Thanks to JustJared who has scans of the beautiful spread. Inside, director Fincher and Rooney Mara talk Dragon Tattoo. Fincher talks of his reasons for casting Mara:
“I saw this not as a blockbuster that appeals to everyone,” says Fincher. “I saw this as an interesting, specific, pervy franchise. The only chance for something like Dragon Tattoo to be made in all of its perversions is to do it big. I think The Godfather is a pretty good fucking movie. You can start with a supermarket potboiler, but it doesn’t mean you can’t aim high.”
In other words, there’s an awful lot of expectation riding on Mara’s slender shoulders. Turns out that almost wasn’t the case. Apparently, the reason for the endless auditioning process was that the studio didn’t want Mara. They thought she was too sensible, that she would never find herself in the situations Salander finds herself in. “I had said so often, ‘This is the one I want,’ ” says Fincher. “They said, ‘No. You are being obstinate. Move on.’ And I said, ‘Nope.’ Part of me wanted that last puppy that nobody else did. I didn’t want the consensus. I wanted the person that made everybody go, ‘Really?’ I needed that.”
Pulpy books like Dragon Tattoo and The Godfather do make for good movies. You want there to be somewhere to go. If you start with a novel that’s already a masterpiece you have nowhere to go but down.
Five more pics after the jump.
I can see how what I wrote could be misunderstood. I didn’t know Pat McGrath was a she, so I said “it was probably his idea.” Maybe you thought I meant Fincher.
Yeah, I agree. What I’m saying is that the director decides which look best serves his vision of the character, with the makeup artist’s assistance. It’s not uncommon for people to say things like “Fincher’s camerawork,” “Fincher’s editing,” “Fincher had her bleach her eyebrows,” etc. And in his case, it makes sense.
I can see how what I wrote could be misunderstood. I didn’t know Pat McGrath was a she, so I said “it was probably his idea.” Maybe you thought I meant Fincher.
Yeah, I agree. What I’m saying is that the director decides which look best serves his vision of the character, with the makeup artist’s assistance. It’s not uncommon for people to say things like “Fincher’s camerawork,” “Fincher’s editing,” “Fincher had her bleach her eyebrows,” etc. And in his case, it makes sense.
@gvk, just quoting the Vogue article where the make-up artist says the eye-brow bleaching was her idea. I don’t think she would be taking credit in print if it wasn’t her idea. Also the BTS video is very short they could have filled up those 30 sec. of trailer time talking to Rooney so he get to know her better.
———————————————————————-
“She [Rooney Mara] is referring to her complete physical transformation at the hands of Pat McGrath, the doyenne of haute makeup; rock-diva hairstylist Danilo; and the costume designer Trish Summerville. As Summerville says, “We didn’t want her to be this girl who looks like a musician in a rock band. She’s real. A lot of the time she’s dirty. She wipes her nose on her sleeve.” Once Fincher approached McGrath, she went straight online to see who was playing Lisbeth Salander. “When I saw that it was Rooney,” she says, “and I saw those bony features, those cheekbones, those eyes, I said, ‘I can’t wait.’ I was instantly inspired. It’s like in fashion, when you get a girl who has one of those haunting faces that you can do absolutely anything with.”
Holed up in a tiny studio for two days with Fincher and Mara, McGrath created about 26 different looks. “We went from the white-powdered sick-clown makeup to stitches in the face all the way to greasy, bloody eyes. I instantly knew how I could make her character so different. And then once the hair was cut in that mad shape, I was like, Well, the eyebrows have got to go. And in the end, it would look now and it would look new.”
@gvk, just quoting the Vogue article where the make-up artist says the eye-brow bleaching was her idea. I don’t think she would be taking credit in print if it wasn’t her idea. Also the BTS video is very short they could have filled up those 30 sec. of trailer time talking to Rooney so he get to know her better.
