It is strange now to remember that Fight Club, one of the best movies of the 1990s, was not always a beloved entry in lists of David Fincher's best films. The movie has become one of those titles people talk about as if it arrived fully formed as a cult classic, but according to Edward Norton, the very first wave of audience reactions was a whole lot rougher, and Brad Pitt apparently saw the storm clouds coming, too.

Norton told the story during an appearance on the Fly on the Wall with Dana Carvey and David Spade, where he looked back on Fight Club’s rocky early reception. The actor reminded the hosts that people sometimes forget the movie was a box-office disappointment before it found its audience. He also recalled the movie’s Venice Film Festival premiere, which sounds like exactly the wrong room for Fincher’s bruising, anti-consumerist fever dream. Norton explained:

That is such an incredible mental image. Two of the stars of what would become one of the most quoted movies pre-the new millennium, standing behind a hotel before a major festival premiere, looking at each other and realizing the whole thing might be about to crash into the marble floor.

Honestly, I get why they were worried. Fight Club is not exactly a polite festival movie. It is loud, nasty, funny, angry and deeply uncomfortable by design. It is a movie where the satire keeps biting, and if you drop that into the wrong room, with the wrong expectations, you are basically asking for a poor reception. If someone in that crowd actually thought they were their effing khakis, their mind must have been blown.

The funny thing is, Norton’s story makes the failure sound almost inevitable in hindsight. Not because the movie was bad, obviously. Time has handled that argument pretty well. But because Fight Club was never built to be easily received. It was built to irritate, provoke and make people laugh at things they maybe did not want to laugh at. That can age into cult status beautifully. It can also make a first screening feel like a public punishment.

According to Norton, the audience response was not subtle. He continued:

Plenty of popular '90s movies have not stood the test of time, but Norton's story says a lot about why Fight Club has. Some movies need time to find the people who speak their strange little language. Fincher’s film did not become what it is because everyone understood it right away. It became many folks' favorite of his work because, once it finally found the right audience, that audience would not shut up about it.

All these years later, Norton’s account makes the movie’s disastrous premiere feel like part of the legend. Of course Fight Club got booed. Of course people walked out. Of course Brad Pitt still knew. And despite all that, it remains one of my, and many other cinephiles', favorite page-to-screen adaptations, even if plenty of film bros still miss the point, and nearly 30 years after its release, we are still talking about it.

It’s hard to believe it’s been almost 30 years since Fight Club was released in theaters. The movie has truly stood the test of time over the last three decades and has to be seen as a modern movie classic. It’s the sort of movie that fans have likely watched dozens, if not hundreds, of times, but there are certainly those who have never seen Fight Club. What's more, there are fans who love the movie who have probably never seen it on a big screen.

Fight Club Is Returning To Theaters

That’s set to change as a new 4K transfer of Fight Club will make its debut in theaters this year. Unfortunately, the opportunity to see this will be limited to one day only, April 22. Even event screenings often run for a couple of days, so this one is even more limited than most. Based on showtimes on Fandango, there is only a single showing of the film, so there aren't even multiple options on the one day.

As somebody who did see Fight Club in theaters back in 1999, I can say it was an experience I still remember. Although I’ll admit part of that may be due to not knowing the story or the ending; the Fight Club ending is so well-known at this point that some know it even without ever seeing the film. Which is not to say everybody agrees on Fight Club's ending. Maybe discussing the ending is the reason none of us were supposed to talk about Fight Club.

At the same time, seeing it in a theater full of people who have already seen Fight Club has a lot to be said for it too. The communal experience of watching a classic movie with other people who love it can be a lot of fun as everybody experiences those memorable moments together.

Fight Club Is Getting A 4K Blu-Ray Release Too

For those who miss out on the theatrical exhibition of the new 4K version of Fight Club, or who just want to own it, there’s also good news as pre-orders are now open for a 4K Steelbook version. Plus the movie will also be released Digitally in 4K starting May 12.

Fight Club is one of those movies that seem to generate an endless amount of fan conversation. Does it glorify the toxic masculinity which is presents, or is it a condemnation? The movie maybe hasn’t aged all that well in a few ways, but that may be exactly why the movie is still talked about, as there may be no film from the late 1990s that is more “of its era” than Fight Club.

Tickets for the theatrical return of Fight Club are available now.

When it comes to Super Bowl spots for big upcoming movies, most of them are expected. Not only do studios frequently let the press know what’s on the way ahead of time, but there are often early teasers released online that gets fans stoked for what’s to come. That being said, sometimes we are treated to surprises, and tonight we got an amazing one in the form of a first look at director David Fincher’s The Adventures Of Cliff Booth a.k.a. the sequel to Quentin Tarantino’s Once Upon A Time In Hollywood that is heading to Netflix this year.

