Ranking David Fincher's Films -- Part 2

And now for the thrilling conclusion of my ranking of David Fincher's films, from worst to best.

5. Fight Club (1999)

Please don't hate me for not ranking this one higher. While Fight Club may not be one of David Fincher's most critically acclaimed films (or at least it wasn't when it first came out), it is perhaps his most beloved and enjoyed. It was a box office disappointment and it received mixed reviews from critics who didn't know what to make of it. But thanks to the emergence of the home DVD market, Fight Club enjoyed cult status success with rentals through the roof. And with such a subversive, non-mainstream, movie it seems as if it couldn't have happened any other way. It is a film that captures the anti-commercial and cynical spirit of the then-coming-of-age Generation Xers. And yet it is a self-aware dark satire that features not only lots of product placements but also many easter eggs and references to the craft of film making as well. The jumping-off point at which Fincher's signature style truly blossomed, Fight Club works so well as a movie that I was surprised to learn that it was based off a book. Could you imagine how a book version of the infamous projectionist scene would play out? Add to this some pitch perfect acting from Edward Norton, Brad Pitt, and Helena Bonham-Carter and a cool, non-conventional soundtrack by the Dust Brothers and you've got a fun movie that was meant to be rewatched again and again. Despite its 90's zeitgeist feel, Fight Club is a film that's gotten better with age and is arguably Fincher's greatest contribution to pop culture.

Academy Awards: (1 nomination for Best Sound Editing)

4. Gone Girl (2014)

Unlike his other thrillers, David Fincher's latest film, Gone Girl, takes place amongst everyday domestic life... that is if every day you were caught in a sadistic plot involving your spouse's disappearance and presumed murder. By this point Fincher became known as the man who makes pretty-looking, nihilistic movies from books you read while flying on airplanes. Considering the tone and subject matter of Gillian Flynn's novel, one can plainly see why the director was drawn towards its compelling, flawed characters, dark humour (satirizing modern media), and gripping story that keeps you guessing right up until the end – even though the big twist comes in at around the film's halfway mark! The casting in Gone Girl is superb. Ben Affleck manages to be sympathetic while at the same time channelling that inner douchebag/narcissist that most guys possess (you know what I'm talking about). Rosamund Pike is terrifying as the manipulative Amy Dunn, one of the most memorable female movie antagonists in recent memory. Neil Patrick Harris, Kim Dickens, even freakin' Tyler Perry is fantastic in this film. On the other side of the camera Fincher assembled his usual core production team lending this film its familiar smooth, creeping camera, cool colour palette, a rich soundscape, and seamless special effects. For the third consecutive time, the director collaborated with Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross to produce an electronic ambient soundtrack that's restless but with a soothing facade. Gone Girl is Fincher's highest grossing film to date and while it doesn't exactly feel like anything new from the man, it's still a great film. Just don't watch it for date night.

Academy Awards: (1 nomination for Best Actress [Pike])

3. Seven (AKA Se7en) (1995)

After the train wreck that was Alien 3's production, David Fincher retreated back to the world of TV commercials for a little while. But it wasn't long before he was given free reign to unleash his own vision upon the world with this startlingly original script previously deemed too edgy by most. Thank goodness Seven came out the way it did because it is a shocking, haunting spectacle you'll never forget. This movie is the closest thing to horror that Fincher has yet done. And yet unlike most modern horror films, Seven does have a sensible amount of restraint: it knows that audiences can be scared by things that are just out of sight, that we can be scared by our own imaginations filling in the gaps. The film also has one of the most memorable endings in decades. The casting is excellent. The two leads, Brad Pitt as the impatient, headstrong rookie detective and Morgan Freeman as the jaded, methodical investigator, have great chemistry. This is in spite of occasional woodenness from certain actors (Pitt, Kevin Spacey). As with a lot of other Fincher movies, this one has a cool opening credits sequence, giving the audience a view of the villain preparing his gruesome crimes. With an atmosphere as oppressive as the constant rain and filth of the nameless city it takes place in, Seven is a visceral experience. It's doubtful that anyone but Fincher could have directed this film this well and it stands out as one of the best (and most underrated) pictures of the 1990's.