———————————————————————-
“She [Rooney Mara] is referring to her complete physical transformation at the hands of Pat McGrath, the doyenne of haute makeup; rock-diva hairstylist Danilo; and the costume designer Trish Summerville. As Summerville says, “We didn’t want her to be this girl who looks like a musician in a rock band. She’s real. A lot of the time she’s dirty. She wipes her nose on her sleeve.” Once Fincher approached McGrath, she went straight online to see who was playing Lisbeth Salander. “When I saw that it was Rooney,” she says, “and I saw those bony features, those cheekbones, those eyes, I said, ‘I can’t wait.’ I was instantly inspired. It’s like in fashion, when you get a girl who has one of those haunting faces that you can do absolutely anything with.”
Holed up in a tiny studio for two days with Fincher and Mara, McGrath created about 26 different looks. “We went from the white-powdered sick-clown makeup to stitches in the face all the way to greasy, bloody eyes. I instantly knew how I could make her character so different. And then once the hair was cut in that mad shape, I was like, Well, the eyebrows have got to go. And in the end, it would look now and it would look new.”
@Gwen: I agree about the book. I don’t like it either.
Just as David Fincher and Laray Mayfield cast the movie together, just as he and Jeff Cronenweth shot the movie together, Fincher is a big part of every aspect of production. I don’t mean to diminish the job of the makeup artist. It was probably his idea. But all decisions are made in the end by the director, according to whether or not it serves their vision.
As far as the Swedish movies contributing to this one being made, I’m not so sure. The first “Girl” book has sold as many copies as The Purpose Driven Life, To Kill a Mockingbird, and The Very Hungry Caterpillar. It was as inevitable as the Da Vinci Code movie. The Swedish movie wasn’t really close to a huge success on that scale.
You seem to be judging Mara a little harshly. I didn’t assume she was lying about the loner part, nor do I think having a picnic at a cemetery is utterly Lisbeth-like. Is there reason to believe she was trying at all, let alone too hard?
Movie studios are known for trying to sell movies HARD. And there’s about 30 seconds of trailer footage on that BTS video, and it relates to what they’re talking about in the video. Don’t see a problem with it.
@Gwen: I agree about the book. I don’t like it either.
Just as David Fincher and Laray Mayfield cast the movie together, just as he and Jeff Cronenweth shot the movie together, Fincher is a big part of every aspect of production. I don’t mean to diminish the job of the makeup artist. It was probably his idea. But all decisions are made in the end by the director, according to whether or not it serves their vision.
As far as the Swedish movies contributing to this one being made, I’m not so sure. The first “Girl” book has sold as many copies as The Purpose Driven Life, To Kill a Mockingbird, and The Very Hungry Caterpillar. It was as inevitable as the Da Vinci Code movie. The Swedish movie wasn’t really close to a huge success on that scale.
You seem to be judging Mara a little harshly. I didn’t assume she was lying about the loner part, nor do I think having a picnic at a cemetery is utterly Lisbeth-like. Is there reason to believe she was trying at all, let alone too hard?
Movie studios are known for trying to sell movies HARD. And there’s about 30 seconds of trailer footage on that BTS video, and it relates to what they’re talking about in the video. Don’t see a problem with it.
@AD: “You should link the whole article because this selection doesn’t illustrate the Mara/Fincher relationship in all its weirdness. This interview was the creepiest thing I have read in a long time. Like someone else said above I felt like taking a shower rigth afterward.”
I know Fincher was joking about giving Rooney permission to eat but there was something freaky about their relationship. The reporter picked up on it, Daniel Craig said so himself. Maybe she is just so grateful for him giving her the part they have crossed boundaries with each other? The funny part of the interview was Rooney taking the reporter to a cemetery for lunch and talking about how she was always a loner. The poor girl is trying too hard to act like she really is Lisbeth Salander! The entire Vogue spread was trying to sell the movie HARD. There is a BTS video of the photoshoot, half the video is taken up with advertising the movie by showing the trailer. Big Studio marketing 101.
@AD: “You should link the whole article because this selection doesn’t illustrate the Mara/Fincher relationship in all its weirdness. This interview was the creepiest thing I have read in a long time. Like someone else said above I felt like taking a shower rigth afterward.”
I know Fincher was joking about giving Rooney permission to eat but there was something freaky about their relationship. The reporter picked up on it, Daniel Craig said so himself. Maybe she is just so grateful for him giving her the part they have crossed boundaries with each other? The funny part of the interview was Rooney taking the reporter to a cemetery for lunch and talking about how she was always a loner. The poor girl is trying too hard to act like she really is Lisbeth Salander! The entire Vogue spread was trying to sell the movie HARD. There is a BTS video of the photoshoot, half the video is taken up with advertising the movie by showing the trailer. Big Studio marketing 101.
