Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (USE SPOILER TAGS!)

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Rainhurt

I've sat out of a lot of speculation surrounding the Lucasfilm deal. I remember people were worried that the 20th Century Fox fanfare may disappear from the Star Wars films, I am indifferent on that, but the opening of Raiders from the Paramount hill to the opening shot of Raiders is just an iconic cinema moment. Will be sad if that ever gets the chop.

Put me down for always preserve every original logo. I don't even like when studios replace their own older logos with current versions.

Unless there's a really, really, really, really good reason just preserve everything that was originally there. And even then give it a hell of a lot of thought.

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by octagon

In a lot of ways I think Dragon Tattoo kind of skewers the Fincher as auteur concerns. Sure, it's a fairly distinctive Fincher film but it's also incredibly faithful to the source material. It's hardly a Monty Python 'Sam Peckinpah's Salad Days' skit.

I think it also undercuts the notion that his stuff is shallow. He does a lot of really subtle things that reinforce central themes and character traits.

Does any of that put him at the top of my wish list? Nope. Will I be disappointed if they go in another direction? Hardly.

But in the unlikely event he does get the nod I won't be gnashing my teeth or rending my garments either.

That's the true problem with auteur theory -- is the director the complete creative force behind a project, or does he collaborate with others to bring his own vision to the screen? If he does collaborate, does that mean he should not have auteur status? Hitchcock, who has become the icon for auteur status, stayed faithful to multiple novels during his career.

It's a theory full of more questions than answers, so it's very debatable and not really reliable IMO.

I agree with your other point, though - his last few films, but especially Zodiac and GWTDT, show how subtle he really is when it comes to subjects that need it; sure, he can bang out the in-your-face-ness as much as anybody, but it's the little things you notice that really start to make you sit up and appreciate him (to varying degrees, of course).

[pikeman1]

[AmrlKJaneway]

^
Excellent! I love it!

I dunno if Leia's hair is elaborate enough. But still, great. Did you do that?

[pikeman1]

^ no, it's a fanart by rhymesyndicate

[Bluyoda]

David Fincher directing SW Episode VII???

He is a good director an dall, but he has no sense of humor, which makes him unsuitable for Star Wars IMHO.

I don't think that's a good idea.

[aiman04]

Both Alan Horn and George Lucas have said that Kathleen Kennedy will decide on the the director. So it's not up to Disney (though they can reject).

[Buddy Ackerman]

Originally Posted by aiman04

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button isn't really "Fincher" except for cinematography, other than that it's more to the Forrest Gump kind lf genre. And if you really look at Zodiac it is very toned down compared to his other crime thrillers.

Benjamin Button is what I was going to bring up to counter the 'Fincher is always dark' comments. The Social Network wasn't a dark film either but Button especially had a real sense of whimsey about it. Now, he's not released anything in the sci-fi genre yet but he's definitely not tied to grimy, dark thrillers either, even if those are the films he seems most interested in making.

He was also working on a remake of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea for Disney so he's had experience in the family sci-fi genre, even if the film hasn't made it to production yet (but Disney must have seen something in his approach to the material to hire him). He called the film "his Empire Strikes Back" which is a telling quote... Plus he knows how to use special effects for spectacle (Benjamin Button), characters (Social Netowrk) and subtle workd building (Zodiac), which is a bonus.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Buddy Ackerman

He was also working on a remake of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea for Disney so he's had experience in the family sci-fi genre, even if the film hasn't made it to production yet (but Disney must have seen something in his approach to the material to hire him). He called the film "his Empire Strikes Back" which is a telling quote... Plus he knows how to use special effects for both spectacle (Benjamin Button), characters (Social Netowrk) and subtle workd building (Zodiac), which is a bonus.

"Dark", and Empire fan. Yyyyeah. Think we know which fandom pigeonhole Davey belongs in.

Nnnnext? So, er, Joe, whaddya think of "A New Hope"?
(If he gets angry hearing it called ANH, we've got our man.)

[octagon]

Originally Posted by EricJ

"Dark", and Empire fan. Yyyyeah. Think we know which fandom pigeonhole Davey belongs in.

Nnnnext? So, er, Joe, whaddya think of "A New Hope"?
(If he gets angry hearing it called ANH, we've got our man.)

As long as we're pigeonholing, who's this 'we'?

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Buddy Ackerman

He was also working on a remake of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea for Disney so he's had experience in the family sci-fi genre, even if the film hasn't made it to production yet (but Disney must have seen something in his approach to the material to hire him).

Fincher has a penchant for 50-70 takes, trying to find what he wants in a performance. This is demanding on everyone, but then he is also dismissive of suggestions from the producers and the studio, which gives a reputation of being "difficult". None of this says "Disney" or "Star Wars" to me.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

Everyone pretty much glows over 'Zodiac', I haven't heard much criticism against that movie. I think you should really watch it before writing it off. In fact, i would say that about his entire later filmography. I think he's come a long way as a director, and his films from later in his career really show that. You should really give them a chance.

