Support NeoGAF

[jtb]

Why do Fincher's projects stall? The man's movies always make money.

Not really. Benjamin Button and Zodiac both underperformed, so did TGWTDT. Not that I give a shit, but he commands pretty big budgets (TGWTDT had a 100m budget, Zodiac 70m, BB... like 150m I think), tons of creative control, and that's always going to be tough for studios to swallow.

Anyways, it's a bit much to say his projects always stall... he put out Zodiac, BB, TSN, and TGWTDT in a really compact period. Now he's working on House of Cards (directed the pilot... plus another episode I think). He's definitely been kept busy over the past few years, especially for a director who's shoots are longer than usual, and spends tons of time and money in post-production.

edit: and pain in the ass? His casts seems to like him.

 

[jetpacks was yes]

Fincher on SW would be unreal. Not getting my hopes up though.

 

[Hindle]

Making spin offs could be awesome, it would allow them to show different sides of the universe.

 

[Randdalf]

True. It looks awful, no matter how you put it. It's remarkable.



Even the visor reflection looks like an N64-era "reflective" surface.

It does look bad in retrospect, but when I saw that scene in the cinema I thought it was the most awesome part of the film (disclaimer: I was pre-teen). All these thousands of troopers marching into giant starships...

 

[Blader]

Why do Fincher's projects stall? The man's movies always make money.

Dragon Tattoo did not make money.

edit: and pain in the ass? His casts seems to like him.

Pain in the ass for studios. He fought like hell to get Rooney the job as Lisbeth when Sony was adamantly against it the whole way.

 

[Tom_Cody]

Why do Fincher's projects stall? The man's movies always make money.

Not relative to how much they cost. Also, it is well documented that he is an asshole.

 

[TrumanBurbank]

$232M Dragon Tattoo made worldwide. Considering the subject matter, unknown actress as lead and the fact that Daniel Craig is boxoffice poison outside the Bond films, I think that's pretty great.

 

[Hindle]

Fincher still intends to make the Dragon tattoo sequels doesn't he? I can't see him committing to another franchise.

Personally I'd prefer an upcoming director, Josh Trank or Max Landis ideally.

 

[TheContact]

Usually things that end in 7 are awesome. Hopefully this is no exception.

 

[Veitsev]

Dragon Tattoo did not make money.



Pain in the ass for studios, not cast and crew. He fought like hell to get Rooney the job as Lisbeth when Sony was adamantly against it the whole way.

Dragon had like a $100 million dollar budget and grossed $230 worldwide.

 

[jtb]

$232M Dragon Tattoo made worldwide. Considering the subject matter, unknown actress as lead and the fact that Daniel Craig is boxoffice poison outside the Bond films, I think that's pretty great.

The Fincher version had a budget of 100m, not counting a pretty sizable advertising campaign. Maybe that's the studio's fault for giving Fincher so much money and allowing him to give the leads to Craig and Mara, but it was certainly not a great return. And it definitely didn't make Sony any money.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

Stardust is mediocre B-movie fluff. .

You keep using the term B-Movie as a negative, which is weird, as that's what Star Wars was, essentially.

Somewhere along the line B-Movie became recognized/accepted as "B for Bad" or something along those lines. Much like "hack" became recognized as "Bad writer" when it's more like "artless mercenary." But a B-Movie isn't a bad movie, or even a cheap-looking movie. A B-Movie is basically a movie with a lesser budget, no real stars, and a faster shooting schedule, because it's really only intended to be released as the back-half of a double feature where people are coming SPECIFICALLY for the A-picture: A high-budget, star-filled full-on PRODUCTION. I guess it makes sense that the term would come to mean something different as the practice of double-features waned and eventually went extinct, but calling something a B-Movie isn't necessarily an insult so long as it delivers entertainingly.