@Sasha: read the full interview, it’s not Fincher who chose to bleach the eyebrow it’s the make-up artist. She wanted the Lisbeth character to look fresh and new.
@Alex: I read all 3 books and Fincher is right, it is trashy pulpy “pervy” supermarket fiction. What makes it different is the Lisbeth Salander character. But let’s face the fact that the reason men like Lisbeth is because she is written by a male writer to have the personality of a young man: she’s violent, a computer nerd, rides motorcycles, her youthful angst manifests it self as rage, she casually sleeps with girls and likes to keep an emotional distance when she does sleep with someone more than once – these would all be considered traditionally (stereotypically) male. She is raped multiple times but has no emotional scars from the abuse, the writer uses the “out” that Lisbeth doesn’t like thinking or talking about her feelings.
Women readers like the Lisbeth character because she gets revenge on her rapist and is smart. The character Blomkvist (the writer’s avatar)is a healing angel for the abused women, he has sex with each of them to ease their emotional scars (is that really what raped victims need?). The mystery and family secrets are easy to figure out, it’s not rocket science. So yeah I wouldn’t go about throwing words like ‘good literature’ about this series. When analyzed closely the premise falls apart rather quickly. Let’s face it if the Swedish version hadn’t been so well received leading more and more people to buy the books, Sony wouldn’t be making this movie. It is a cash-grab by the studio but Fincher is trying to elevate both the poor source material and the greed of the studio. Tough job.
@Sasha: read the full interview, it’s not Fincher who chose to bleach the eyebrow it’s the make-up artist. She wanted the Lisbeth character to look fresh and new.
@Alex: I read all 3 books and Fincher is right, it is trashy pulpy “pervy” supermarket fiction. What makes it different is the Lisbeth Salander character. But let’s face the fact that the reason men like Lisbeth is because she is written by a male writer to have the personality of a young man: she’s violent, a computer nerd, rides motorcycles, her youthful angst manifests it self as rage, she casually sleeps with girls and likes to keep an emotional distance when she does sleep with someone more than once – these would all be considered traditionally (stereotypically) male. She is raped multiple times but has no emotional scars from the abuse, the writer uses the “out” that Lisbeth doesn’t like thinking or talking about her feelings.
Women readers like the Lisbeth character because she gets revenge on her rapist and is smart. The character Blomkvist (the writer’s avatar)is a healing angel for the abused women, he has sex with each of them to ease their emotional scars (is that really what raped victims need?). The mystery and family secrets are easy to figure out, it’s not rocket science. So yeah I wouldn’t go about throwing words like ‘good literature’ about this series. When analyzed closely the premise falls apart rather quickly. Let’s face it if the Swedish version hadn’t been so well received leading more and more people to buy the books, Sony wouldn’t be making this movie. It is a cash-grab by the studio but Fincher is trying to elevate both the poor source material and the greed of the studio. Tough job.
That the stars are far away doesn’t mean they can’t be reached for.
That The Godfather is perfect doesn’t mean it can’t be used in comparisons.
I’m calling Rooney Mara for the Best Actress Oscar. I felt it strongly once I saw the trailer. You heard it here first folks!
That the stars are far away doesn’t mean they can’t be reached for.
That The Godfather is perfect doesn’t mean it can’t be used in comparisons.
I’m calling Rooney Mara for the Best Actress Oscar. I felt it strongly once I saw the trailer. You heard it here first folks!
You should link the whole article because this selection doesn’t illustrate the Mara/Fincher relationship in all its weirdness. This interview was the creepiest thing I have read in a long time. Like someone else said above I felt like taking a shower rigth afterward. Maybe Vogue should have stuck with the pretty pictures!
You should link the whole article because this selection doesn’t illustrate the Mara/Fincher relationship in all its weirdness. This interview was the creepiest thing I have read in a long time. Like someone else said above I felt like taking a shower rigth afterward. Maybe Vogue should have stuck with the pretty pictures!
