David Fincher may direct lit hit 'Gone Girl'

Wait, you haven't read Gone Girl yet? The thriller by Gillian Flynn, former TV critic for Entertainment Weekly, was this summer's huge hit, a popular choice both for beach reads and book clubs. It's a genre page-turner, but a good one. It's kind of like a Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, which brought in many people who don't normally pick up thrillers or mysteries. Reese Witherspoon's production company picked up rights to the book shortly after its publication, when it was at the top of the New York Times' bestseller list. Perhaps it's no surprise that the director that brought Girl with the Dragon
Tattoo to the big screen, David Fincher, is also eyeing the book as his next directing project. He's long been entangled doing an adaptation of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea for Disney, but it appears this complicated, big-budget project may be temporarily grinding to a halt, giving him an opportunity to jump off that ship and board a new one.

Gone Girl relies on literary sleight-of-hand in order to keep its readers guessing. It starts off being told by one narrator, the husband of a woman who has disappeared under suspicious circumstances, and then switches to her point-of-view. Movies don't have the luxury of showing a point-of-view that's completely filtered through one character's actions, which will be the biggest challenge of the adaptation. Flynn has signed on to adapt her own work. With three novels under her belt and a long history as a media critic, she certainly sounds qualified for the job.

Fincher is still attached to the sequel to Dragon Tattoo, The Girl Who Played with Fire, but that movie isn't being fast-tracked into theatres. The Swedish-language trilogy was such a success that those films appear to have cannibalized the market for the English-language version. I knew a number of fans of the book who raced to see the Swedish-language versions but were burned out on the story by the time Fincher's (great, let it be known) adaptation hit screens over Christmas last year.

There's some speculation that Witherspoon will play the lead. She hasn't taken on a role like the one in Gone Girl since the 1996 movie Fear, a teen flick about a scary relationship. I'm curious if she can manage to make her sweet persona darken when necessary. One thing's for sure--if this adaptation is shepherded by the same director who did Dragon Tattoo, Seven, and Zodiac, the movie will be just as deliciously terrifying as the book.

DGA nominees hint at who will receive Oscar nods

By Sarah Sluis

Yesterday, the Directors Guild of America announced its five nominees for Best Director. As opposed to the Screen Actors Guild (SAG), Writers Guild (WGA), and Producers Guild (PGA), the DGA awards have a track record of predicting the winner of the Oscar for Best Director. Since the Best Director victor frequently helms the Best Picture, one can reasonably assume that among these five films, we have our Best Picture winner, and probably at least five of the nominees.

DGA nominees:
Woody Allen for Midnight in Paris
David Fincher for The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Michel Hazanavicius for The Artist
Alexander Payne for The Descendants
Martin Scorsese for Hugo

The biggest shut-outs are War Horse and The Help. The DGA has already honored Steven Spielberg three times: for The Color Purple in 1985, Saving Private Ryan in 1998, and with a (preemptive, perhaps) Lifetime Achievement Award in 2000. Maybe they just want some new blood in the running. Spielberg has more Oscar-worthy projects in development, like a biopic of Lincoln, and War Horse was a wee sentimental.

The Help received its biggest support from the SAG, which makes sense. Director Tate Taylor has an acting background himself, meaning he has plenty of connections within the guild. It's only amplified by the large ensemble of actors who appeared in the movie. The Help will definitely receive a Best Picture nod, and certainly a few acting ones as well, but the new director slot went to Hazanavicius instead of him.

When it comes to who actually wins the award, history matters. Both Allen and Scorsese have been honored by the DGA, both for an individual film and with a Lifetime Achievement Award. Will Hugo or Midnight in Paris merit an additional honor? As a newbie, I doubt Hazanavicius will win. I think it comes down to Payne or Fincher, neither of whom has won before. Both have great track records and each of their films exemplify the work the helmers are known for. Payne specializes in the mix between comedy and drama, with sad-sack heroes that somehow endear themselves to the audience. Fincher is probably the most technically brilliant directors out there. None of the dark films he specializes in look like they use extensive special effects, but they do, and YouTube videos like this and this sold me on the kind of detailed planning and creative control Fincher exercises. I'm betting on Payne or Fincher.

On January 28, in less than three weeks, the DGA will announce the winner of their award--and make the outcome of the Oscars a little bit easier to divine.

American remake of 'Girl with the Dragon Tattoo' underperforms, but why?

By Sarah Sluis

One of the films I managed to catch over the holidays was The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. I had heard warnings that the movie was violent and hard to follow. Only the first was true, but infrequent. "One of the best movies I've seen all year," my seatmate enthused after the show. If Girl with a Dragon Tattoo is such a great film, why has it earned just $27.8 million since it opened on Wednesday?

Most people I talked to about the movie were familiar with the books. Some were confused about the remake. Hadn't they seen something like that on Netflix before? Was that the one in Swedish? Others wanted to hold out until they read the book. Still others read the book but were unimpressed, thinking they'd skip the movie. Dragon Tattoo also may have suffered because of its dark content. More buoyant action sequels, Mission: Impossible 4 and Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, easily beat Dragon Tattoo this weekend.

I still think there's a chance for Dragon Tattoo to rebound. 86% of critics and 85% of audiences on Rotten Tomatoes rated the movie positively. From an awards perspective, it hasn't done so well so far. The thriller received just two Golden Globe nominations: Rooney Mara for Best Actress along with a Best Original Score nomination. I think the movie is much better than at least two of the contenders in the "Best Motion Picture - Drama" category, so perhaps it will sneak into the Best Picture Oscar race once this late December release is viewed more widely.