Lots of the best movies ever made were B-pictures.

edit: on-topic, Fincher's been open to do this stuff since day one. I remember a well circulated story in the REALLY early days of the internet - could be true, could be false, but it certainly got around - that before Lucas decided he was going to direct ANY of the movies, he had meetings with Joe Johnston, Frank Darabont, and David Fincher, as to whether they'd be interested in doing Episode I, II, and III, and in that order.

Of course, shortly thereafter, Lucas decided to do them all himself.

 

[Blader]

$232M Dragon Tattoo made worldwide. Considering the subject matter, unknown actress as lead and the fact that Daniel Craig is boxoffice poison outside the Bond films, I think that's pretty great.

Sony disagrees, which is they're in no rush on making the sequels.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

Sony disagrees, which is they're in no rush on making the sequels.

There won't be sequels, in all likelihood. the zeitgeist for those books has come and gone, and nobody really remembers the movie all that fondly.

 

[JB1981]

No way Fincher gets put on this thing. It's nice to want things though

 

[CF_Fighter]

Fincher and the "feel" his movies have would work great for a SW film in the new trilogy that was like Empire or Jedi, in certain parts, in terms of subject and theme.

 

[Anth0ny]

My GOD if they can get Fincher... I'd actually be hyped.

 

[mattiewheels]

Could someone point me to a part of Fincher's filmography that makes him a great choice for this? Besides the fact that he's a really accomplished director? His style is just so far apart and opposed to this, I can't see him making a 'fun' movie, even if he was forced to.

 

[The Outsider]

The idea of Fincher directing Star Wars is a very strange one, but he's my favorite director, so I'd love to see what to he'd do with the franchise.

 

[Branduil]

Even the visor reflection looks like an N64-era "reflective" surface.

Gosh it's even worse than I remembered.

 

[shira]

Could someone point me to a part of Fincher's filmography that makes him a great choice for this? Besides the fact that he's a really accomplished director? His style is just so far apart and opposed to this, I can't see him making a 'fun' movie, even if he was forced to.

here

Visual Effects (3 titles)

1984 Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (matte photography: ILM) 
1984 The NeverEnding Story (matte photography assistant: ILM - as Dave Fincher) 
1983 Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (assistant cameraman: ILM)

 

[Bobby Roberts]

Fincher's also trying his damndest to get Eric Powell's "The Goon" off the ground, and that's a straight up slapstick comedy.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

I love Fincher, but I just can't imagine what a Fincher Star Wars movie would be like. Perhaps his style would have been suited to the prequels, what with all the politics and talking involved. But nothing Fincher has done tells me that he could make a good Space Opera.

Regardless, he's much much better than the other names that have cropped up, so I'd definitely love to see what he could do.

 

[jtb]

Fincher's done all kinds of genres, and he's a visual master. He'd be a great fit for this. Anyways, it's not like Kershner had directed space operas before ESB, and that's exactly what made him a great fit for the franchise. There needs to be less obsessing over "blockbuster" directors, and more focusing on directors that actually understand the basics of movie making and will be devoted to making a quality film.

(Not to sound like a broken record, given how we've had this discussion in one of the previous threads....but) Fincher is that guy.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

I love Fincher, but I just can't imagine what a Fincher Star Wars movie would be like. Perhaps his style would have been suited to the prequels, what with all the politics and talking involved. But nothing Fincher has done tells me that he could make a good Space Opera.

Regardless, he's much much better than the other names that have cropped up, so I'd definitely love to see what he could do.

There's nothing in Fight Club that tells you he can set up shots, get performances out of actors and move the camera judiciously in order to maximise the effect of the drama? Or The Game? or Zodiac?

A lot of people confuse the content of the story with the ability of the director bringing it to life. If he's competent enough to bring a story like Benjamin Button to life, I don't know why he'd have a problem bringing something WAY thematically simpler like Star Wars to the screen.

