Sunday, May 15, 2011

Directors: David Fincher


     Throughout my experiences with movies, I became less and less interested in following actors. I altogether stopped caring what the next movie Brad Pitt would appear in, or if Kiera Knightly was really attached to play whatever character. Furthermore, I could not seize upon a single genre of film, whether it be outrageous comedy, high-octane action, or stylized surrealism. It was then that I came to the realization that I am not an actor man, nor am I a genre man, but I was, I finally settled upon, a director man.


     I take great enjoyment from looking at a director’s large body of work and attempting to root out his true “style”. What is there about this director that I can love or hate? What are his strengths and weaknesses? If he uses a familiar cast of actors, does he reuse them for similar roles or spread them across a variety of character types? And most importantly, are his movies good?


     It is with this (largely pointless and massively biased) premise that I shall begin to speak at length on an... irregular basis. Each episode will carry within itself an analysis of an individual director, including an analysis of the style, themes, plotting, writing, shooting, and acting of all his films. And when I say all of his films, I do mean ALL of his films. I will not complain about the movies I don’t watch. I will also look at the director’s comments, look up some background knowledge about their on-set method, and try to give a commentary on any of the director’s more frequent collaborators, ESPECIALLY if they tend to use the same screenwriters.


     To begin, I think we should start with someone from the Oscar nominations, and a personal favorite of mine, David Fincher. First, a little history. Before he got his start in making movies, he made small time ads and music videos. Then he made big time music videos. How big time? Madonna’s “Vogue” big time. He made some other pretty big ones (Aerosmith’s “Janie’s Got a Gun” comes to mind), but nothing quite as awesome as “Vogue”.


     His first feature film was technically Alien 3, but he has since disowned the film, and blames the failure it eventually became on 20th Century Fox for not trusting him to make a good movie. While there is a Director’s Cut, Fincher claims that it is not his work, even though fans of the series and critics actually kinda like it. In other words, we will be skipping this film.


     Next he made his first true success, Se7en, which became a major critical and commercial success, launching his career as a movie director. Written by Andrew Kevin Walker, Se7en was a thriller, with major gore and horror elements, starring Brad Pitt, Morgan Freeman, and (spoiler alert!) Kevin Spacey. It was, in fact, the movie that proved, once and for all, that no matter the crime, Kevin Spacey did it.


     After that came another thriller called The Game. John Brancato and Michael Ferris wrote the screenplay, with the Michael Douglas and Sean Penn starring. Sean Penn didn’t actually appear very much, though. Many believe it to be more of a neo-noir film than a thriller.


     Next in line is probably his most famous work, Fight Club. Once again, Brad Pitt stars, this time with Edward Norton and Helena Bonham Carter. This movie, based on the book by Chuck Palahnuik (screenplay by Jim Uhls) was a meditation on coming of age storytelling, and Fincher describes it as The Graduate meets Rebel Without a Cause. While not originally a hit, the film is now a cult classic, and he is well respected for directing it.


     Next came Panic Room, a return to thriller movies, starring Jodie Foster and Kristen Stewart (far before she had the severe misfortune of being cast as Bella Swan), and written by David Koepp. It was born from Fincher’s desire to do a smaller, more quiet movie after the enormous production that was Fight Club.


     Following in its heels came the thriller Zodiac, starring Jake Gyllenhaal and Robert Downey Jr. playing himself. This time written by James Vanderbilt, Fincher dives into slightly newer territory by never revealing the killer, and indeed only having a few scenes including him. Instead, it was pursued more from the mystery side of things, but was nonetheless filled with heart pounding tension and serious material.


     David Fincher moved to truly unfamiliar territory with his next film, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, written by Eric Roth, who also wrote Forrest Gump. Anyone who has seen both movies will find this fairly obvious. Fincher got his first Oscar Nomination for this one.


     Finally, David Fincher has reach super-stardom with his latest film, The Social Network. Written by Aaron Sorkin, this dramatic story comprises of Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield, and Justin Timberlake of all people. A story of friendship and betrayal, Fincher has been lauded for this movie more than any other, including another Oscar nomination.