If this article praising director David Fincher for "[understanding] digital cinematography more than any working filmmaker" means anything, both Fincher and his DP Jeff Cronenweth will receive notice from their peers in the Academy. This scene analysis, courtesy of The New York Times, drives home the amount of thought that went into the look, feel, and flow of the movie. But I'm not holding my breath for Fincher. I feel like he has been rewarded for some of his worst work. Zodiac was about ten times better than Benjamin Button, but only one made a showing in awards season. The Social Network was good, but coasted on its zeitgeisty reputation all the way to the Oscar podium. Because Dragon Tattoo is a remake of a Swedish film many critics (though not ours) liked, and some have felt doesn't do enough to innovate on the earlier film, I doubt it will receive the attention from critics it deserves. But American audiences should see what amounts to one of the more entertaining, thrilling popcorn movies this year, with a strong female heroine to boot.

A friendly discussion of 'The Social Network'

By Sarah Sluis

In case you haven't heard, "that Facebook movie" is coming out in two days. It seems like every critic is raving about the movie, currently rated 100% on Rotten Tomatoes, and every magazine has a Mark Zuckerberg story on its cover, but my advice is this: If you want to enjoy a good movie (not a great movie, mind you, a good movie), don't believe the hype.

While The Social Network is a perfectly competent and enjoyable film, it didn't awe me as much as I expected. When I watch a movie, I expect to be taken on an emotional roller coaster, but this one had the highs and lows and emotional arc of a television show. I was entertained, but not stunned. When I start hearing "Best Picture at the Oscars," my expectations get raised. When I see an awesome trailer, I expect the film to deliver. While living up to those kinds of predictions can be hard, there are definitely films (like Avatar) that live up the buzz.

The Social Network goes by very fast, but doesn't really ever rest on anything. Citizen Kane (which people are unfortunately comparing this movie to) also covered a lot, but it didn't feel rushed the way this does. One technique I didn't think added much was cross-cutting between Zuckerberg's Facebook-related lawsuits and the rise of Facebook. There wasn't a significant difference between Zuckerberg the rising star and Zuckerberg the defendant. If they were going for that stark contrast that you get with a "before/after he was behind bars" kind of movie, they failed.

The writer (Aaron Sorkin), director (David Fincher), and producer (Scott Rudin) of this film are immensely talented, and all have works on my "best" list. I saw bits and pieces of their trademark strengths, but everything didn't add up. Fincher was at his best at showing off Harvard's in-groups, creepiness, excess and conspiracy, hearkening back to his work on Fight Club, Se7en and Zodiac. I loved Sorkin's use of technical dialogue (hello, he is an offspring of Howard Hawks, although I prefer him when he's channeling the geekiness of Ball of Fire, not that His Girl Friday opening sequence).

I'll gladly see the movie again to find out if the Emperor really is wearing clothes, but in the meantime I'll keep my lonely position and set my sights on another film for Best Picture--True Grit.

Analysis of an awesome trailer: 'The Social Network'

By Sarah Sluis
So far there have only been posters and teaser trailers for The Social Network. While movie geeks like me are already sold by the combination of the screenwriter (Aaron Sorkin) and director (David Fincher), it's hard not to get a little tingle on your spine when you hear the tagline, "You Don't Get to 500 Million Friends Without Making a Few Enemies." Who would have thought the story of Facebook would sound more like Wall Street meets The Skulls and less like an underdog winning gold at the Olympics?

Here's the trailer:

The #1 reason this trailer is awesome is that it doesn't introduce any characters until 48 seconds into a 2 minute, 30 second trailer. Instead, the trailer reels the audience in by forcing us to reflect on how we, the viewers, use Facebook. Screenshots of parties, profile pictures, weddings, and babies are edited to the lyrics of Radiohead's "Creep," sung by women with high voices and a melancholy tone (the Vega Choir). The lyrics pretty much say it all: "Don't care if it hurts/Wanna have control/Wanna perfect body/Wanna perfect soul/I want you to notice/When I'm not around/You're so very special..."

The latter, story part of the trailer emphasizes Ivy League intrigue, decadence, and excess among the rich. I counted nine scenes of drinking/partying, including liquor swilled straight from the bottle, champagne spraying, puking during fraternity hazing, and post-success imbibing of appletinis. Will these kind of storylines ever go out of style? I give the trailer one point for an unconventional but oh-so-Ivy scene with an indoor erg rowing machine that uses actual water (never seen one of those, but where else but Harvard?). However, Fincher loses points for a shot of Jesse Eisenberg as the Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg writing a formula on a window. We've already seen A Beautiful Mind and Good Will Hunting, thankyouverymuch.

On a final note, Fincher's Citizen Kane-like epic is also worth seeing for its strong cast composed of rising stars: Jesse Eisenberg, Justin Timberlake, Rashida Jones, and Andrew Garfield, the next Spider-Man. And if you're wondering, like I did, why Zuckerberg hasn't sued, it's because he's a public figure and therefore open to portrayal. Also, it might potentially be more embarassing to sue than to keep things quiet. As for suppression, it doesn't look like The Social Network will be advertised on Facebook due to their advertising rules, but everywhere else is fair game. Zuckerberg doesn't have quite the influence of William Randolph Hearst.