Academy Awards: (1 nomination for Best Editing)

2. The Social Network (2010)

It may seem weird at first for David Fincher to choose to direct a real-life college drama about a website; he makes thrillers, not movies where people talk all the time. Right? Back in 2010 when I first heard that a movie about Facebook was being made I rolled my eyes and said, “that's a silly idea.” But when you see The Social Network you realize that Fincher was the perfect guy to take charge of this project. It touches on many recurring themes that can be found throughout the man's filmography: mankind's relationship to technology, evolving architecture, punk culture, and a narcissistic/consumed main character. This character, portrayed in a breakout performance by Jesse Eisenberg, is culpable but still intriguing and even somewhat relatable. He's a brilliant, absent-minded, yet somewhat narcissistic young man with a fragile ego willing to do anything to fully realize his projects. In this mostly-fictional version of Mark Zuckerberg one can see at least a small reflection of oneself. The other actors – Justin Timberlake, Andrew Garfield, Armie Hammer, etc – all give top notch performances. Shot on the new Red One camera and its amazing 4K visuals, The Social Network is one of Fincher's best looking films to date. Unlike most of his earlier films, the camerawork is more staid and less flashy and the colour palette remains impersonal without resorting to the familiar blue tint. Instead there's more yellow and green, with high-contrast practical lighting. And how could I not mention the spooky, unconventional, Oscar-winning soundtrack by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross? The duo's first collaboration with Fincher gives the film an electronic sound that signals the old order giving way to the new. The Social Network is so cool and is beyond doubt Fincher's most well-received film. The film received several Oscar nominations, but because life is unfair it was passed over for the best picture and best director awards. Regardless, it's still a masterpiece, a likely candidate for best film of the decade before the decade's first year was even out.

Academy Awards: Best Original Score, Best Editing, Best Adapted Screenplay (nominated for 5 more)

1. Zodiac (2007)

If you've read my list of Top 20 Best Movies I've Ever Seen (back in December), then this should come as no surprise to you. Now all I gotta do is say something I haven't said already about this movie. Zodiac is a film about obsession, and who better to make such a film than the obsessive perfectionist himself: David Fincher. Not only that, but the story of the Zodiac also connects to Fincher's personal history; the man grew up in San Francisco during the the real life boogeyman's reign of terror. The director has said that one of his goals with the film was to demystify the legends surrounding the murders. In doing so, Fincher's film stays as much to the facts as possible, resulting in one of the most realistic and historically accurate true crime-mystery films ever. It's the fine details that makes the movie, but halts the case. Each character's drive to uncover the killer's identity takes over their lives, and the inability to catch him leads them to either take up alcoholism, suffer an existential crisis, or desperately commit even more of their crumbling lives to the wild-goose chase. It just goes to show that no matter how much effort you put into doing something, it can always be called into question by human error and compulsive desperation. This comes to a head in one of my favourite scenes, in which Jake Gyllenhaal's Robert Graysmith hears noises above the ceiling from the basement of a creepy house. It's never revealed whether there was someone else in the house, Graysmith was overreacting by thinking so, or if the noises were even real at all and not just a product of Graysmith's overzealousness. As was the case in real life, the killer is never caught and yet the film still manages to feel satisfying. In addition, the film showcases a paranoid musical score, excellent use of CG effects, highly detailed set design, and precise camerawork in what was Fincher's first feature-length film shot on digital camera. As I said before, Zodiac is a film perfectly suited to David Fincher's artistic sensibilities, an effortless masterstroke. The fact that it received no Academy Award nominations is an absolute travesty, but I firmly believe that Zodiac is one of the 21^st century's best movies so far and is no doubt the gold standard of Fincher's filmography.

Academy Awards: (no nominations)

Ranking David Fincher's Films -- Part 1

David Fincher is my favourite director. He directs movies with such a high level of technical proficiency, detail, and sharpness that it isn't difficult to recognize his style. After taking the world of music video and television commercial directing by storm he proceeded to assault the Hollywood scene in the early 1990's. In the quarter-century since he's become one of the most innovative and obsessed directors of this generation. Fincher's most recent film, Gone Girl, came out in 2014 and while his next big project has yet to be announced, I eagerly look forward to the day it's brought to life. Now that I've seen all ten of his feature films I'd like to take this moment to rank them all from worst to best in as objective a viewpoint as possible. I'll also list any Academy Award wins/nominations for each film as well.

