Is David Fincher among the all-time greats?
With 10 critically acclaimed movies under his belt, is it too early to list (not rank) among the greatest directors? I don't think so.
I mean, most directors don't have Zodiac or The Social Network or Se7en (arguably the best films in their genre) in their resume. Is he an all-time great like Coens, PTA, Tarantino and Leone already did? Fincher has impeccable filmmaking skills and a fantastic rang, his use of subtle CGI and shot on digital and mature content. What do you think? Does he need more movies under his belt? Does he need more timeless classics to qualify (Something like Brazil, The Shining or Fargo)? |
Re: Is David Fincher among the all-time greats?
If he's not there, he's getting there.
|
Originally Posted by Yoda (Post 2187157)
If he's not there, he's getting there.
Girl with dragon tattoo, gone girl and social network all had impressive and tight scripts. Meanwhile in the past, y'know The Game has rushed moments, Button is bloated and too long (i like it though), Alien 3 had studio interefence and Hicks' thing that was extremely disappointing, and Panic Room was an excercise in style. I still like all of his films, even Alien 3 but upon rewatch of Zodiac and Gone Girl i'm sure he's top tier. |
Re: Is David Fincher among the all-time greats?
I loved Mank, personally, but whether you liked it or not I think the change of pace speaks to the breadth of his skill (since he's mostly made thrillers in some form or another), which is a great sign for the purposes of the question this thread's asking.
|
Originally Posted by Yoda (Post 2187168)
I loved Mank, personally, but whether you liked it or not I think the change of pace speaks to the breadth of his skill (since he's mostly made thrillers in some form or another), which is a great sign for the purposes of the question this thread's asking.
But i much prefer his thrillers, even The Game is something i have interest on seeing it multiple times. I'd say he has gotten more consistent after Button, your thoughts? His best films are still made in the past though. |
Re: Is David Fincher among the all-time greats?
His current filmography is too hit-and-miss for my liking where the hits are 8/10 at best and the misses, while not necessarily awful, drag down his average enough that I never think of him when determining the greats (living or otherwise). Would not be averse to rewatching and potentially reassessing everything he's done, but it really doesn't feel like a priority at the moment.
|
Originally Posted by Iroquois (Post 2187475)
His current filmography is too hit-and-miss for my liking where the hits are 8/10 at best and the misses, while not necessarily awful, drag down his average enough that I never think of him when determining the greats (living or otherwise). Would not be averse to rewatching and potentially reassessing everything he's done, but it really doesn't feel like a priority at the moment.
|
Originally Posted by Iroquois (Post 2187475)
the hits are 8/10 at best
|
Originally Posted by Iroquois (Post 2187492)
If anything, I rewatched Se7en not too long ago and actually docked it from a 9 to an 8. As for Zodiac and Social Network, I guess we'll see how I feel if I ever do the aforementioned rewatch of his entire filmography.
Fair enough. |
Re: Is David Fincher among the all-time greats?
Heh, Memento is still a 9 last I checked. Might have to revisit The Prestige, though - meant to redo a bunch of Nolans in the lead-up to Tenet but missed that one.
|
Re: Is David Fincher among the all-time greats?
Se7en makes him a tad bit better than Christopher Nolan.
And when you're just a tad bit better than Nolan, you can't possibly be considered all-time great. |
Originally Posted by Mr Minio (Post 2187502)
Se7en makes him a tad bit better than Christopher Nolan.
And when you're just a tad bit better than Nolan, you can't possibly be considered all-time great. But i tend to favor Nolan due to having watched his films a lot more time, and having some interesting ideas and subjects. They're just more fun to me. I don't think the gap is wide, so "a tad bit" better is fair. Anyways, what Fincher lacks to be put up there with Leone, Lynch, Spielberg etc? IIRC, Anderson and Tarantino are already there.
Originally Posted by Iroquois (Post 2187497)
Heh, Memento is still a 9 last I checked. Might have to revisit The Prestige, though - meant to redo a bunch of Nolans in the lead-up to Tenet but missed that one.
Meanwhile the general public always say Fight Club or The Dark Knight as their best. |
You forgot Fight Club.
|
Re: Is David Fincher among the all-time greats?
Nowhere near.
|
Originally Posted by ScarletLion (Post 2187586)
Nowhere near.
How close he is to the ones considered all-time great? |
Originally Posted by Ezrangel (Post 2187637)
Based on?
If he's a step below QT, Coens and PTA and two step below Coppola, Spielberg etc.
How close he is to the ones considered all-time great? |
Originally Posted by ScarletLion (Post 2187720)
His film output.
They're all American greats. Not all time greats. Quentin Tarantino being considered an all time great is laughable. But that's just my take. Many will disagree. http://thecinemaarchives.com/2020/08...s-of-all-time/ And there are others. Tarantino has Pulp Fiction, which is undeniably considered one of the best films ever made. What make you think they aren't? Anyways, back to the main topic. Se7en, Zodiac, Fight Club, Social Network, Gone Girl ain't enough to rank up there with those directors i mentioned? |
Originally Posted by Ezrangel (Post 2187733)
https://www.theyshootpictures.com/gf...0directors.htm
http://thecinemaarchives.com/2020/08...s-of-all-time/ And there are others. Tarantino has Pulp Fiction, which is undeniably considered one of the best films ever made. What make you think they aren't? To be considered a great you surely have to be in top 10 or 20. Not 114th.
Anyways, back to the main topic.
Se7en, Zodiac, Fight Club, Social Network, Gone Girl ain't enough to rank up there with those directors i mentioned? Check out what the likes of Hitchcock, Welles, Kurosawa, Bergman, Bresson, Antionioni, Makmhalbaf, Ozu, Kieslowski, Fellini, Truffaut, Mizugochi, Dreyer achieved. Then compare it to Fincher. The response to that will tell if you're a serious poster or not. |
Originally Posted by ScarletLion (Post 2187738)
1 good film and he's THE film genius? I'm not digging your criteria here Ezzy. I mean that first link you posted doesn't even put Fincher in the top 100 directors of all time.
To be considered a great you surely have to be in top 10 or 20. Not 114th. Clearly not. 2 maybe 3 good films? Check out what the likes of Hitchcock, Welles, Kurosawa, Bergman, Bresson, Antionioni, Makmhalbaf, Ozu, Kieslowski, Fellini, Truffaut, Mizugochi, Dreyer achieved. Then compare it to Fincher. The response to that will tell if you're a serious poster or not. Isn't 114th place a strong one in a list considering he's "new" ? Yeah, those direcors you mentioned are better so are Coppola, Leone etc but if he's one step below them... why aren't the likes of Zodiac and Se7en enough? I mean PTA and Coens are up there. |
Originally Posted by Ezrangel (Post 2187741)
1 masterpiece though, Ridley Scott has Blade Runner and to a lesser degree Alien and he's considered an all-time great.
Yeah, those direcors you mentioned are better so are Coppola, Leone etc but if he's one step below them... why aren't the likes of Zodiac and Se7en enough? |
All times are GMT -3. The time now is 12:32 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright, ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Movie Forums