Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#101 Post by movielocke » Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:37 am

domino harvey wrote:I finally saw this today after studiously somehow avoiding spoilers for over a month-- I figured I had tempted fate enough and I'm really glad I did get to it before its myriad secrets were revealed. I've seen every Fincher but Panic Room and while I'm hardly a fan, this is easily his best film and one of the best of the year, and it does me some sadness to read a thread of people who've yet again seen a different movie than me.
SpoilerShow
I was, however, relieved to see Bordwell drew comparisons to Leave Her to Heaven, which is definitely one of the cornerstone cultural markers for this film. And that's fundamentally my issue with reading this chiefly as a work of satire at any of the aforementioned targets, in that this film certainly has a cheeky sense of cynicism, it's the sort found primarily in film noir. And this pic is 100% film noir. I was reminded of Ellroy's perfect and divine in simplicity definition of Film Noir: "You're fucked." The whole film is this message over and over for both Affleck and Pike. Your plans will run afoul in the most comically horrific way possible. Your frame is set so expertly that everything you do just tightens the noose. Nowhere is it more clear than in the finale. From what I gather in this thread this is the "changed ending." Good. The film wouldn't be what it is without it. How perverse for the ultimate answer to be what both previously desired to leave behind. How fucked. How wonderful.
Totally agree. The satire nonsense is such a blind misreading of the film.

Panic room is a wonderfully juicy b movie piece of genre pulp. It's probably finchers mist purely entertaining film.

User avatar
greggster59
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:37 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#102 Post by greggster59 » Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:53 am

I was reading through all the comments in this thread with great interest after seeing see the film last night. I'm a big Fincher fan except for Panic Room and the well made but unnecessary remake of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. The aspect of the film that fascinated me the most is barely discussed here.
SpoilerShow
Amy's awareness and discomfort of her parents' use of her childhood as a platform to advance their careers. When the reality of Amy's life did not make for a good story her parents, both psychologists with PhD's, did not hesitate to fabricate a more appealing version of Amy's life for their readers. She was essentially an accessory to their narcissism and personal ambition. Even the way they presented themselves during the media blitz seemed, to me, to be very calculated and self serving. Amy had some fine role models to abet her sociopathy.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#103 Post by Lost Highway » Mon Jan 05, 2015 3:12 pm

I thought Gone Girl was watchable enough but as these type of twisty neo-noir thrillers go it's nowhere as much fun as Soderbergh's Side Effects. That film had an awareness of its own ludicrousness which Gone Girl seems to lack. It feels like Fincher treats its subject matter with far more seriousness than this potboiler deserves. Side Effects on the other hand first comes on as a ponderous issue film about the pharmaceutical industry before it flips and becomes closer to something like a Brian De Palma lark complete with treacherous lipstick lesbians. It sends up its own self-importance.

Rosamund Pike has been great in everything I've seen her in and if one good thing comes from Gone Girl, it's that I hope that her performance will catapult her into the A-list. Otherwise I class this among Fincher's lesser films but then I seem to be at odds with general consensus on several of his thrillers. I always been bewildered by the acclaim for The Game, while I'm a fan of the underrated Panic Room.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#104 Post by mfunk9786 » Mon Jan 05, 2015 3:54 pm

Hmmm. Are you sure that's a review of Gone Girl? Because it seems like you name-dropped it, then reviewed Side Effects, then talked about the Fincher movies you like.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#105 Post by Lost Highway » Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:28 pm

mfunk9786 wrote:Hmmm. Are you sure that's a review of Gone Girl? Because it seems like you name-dropped it, then reviewed Side Effects, then talked about the Fincher movies you like.
I also mentioned the general fabulousness of Rosamund Pike. But yes, that's my review. "Not as good as Side Effects" should go on the poster.

Seriously though, only having watched Gone Girl recently I find it odd how many think pieces and how much serious discussion the film inspired when it came out, as if the archetype of femme fatale was anything new. The character is a conceit to hang a twisty and highly artificial plot from. I don't have a problem with that but I don't think it has much to say about marriage or a womans role in a relationship. And if it really was a satire then the film would have needed a lighter touch.

