David Fincher interview

email this story
read comments (29)
post a comment

Given the longish length of Zodiac (the Director's Cut DVD runs 162 minutes) and the general theme of obsessiveness and meta-detail, it seemed fitting that this morning's phoner with director David Fincher should run longer than usual and go into a little more technical detail than normal. We talked for 49 minutes and the time just flew.

We began by discussing Fincher's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Paramount, 11.28), which he hasn't test-screened or even come close to finishing. To go by yesterday's posting (which came second-hand from a below-the-liner who allegedly worked on it), this adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald's 1922 short story may be more emotionally affecting than the Fincher usual-usual, which has always been on the dark, visually audacious side.

I told Fincher my only problem thus far is with the name "Benjamin Button," which sounds like something out of Hans Christian Andersen. Fincher doubts if the title means anything to anyone these days, and doesn't hold the Fitzgerald association in terribly high regard. "He probably wrote the story for drinking money," he says.

We moved on to (a) digital photography and the revolutionary qualities that after-dusk images now possess; (b) a reported tendency on his part to ask certain actors (or at least Zodiac costar Jake Gyllenhaal) to perform numerous takes of a given scene until it's right; (c) the bizarre cuts that were made to Zodiac due to test-screening reactions (like the 45-second black-screen time-passage sequence), (d) the fact that Zodiac is currently listed as the 4th best film of '07 on the Movie City News critics' chart (even though this liking hasn't translated to any Best Picture awards), and so on.

The money quote comes right at the beginning when Fincher asks me, "Where do I send the check?" Again, the interview in all of its raging 49-minute glory.

"Changeling" correction<< previous | next >>Secret A-lister meeting?

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on January 2, 2008 at 1:16 PM

comment #1

christian says ...

"He probably wrote the story for drinking money," he says.

Yes, Fitzgerald was a hack. Too bad Nike wasn't around then. But I'm sure Fincher can save the ho-hum story with beautiful lighting and framing.

Posted by christian at January 2, 2008 2:54 PM

comment #2

MAGGA says ...

I read the story today, and it was not terribly well written or interesting. The concept is good, though, and should make a great movie.

Posted by MAGGA at January 2, 2008 3:01 PM

comment #3

renorambler says ...

Even "Great" writers wrote for a paycheck on occasion. Or, more often, they wrote for a paycheck and happened to create some great pieces of literature along the way.

Posted by renorambler at January 2, 2008 3:13 PM

comment #4

renorambler says ...

Even "Great" writers wrote for a paycheck on occasion. Or, more often, they wrote for a paycheck and happened to create some great pieces of literature along the way.

Posted by renorambler at January 2, 2008 3:14 PM

comment #5

Jay T. says ...

Fitzgerald wasn't a hack... that's ridiculous. Now, it is fair to say he occasionally wrote for money, but to label him that way is absurd and insulting.

Posted by Jay T. at January 2, 2008 3:17 PM

comment #6

christian says ...

So do "great" directors -- except that Fincher is probably getting a few million to transform some obscure, hack writer's lame story that for some reason the studio is spending a small fortune to make.

You can debate the story merits, but to glibly shrug off its creator is kinda what this strike is all about.

Posted by christian at January 2, 2008 3:20 PM

comment #7

christian says ...

Jay T., you get that I was being snarky calling Fitz a hack? He's one of my heroes.

Posted by christian at January 2, 2008 3:22 PM

comment #8

Craig Kennedy says ...

You need that special Sarcasm Font I've been meaning to invent Christian.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at January 2, 2008 3:29 PM

comment #9

The Pope says ...

The amazing thing about Fitzgerald is that he was often so capable of writing so beautifully about people who were, essentially, quite rotten at their core. I can't count the number of women who have read Gatsby and closed the book thinking he was just the darndest romantic that ever walked the East Coast. I know, it was the scene with the shirts and the fact that he was poor and he went away and made his fortune and then came back. But Lordy, how many of them utterly missed the fact that Gatsby made his money bootlegging for the Mob. Gatsby was a crass, hollow materialist... and boy, do the girls love him (and it has little or nothing to do with Redford playing him in the 70s). That is why I am so intrigued by Fincher doing a story like Benjamin Button. Fincher is such a mesmerizing visualist that he could present you with your own personal apocalypse and you would thank him for how wonderfully the flames are licking around your ankles. And I think it is apt that someone who is so willing to present the late 20th century in such yet beautiful tones should be delving into something that in another person's hands would be a little flute of champagne that would have no kick. Fincher's sensibility will give it a strange taste.

Posted by The Pope at January 2, 2008 3:36 PM

comment #10

christian says ...

I assumed the "too bad Nike wasn't around then" line would have sufficed as Proof of Snark. But if you create that font, sign me up, CJ. We'll all wear it down.

Posted by christian at January 2, 2008 3:37 PM

comment #11

christian says ...

However Pope, to reduce Fitzgerald's creativity to "drinking money" is rather cruel and uninformed given that Fitz wrote to pay off hospital bills for his ailing wife, Zelda. That's the kinda hack he was.

I would think one should feel some sort of honor or fealty at adapting a story by one of the 20th century's greatest writers. And Fitz might have rotten characters, but he did have empathy. Somthing Fincher hasn't quite achieved.