     So, while he hasn’t worked with many screenwriters multiple times (though he did have Andrew Kevin Walker do some rewrites for The Game while they worked on Se7en), David Fincher has worked on some very thematically similar works. A running theme is coming of age, especially for grown men, or some other greater realization of “the way the world works”, though this relationship is rather tenuous at best, and at worst could be said to be applied to every movie. It would be better to call it a film series of violent, visceral thrusts into reality. This is most obvious in Se7en, in which Mills is thrust into the knowledge that every man is flawed, and that even he can fall.


     The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is even more applicable to this theme. A character study, we see him aging as war, pain, love, and hardship allow him to grow and realize his place as a man. The coming-of-age tale is one so universal that this sort of story is so fundamentally different from something like The Graduate that the two are practically incomparable.


     Another interesting theme is his treatment of the city and city life. While The Game, Zodiac, and Se7en were clearly inspired from noir films, given their themes of crime, manic twists, and detective-shaped protagonists (though The Game might be stretching it), it is only natural that he further be influenced to create a noir-like city. It is oppressive, unconquerable, and emotionless, and always seems to hate the protagonist. Indeed, the level in which the members of Project Mayhem vandalize their city seems almost a natural response. For that matter, Fight Club seems to most obviously deal with this facet, as we get glimpses of Tyler Durden’s twisted philosophy through his projects. He commands the destruction of a piece of corporate art, and uses it to destroy a meaningless franchise coffee shop. In this, we see the reaction to the oppressive noir city to be one of destruction and hate. This city has taught them to accept things they do not need, and they feel the urge to fight back.


     Panic Room is especially noteworthy in that it has an entire house that feels oppressive and unconquerable. It takes the concept of a noir city and shrinks it and the characters down for the film. The noir aspect is especially played up in the black and white motifs throughout the movie, from the house to the room to the thieves themselves. 


     A frequent note towards all of David Fincher’s films is his exceptionally clever use of film styles. For example, in Se7en he did not remove the silver in the film stock, achieving a darkening, bleaker tone throughout the picture. It helped emphasize and make real the dark, decaying city. Fight Club used a whole host of filming techniques to wildly different effects, such as flashing, use of high contrast, under-exposing the film, and once again leaving in the silver. This belies his background in filmography. While he received no formal training, he has been making movies personally since he was eight (no shit), so it should come as no surprise that he really understands how to shoot a film more than anything.


     While using this film techniques are a sort of trademark of his (seriously cool trademark, by the way), Zodiac stands out as supremely different from the rest. This is because he shot it in a very realistic manner, so that the audience would accept it as real. This is perhaps why the city’s oppressiveness is never really felt the way it is in his other films. While this may not be a detriment to the film itself, it does mean that Zodiac feels as though it doesn’t fit, and foreshadows his switch to less neo-noir films.


     As David Fincher’s career has progressed, I feel that he has grown in his use of style. When he does use his (frankly immense) knowledge of shooting and film, it is always used to great effect, and this has only grown in recent years. While I personally dislike The Social Network, I cannot deny that it is a beautifully shot movie, with some scenes that are downright breathtaking in terms of cinematography. The lighting was especially good, as well as the use of mirrors and perspective shots. It allowed the audience to really feel each character’s experience on such an intimate level.


     As for my opinions on each of the films, I have highly mixed feelings about both The Social Network and Zodiac, but I enjoyed Se7en, The Game, and Panic Room very much, especially for their neo-noir slant (I am big fan of noir). The Curious Case of Benjamin Button would be my favorite, but Fight Club is such a well-made film that I cannot deny it that honor. It is enjoyable, hilarious, dangerous, and wonderful. To date, I count it among my favorite films ever.


     In conclusion, for his attention to shooting and tone, I think that David Fincher could evolve into the next Stanley Kubrick. Indeed, with his new genre-hopping, he could end up defying all expectations for the future. While his The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is no Barry Lyndon, and nor is Fight Club truly better than Dr. Strangelove, I believe that David Fincher is only getting started. If he continues to make films at the rate he is currently maintaining, he will have many new films under his belt in no time at all. And at 48 years old, it is clear that we will be cherishing this director (and his movies) for many years to come.

No comments:

Post a Comment