View Single Post
  #3  
Old 01-18-2011, 03:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocknblues81 View Post
I have to wonder if David Fincher was a director for hire on this one. He has made it clear that he is not happy about all the acclaim this movie has got in comparison to Zodiac (which he seems as the better film) and maybe he is upset because this wasn't *HIS* movie while Zodiac feels like a personal film. Just the same, it's nothing to be ashamed of. It's well directed, the acting is good enough for what it is, and it is meaningful to the younger generation and it is watchable enough for everyone else. It's a good achievement, but it's not a GREAT film.

I feel the same way about Fincher in general. He's a competent director, but I seldom feel like he brings anything to the table. His soundtracks, for instance, are always very cool (perhaps a little inside help from having a music industry past) but don't ever add much to the film, aside from just having good music - most of the songs used in The Social Network could have been interchangible with any semi-underground to mainstream hit of the early-to-mid 2000s. With the exception of the Beatles track at the end, there was little there.

His actors are always very charismatic, and could carry the films on their own - often, it's just them showing up being who they always are. I've never felt that any of them were directed to give a performance beyond anything I've seen before.

My take is that most of Fincher's films success derives from the source material he uses. He always manages to get really great stories, but even there, I feel he doesn't connect with them beyond just having the sense to know they are good stories (much like music choices)

Basically, my feeling is that films directed by Fincher are good examples of times when the director is not the auteur. This point is only clear to me from the seemingly accepted idea (no doubt a post-fallout from the Tarantino "director is the god" mentality that went full fledged pop in the mid-90s) that Fincher makes the movies great, because, you know, he directed it, and the director is responsible for everything that makes the movie great.

Not quite.
Reply With Quote