In the first few seconds of the spot, it’s not totally clear what audiences are looking at from the first shot, as we simply see Brad Pitt reclining with a pack of frozen peas subbing for an icepack on his knee and a blue scribble seemingly censoring a joint in his mouth, but the identity of the production becomes clear as we hear the voice of Elizabeth Debecki: “So you helped Rick subdue those hippie intruders?” Rick, of course, is none other than Rick Dalton, and “those hippie intruders” were none other than Charles Manson’s cronies sent to kill Sharon Tate and her friends. The one and only Cliff Booth explains that he knows better than to get in the way of a true story, and the preview is off to the races as a shotgun explosion of style.

It’s an awesome and unexpected preview of one of the year’s most anticipated movies, but what makes it even better is when you realize the significance of today’s date. While the Super Bowl is being played on February 8 because it aligned with the schedule of the National Football League, today also just so happens to be 57th anniversary of the day that Rick Dalton and Cliff Booth drove from the former’s home to meet agent Marvin Schwarz for a drink at the Musso and Frank Grill at the beginning of Once Upon A Time In Hollywood:

Would this first trailer for The Adventures Of Cliff Booth have arrived today even if it weren’t Super Bowl Sunday? I have absolutely no idea, but there’s a part of me that likes to think that the answer is yes.

Now let’s get to the bad news: while The Adventures Of Cliff Booth appears to be full of 70s sex, drugs and rock and roll Hollywood-style, we know extremely little about what it is going to be about. And to make matters even worse, it would seem that Netflix is continuing its tradition of not announcing release dates too far in advance, as we presently have no idea when the Fincher film will be made available streaming (all we have is the “Coming Soon” from the end of the Super Bowl spot and knowledge that it’s coming some time in this calendar year). As ever, be sure to stay tuned here on CinemaBlend for more info about the exciting upcoming Netflix movie, as we’ll be feasting on every morsel of teaser that is offered.

Following Quentin Tarantino’s decision to scrap making The Movie Critic, it remains unclear what his 10th and final movie will be. However, one of his film characters is continuing onward under the supervision of a different director. The Once Upon a Time in Hollywood sequel The Adventures of Cliff Booth sees Brad Pitt reprising the title role and re-teaming with David Fincher for the first time in nearly two decades. According to one of the upcoming 2026 movie’s other actors, filming has wrapped, and they had a great time working on it.

Elizabeth Debicki from Tenet, The Crown and the latter two Guardians of the Galaxy movies is starring opposite Pitt in The Adventures of Cliff Booth, which will be exclusively streamable with a Netflix subscription. In an interview with People, the actress shared that she “just wrapped” on the Fincher-helmed movie and “absolutely loved it.” She then added:

It’s good to hear that Elizabeth Debicki had an enjoyable time working on The Adventures of Cliff Booth, which began rolling cameras towards the end of last July. This will be her first movie since MaXXXine in 2024, although she did star in a West End production called My Master Builder, adapting the Henrik Ibsen play The Master Builder, in 2025. Since this first time working with Brad Pitt and David Fincher went so well, maybe this will lead to more collaborations between them and Debicki, either separately or all together.

The Adventures of Cliff Booth marks the fourth time that one of Quentin Tarantino’s scripts has been brought to life by another director, the previous three being True Romance, Natural Born Killers and From Dusk till Dawn. Brad Pitt’s Cliff was introduced in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood as the longtime stunt double of Leonardo DiCaprio’s Rick Dalton who was suspected to have killed his wife (later confirmed in the movie’s novelization) and once got into a fight with Bruce Lee. This time around, Cliff will reportedly be a Hollywood studio fixer.

Brad Pitt and Elizabeth Debicki are joined in The Adventures of Cliff Booth by Timothy Olyphant reprising James Stacy, and Scott Caan, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Carla Gugino, Holy McCallany, Corey Fogelmanis, JB Tadena, Karren Karagulian, Barry Livingston, Lauren Glazier and Peter Weller all in undisclosed roles. The movie doesn’t have a specific 2026 release date assigned yet, but you’re welcome to stream Once Upon a Time in Hollywood over at fuboTV while we wait for that information and more updates.

One of the perks of James Cameron releasing an epic adventure like Avatar: Fire and Ash is that the verbose and opinionated filmmaker goes on a lengthy press tour and shares tons of interesting and sometimes inflammatory anecdotes, while also teasing upcoming projects like new Terminator movies. The Oscar winner has not disappointed this time around at all, and he let some surprisingly candid thoughts fly when asked about Alien 3 infamously and immediately killing off fan-favorite characters.

Cameron had a lengthy chat with one of his former go-to stars for the podcast Just Foolin’ About with Michael Biehn, and in the midst of a conversation about generative AI and how it affects actors’ likenesses being used on screen, Aliens’ Michael Biehn made a quick pivot in direction. He instead lobbed the interview version of a grenade at the director by asking how he felt about Carrie Henn’s Newt revealed as dead in Alien 3. Cameron chuckled before answering with:

It was almost like Michael Biehn's question was the personification of Newt's death confirmation, so out of nowhere it came. To be sure, James Cameron hasn't ever pretended to adore the way the third Alien movie kicked off with the fanfare-free reveals that Newt, Biehn's Corporal Hicks, and Lance Henriksen's Bishop all perish when their escape pod crashes on Fiorina 161. But he usually doesn't drop F-bombs about it, either.