Maybe I'm reacting as much to the discussion around the film and the book as to the film itself, but it's become difficult to watch the film with fresh eyes by now. I've also noticed that despite good reviews, etc, the film seems to have been a little forgotten about in the critics year best lists unlike some other Fincher films of the past.
Last edited by Lost Highway on Mon Jan 05, 2015 5:22 pm, edited 3 times in total.

jojo
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 1:47 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#106 Post by jojo » Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:59 pm

Gone Girl gets a lot think pieces because it's a big grossing mainstream movie. By and large people are only going to talk about something when it's shoved in their faces.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#107 Post by Mr Sausage » Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:23 pm

The Amazing Amy book that came with the bluray is really creepy in context. Hell, it's creepy out of context (and I'm pretty sure not something an actual psychologist would write). The central lesson seems to be: lying is bad, but disappointing your parents is worse. You're perfect in their eyes, don't you dare take that away from them.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#108 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:39 pm

So is it premature to speculate that Criterion might release a special edition later on? More likely Fox themselves does, but it seems weird for this just being the definitive disc after his last releases several which were venerable film schools.
Last edited by flyonthewall2983 on Sun Feb 01, 2015 10:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

jojo
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 1:47 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#109 Post by jojo » Fri Jan 23, 2015 1:06 pm

Yeah, but would Criterion include the Amazing Amy book? :-k

ianungstad
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 9:20 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#110 Post by ianungstad » Wed Jan 28, 2015 10:33 pm

It does seem odd that there's so little on this release. David does love to have loaded special editions of his films. He even employs his own dvd producer; David Prior. Prior has a dedicated forum on HTF If anyone wants to ask him about this.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#111 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Fri Jan 30, 2015 9:31 pm

I have seen a picture somewhere of Prior with Reznor and Ross during the scoring, so it's not like he wasn't utilized during production.

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#112 Post by zedz » Sun Feb 01, 2015 10:05 pm

Cameron Swift wrote:
warren oates wrote:
SpoilerShow
--The woodshed: So let me get this straight, according to Amy's frame-up fiction Nick supposedly bought himself all those man cave items on a secret credit card he knew they couldn't afford to pay off but then didn't unbox let alone use them because why exactly? And how does her discovering this and making it part of her anniversary game play out if the cops find it all first, as they were supposed to, with her Punch and Judy dolls on top?
SpoilerShow
Once Affleck's character discovered the woodshed full of boxed goodies, I immediately thought he should go to the police with this find because it would basically exonerate him. And yet, the inept cops somehow saw it as reinforcing their theories. A poorly written plot point in a movie full of them (I found myself in agreement with much of your post) and yet, a movie that I still found thoroughly entertaining.
This was my feeling as well.
SpoilerShow
Didn't the note that she included with the puppets basically amount to an admission of the set-up, or at the very least make her abduction story extraordinarily dubious? Why on earth didn't Affleck share that note with the vaguely sympathetic cop at any point?
As for other character inconsistencies,
SpoilerShow
I see much of the motivation of Amy's character in the final act as being her need to 'win' the media battle (and Affleck also knows that this is exactly what will draw her out - not any nostalgia for whatever it was they had).
But I still find that rather shaky as character motivations go, and not wholly consistent with what else we learn about her character. Likewise,
SpoilerShow
it seems that her being pregnant is the key to Affleck's decision to stay with her, and there's some vague and clunky scene-setting for that earlier on (e.g. he was the one who wanted children, not her),

but that seems even more shaky, not to mention flaky. You can add to that, however, the slightly more plausible
SpoilerShow
recognition that the pregnancy - among other things - signals that she has completely outmanoeuvred him on the media front, so he can't walk out without being vilified. The problem is, throughout the rest of the film it doesn't seem as if he's particularly obsessed with his media profile per se, but only as it pertains to the likelihood of his being executed for murder. The most plausible explanation for his behaviour is that he realizes that she can pull another stunt like the last ones again whenever she wants, but the problem with that is that if he just walks away and stays away, the risk of her being able to pull that off seems remote. Plus, how many times does she get to ostentatiously play the victim before the media / police / FBI smell a rat?