@Sasha
“The reason I quoted that piece and the reason I commented on it was because I knew a reactionary audience was waiting out there to pounce on it”
So you mainly posted this to see which of your readers have a “narrow mind”? Sad, if true. I must say, I fell on your condescending bear- trap. I didn’t read the whole Vogue article but only what you so wisely chose to quote. My fault.
Which leads me to conclude what I’ve been suspecting all along. It’s the media’s fault. Not Fincher’s. Because of this type of selective quoting now people like me (the narrow minded) are comparing the Godfather to a film none of us has seen.
My problem with quoting these other classic movies when referring to a yet-to-open movie is that it inevitably takes all perspective when addressing the movie that is about to open. In this case, Fincher’s Dragon Tattoo. It simplifies and reduces an experience. Much like you say when we’re not capable of complex thinking…sort of like that. Then by the time the movie opens some people will come with that analogy in mind (Dragon Tattoo= Godfather) and will start to try to connect the dots.
By all means, I don’t think these movies (The Godfather or Citizen Kane) must never be mentioned, like they’re the holy grail or something. But we must be careful when name dropping them because they might interfere with our experience of a particular movie.
But as I said, I read the whole article by now. It’s not like Fincher is comparing his film to The Godfather. He says he wants to go big, like the Godfather did. And I think it’s great to have that ambition; I’m sure he’s going to nail it. My mistake for falling on your trap.
Yours truly,
A narrow, reactionary and dissapointed reader.
So you mainly posted this to see which of your readers have a “narrow mind”?
Billyboy, please don’t take it so personally. It’s not entrapment.
Don’t we all know that every time we open our mouths there’s a chance we’ll say something that’s misunderstood or rubs someone the wrong way? Isn’t it natural to anticipate and expect that a controversial statement will provoke strong reactions?
Nobody’s trying to target reactionaries or flush them out of the woodwork. yeesh, reactionary reactions on these pages is an everyday occurrence — and sometimes it’s me or Sasha who bristles first, right? We all do. Reactionary readers at AD don’t scurry off when candles are shined in their eyes. We proudly stand on the soapbox in the spotlight.
The media plays us all. It’s their job to poke and prod. The media is usually nothing but a noise machine and it’s up to us to figure out how we want to filter it. Sometimes we don’t have time or patience or even desire to filter it. Face it, some of us love to have our buttons pushed.
When we post things like this, it’s deliberately intended to stir up reactions. Trust me, it’s a lonely day at Awards Daily when no reactionaries show up.
@Sasha
“The reason I quoted that piece and the reason I commented on it was because I knew a reactionary audience was waiting out there to pounce on it”
So you mainly posted this to see which of your readers have a “narrow mind”? Sad, if true. I must say, I fell on your condescending bear- trap. I didn’t read the whole Vogue article but only what you so wisely chose to quote. My fault.
Which leads me to conclude what I’ve been suspecting all along. It’s the media’s fault. Not Fincher’s. Because of this type of selective quoting now people like me (the narrow minded) are comparing the Godfather to a film none of us has seen.
My problem with quoting these other classic movies when referring to a yet-to-open movie is that it inevitably takes all perspective when addressing the movie that is about to open. In this case, Fincher’s Dragon Tattoo. It simplifies and reduces an experience. Much like you say when we’re not capable of complex thinking…sort of like that. Then by the time the movie opens some people will come with that analogy in mind (Dragon Tattoo= Godfather) and will start to try to connect the dots.
By all means, I don’t think these movies (The Godfather or Citizen Kane) must never be mentioned, like they’re the holy grail or something. But we must be careful when name dropping them because they might interfere with our experience of a particular movie.
But as I said, I read the whole article by now. It’s not like Fincher is comparing his film to The Godfather. He says he wants to go big, like the Godfather did. And I think it’s great to have that ambition; I’m sure he’s going to nail it. My mistake for falling on your trap.
Yours truly,
A narrow, reactionary and dissapointed reader.
So you mainly posted this to see which of your readers have a “narrow mind”?
Billyboy, please don’t take it so personally. It’s not entrapment.
