He's a perfectionist, I'll have to give him that. He filmed his upcoming movie Gone Girl here in town for over five weeks last year. I have a few friends who will even appear in the movie...unless those scenes are trimmed or deleted. One (can't reveal their name) even had to sign a confidentiality agreement since his envolvement dealt heavily with one of the major stars of the film. I shouldn't even know that, but he's a good friend. :lol: Practically every shot, Fincher does 20-40 takes. And even though Zodiac isn't really considered a horror movie per se, that one chilled me to the bone more than 95% of "true" horror films.
Zodiac is a masterpiece of obsession dressed up as a procedural, one of my favourite films for sure. James Elroy on the commentary for it is great. He calls it the greatest crime film ever made.
I hate Zodiac. Hate. I won't argue that. But, the scenes that really HIT YOU hit me harder because the pacing did slow. The scene of Jackie being interrogated by Ray made her look more human than a good 50% of the movie where she had to be too cool with everyone. So, that worked better with a change of pacing. As did the scenes with Max Cherry and Ordell. Especially Ordell's final scene- which is just about the best example of drama I can think of: no music. No heavy dialogue. Just. Human. Actions/Reactions. And that look in Samuel L. Jackson's eye. Then, the last 2 scenes with Max and Jackie, then just Jackie in the car. Best use of soundtrack. Probably the best characterization QT's ever written. Seriously, this Inglorious Basterds better be made out of solid gold to be better than Jackie Brown in terms of drama and character.
It is nothing short of Death for a movie when there are literally No Surprises to/for me in it at all, especially for a thriller, mystery, crime film, etc. Every thing in that movie I felt I'd seen before or just knew exactly how it would play out. Even though I know absolutely nothing about the real life events or people. I can't watch a film like this and feel like I recognize the entire thing. Jesus: DePalma's Black Dahlia was a bigger surprise than Zodiac. And, speaking of unpopular opinions (I remember Brian DePalma's been tossed around here recently): DePalma's Black Dahlia > Mulholland Dr. Or, in general: Brian DePalma > David Lynch
Is that unpopular? Academically, I like Lynch. But there are only a few of his films that I actually enjoy re-watching (Dune, Blue Velvet, Wild at Heart, Lost Highway). DePalma, on the other hand, is first and foremost a ridiculously entertaining filmmaker.
Im no fan of Lynch or Depalma, Black Dahlia i have has one of the worst films ever made, a genuine 1/10 or less
It would take an (insanely in-depth) academic reading on every one of his films to make me appreciate them. But every one of his films has failed me. Lynch, that is. I love the mood / atmosphere of Lost Highway. The soundtrack's to die for, the performances are impeccable (except Bill Pullman- who I freaking love, but Not Here), but like all of Lynch's films: it's a silly, ridiculous thing so amazingly disjointed that only pieces of it mean anything. If that's his way of appealing to as broad an audience as possible, congratulations are in order. But then it's only a few pieces of his movies that will ever mean anything to me. DePalma is the perfect amount of "crazy" in filmmaking. He bores me or lets me dangle at times but he never completely loses me. If Black Dahlia didn't lose me... Bravo, is all I can say. And, unlike when I said it for Lynch, I really mean it. And, yes, it's unpopular. Not because people disrespect DePalma (that's subjective, case-by-case basis) but because the community of film lovers/fans are literally obsessed with Lynch. By and large. That's your opinion- I can respect it. But even I have the good sense to rate the inferior Zodiac a 5/10.
No kidding, I hated Black Dahlia. It was just a terrible failure of a film in multiple ways. Staring at a blank wall would probably be less sleep-inducing than watching it again.
Not a Dennis Hopper fan. But, no. I've missed that one. And I've been told that it actually sidesteps the usual Lynchian formula. I tried to watch it on Netflix but it was Fullscreen. The only stuff I'll knowingly watch compromised from its original aspect ratio is garbage like Enough. (Which I watched because I was in the mood to be offended that night.)
I feel as if I said this already, but if not: I think Black Dahlia is one of the best films of the 00's.
BLUE VELVET was not as twisted a flick as I was expecting. There are some filthy, foul moments but I was pleasantly surprised. I finally saw it in 2011.