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#113 Post by movielocke » Mon Feb 02, 2015 2:30 am

I think that last bit might be part of his reasoning, he knows the cops smell a rat and he knows Amy knowing that will probably restrain her options to act against him. I think he thinks he has less to fear if he keeps his enemy close rather than trying to "run away" which looks guilty.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#114 Post by swo17 » Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:59 pm

Uh, this film has no plot holes.
SpoilerShow
All the criticisms I've seen in this thread I'm pretty sure are addressed in some capacity in the film (he doesn't go to the police about the shed because his lawyer tells him it's an unbelievable story--a private wink between spouses that would only be compelling evidence to someone who knows them intimately--and so they're saving it as a last resort, Desi's murder isn't more closely scrutinized--even though Amy's story doesn't hold any water--because of the media maelstrom that has developed at that point, etc.) Now, you may not find these explanations convincing, but I think the film at least attempts to give lip service to all of the reasonable questions that arise over the course of the story. In any event, I don't find any of these details anywhere near as much of a stretch as the central conceit of the film, that a married couple would play out their make-up games on such a massive, public scale. Particularly the part about meticulously faking the forensic evidence of your own death. (Although the very act of setting up a scavenger hunt is pretty psychotic to begin with, so I suppose it's not actually that much of a leap to have Amy take it as far as she does.) Either you go with this idea or you don't, but if you do, you've pretty much abandoned reality at this point, so it seems silly to hold the rest of the film to that standard. And it's a deliciously devious little film if you're willing to approach it on these terms.

Speaking of games, this was actually a lot like The Game in some respects, only a nice change was to have the big reveal come before the halfway point (when I'm more apt to be forgiving of a ridiculous twist), so that the rest of the film can explore all of the implications, if not in reality than at least thematically. The main theme here being the dangers of jumping to conclusions based on limited information, whether this be in entering into a romantic relationship, taking sides when someone else's personal matter becomes public spectacle, or watching a David Fincher film.

User avatar
warren oates
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:16 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#115 Post by warren oates » Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

You seem pretty unwavering on the plot holes, so what about the character holes? Does Amy actually seem like the same Amy who would have done everything we need to believe she's done to go along with it all? And why is
SpoilerShow
killing herself ever part of her plan?

User avatar
copen
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:43 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#116 Post by copen » Wed Feb 11, 2015 4:33 pm

for me, a plot hole was when
SpoilerShow
amy let those two people into her hotel room after she knew that they saw her with a lot of money.
if she was such a genius (which she obviously was), then she'd have left the hotel immediately after this event took place.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#117 Post by swo17 » Wed Feb 11, 2015 5:04 pm

warren oates wrote:You seem pretty unwavering on the plot holes, so what about the character holes? Does Amy actually seem like the same Amy who would have done everything we need to believe she's done to go along with it all? And why is
SpoilerShow
killing herself ever part of her plan?
SpoilerShow
That's part of what I was calling the film's biggest stretch--that any of this would happen, really. I suppose I can see the motivation behind it. Amy is devastated upon discovering the affair, and since this is a movie, she processes it in extremes. She's suicidal and vengeful, but at heart, all she really wants is a grand gesture of apology from her husband. When she sees that her plan is going well, she abandons the idea of actually killing herself, perhaps because it's all giving her a strange new thrill, or maybe because she suspects at that point that Nick will go down even without that last bit of damning evidence. In any case, when she finally gets the grand gesture from him, all is forgiven. She then only has to concoct a plot to return home that will be incredible enough to top what's come before it. If this were all pitched at like 5% the intensity level, it might begin to resemble the reality of some marriages I know.
copen wrote:for me, a plot hole was when
SpoilerShow
amy let those two people into her hotel room after she knew that they saw her with a lot of money.
if she was such a genius (which she obviously was), then she'd have left the hotel immediately after this event took place.
SpoilerShow
She was getting ready to leave right then and they forced their way in?

User avatar
copen
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:43 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#118 Post by copen » Wed Feb 11, 2015 5:14 pm

copen wrote:for me, a plot hole was when
SpoilerShow
amy let those two people into her hotel room after she knew that they saw her with a lot of money.
if she was such a genius (which she obviously was), then she'd have left the hotel immediately after this event took place.
swo17 wrote:
SpoilerShow
She was packing to leave right then and they forced their way in?
SpoilerShow
i don't remember her packing, i don't think she was. i do remember that she willingly opened the door to them, which was also a stupid thing to do.
also, i don't think we know how much time elapsed between them seeing her with the money by the pool, and them knocking on her hotel door/her letting them in. but it would seem that some time had passed before they came to her hotel door.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#119 Post by swo17 » Wed Feb 11, 2015 5:33 pm

SpoilerShow
Actually, I'm not sure if I might be confusing some details between this movie and last night's episode of Justified. :-"

In any case, there's a big difference between plotting out a crime over months at your leisure and reacting on the spot to a kink in the plan. Also, just as it wouldn't have made sense for her to stay at the hotel for long, it wouldn't have made sense for them to wait long to try to rob her, so I doubt that much time was supposed to have passed between the two encounters. If this is a flaw in the film, I'd call it more of a plot convenience than a plot hole.

