read the count.
Hitchcock seemed to worry less about the overall visual effect of some of his background shots (e.g, the exposition in driving scenes with the grossly fake backgrounds); they always looked cheesy to me, to the point of eliminating my suspension of disbelief.
Later critics I read called him on it, implying he just resorted to it because it was a familiar technique.
If critics considered it a fault, I always wondered if it bothered a contemporary audience.
A script re-write could have put a lot of the dialogue in different places.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||06/16/2011|
[quote]Later critics I read called him on it, implying he just resorted to it because it was a familiar technique.
I'm not familiar with those writings. I have read 'Hitchcock's films' by Robin Wood, in which he analyzes all the 'cheesy' looking shots, as you call them, in Marnie. He makes a pretty good case that the obvious visual effects may be addressing psychological elements in the story. I am not sure I agree with him. The other two books on Hitch I read are by Chabrol/Rohmer and by Truffaut (the interviews). I also read Bogdanovich's writings on Hitchcock. None of them criticize Hitchcock for his outdated techniques when it comes to visual effects. Which film historians and critics are you referring to?
|by Anonymous||reply 108||06/16/2011|
Love you, R106. I like Fincher's work but that movie/book left me cold. It's all about being overprivileged.
|by Anonymous||reply 109||06/16/2011|
[R109] I was wondering what were those guys complaining about. People have it so much worse in other parts of the world and those men were simply bored and had no meaning in their lives so they found it in beating each other and causing anarchy. How is that a solution? I can see teen boys seeing that as cool since that's what they do but adult men? They refuse to take responsibility and blame everyone for their problems: their boss, their girlfriend, their parents etc. Nothing but whining.
|by Anonymous||reply 110||06/16/2011|
I definitely see the "white boy problems" angle, but I also see the trap of bourgeois expectations from society.
Patrice O'Neal on Fight Club:
|by Anonymous||reply 111||06/16/2011|
I put off watching "Fight Club" for years, because I thought I'd just sit there telling myself what idiots men are.%0D %0D Sure enough, when I finally saw it, I sat there telling myself that white straight men are a bunch of nasty whiners who can't deal with their feelings. What a waste of filmmaking expertise.
|by Anonymous||reply 112||06/17/2011|
Fincher is a micro-manager as far as production and marketing is concerned. I don't blame him. I've seen bad marketing sink some really good movies. Production people get frustrated with him because if he hired them, they know their job, but he is SO speicifc about what he wants they are climbing walls.%0D %0D As far as his interpersonal relationships go within the acting community, I think if you kiss his ass and chase after him, he'll use the crap out of you and discard you, but if he has to chase after you, everything works well, as long as you give him his props on set.
|by Anonymous||reply 113||06/17/2011|
R113, do you have any stories from the set of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button?
|by Anonymous||reply 114||06/17/2011|
Thank you so much for the info r113. It's been a gossip desert here recently.
[quote]As far as his interpersonal relationships go within the acting community, I think if you kiss his ass and chase after him, he'll use the crap out of you and discard you, but if he has to chase after you, everything works well, as long as you give him his props on set.
That's interesting considering the rebel outsider 'fuck you' image he always cultivated. Sounds like a certain type of gay male.
|by Anonymous||reply 115||06/17/2011|
|by Anonymous||reply 116||06/17/2011|
From the Craig/Weisz marriage thread:
[quote]I think Daniel and Rachel make an attractive couple...and it's also cool that they're close in age (DC doesn't seem to be like a lot of his sleazy pals..ahem, David Fincher...who are into significantly younger women). by: Anonymoustreply 15t06/26/2011 @ 12:05AM
According to a previous poster, he was closeted. He does ping like hell, in a hot prick way.
|by Anonymous||reply 117||06/26/2011|
Handsome picture. Scary hairline, but gorgeous eyes.
|by Anonymous||reply 118||07/22/2011|
Oops. Click on the title and scroll down.
White Tie shot.
|by Anonymous||reply 119||07/22/2011|
bump for more fincher gossip
|by Anonymous||reply 120||01/04/2013|
I'm curious about his relationship with Donya Fiorintino (Linda's sister). He was married to her for a while. She met Gary Oldman in rehab, married him and they had a couple of kids which he got custody of in a bitter divorce because she was using again (or still). Gary Oldman, if you remember, was supposed to star in Zodiac. One day he was cast, and then I never heard his name mentioned in conjunction with that project again. I wonder what happened with that. Related to Donya? The Fiorintino sisters are supposed to be massively screwed up.
|by Anonymous||reply 121||01/04/2013|
i googled R121, and linda and donya are not related.
|by Anonymous||reply 122||01/05/2013|
He comes across as a huge ass hole. I think he has some serious dominant sadist disorder issues. Has his actors do around 100 takes to get the scene right. He claims to be a perfectionist to justify this, but mostly the numerous takes are the result of his idea of perfect composition, but what he calls perfection to me is boring, empty and very un-alive. I find his work very overrated, most of his work is without any gravitas or emotional maturity.
|by Anonymous||reply 123||01/05/2013|
Thanks, R121. When Oldman was going through custody proceedings, I could swear she was identified as Linda's sister.
|by Anonymous||reply 124||01/05/2013|
This is one of the old threads I'm glad got bumped.
Last I heard, he had a huge falling out with Amy Pascal over Dragon Tattoo. It was supposed to be a flop, but I never did see any final numbers--it just disappeared from Hollywood radar.
The shoot was described as 'difficult' but I'd love to hear details.