I think, given the right script, Fincher would make an excellent 'Star Wars' film. I feel the same way about Favreau and Johnston. Those are the three I really want to see do this new trilogy, personally. I would have loved to see Brad Bird do it, but I know that isn't going to happen. In the end, I think we can all agree we just really want to see a great trilogy to 'Jedi', because the possibilities are really endless right now.

Zodiac to me ended up being terribly boring. It started OK and all that but the problem is that the true story isnt very interesting becasue there is hardly a stroy arc and nothing gets solved. The film is seemingly 3 hours of letters being sent to the detective guy, he checks it out, dead lead, lather, rinse.... you knwo the deal. Again, its not all Finchers fault - the real life story isnt very intriguing at all. No closure. Nothing to get excited about.

Just let someone else do SW. Thats all.

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Zodiac to me ended up being terribly boring. It started OK and all that but the problem is that the true story isnt very interesting becasue there is hardly a stroy arc and nothing gets solved. The film is seemingly 3 hours of letters being sent to the detective guy, he checks it out, dead lead, lather, rinse.... you knwo the deal. Again, its not all Finchers fault - the real life story isnt very intriguing at all. No closure. Nothing to get excited about.
Just let someone else do SW. Thats all.

That's where the pleasure is, though -- why do you think there are so many Jack the Ripper enthusiasts around? A serial killer who escapes capture is intriguing and I think Fincher captured that tone perfectly with Zodiac. He was saying "this is real life, not the movies; sure, you might get close to the killer once or twice, but it isn't always a fairytale ending."

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

That's where the pleasure is, though -- why do you think there are so many Jack the Ripper enthusiasts around? A serial killer who escapes capture is intriguing and I think Fincher captured that tone perfectly with Zodiac. He was saying "this is real life, not the movies; sure, you might get close to the killer once or twice, but it isn't always a fairytale ending."

Perhaps. I just never got down with the film. Jack the Ripper was more interesting though. He does have a background. There were tales told of him that may not have all been true but they were damned cooll! With Zodiac, I felt like I learned nothing. I didnt have anything to grab onto.

Its not Finchers fault though, in fairness. Its the subject material.

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Perhaps. I just never got down with the film. Jack the Ripper was more interesting though. He does have a background. There were tales told of him that may not have all been true but they were damned cooll! With Zodiac, I felt like I learned nothing. I didnt have anything to grab onto.

Its not Finchers fault though, in fairness. Its the subject material.

I agree there -- I'm still waiting for a brilliant film about Jack the Ripper to be made (I really enjoyed From Hell, but think it was a bit too contrived in places).

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

I agree there -- I'm still waiting for a brilliant film about Jack the Ripper to be made (I really enjoyed From Hell, but think it was a bit too contrived in places).

Right - From Hell is actually under rated, IMO. I liked the Freemasons angle and it made sense for them to want to rid themselves of any ties to the girlfriend and her friends. That was well done! It was a little "overdone" too at the same time... Iagree.

Id love a Jack the Ripper film that really nailed it!

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Right - From Hell is actually under rated, IMO. I liked the Freemasons angle and it made sense for them to want to rid themselves of any ties to the girlfriend and her friends. That was well done! It was a little "overdone" too at the same time... Iagree.

Id love a Jack the Ripper film that really nailed it!

I liked From Hell, also.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Star Wars IS over the top with the fanbase. So is LOTR, Star Trek and just about any other popular movie or book series. However, Star Wars has suffered the most changes and edits along the way so its a special test case.

that is true. How many movies can you think of where there are 4 different versions of the same thing - theatrical, special edition, dvd release, bluray release? even the new movies generally have 2-3 versions and they are not that old. people pick on Star Wars because it is being constantly "improved" and not all of the changes make sense. Look at Trek - there are only 3 directors cuts out of 10 movies and even the original motion picture only has 3 versions(the history on that is crazy). you can't blame people for feeling a bit used when you go and see a movie and then it keeps getting changed for every release. having said that, it is one thing to feel used, it is another to keep buying the product and then complain how bad it is when you know full well that changes were made.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

That's where the pleasure is, though -- why do you think there are so many Jack the Ripper enthusiasts around? A serial killer who escapes capture is intriguing and I think Fincher captured that tone perfectly with Zodiac. He was saying "this is real life, not the movies; sure, you might get close to the killer once or twice, but it isn't always a fairytale ending."

I thought Fincher was implying that the two leads became more victims of the Zodiac, because they lost themselves in their obssession in solving the case.

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I thought Fincher was implying that the two leads became more victims of the Zodiac, because they lost themselves in their obssession in solving the case.

I think that is the main point of the whole film, yeah - the person Jake Gyllenhaal plays (Robert Graysmith) become obsessed to the point of losing marriages with finding out who the killer was, and even confronted Arthur Allen, the person he thought did it, after the investigation had ceased in his real life, and that comes across well in Gyllenhaal's performance.
There's a kind of desperation to find out who the killer is, a need for closure when you get too close to murder cases like that, that the actors nailed within Zodiac. Graysmith almost seems to lose his own identity in the search for finding someone elses.

But it's a lovely unconventional ending that is more true to real life than most Hollywood pictures; just because it's a crime thriller doesn't mean the murderer can be found. Really need to re-visit this film again now!