10. Alien 3 (1992)

No surprise here. The first feature length film helmed by David Fincher, Alien 3 is generally regarded as the only bad movie he's ever made. And even at that it wasn't entirely his fault. The film's notorious production was marred by sickness, an unfinished script, overbearing studio control, and strict deadlines. The director has since disowned the final product, refusing even to endorse the re-edited “assembly cut” that was released 11 years later. One could say that the trouble surrounding the film's production is more interesting than the film itself. Alien fans weren't pleased that the previous film's heroes were killed off-screen in this film's opening scene. But to be fair, it's not all bad. The acting is good, the mood/tone is on point, the visuals look nice, and the Oscar-nominated special effects are impressive for 1992. Still, Alien 3 is a movie most people don't look back on fondly. It doesn't hold a candle to either of the first two movies in the series, and was easily the worst in the series until 1997's Alien: Resurrection gave it a run for its money.

Academy Awards: (1 nomination for Best Visual Effects)

9. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)

While Benjamin Button isn't a bad movie, it's definitely the most atypical of Fincher's filmography. From a director who was mostly known for making thrillers came a romantic fantasy. Imagine Forrest Gump, but with a more sombre tone, less comedy, and more impressive visuals. Benjamin Button has what's easily the best use of computer generated effects of any film in this list, not only from the reverse-aging Brad Pitt undergoes but also from the backdrops that show New Orleans's evolution throughout the 20^th century. The sets look great for their respective periods; I was able to tell what year any given scene was in without needing to be told the date. Unfortunately, the thing felt a bit pretentious and somewhat meandering. For instance, the story's whole ending feels like it had no payoff at all. Did the screenwriter just forget to write an ending? Still, I think this movie is worth watching once. Its themes do offer an interesting look into the fragility of the individual's short existence on this Earth. By this point in his career Fincher had reached middle age and perhaps this was his way of being self-reflective without trying to veer too far off of what his work is best known for. The results were mixed; some people like this movie, others don't. If nothing else, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, served as a launch platform to garner its director more critical acclaim (the movie got tons of award nominations) as well as a place to perfect and hone his craft to its tightest and most potent form for his following three movies. Now if only the man could figure out a way to make cars age in reverse...

Academy Awards: Best Art Direction, Best Makeup, Best Visual Effects, (nominated for 10 others)

8. The Game (1997)

The Game is a bit of a forgotten gem today, but it is in fact a fine movie well worth the watch. It evokes a Hitchcockian spirit of classic puzzle-paranoia, yet it is also very much a product of its time. This film fulfills a bunch of ticks on the David Fincher checklist: a steely colour palette, a rich attention to detail, a run-down urban setting, an obsessed main character, rich white people problems, etc. But it all comes together to make for an engaging experience that'll keep you guessing as to what's really going on. Michael Douglas is the perfect actor for the lead role of Nicholas Van Orton, a rich jerk who's cut himself off from everyone as a result of a traumatic childhood experience. Watching him go through his personal change is a bit like watching Ebenezer Scrooge's in A Christmas Carol, but within the plot of Total Recall. However one thing that bugged me a bit was the plot holes the actual game presents; CRS would have to be omniscient to plan out the game exactly as they did. For example, how did CRS know that Nicholas wouldn't check to see if his gun was loaded with blanks? How did they know he would've been able to escape the sinking car? How did they know the exact spot from which he was going to jump off the building? And how did they know the exact spot the commando dudes with blanks would be shooting at? Was Christine's house completely covered in squibs just waiting to be detonated? It's a shame that a film that wants to make you think doesn't have airtight logic. Nevertheless, I enjoyed The Game very much and I would watch it again any time. (PS – I would love to have a T-shirt that says “I was drugged and left for dead in Mexico – and all I got was this stupid t-shirt”.)