I wonder if he still has his creepy BDSM relationship with Rooney Mara, or if that was just for the film.
|by Anonymous||reply 125||01/05/2013|
bump for gossip and..
Has anyone seen House of Cards?
It's based on a UK show, so I'm assuming they can't fuck it up too much.
I also can't believe that Fincher would want to do 20,000 leagues.
He's supposed to be directing another movie now, but I forge the name-not Cleopatra.
|by Anonymous||reply 126||01/30/2013|
You googled? Darling it's there on Google, Donya & Linda Fiorentino (which you misspelled) ARE sisters!
|by Anonymous||reply 127||01/30/2013|
"Brad was excellent in The Assassination of Jesse James. I actually preferred his performance over Casey Afleck's."
Brad was the weakest link in that movie, I laughed at how bad he is a acting.
|by Anonymous||reply 128||09/24/2014|
|by Anonymous||reply 129||09/26/2014|
Well to be fair, Brad is usually bad.
|by Anonymous||reply 130||09/26/2014|
What does anyone think of his newest film Gone Girl? I haven't seen it yet. I was just wondering if anyone on here has.
|by Anonymous||reply 131||11/23/2014|
If you make your actors do 100 takes you are hardly a good director. Sorry the guy is a humourless selfimportant hack whose movies come across incredibly immature.
|by Anonymous||reply 132||11/23/2014|
I asked a woman who worked on videos in the 80s and 90s about him. She said he was a golden child ushered into leadership roles with no ladder climbing, though she didn't know why. He's from Marin. He's total 1% elitist sick creep culture. His movies are distasteful and unpleasant, yet shallow. So he's perfect.
|by Anonymous||reply 133||11/23/2014|
|by Anonymous||reply 134||11/24/2014|
[quote]If you make your actors do 100 takes you are hardly a good director.
Well, he seems to know what he wants and goes to great lengths to achieve it. If he pisses off some Hollywood princesses on the way I don't care. Stars are being paid millions for a short time of work so trying to get the needed performance out of them is fine by me.
He sounds like a control freak perfectionist. I'm sure he's not easy to work with but without him there wouldn't be Fight Club or Zodiac which are great pieces of cinema.
[quote]He's total 1% elitist sick creep culture. His movies are distasteful and unpleasant, yet shallow.
Well, we all have our opinions.
|by Anonymous||reply 135||11/24/2014|
I take a PTA movie anytime over Fincher. Outstanding performances without torturing your actors. Zodiac was a boring drag. Neither Ruffalo nor RDJ would ever work with Fincher again. His movies also look cheap because he uses digital. Fincher is a hack.
|by Anonymous||reply 136||11/24/2014|
Does anyone think on here that David Fincher is staying clear from Rooney Mara because of her boyfriend or her family?
|by Anonymous||reply 137||11/24/2014|
I thought Gone Girl was amazing. He actually got great performances out of Tyler Perry and Ben Affleck. I think he could pull someone off the street and get an awards-worthy performance out of them. Sloppy filmmaking like Interstellar make me appreciate Fincher's efforts. He's a perfectionist but it really shows in the high quality of his work.
|by Anonymous||reply 138||11/24/2014|
R79, I heard that Kubrick's treatment of Scatman Crothers in the Shining led Jack Nicholson to swear he'd never work with him again. He forced that 90 year old man to take an axe to the back 150 times, he was basically begging "Mr. Kubrick, please, I can't do it again," and Nicholson was disgusted.
|by Anonymous||reply 139||11/24/2014|
r137 probably because he's in love with his stars while he works with them, then it's over like almost all of HW. In love during the shoot, over afterwards.
|by Anonymous||reply 140||11/24/2014|
[R137] No, I don't get that impression. Why do you think that? I think he's just completely over making the Dragon trilogy and has moved onto other things. Rooney's still in Lisbeth mode, though. Clinging to the hope that the sequels will get made with Fincher.
|by Anonymous||reply 141||11/24/2014|
It was just a hunch, r141.
As much as I would love to hope that the sequels to "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" get made. I am not sure it will happen now because Fincher has moved onto other things. Daniel Craig still wants more money as well.
|by Anonymous||reply 142||11/24/2014|
House of Cards. If not a little too dark and sterile.
|by Anonymous||reply 143||11/27/2014|
He has a kid with Donya Fiorintino? WTF
|by Anonymous||reply 144||02/10/2015|
Had two new shows with HBO and both fell through due to his unreasonable demands. He won't be satisfied until he burns every bridge in the entertainment industry. Next up? He'll probably head east and try to kill a few dreams on Broadway.
|by Anonymous||reply 145||08/23/2015|
In the past I never could stand his work, as technically beautiful as it was, because of its inhuman quality: his films about murder and iolence always de-humanize people, especially victims of crimes (as in "Se7en," where the point is how aesthetically cool the murders are rather than the suffering of the murder victims).
But then he completely reversed himself with "Zodiac," which is by far his best film and is almost entirely about the sufferings and fear of Zodiac's victims, and since then his films have been very synpathetic to crime victims rather than criminals. I've always wondered what happened to change him.
|by Anonymous||reply 146||08/23/2015|
I thought Zodiac was an overlong bore, which was only saved by Downey and Ruffalo. Fincher's movies are a humorless and lifeless exercise in cold, emotionless perfectionism.
|by Anonymous||reply 147||08/24/2015|
For me, Zodiac improves on multiple viewings. I think it is my favorite Fincher movie now, despite Jake G's earnest performance. No wonder Fincher had such a hard time with him.
|by Anonymous||reply 148||08/24/2015|