Don’t we all know that every time we open our mouths there’s a chance we’ll say something that’s misunderstood or rubs someone the wrong way? Isn’t it natural to anticipate and expect that a controversial statement will provoke strong reactions?
Nobody’s trying to target reactionaries or flush them out of the woodwork. yeesh, reactionary reactions on these pages is an everyday occurrence — and sometimes it’s me or Sasha who bristles first, right? We all do. Reactionary readers at AD don’t scurry off when candles are shined in their eyes. We proudly stand on the soapbox in the spotlight.
The media plays us all. It’s their job to poke and prod. The media is usually nothing but a noise machine and it’s up to us to figure out how we want to filter it. Sometimes we don’t have time or patience or even desire to filter it. Face it, some of us love to have our buttons pushed.
When we post things like this, it’s deliberately intended to stir up reactions. Trust me, it’s a lonely day at Awards Daily when no reactionaries show up.
I read the interview. I needed a shower afterward.
I read the interview. I needed a shower afterward.
Alex, no, a book doesn’t have to read like The Scarlet Letter to be considered great literature. It has to read like great literature to be great literature.
I agree 100%, Sasha. I remember the Social Network/Citizen Kane thing came from Fincher calling it the “Citizen Kane of John Hughes movies,” which of course was just a funny and apt way of describing its subject matter. And inevitably everyone went, “*gasp!* he invoked Citizen Kane!”
Alex, no, a book doesn’t have to read like The Scarlet Letter to be considered great literature. It has to read like great literature to be great literature.
I agree 100%, Sasha. I remember the Social Network/Citizen Kane thing came from Fincher calling it the “Citizen Kane of John Hughes movies,” which of course was just a funny and apt way of describing its subject matter. And inevitably everyone went, “*gasp!* he invoked Citizen Kane!”
>>>>>>> Trying to sell a big franchise movie (a sell out in its own right when it comes from someone as talented as Fincher) by deliberately selling the star on magazine covers doing all kinds of poses and styles, is just tiresome and lame, really.
The photos are mainly to sell magazines. Not the movie. And nobody tries to pretend that it’s Lisbeth Salander in the flowing gowns. It’s an actress who is the It Girl this year. Vogue and Elle and Vanity Fair do this every month. There are stars on their covers all the time.
Ryan Gosling is on the cover of GQ and looks amazing. Does him being on the cover of GQ cheapen Drive? Not at all. The article inside is interesting. This Vogue article is more substantial than most things you ever read in legitimate movie magazines.
It’s Vogue. Their job is to dress up pretty people. They’re providing a lot of substance to go along with the superficial fashion stuff.
I don’t see a problem. I love the article. I love the photos. We’re all smart enough to separate the PR from the movie itself.
>>>>>>> Trying to sell a big franchise movie (a sell out in its own right when it comes from someone as talented as Fincher) by deliberately selling the star on magazine covers doing all kinds of poses and styles, is just tiresome and lame, really.
The photos are mainly to sell magazines. Not the movie. And nobody tries to pretend that it’s Lisbeth Salander in the flowing gowns. It’s an actress who is the It Girl this year. Vogue and Elle and Vanity Fair do this every month. There are stars on their covers all the time.
Ryan Gosling is on the cover of GQ and looks amazing. Does him being on the cover of GQ cheapen Drive? Not at all. The article inside is interesting. This Vogue article is more substantial than most things you ever read in legitimate movie magazines.
It’s Vogue. Their job is to dress up pretty people. They’re providing a lot of substance to go along with the superficial fashion stuff.
I don’t see a problem. I love the article. I love the photos. We’re all smart enough to separate the PR from the movie itself.
Well, alex, that shot is obviously nicked from Melancholia. Even the colors are the same!
Well, alex, that shot is obviously nicked from Melancholia. Even the colors are the same!
People have to stop calling the books “trashy” and “pulpy” (I know pulpy doesn’t necessarily mean bad but it does have a negative connotation). Where is all that coming from?? A book doesn’t have to read like The Scarlet Letter (which I happen to love, btw) to be considered “great” or “real” literature. Yes, it’s a thriller, and no it might not have any great symbolism or allegory but it is a damn good book with one of the best heroines I’ve read about in years.