It's like my Vaughn arguments earlier in the thread: When it comes to stepping into a Star Wars movie, it's less about the stories they've told previously, and more about HOW they told them. Kershner directed a romance, and the sequel to "A Man Called Horse," and that was pretty much it. Marquand directed a romantic-thriller. Hell, LUCAS directed an R-Rated sci-fi satire, and a teen comedy before Star Wars.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

There's nothing in Fight Club that tells you he can set up shots, get performances out of actors and move the camera judiciously in order to maximise the effect of the drama? Or The Game? or Zodiac?

A lot of people confuse the content of the story with the ability of the director bringing it to life. If he's competent enough to bring a story like Benjamin Button to life, I don't know why he'd have a problem bringing something WAY thematically simpler like Star Wars to the screen.

It's like my Vaughn arguments earlier in the thread: When it comes to stepping into a Star Wars movie, it's less about the stories they've told previously, and more about HOW they told them. Kershner directed a romance, and the sequel to "A Man Called Horse," and that was pretty much it. Marquand directed a romantic-thriller. Hell, LUCAS directed an R-Rated sci-fi satire, and a teen comedy before Star Wars.

I don't doubt his ability to direct a great movie. It's the tone that I worry about. Like how I think Nolan is great at what he does, but I would never want to watch a Nolan directed Lord of the Rings film.

Certain genres have idiosyncrasies exclusive to them, like the feel-good cheese found in Space Opera. It demands a type of schlock that I imagine a bunch of fantastic directors might be hesitant to add. It's just a different creative approach, and one that I assume Fincher doesn't have the taste for.

He'd make a great movie, I'm sure. But it's likely that his Space Opera will be lacking in adventure and thrill, and filled with dialogue and intrigue.

 

[iuxion]

Fincher would be amazing.

Amazing.

 

[pel1300]

I don't doubt his ability to direct a great movie. It's the tone that I worry about. Like how I think Nolan is great at what he does, but I would never want to watch a Nolan directed Lord of the Rings film.

Certain genres have idiosyncrasies exclusive to them, like the feel-good cheese found in Space Opera. It demands a type of schlock that I imagine a bunch of fantastic directors might be hesitant to add. It's just a different creative approach, and one that I assume Fincher doesn't have the taste for.

He'd make a great movie, I'm sure. But it's likely that his Space Opera will be lacking in adventure and thrill, and filled with dialogue and intrigue.

I think Nolan could make a great LOTR film.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

He'd make a great movie, I'm sure. But it's likely that his Space Opera will be lacking in adventure and thrill, and filled with dialogue and intrigue.

See, I disagree, because if his script says "And here's the part where a huge dogfight breaks out" he's not gonna excise it. Or say "It needs more dialog." He's gonna try to make a crazy ass dogfight.

Panic Room was a pretty decent thriller, with interesting setpieces. As was Fight Club. In fact, Fight Club is littered with visually exciting ideas. The plane crash. The Ikea walkthrough. The apartment explosion. The car crash.

It's less that he can't do it, and more that the material he's chosen doesn't necessarily let those sorts of opportunities pop up. But if he's signing on for a Star Wars movie - he knows what he's getting into. There are expectations. The question then becomes is he technically proficient enough to fulfill them? I think that's an easy yes. Same with Vaughn, or Favreau, or Johnston, or Verbinski.

 

[Count Dookkake]

.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

Would be funny to see one of these name directors get the gig and then completely follow the Lucas playbook.

I think this more likely going to be the case than not. Most of the candidates are workmanlike to begin with, but I'd expect any director to tamp down their stylistic tics and take Lucas' invisible camera approach. The big advantage to having a name director is having someone who can actually direct the fucking actors.

 

[Count Dookkake]

.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

The big advantage to having a name director is having someone who can actually direct the fucking actors.

Yes indeed.

I don't know if anyone's keen to follow "the Lucas Playbook" considering he went 1 for 4 using that playbook on Star Wars - but there will likely be some set stylistic boundaries the producers will expect any director/writer to stay within.

 

[Count Dookkake]

.

