David Fincher's 'Gone Girl' Starring Ben Affleck

[TheNextNolan22]

Guns are coming along nicely.

And teh scruffy! t:

 

[The Shape]

I don't get the cover, I mean I'm a big enough pop culture ****e to get the reference but it just seems...silly to me.

There's nothing to "get", especially if you haven't read the book. This image (created by Fincher for the cover and NOT a still from the film itself) is simply meant to drive home the over-arching idea of Gone Girl -- a husband searching for his missing/presumed dead wife.

It has little to do with pop culture or references you're supposed to catch.

 

[Keyser Soze]

Flynn mentions that she and Fincher weren't afraid to diverge from the source material. I wonder what kind of changes they've made to the story. I imagine they'll add a bit more action to the climax somehow, or tack on a small ending/epilogue that gives the story more closure somehow.

The one thing I REALLY hope they don't change is the ending. The last page is one of the most chillingly perfect endings to any story in any medium I've encountered in ages.

 

[The Shape]

The one thing I REALLY hope they don't change is the ending. The last page is one of the most chillingly perfect endings to any story in any medium I've encountered in ages.

I agree, I hope it stays as is. I can't really imagine how they could change that, but you never know with film adaptations of novels. Fincher in the EW interview says he feels that with The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, he was too focused on sticking to the source material. Even Gillian Flynn says she had fun taking apart the novel and reassembling it for the screenplay. I'm guessing there will be at least a few semi-major deviations from the book.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

There's nothing to "get", especially if you haven't read the book. This image (created by Fincher for the cover and NOT a still from the film itself) is simply meant to drive home the over-arching idea of Gone Girl -- a husband searching for his missing/presumed dead wife.

It has little to do with pop culture or references you're supposed to catch.

I know it's not a still from the movie and I know Fincher shot it. I'm allowed to not get or like the cover. You are obviously just mad because you like the cover and I don't care for it. Newsflash, people have differing opinions. Deal. With. It.

 

[The Shape]

I know it's not a still from the movie and I know Fincher shot it. I'm allowed to not get or like the cover. You are obviously just mad because you like the cover and I don't care for it. Newsflash, people have differing opinions. Deal. With. It.

Whoa, relax. I'm not mad about a damn thing. I was merely responding to you saying that you didn't get it, and I offered somewhat of an explanation, whilst also stating that there isn't much to "get". I was perfectly civil and didn't attempt to impose my opinion on you in any way...

Overreact much?

 

[redhawk23]

There's nothing to "get", especially if you haven't read the book. This image (created by Fincher for the cover and NOT a still from the film itself) is simply meant to drive home the over-arching idea of Gone Girl -- a husband searching for his missing/presumed dead wife.

It has little to do with pop culture or references you're supposed to catch.

Yeah but the fact that it is very clearly riffing on the John and Yoko Rolling Stone cover just makes it a bit of an odd choice. I mean its inconsequential but its a bit like when shirt sites have a completely pointless mashup shirt.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It is clearly riffing on the Yoko/Lennon RS cover, there is no denying that. And I'll give it this, it's more interesting than the usual EW cover but that doesn't mean I have to love it. I don't hate it either.

 

[The Shape]

Yeah but the fact that it is very clearly riffing on the John and Yoko Rolling Stone cover just makes it a bit of an odd choice. I mean its inconsequential but its a bit like when shirt sites have a completely pointless mashup shirt.

You're right, but it's not that odd of a choice really. In fact, a Lennon/Yoko comparison to Nick/Amy in Gone Girl actually makes a strange bit of sense to me.

 

[redhawk23]

It is clearly riffing on the Yoko/Lennon RS cover, there is no denying that. And I'll give it this, it's more interesting than the usual EW cover but that doesn't mean I have to love it. I don't hate it either.

It always baffles me how badly photoshopped EW covers are most of the time.

 

[Carnotaur3]

When is Davis Fincher gonna stop color correcting his films the same way?

 

[Anubis]

Soon as your average movie goer learns what that even means and actually gives a s**t about it.

 

[Carnotaur3]

So you're saying they're an obstacle?

 

[Anubis]

I'm saying I have no idea what you're talking about and don't really care either way.

 

[Carnotaur3]

I'm saying I have no idea what you're talking about and don't really care either way.

It disappoints me that you would chose to be rude with me. If you wanted no part in the discussion I was starting, maybe you should've chosen to stay out of it. Instead, you chose to antagonize me. I'd ask why, but I'm not sure I'd get an answer.

 

[The Shape]

 

[Anubis]

Honestly I just hate technical complaints. Stuff like the Score or some other crap I don't care about, being off or wrong....I mean, who cares? I mean really? There's only one thing that matters with a movie. Is it good or is it bad.

 

[The Shape]

Honestly I just hate technical complaints. Stuff like the Score or some other crap I don't care about, being off or wrong....I mean, who cares? I mean really? There's only one thing that matters with a movie. Is it good or is it bad.

It's no wonder you're the Comic Books POTY and not the Film POTY. You clearly don't understand the art of film.

All of the technical aspects of a film -- music, lighting, editing, camera work, writing, acting, directing, visual FX -- are what make it good or bad...

 

[Carnotaur3]

Honestly I just hate technical complaints.

That's a great discussion and debate to start, but you don't have to do that by just shutting me down suddenly. I have passionate feelings of my own as well.

 

[Anubis]

Passionate is a strong word. I straddle the line between indifference and slightly irked.

It's no wonder you're the Comic Books POTY and not the Film POTY. You clearly don't understand the art of film.

All of the technical aspects of a film -- music, lighting, editing, camera work, writing, acting, directing, visual FX -- are what make it good or bad...

To like less than 1% of the audience.

 

[Raiden]

Not the RS cover, but it's the same pose and I don't want to pose a picture of a naked John Lennon here.

This movie looks very promising btw, and Fincher may receive the accolades that eluded him from the Dragon Tattoo movie.

 

[Carnotaur3]

To like less than 1% of the audience.

Most audiences come home from a movie and are asked whether they liked it or not. They answer "yes" or "no".

And that's about as deep as the discussion gets.

What exactly are the objectives of these here boards?

 

[Anubis]

Fart jokes and super heroes.

 

[Carnotaur3]

Fart jokes and super heroes.

That's cute. But certainly you see my point.

 

[The Shape]

To like less than 1% of the audience.

I can't help but wonder if you're joking or being dead serious.

Whether people are aware of what goes into making a movie or not, they can still recognize when certain aspects of a movie suck. Not all people walk out of movies like zombies saying only "Dat movie good" or "Dat movie bad". People can acknowledge and discuss the strong and weak points of a movie, which often comes down to things like acting, special effects, cinematography (the way a movie is shot/filmed), etc. You don't have to be a film geek to recognize these things.

Despite what you want to believe, you don't speak for 99% of the movie-going audience around the world. You don't give a ****, but millions of people do. A good majority of the members of SHH have joined this forum to discuss the technical aspects and minute details of superhero movies.