Really loving the Ophelia shot btw – Clayton, Von Trier has a similar (almost same) shot of Dunst for the Melancholia poster
People have to stop calling the books “trashy” and “pulpy” (I know pulpy doesn’t necessarily mean bad but it does have a negative connotation). Where is all that coming from?? A book doesn’t have to read like The Scarlet Letter (which I happen to love, btw) to be considered “great” or “real” literature. Yes, it’s a thriller, and no it might not have any great symbolism or allegory but it is a damn good book with one of the best heroines I’ve read about in years.
Really loving the Ophelia shot btw – Clayton, Von Trier has a similar (almost same) shot of Dunst for the Melancholia poster
Does she look stunning? I don’t know…and the point is, I don’t care!
Trying to sell a big franchise movie (a sell out in its own right when it comes from someone as talented as Fincher) by deliberately selling the star on magazine covers doing all kinds of poses and styles, is just tiresome and lame, really. They started putting out these pictures almost a year ago, desperately trying to sell a project that the people involved KNOW is a cash in project (except maybe for Mr. Fincher himself, who I honestly don’t think care too much about the box office prospects, he just wants some nihilistic, violent material and a lot of money to be able to realize that “vision”. To me, it seems like a vanity project and I am a BIG fan of Fincher!…)
Does she look stunning? I don’t know…and the point is, I don’t care!
Trying to sell a big franchise movie (a sell out in its own right when it comes from someone as talented as Fincher) by deliberately selling the star on magazine covers doing all kinds of poses and styles, is just tiresome and lame, really. They started putting out these pictures almost a year ago, desperately trying to sell a project that the people involved KNOW is a cash in project (except maybe for Mr. Fincher himself, who I honestly don’t think care too much about the box office prospects, he just wants some nihilistic, violent material and a lot of money to be able to realize that “vision”. To me, it seems like a vanity project and I am a BIG fan of Fincher!…)
She looks amazing.
She looks amazing.
And while Fincher already had his mind made up, several actresses came through, and worked hard and busted a gut and had amazing auditions that he pretentiously ignored because he was never going to accept anyone else.
And while Fincher already had his mind made up, several actresses came through, and worked hard and busted a gut and had amazing auditions that he pretentiously ignored because he was never going to accept anyone else.
Theory: The Social Network will have been the closest Fincher ever gets to Godfather-like glory.
Theory: The Social Network will have been the closest Fincher ever gets to Godfather-like glory.
@Stephen Holt: I’d say pulp, since he called it a “supermarket potboiler.”
@Stephen Holt: I’d say pulp, since he called it a “supermarket potboiler.”
Me,I never liked “The Godfather.” Give me Scorcese any day. So he thinks this is the what? Pulp…?Lit…?
Me,I never liked “The Godfather.” Give me Scorcese any day. So he thinks this is the what? Pulp…?Lit…?
Fincher is just making a point about turning trashy, popular books into great cinema, he’s not saying his film will be a classic like The Godfather.
The Silence Of Lambs is perhaps a better example of a B grade thriller being transformed into an A grade film.
Fincher is just making a point about turning trashy, popular books into great cinema, he’s not saying his film will be a classic like The Godfather.
The Silence Of Lambs is perhaps a better example of a B grade thriller being transformed into an A grade film.
She really is stunning. Some of those shots looks like they’re taken from a Von Trier movie.
She really is stunning. Some of those shots looks like they’re taken from a Von Trier movie.
I think his (Fincher’s) comparison refers to the attraction of taking a mediocre (but popular) piece of lit and using it as a base to make a better movie. I don’t hear him comparing his movie to The Godfather. I made that leap, as a fan, when expressing a wish that Fincher might have his Godfather – complete with box office, critical acclaim and an oscar.
Yeah, comparisons to past movies irk me, too, usually : “ABCD is this year’s ‘The King’s Speech'” That is just unimaginative marketing.
I think his (Fincher’s) comparison refers to the attraction of taking a mediocre (but popular) piece of lit and using it as a base to make a better movie. I don’t hear him comparing his movie to The Godfather. I made that leap, as a fan, when expressing a wish that Fincher might have his Godfather – complete with box office, critical acclaim and an oscar.