Then again, if you are questioning the realism of this film, why would you start with this scene?

User avatar
warren oates
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:16 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#120 Post by warren oates » Wed Feb 11, 2015 5:52 pm

A lot of the specific examples swo's given for the flawless integrity of Gone Girl's plotting are on the order of "It's that way because this or that character says so." Which is fine as far as you accept the motivation and authority of whoever it is who has the bit of dialogue papering over any given objection. Once you start asking what reasons everybody else in the story has to believe any of the pat "because that's how it is" explanations, then you'll run into more trouble.
swo17 wrote:If this were all pitched at like 5% the intensity level, it might begin to resemble the reality of some marriages I know.
Well said. That would be more believable but probably way less exciting to watch. It's easier for me to see how people who don't find the writing of characters problematic might admire the film. A bit harder to see why you do. This is a genre film and it's supposed to be heightened. But that doesn't mean the writer gets a free pass on the construction of her characters, that they can just do whatever next thing would make the story least predictable.

User avatar
copen
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:43 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#121 Post by copen » Wed Feb 11, 2015 6:33 pm

swo17 wrote:
SpoilerShow
Then again, if you are questioning the realism of this film, why would you start with this scene?
probably because up until then, everything was going perfectly for her, she seemed invincible. but starting with this, it all began to look implausible, and kind of ridiculous.
SpoilerShow
the mansion sequence, and especially the questioning by the police, where the hard hitting questions are conveniently brushed aside by the chief of police, and the other 10 cops in the room. i think she would have done what any normal person would do in that situation: run like hell out of that hotel room right after they saw her with the money.

the movie lost me there.

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#122 Post by zedz » Wed Feb 11, 2015 6:39 pm

swo17 wrote:
SpoilerShow
Actually, I'm not sure if I might be confusing some details between this movie and last night's episode of Justified. :-"

In any case, there's a big difference between plotting out a crime over months at your leisure and reacting on the spot to a kink in the plan. Also, just as it wouldn't have made sense for her to stay at the hotel for long, it wouldn't have made sense for them to wait long to try to rob her, so I doubt that much time was supposed to have passed between the two encounters. If this is a flaw in the film, I'd call it more of a plot convenience than a plot hole.

Then again, if you are questioning the realism of this film, why would you start with this scene?
SpoilerShow
To me, it seemed pretty clear that this was the next day, and Amy was in the process of leaving. She was, in fact, right in the middle of 'spring'-cleaning her fingerprints off everything - which is what was preventing her from just bolting immediately. Presumably she also wanted it to look like she was just moving on, not fleeing discovery in the middle of the night for some mysterious reason.

In my opinion, this is very small potatoes in the film's potato salad of plot and character implausibilities.

User avatar
copen
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:43 pm

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#123 Post by copen » Wed Feb 11, 2015 6:51 pm

i do agree that my gripe with the hotel stay is a plot convenience rather than a plot hole. the genius suddenly becomes an idiot for a moment so that the movie can continue.
it's just bad writing by the author of the book or by fincher, whichever of the two came up with it.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#124 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Feb 11, 2015 6:54 pm

Again, she was not being an idiot. The stupid move would've been to leave with evidence everywhere. Rock; hard place; etc

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Gone Girl (David Fincher, 2014)

#125 Post by Mr Sausage » Wed Feb 11, 2015 7:41 pm

Yeah, that does seem like a big case of hindsight bias. Because we see that she got robbed the very next day in broad daylight, of course it was always going to happen that way. But, really, why should she have known the when and where, or even that they definitely were going to rob her? Our knowledge of the outcome is guiding our judgement of her actions. If she had cleaned and left without incident, would anyone say it was a stupid plan and she just got lucky?

Amy is a genius at planning; she's obviously not a genius at improvisation.

Also, regarding Amy from the first half not matching Amy from the second half: everything we know about Amy in the first half is mediated (it's her own description of herself, and a manufactured one at that), and she even outright tells us in the second half that she was putting on an act in order to have the perfect marriage and live up to her Amazing Amy reputation. Indeed there's a bunch of evidence throughout the film that she manufactures herself and her circumstances in order to get superficial approval, and then burns it all to the ground when the other party (inevitably) lets her down.

Post Reply