Black Dahila was fucking TERRIBLE! Call me crazy, but I went in expecting a movie about, oh, I don't know, THE BLACK FUCKING DAHLIA! They need to make John Gilmore's book "Severed" into a film. That book was amazing.
I'm a little confused...you were hoping it was going to be more twisted? or were glad that it was not? personally, I love watching the Leave-It-To-Beaver type characters having to deal with an incredibly sleazy situation, and how that plays out in their dialogue and mannerisms.
Ha!!!! I confuse myself sometimes when I read my old posts. I suppose after seeing his most recent films post 1989, I was expecting something different than what the film delivered. The film is much more traditional than I was expecting...on the surface. Either way, it was terrific. But, I have no preference - twisted or less...as long as I'm entertained. So far the only David Lynch film I just could never get in to would be The Elephant Man which I have seen many times. It's a terrific film but I really don't like it much.
I've been on one of his sets, this is absolutely true. I was there for well over an hour and they hadn't gotten shot when I left (same one when I arrived). He knows what he wants and he wants it right from what I can tell. I think he is one of the best working today, if not the best.
What's trippier? That last year, Power Rangers turned 20 or that "Milkshake" turned 10? Or that in 6 years, the 20-year rule will start to apply...to the early 2000's? When SpongeBob SquarePants will turn 20? He's already 15. Oh yeah, an opinion... : if I listen to any metal, it's either the stuff that was considered metal when I was in school- Smashing Pumpkins, Stone Temple Pilots, Nails/Manson, Alice in Chains, etc. Which I hold with genuine affection. Or, it's 80's music I can't possibly listen to without irony- like Twisted Sister's one good song (imo), "Burn in Hell." (Part of the irony comes in the fact that Pee Wee Herman exposed me to it.) And I'm with Corgan- expecting bands to revive that old music out of nostalgia is sad and kills the original spirit. But post-grunge metal basically sucks. (Unless you considered it punk instead, then women like Kathleen Hanna managed to keep it alive for awhile. Until Ric Ocasek started producing for her.) (And, GOD do I hate American Idiot-era Green Day! Even though I agree with their politics.) Every bit as much as hair metal was only a punchline in an 80's joke. Here's an opinion that's not-so-unpopular: Lady Gaga has officially lost it. As, apparently, she's cleaned up from some drug/alcohol addiction problem. Which excuses the ridiculous, scattered, assheaded mess that is ArtPop...but not her reaction to The Public's Reaction to ArtPop. And her record company's bullshit damage control scheme of just releasing single after single after single in the space of under half a year to try reassuring fans that she hasn't lost it. Her personal reaction is: "I've been betrayed in my time of weakness (getting on the wagon). The people selling you ArtPop have been misrepresenting it and 'Applause' was rushed and now I'm going to press the Reset button and do it right." The album sucks, Gaga. And you have nothing without strong music. You have failed. Write it off and move on. To put things into perspective - Miley Cyrus is now producing consistently stronger work and Ke$ha has fully artistically eclipsed Gaga. The latter doesn't surprise me, since Cannibal was the best "pop" album I've heard since Rated R. But the former...that is saying something.
Dunkin Donuts' coffee is the absolute worst coffee on the face of the planet, but all of the fat fucks in New Hampshire guzzle it like it's mother's milk. To mask it's vile taste you have to dump a ton of sugar and milk into it (which explains the obesity and the love). People who drink that crap don't like the taste of coffee, pure and simple. I used to have a job where every year for Employee Appreciation Day, my boss would pass out Dunkin Donuts' gift certificates to everybody which I'd then just give to somebody else. There's nothing worse in my mind than giving out gifts like this. It's a bad assumption that everybody else likes the same thing that you do. One year, instead of giving out a $100 Christmas bonus (A kingly sum in the Direct Support field) they gave everybody a $100 Shaw's Supermarket gift card. That wouldn't entirely have been such a bad deal if Shaw's wasn't the single most expensive grocery store in the town. It was basically the equivalent of a $75 card anywhere else. They must have gotten a lot of flack for that because they never tried that bullshit ever again. (Shaws did have a beer section with a lot of specials and sale items though so it became a de facto beer card.) But I digress. If there was ever one reason I wished I lived in California that'd be the lack of Dunkin Donuts.