Yeah, comparisons to past movies irk me, too, usually : “ABCD is this year’s ‘The King’s Speech'” That is just unimaginative marketing.
Honestly, I prefer Fincher’s movies to the Godfather. (Well, maybe not Panic Room…)
Honestly, I prefer Fincher’s movies to the Godfather. (Well, maybe not Panic Room…)
Agreed. As much as I love Fincher, Enough with the Godfather comparisons.
Agreed. As much as I love Fincher, Enough with the Godfather comparisons.
I sort of knew this was how people would respond – kind of like the Citizen Kane/Social Network stuff last year. It is as though we are all, in mass, incapable of complex thinking anymore. We just need one wall. We accept the wall. We never turn it to see its dimensions. This is exactly why there isn’t as much complexity in movie making or music … people need and can deal with just the one thing. Think broader, readers. Don’t just react to the one wall.
Agreed. As much as I love Fincher, Enough with the Godfather comparisons.
Agreed. As much as I love Fincher, Enough with the Godfather comparisons.
I sort of knew this was how people would respond – kind of like the Citizen Kane/Social Network stuff last year. It is as though we are all, in mass, incapable of complex thinking anymore. We just need one wall. We accept the wall. We never turn it to see its dimensions. This is exactly why there isn’t as much complexity in movie making or music … people need and can deal with just the one thing. Think broader, readers. Don’t just react to the one wall.
Ryan,
The three new ones I liked, though the plant one, not quite as much as the two darker contrast ones.
Ryan,
The three new ones I liked, though the plant one, not quite as much as the two darker contrast ones.
@Colin Biggs And as good as Un Prophete is, it’s not even close. Not much is. It’s like me saying, “You know if I blow my hair out, I bet I’ll look like Angelina Jolie.” lol
@Colin Biggs And as good as Un Prophete is, it’s not even close. Not much is. It’s like me saying, “You know if I blow my hair out, I bet I’ll look like Angelina Jolie.” lol
A lot of news outlets are making a big deal about the Hitchcock-esque relationship Fincher has with Rooney? What did you think, Sasha?
A lot of news outlets are making a big deal about the Hitchcock-esque relationship Fincher has with Rooney? What did you think, Sasha?
I don’t know. I won’t know until I see the movie. What I know about Fincher is that he is obsessive. Taking on Dragon Tattoo meant he wasn’t just going to make this movie. He was going to get obsessive about it – about its star, about the place, about the look, about even the eyebrows. So, Hitchcock kind of honed in on the blonde — in particular, Grace Kelly, Tippi Hedren — etc. His blondes would tend to sort of exist in the same realm each and every time. I don’t get this from Fincher because all of his films, and all of the characters that inhabit them, are different. You can’t really draw comparisons — except to say that he is perhaps drawn to stories about similarly obsessed people, like himself. This was why The Social Network was such a perfect movie — Sorkin is an obsessive writer. The character, Mark Zuckerberg, an obsessive. Put them all together – magic. I don’t know what will come of Dragon Tattoo — I have to see it. I also have to finish the book.
Hitchcock-esque relationship Fincher has with Rooney?
There’s a better parallel between Hitchcock-Stewart and Fincher-Pitt. Aside from Panic Room, we haven’t had much opportunity to see Fincher put women at the center of his movies. Rooney Mara’s role in The Social Network wasn’t big enough to qualify as an obsession.
In fact, if I had to make any kind of Fincher-Hitchcock comparison right now it’s more interesting for me to imagine Fincher playing Scottie Ferguson and Rooney Mara as Judy/Madeline.
A lot of news outlets are making a big deal about the Hitchcock-esque relationship Fincher has with Rooney? What did you think, Sasha?
A lot of news outlets are making a big deal about the Hitchcock-esque relationship Fincher has with Rooney? What did you think, Sasha?
