Martin Carr on the work of David Fincher…
‘I’m interested in films that scar’ February 96’ (Empire Magazine)
‘I’m not interested in the guy on his own, in a dark room sharpening his knives’ (Zodiac Commentary)
At the heart of David Fincher is a contradiction. Beneath his meticulous approach and need for perfection is a conflict of interest. With a history of visually striking music videos which often extend into short narrative films, Fincher’s unflinching focus on character and exploration of social agendas make him a true original. For someone defined in part by his use of darkness, that Fincher would feign indifference to those characters that exist within it is baffling. If we discount The Curious Case of Benjamin Button it becomes apparent that elsewhere, from Alien3 through to The Social Network, are pivotal characters with thematically dark undertones. So the question is, how can he be so drawn to darkness yet have no interest in those who create it?
From the late sixties through to January of 74’, San Francisco’s Bay area was terrorised by a serial killer known only as ‘Zodiac’. These murders had no motive, connection or preferred weapon. They got wide spread media coverage through television and tabloid, which the killer exploited by sending cryptic codes known as ciphers to different newspapers listing demands. As these slowly morphed into threats television bulletins became more frequent. One such broadcast was aired when the killer, at large for a few years then, threatened to shoot out the tyres of a school bus that morning. Fincher recalls hearing the threat, which stated school buses would be targeted along with the occupants. That his father still let him ride the bus to school that morning is sure to have had an effect. Whether this period of time or that specific event came to shape Fincher’s formative years and subsequent film choices is up for debate. That the ‘Zodiac’ murders remain unsolved and still under investigation in some counties today, surely had no bearing on his thematic obsessions.
At the age of twenty seven having gained a reputation for producing truly original music videos, David Fincher was handed fifty million dollars to make a movie. What happened next has become the stuff of legend and a cautionary tale told around corporate campfires. Numerous articles have picked over it like vultures, asking questions of those still prepared to talk whilst Fincher remains circumspect and diplomatic. The film of course is Alien3.
There are few creatures more iconic and fewer franchises more maligned than Alien. That H R Giger took inspiration from the Nazis is well documented, going so far as to model the head or crown on Nazi helmets. Scott and Cameron created two very different but equally successful takes on the premise, each carrying Sigourney Weaver through successive films as Ripley. This potentially dark subject matter was possibly an initial attraction. However whether this had a bearing or not Fincher was given a large budget, an unfinished script and an expensive star to make his debut. Stories of Fincher clashing with studio execs, combined with an ever inflating budget fuelled rumours that the production was in trouble. Script issues which included continual rewrites pushed Alien3 over budget by thirteen million dollars. Fincher was quickly earmarked as the scapegoat, hogtied and hung out to dry. He made no more films for five years; until Se7en.
Andrew Kevin Walker was not feeling himself when he wrote this film. Comparisons with Paul Schrader at the time of Taxi Driver could easily be made. Walker admitted to a deep depression, while Schrader was overflowing with Catholic guilt and slept with a gun under his pillow when Travis Bickle poured onto the page. Legend has it there were two endings and Brad Pitt got sent the wrong script. When the studio corrected their mistake he refused to sign on, which is why we have Ms. Paltrow’s head in a box at the end rather than something more palatable. That Fincher was drawn to this piece and managed to create something so memorable from it remains his greatest achievement. No director had embraced darkness to such an extent before this, although there were a number of copycats thereafter including Joel Schumacher’s 8mm. Such was the graphic nature of these crimes on screen, that in some quarters Fincher and his cohorts were considered sick. Needless to say ‘test’ screenings of Se7en made an already jumpy studio ready to throw in the towel. Today this is considered a game changer and seminal classic, but back then people were scared.
Things are specifically designed to unbalance the audience. End credits roll up not down, images are flashed up for a split second to maximise short term memory retention, while in my opinion Fincher becomes braver with every viewing. Se7en remains one of the few films released to earn its eighteen rating. Almost twenty years later, bearing in mind what goes into a fifteen or twelve a today, the impact and its importance have not diminished.
If you are wondering how a director might approach the same film today consider this. Se7en would never get made. This version only exists because of a clerical error and Brad Pitt. Few actors can produce a film, successfully anchor the premise, then ride a storm of bad press to the tune of one hundred million dollars plus reshoots and succeed. Brad Pitt is one of them. World War Z is proof positive why himself and Fincher have weathered the storm and continue working together. A creative relationship which in my opinion peaked, irrespective of Benjamin Button, with the adaptation of Chuck Palahniuk’s Fight Club.
Just as people had no idea how to take Fight Club, it would appear they had equal problems marketing it. Just for the record this film is not about bare knuckle boxing although that does feature. Palahniuk’s book defies description and Fincher’s take on it is equal parts pitch black comedy, social commentary and moral vacuum. With an equally powerful twist in the tale Fight Club got under the skin in a similar way to Trainspotting. Poster sales shot up, Pitt became a pinup yet again, while Fincher was lorded as a genius and innovator for daring to be ironic. For the record Helena Bonham Carter, future wife of Tim Burton, kicked down the door of costume drama with venom, while Edward Norton held his ground and Meatloaf strapped on a rack surprising everyone. That Fincher should choose this after The Game should be less so.
If you look at them together there appears to be little in common. In one a man loses every material thing he holds dear, drops off the grid, extorts monies from his work place and brings about a financial meltdown. In another an independently wealthy, socially high ranking individual receives a birthday present from his brother. He then has all his wealth taken away, is denied access to all he holds dear and is forced to associate with someone he would normally avoid, before being thrown off a roof. Well then what do they have in common? In my opinion that moment of clarity when Douglas hits the water and his brother Penn comes to embrace him is crucial. It is an epiphany and rebirth as Douglas finally steps out from his father’s shadow, a metaphorical presence throughout. Similarly in Fight Club as Edward Norton and Helena Bonham Carter hold hands and those skyscrapers collapse Norton has a realisation. Social expectations need not define who he is or what can be achieved. Fight Club not only remains David Fincher’s most important film, but potentially suggests an answer to my original notion of contradiction in his work.
My opinion is that David Fincher aims to illustrate time and again that darkness need not be personified or tangible. It can manifest itself through social pressure, professional expectations and personal responsibilities. People choose to combat this in a number of ways. Some work harder and earn more, others work less and focus on family, while a final minority address it time and again from different directions using another medium. Ernest Hemingway once said:
‘The world is a fine place, and worth fighting for’.
Hopefully Fincher would agree with the second part.
Martin Carr – Follow me on Twitter.
Originally published July 16, 2014. Updated November 29, 2022.