Academy Awards: (no nominations)

7. Panic Room (2002)

When I was deciding on the order of this list, I agonized over which order to put Panic Room and The Game. Both are very good movies with gripping plots that pull you in and good acting. And while I think I personally prefer The Game, I must acknowledge that Panic Room, from an objective viewpoint, is the superior film. It seems as if the two films were made to be directly compared; two somewhat-minor thriller films with an interesting basic concept with a passive main character who goes through personal change. And yet, Panic Room is more tense and energetic mostly because 99% of the film takes place at a single location. The film was shot on a big multistory set with many of the shots pre-visualized via 3D computer models, giving David Fincher total control over filming. There's tons of sweeping shots, crane shots, and those soaring, CG-enhanced shots flying past/through nearby objects no matter how small. We saw shots like this in 1999's Fight Club, but their ubiquity here has a twofold effect: sometimes it enhances the film's claustrophobic mood, other times it just comes off as a bit gimmicky. But one thing Panic Room does very well is the characters. There aren't many of them, but you'll enjoy watching them and you'll remember every one of them. This is in big part thanks to the superb acting. Jodie Foster does a commendable job despite being brought on board at the last minute. After the sprawling opus of his last film, Fight Club, Fincher clearly wanted to relax a bit with a less taxing project and it shows. Panic Room is a lean, easily digestible, straightforward thriller with no significant subtext that is easy to like.

Academy Awards: (no nominations)

6. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (2011)

What else can I say about The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo that I haven't said before? I love this movie, but objectively I can't rank it any higher on this list since as a cohesive project it doesn't do many things conspicuously better than Fincher's other films. Like his earlier movies, this one is a murder mystery-thriller based on a book with obsessed characters. It's standard Fincher stuff, but it's a very good standard. Highlights of Dragon Tattoo include robotic, calculated camera movements, a bleak and uninviting tone, an ominous, cold, pitch-perfect soundtrack by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, subtle yet effective use of CG effects, and masterful acting. This of course includes Rooney Mara as the title character Lisbeth Salander. Her total role commitment to the young, defiant, misanthropic, cyber punk is undeniably magnetic and is a major asset to the film. The story of two people who are brought together by their shared obsession – and subsequently split apart once that obsession concludes – is fully realized by a fine screenplay written at a patient, methodical pace to mirror/draw the viewer into the characters' own infatuation. Despite Fincher's natural style and impeccable story-telling, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo was a minor box office disappointment and didn't get all the respect it deserved. Sadly, by this point it seems unlikely that we'll ever see the next two films that were originally planned... at least not in the way we wanted to see them.

Academy Awards: Best Editing, (nominated for 4 others)

Check back next week for part 2!

Movie Review Repost -- X-Men: First Class (2011)

Since Logan is still out (and awesome) I think now might be a good time to look back on another X-Men movie, First Class, a movie that... doesn't have... Wolverine... Yeah, sorry guys. I started a new job this week and my new schedule doesn't allow for as much free time as it used to. But don't worry, I've been working on some stuff and I promise there'll be new material next week. Anyways, as I mentioned in January's "Movie Review Mistakes?" article I think First Class is a better film than I originally gave it credit for. I was too harsh, but I could probably chalk it up to the fact that it was on;y the second movie review I ever wrote (June 2011). Enjoy. 

   Last night I saw X-Men: First Class, the latest in a growing line of X-Men films. And to be honest it was kind of a mixed bag.