 

[jtb]

I dunno, the prequels have a very different feel compared to the OT, even if they all have wipes, similar editing styles, etc. I'm sure the sequel trilogy will have those same staples, but still have their own feel, and whoever directs it will have a big part in creating that feel.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

No, the films are 6 for 6 in that regard.

I am referring to how the film looks, is paced and edited.

Whoever ends up calling shots on set, this will look virtually indistinguishable from a Lucas film.

No, Empire isn't shot, or paced, or edited like the other 5 are, and neither is Star Wars, really. Jedi looks a LOT more flat than the other two in the original trilogy, and drags more than either film. The Prequels are mostly uniform in their look/feel/pace. Revenge of the Sith is a little prettier than Episode II.

 

[Count Dookkake]

.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

Yeah, Empire probably has the richest photography, and the camera moves a bit more in the prequels (mostly in CG sequences), but I don't think there are dramatic differences between them. None of the films are interested in looking overtly directed.

 

[Clevinger]

He'd make a great movie, I'm sure. But it's likely that his Space Opera will be lacking in adventure and thrill, and filled with dialogue and intrigue.

He wouldn't be writing it, right? Then it's just a matter of what the screenwriter gives him.

 

[Anticitizen One]

Fincher on Star Wars would be a disaster. yall remember the last time Fincher did a sci-fi movie (which also happened to be a sequel to a very sucessful franchise)....

I bet Han and Luke would die in the first few minutes and leia will shave her head.

 

[jtb]

Fincher on Star Wars would be a disaster. yall remember the last time Fincher did a sci-fi movie (which also happened to be a sequel to a very sucessful franchise)....

I bet Han and Luke would die in the first few minutes and leia will shave her head.

Oh come on. Everyone knows Fincher had zero say over killing off the main characters and the majority of the big decisions, and has subsequently disowned the movie.

And you know what? It's still better (certainly far more interesting) than all three prequels. Bring it on.

 

[Abdozer]

Fincher on Star Wars would be a disaster. yall remember the last time Fincher did a sci-fi movie (which also happened to be a sequel to a very sucessful franchise)....

I bet Han and Luke would die in the first few minutes and leia will shave her head.

Do you know the whole story with Fincher and Alien 3?

 

[Count of Monte Sawed-Off]

The Assembly Cut of Alien 3 is pretty good.

 

[jtb]

I really don't understand the skepticism over Fincher. He's perfect for this. He understands pacing better than most action directors, he understands CG better than most, if not every, studio director that gets handed big budgets, not to mention he's handled big budgets before, and he always gets quality performances out of his actors.

Every director hadn't worked on a space opera/action movie/big budget studio vehicle/etc. before being given the chance. Will he get the chance? I don't know. But I know he's make a great movie out of it if he did.

 

[Cheebo]

Fincher on Star Wars would be a disaster. yall remember the last time Fincher did a sci-fi movie (which also happened to be a sequel to a very sucessful franchise)....

I bet Han and Luke would die in the first few minutes and leia will shave her head.

Alien 3's flawa are not Finchers fault. Not in the slightest.

 

[Solo]

Fincher won't do Star Wars. Come the fuck on, sons.

 

[Dany]

Fincher on Star Wars would be a disaster. yall remember the last time Fincher did a sci-fi movie (which also happened to be a sequel to a very sucessful franchise)....

I bet Han and Luke would die in the first few minutes and leia will shave her head.

The most uninformed most and dated examples goes to...

Just get Duncan Jones or some crap, it doesn't matter. It isn't like the director is going to have any say over anything with Disney on their backs.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

Joe Wright? You guys are nuts. Dude has already got his Houdini biopic going and then has a Bond movie to make.

 

[T Dollarz]

Fincher won't do Star Wars. Come the fuck on, sons.

Pretty much lol Fincher would never go back to something like this. His filmmaking has matured.

 

[Spider from Mars]

The Assembly Cut of Alien 3 is pretty good.

I felt I was alone in liking Alien 3 in any capacity. Are we also Alien Resurrection bros or will I have to continue traveling that road alone?