I don’t know. I won’t know until I see the movie. What I know about Fincher is that he is obsessive. Taking on Dragon Tattoo meant he wasn’t just going to make this movie. He was going to get obsessive about it – about its star, about the place, about the look, about even the eyebrows. So, Hitchcock kind of honed in on the blonde — in particular, Grace Kelly, Tippi Hedren — etc. His blondes would tend to sort of exist in the same realm each and every time. I don’t get this from Fincher because all of his films, and all of the characters that inhabit them, are different. You can’t really draw comparisons — except to say that he is perhaps drawn to stories about similarly obsessed people, like himself. This was why The Social Network was such a perfect movie — Sorkin is an obsessive writer. The character, Mark Zuckerberg, an obsessive. Put them all together – magic. I don’t know what will come of Dragon Tattoo — I have to see it. I also have to finish the book.
Hitchcock-esque relationship Fincher has with Rooney?
There’s a better parallel between Hitchcock-Stewart and Fincher-Pitt. Aside from Panic Room, we haven’t had much opportunity to see Fincher put women at the center of his movies. Rooney Mara’s role in The Social Network wasn’t big enough to qualify as an obsession.
In fact, if I had to make any kind of Fincher-Hitchcock comparison right now it’s more interesting for me to imagine Fincher playing Scottie Ferguson and Rooney Mara as Judy/Madeline.
Any comparisons to The Godfather should be avoided. I know that blurb for the ‘Un Prophete’ trailer killed the movie for me a little bit when it compared itself to it.
Any comparisons to The Godfather should be avoided. I know that blurb for the ‘Un Prophete’ trailer killed the movie for me a little bit when it compared itself to it.
What Fincher said was that when you are dealing with pulpy source material the only way to do it is to go bigger. He uses Godfather as … wait for it … an example of going bigger. An example of when pulp turned to greatness. The reason I quoted that piece and the reason I commented on it was because I knew a reactionary audience was waiting out there to pounce on it. Fincher is often misinterpreted, I think, because he doesn’t filter himself when he talks to you – I know because I interviewed him. And half the time I wanted to say, I can’t believe he just said that. But I appreciate it – it isn’t arrogance on his part; its his own admiration of The Godfather that comes through here. Do you people honestly think he believes his film will be, in any way, like The Godfather? That’s like sitting down to write your own novel and imagining it will have the same impact as the Bible.
Any comparisons to The Godfather should be avoided. I know that blurb for the ‘Un Prophete’ trailer killed the movie for me a little bit when it compared itself to it.
Any comparisons to The Godfather should be avoided. I know that blurb for the ‘Un Prophete’ trailer killed the movie for me a little bit when it compared itself to it.
What Fincher said was that when you are dealing with pulpy source material the only way to do it is to go bigger. He uses Godfather as … wait for it … an example of going bigger. An example of when pulp turned to greatness. The reason I quoted that piece and the reason I commented on it was because I knew a reactionary audience was waiting out there to pounce on it. Fincher is often misinterpreted, I think, because he doesn’t filter himself when he talks to you – I know because I interviewed him. And half the time I wanted to say, I can’t believe he just said that. But I appreciate it – it isn’t arrogance on his part; its his own admiration of The Godfather that comes through here. Do you people honestly think he believes his film will be, in any way, like The Godfather? That’s like sitting down to write your own novel and imagining it will have the same impact as the Bible.
Yeah I dunno. Even to make a point, I wouldn’t throw around The Godfather in reference to my movie.
Yeah I dunno. Even to make a point, I wouldn’t throw around The Godfather in reference to my movie.
I loved, loved, loved the cover, hated the other 2…
Added 3 more shots, Ric. Like any of those?
😉
I loved, loved, loved the cover, hated the other 2…
Added 3 more shots, Ric. Like any of those?
😉
You can start with a supermarket potboiler, but it doesn’t mean you can’t aim high.
All right, now I’m officially excited. That’s a very good point. I forgot that Scorsese also recently proved it with Shutter Island.
You can start with a supermarket potboiler, but it doesn’t mean you can’t aim high.
All right, now I’m officially excited. That’s a very good point. I forgot that Scorsese also recently proved it with Shutter Island.
“If you start with a novel that’s already a masterpiece you have nowhere to go but down”
Precisely! Wouldn’t it be great if this turned out to be Fincher’s “Godfather”? (not that my expectations are too high.)
“If you start with a novel that’s already a masterpiece you have nowhere to go but down”
Precisely! Wouldn’t it be great if this turned out to be Fincher’s “Godfather”? (not that my expectations are too high.)