Posted by christian at January 2, 2008 3:46 PM

comment #12

jeffmcm says ...

There's empathy enough in Seven and Zodiac.

Posted by jeffmcm at January 2, 2008 4:15 PM

comment #13

christian says ...

Obssession is not empathy.

Posted by christian at January 2, 2008 4:19 PM

comment #14

Craig Kennedy says ...

It's fair to say I like Fincher much more than you Christian, but I find his dismissal of the source material a little troubling as well. That's not to say I'm not really looking forward to the movie.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at January 2, 2008 4:20 PM

comment #15

jeffmcm says ...

That's true, and also a non sequitur. Both are present in both movies. Seven in particular has the empathy and anguish of Morgan Freeman's character as its raison d'etre.

Posted by jeffmcm at January 2, 2008 4:21 PM

comment #16

The Pope says ...

Christian,
I think you may have confused my regard for Fitzgerald with Fincher's flippant remark. I hold Fitz is very high esteem.

Posted by The Pope at January 2, 2008 4:25 PM

comment #17

christian says ...

I also recall Fincher mocking people who would pay 100 bucks to see a FIGHT CLUB musical that he was involved with, so his empathy often eludes me.

Posted by christian at January 2, 2008 4:28 PM

comment #18

jeffmcm says ...

I like Fight Club, but those people should be mocked.

Posted by jeffmcm at January 2, 2008 4:40 PM

comment #19

lazarus says ...

Helena is a huge beating heart in Fight Club (funny that she does the same trick for Sweeney Todd). The second time watching the film, when you realize what mind games Durden is (however inadvertently) playing with her, it's pretty devastating.

Also, the diner scene with Paltrow and Freeman in Seven. More humanity in that than most directors are able to manage in their entire films. Perfectly done.

Posted by lazarus at January 2, 2008 5:18 PM

comment #20

Gordie Lachance says ...

Could you girls put your claws away please?

He was MAKING A JOKE about Fitzgerald, as evidenced by his LAUGHING through it.

F Scott was a well known hard drinker who regularly whored himself to magazines for pocket money. There was nothing untrue or disparaging (or even flippant) about Fincher's comment. Nor did he "dismiss" the source material.

That said, this sounds like a return to form for Fincher after a couple of misfires.

Posted by Gordie Lachance at January 2, 2008 6:02 PM

comment #21

aspiringcrackaddict says ...

Christian, why so serious?

You know, sometimes irreverence is funny. And this was one of those times. :-) :-)

Posted by aspiringcrackaddict at January 2, 2008 6:26 PM

comment #22

christian says ...

I couldn't get the interview to play so I didn't get the tone. I admit, I'm prickly today. I just think Fitz deserves a little more credit.

Posted by christian at January 2, 2008 6:59 PM

comment #23

OddDuck says ...

Great interview! We need more of these Mr. Wells!

Maybe I wasn't listening carefully enough, but his talk about Gyllenhal sorta implied that he thought that he came to the set unprepared and wasn't serious enough in his approach? He talked about actors who don't want to do their homework and are lazy and it seemed REALLY clear from the context that this was a reference to Gylenhal. Wow. If I heard it wrong, though, maybe not.

Oh, and Christian, if you heard his line about Fitzgerald it'd be obvious that he said it with absolutely no disrespect intended or actually given, but I can see how on the page it reads different.

Posted by OddDuck at January 2, 2008 9:13 PM

comment #24

BurmaShave says ...

Beating off ceaselessly, against the tide.

Posted by BurmaShave at January 3, 2008 4:05 AM

comment #25

Jay T. says ...

christian - sorry, didn't pick up on the sarcasm. People say some crazy stuff in these comments so sometimes it's difficult to tell the difference between sarcasm and genuine absurdity.

Posted by Jay T. at January 3, 2008 9:15 AM

comment #26

scooterzz says ...

a couple of interesting/disturbing stills from 'bb' of brad pitt posted today on towelroad....

Posted by scooterzz at January 3, 2008 9:28 AM

comment #27

James Kang says ...

I think Fincher's comment about Fitzy being a hack is related more to Fincher's insecurity as a writer than anything else. I am sorry that David is so obviously about his weaknesses, but that can't be helped. As for Jack Gyllenhaal...would Fincher really have it any other way? If Gyllenhaal came in perfectly prepared I doubt that Fincher would like it, because Jake intimidates Fincher...soooooooo Jake can never get it right with him. Fincher always felt the need to take Jake down a notch. I feel bad for Jake, but more so for Fincher who can't handle working with a young, attractive man who gets more females than himself. Besides, I think Fincher is a full-blown bisexual who loves Brad fucking Pitt. Get over it David!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by James Kang at August 9, 2008 2:37 AM

comment #28

sarkmbt says ...

the little woman's hat
was white, and she wore a white gown that hung in pleats from her
shoulders. Over it were sprinkled little stars that glistened in
the sun like diamonds.
-----------------

Nike shoes
MBT
supra footwear
famous footwear
shoe dept

Posted by sarkmbt at March 26, 2010 12:16 AM

comment #29