   First let's take a look at the characters. While all roles are well-acted only some of the characters are really interesting. The Professor, Magneto, Beast, Mystique, and Banshee are all fantastic; you just can't take your eyes off them in whatever scenes they're in. It was a real treat to see Professor X (James McAvoy) portrayed so differently: younger, energetic, and a touch egotistical. The villains on the other hand were pretty see-through and dull. By the end of the movie you won't even remember their names. Also, I couldn't help but feel that Beast could've used a little more development towards the end after he turns himself into a monster. The matter is addressed for about one minute and then dropped forever.
   The plot also has its ups and downs. The action scenes are intense and a lot of fun to watch thanks to the great CGI. The setting, 1962, was also fun to see, and I love how a summer blockbuster movie dramatically portrays the Cuban Missile Crisis (albeit with mutants and all). That part (the climax) where Magneto catches and stops the hundreds of American and Soviet missiles from killing the X-Men is just awesome. And what superhero team movie is complete without a training montage, eh? This film also has some good jokes too - especially Wolverine's cameo appearance! Nevertheless, this movie's plot has many shortcomings. First and foremost, the villain's plan was bland and just totally lame! They want the USA and USSR to go to nuclear war so humanity is wiped out, only the strongest survive, mutants rule the world, blah, blah, blah... Next, the romance between Professor X and that MacTaggert chick near the end sort of came out of nowhere. Furthermore, why did Mystique leave the X-Men and join Magneto even though she didn’t really have any motivation to do so?
   Yes, this film has plotholes, but unlike Thor these plotholes are just obnoxious and confusing. For instance, no explanation was given for why Beast screwed up his "mutant cure" formula so badly. Likewise, when young Magneto freaks out and kills the Nazis at that concentration camp, why did he kill everyone except the guy who killed his mother? I guess he just felt like waiting 18 years so he could go through the trouble of searching the world and finding him first.
   Lastly, this movie just totally screws up the timeline of the other X-Men movies. The ending - where Magneto leaves the X-Men and Xavier is paralysed - contradicts what we saw in both X-Men 3 and X-Men Origins: Wolverine which both suggest that up until just a few years ago Xavier could walk and that he and Magneto were still allies.
   So to sum up, we've got a movie with cool heroes, lame villains, a dumb plot, cool action scenes and CGI, great jokes, big plotholes, and good acting. We've got a movie that is entertaining but it screws up the continuity of the other films. I will recommend this for X-Men fans. But for casual moviegoers, you might like this.

   I give it three stars out of five.

Movie Review -- Logan

   It's time for one last Wolverine movie, Logan. After seven outings as everyone's favourite scissor-knuckled Canadian mutant (nine if you count cameos) Hugh Jackman has fully embodied his character like few other superhero actors have. So is Logan a proper sendoff to this actor and his 17-years long role? Let's take a look.

   Logan takes place in the future, year 2029 in which mutants are nearly extinct. The man once known as Wolverine is now a grumpy alcoholic chauffeur taking care of the elderly Professor Xavier. His healing factor isn't working so well, but it can work with the occasional conservative dose of... steroids? C'mon Logan, winners don't use drugs! But trouble brews as he discovers an 11 year old girl not unlike himself is being hunted down by some bad dudes. Saying anything more would risk giving away some good storylines, many of which are quite thoughtful and moving. I know I felt like crying at the end. I also wouldn't want to spoil a new (CENSORED) who shows up at the halfway mark; he/she will blow your mind! What is worth mentioning is that Logan shows little regard for the continuity of the rest of the X-Men series. And it's about time we had a standalone X-Men movie; that series' timeline is more convoluted than a possessed yoga instructor with scoliosis. The most I could speculate is that this movie may have taken place in the same universe(s) as 2016's X-Men: Apocalypse and/or perhaps 2013's The Wolverine, but that's a big maybe. Instead, this movie takes place in a universe in which X-Men comic books also exist. Neat, huh?

   You may have noticed that this is the first rated R X-Men film (if you don't count Deadpool), playing well into the violent nature of Wolverine's character. And this movie earns its rating with lots of blood, gore, and curses, but it takes a while for these elements to be used properly in a natural way. For the first half hour or so it feels as if the producers decided to cram in loads of F-bombs and brief nudity simply because they could. Nevertheless Logan does succeed in giving us a more stripped-down, nitty-gritty, back to basics action film. One can see this through the closeup, excellently choreographed fight scenes in place of the big CG set pieces that most superhero films have grown accustomed to. The result is a film that is gritty, but not humourless.

   Hugh Jackman really goes out with a bang in what is undoubtedly his finest Wolverine performance yet. His role this time around is even more moody than usual and it's pulled off with a fine degree of nuance. What can I say? He's the best there is at what he does. Patrick Stewart also makes a return to his iconic role of Professor X, who now has a degenerative brain disease that makes him dangerous if he doesn't take his medicine. It's a really interesting idea. And lastly we have a similarly interesting new character, Laura (AKA X-23) played by Dafne Keen. Her awkwardness, naivete, and volatility not only challenges Logan in a completely new way, but it also establishes a character who is engrossing in her own right.

   But of course I can't let an X-Men movie go by without listing all its plotholes. Heh heh heh. If Wolverine's (CENSORED) is impeding his healing factor then does that mean the same thing will happen to Laura? Besides, his healing factor seemed to be working just fine after the opening scene. Why didn't the steroids make Logan go crazy like everybody said it would? Why doesn't Professor X use his powers for useful things other than calming down horses? It would sure make a lot of things easier! Instead, the Professor is content with putting friendly (CENSORED) in needless danger. What a tool. Lastly, did the movie just end with a reference to The Outlaw Josey Wales? Does this mean the mutant kids are going to join the Confederate Army?

   Luckily the rest of Logan is awesome enough to make you not care about these plotholes. On the whole, it's a very good superhero movie with a different premise and tone to the usual ones. With its strong emotional punch, Logan is easily the best of the three Wolverine films and perhaps the best X-Men film of all. Mature action fans of all types, think about giving this one a try.

   PS – There's no end credits scene, so don't waste your time like I did.

Grade:

Movie Review Repost -- The Wolverine (2013)

Logan, the last Wolverine movie to star the outstanding Hugh Jackman, is in theatres and I've heard great things. I can't wait to watch it! You can expect to see a review of it here shortly. In the meantime I thought it'd be cool to look back on my thoughts on the previous standalone Wolverine movie, 2013's The Wolverine. I thought it was pretty good; it had cool action and a unique setting for a Western superhero film. My opinions on it haven't changed much, though it is a shame that the films seems to have been forgotten with the passage of time. Maybe it's time to give this one another viewing, methinks. (Though I've now come to see why X-Men Origins: Wolverine sucks. So please ignore what I said in the first paragraph.)

   You know, I don't think X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009) was as bad as everyone says. Sure, it had an unoriginal story, a confusing timeline (seriously, was anyone able to figure out what year that movie took place in?), and was rather forgettable overall. But it did have good performances and gripping fight/action scenes. And it is those two qualities that are largely inherited by The Wolverine (and every Logan movie for that matter).

   Set after the events of X-Men 3: The Last Stand, The Wolverine actually does not follow the four-issue 1982 miniseries as I expected, though it does use the same characters in the same setting. Our plot follows Logan, a loner once again, haunted by Jean Grey's death. Summoned to Japan by an old dying friend, Logan soon finds himself out of his element: having to battle mobsters, mutants, and ninjas in a setting he is unfamiliar with and without the aid of one of his most precious powers. There's also a mid-credits scene that will blow your mind. Don't miss it! (Yeah, mid-credits. We don't have to sit through ten minutes to see stuff now. So thoughtful.) I've gotta say, the Japanese setting was a cool thing to see, especially since it gives us that insane fight on top of the bullet train.

   As stated above, this film has good casting (except for maybe that Viper chick, she was kind of boring) and action. By now I'm convinced that Hugh Jackman isn't just portraying Wolverine, he is Wolverine. His is a fully realized and somewhat darker performance, as Logan has to come to terms with his own immortality. Additionally, the fight scenes are amazingly intense and kick miles of ass. It's what makes a Wolverine movie, and the action in The Wolverine is superbly entertaining. Also, the special effects were well done, though I guess we're now at the point where serviceable CGI is no longer impressive.

   But it's too bad that the final action scene sort of degenerates into cartoony weirdness. Also, those Jean Grey hallucinations are pretty jarring in that they repeatedly pull you out of the story. She's dead, Logan. Get over her!

   In conclusion, The Wolverine gives audiences an exciting new look at the X-movies' best character. It has a far better story and more gripping action than that other Logan film. Action movie fans will enjoy it regardless of their familiarity with the source material.

Rating: three and a half stars out of five.