As much as it was a jolt for viewers to see that trio of Aliens characters suddenly out of the picture, cementing it as a sequel we kinda wish didn't exist, you can bet that it was even more jarring for Cameron, considering he was the main creative force in bringing the three to life. He continued his sarcasm-laced comments, saying:

If James Cameron ever passive-aggressively referred to me as clever and smart while so very obviously meaning the exact opposite, I might very well go throw myself in front of a speeding Xenomorph. That kind of burn doesn't go away with just a topical ointment.

Not that Cameron is even pointing the finger of blame at Alien 3's credited director, the highly esteemed David Fincher, given the numerous issues that have been publicly disclosed regarding that production. He addressed his fellow filmmaker, whose next film would be the all-time great '90s classic Se7en, by saying:

The story behind all of Alien 3's various behind-the-scenes changes and setbacks literally takes longer to go through than the runtime of the 1992 film itself, which is widely viewed as one of the most nihilistic horror sequels of the era. Fincher's lauded work in the world of music videos helped land him the 20th Century Fox gig after other directors had vacated, and he's been very vocal about how little oversight he had, and how much he had to fight for the few creative choices he was allowed to bring in.

So while "pissing James Cameron off about Newt" probably wasn't high on David Fincher's list of worries when it came to getting Alien 3 out into the public, at least we now know it never had to be on that list at all. Which leads me to my follow-up, "why James Cameron needs to get on board with Mindhunter Season 3: a five-part argument."

For those who want to relive the discomfort of those three hastily revealed deaths, Alien 3 is currently available to stream via Hulu subscription.

Every once in a while, the Twitter film community decides to wake up and choose violence. This time, the target is David Fincher and, as someone who still hasn’t forgiven Netflix for leaving Mindhunter in limbo, I feel personally attacked. A recent post on X has gone somewhat viral, racking up more than two million views and well over 23,000 likes, all because it dares to suggest that Fincher “fell off so bad.” That’s the actual phrasing--crying emojis and all--and the Mindhunter fan in me is absolutely outraged.

Film Twitter Says David Fincher Fell Off

The tweet, shared by X user @mistonvinyl, includes a screenshot of Fincher’s films listed by release date, starting with the wonderfully creepy thriller flick Zodiac and running through the, at the time, buzzy Netflix's The Killer, capped off with the upcoming The Adventures of Cliff Booth. The caption reads, “this is wicked work man… he fell off so bad,” as if this is some kind of universally accepted truth and not an invitation for chaos.

In the time since it went up, the post spread and has been quote-tweeted into oblivion. Also, it's somehow seemingly convinced a sizable chunk of the internet that one of the most meticulous directors of the last 25 years suddenly forgot how to make movies.

Here’s the thing. Even if you weren’t in love with The Killer, which got three out of five-star review, calling it proof of a creative downfall feels wildly off-base. The Michael Fassbender-led film earned generally positive reviews, with plenty of critics praising its icy tone, procedural patience and very Fincher-specific commitment to detail. Was it everyone’s favorite? No. Was it some embarrassing misfire? Also, no. Disliking a movie is not the same thing as a director “falling off,” no matter how many likes the tweet gets.

And then there’s the Hollywood historical picture, Mank, which this narrative conveniently glosses over. That movie picked up 10 Academy Award nominations at the 2021 Oscars, including Best Picture and Best Director. You don’t accidentally stumble into that kind of recognition while allegedly losing your touch. You can argue about whether Mank connected emotionally, but from a craft standpoint, it was Fincher doing exactly what he’s always done: obsessing over form, tone, and historical texture in a way very few filmmakers even attempt.

But where are Fincher fans on this take? Well, the replies are all over the place.

The Replies Might Be Even Wilder Than The Fincher Tweet

Once the post started circulating, other X users wasted no time jumping in, and the replies paint a much messier picture than the original claim:

• @Vinod_r108: “Literally not one of these is bad, so I’m confused about what you’re trying to argue.”
• @LeahRayAFC: “Normalise explaining who the tweet is referring to.”
• @kuuroishi: “Omg.. what happened to him.
• @Lil_Luna_IRL: “I really hope that at the peak of my career, I won't experience this decline. I just want to keep on getting better.”
• @cristinafoxtv: “That run is still insane though.”
• @teroteroter: "I remember when people pretended Mank was good - and the entire dialogue was cobbled together from scathing one liners from celeb bios. Nobody talks like that because every line was a zinger from some book."
• @brownsamwell: "Mank Forever"
• @LifeWithAnnaS: “That run was insane though, hard to top.”

That last point is really the key. David Fincher’s early and mid-career run set the bar absurdly high. Not matching Zodiac or The Social Network every single time isn’t the same thing as falling off. It’s just what happens when expectations get unrealistic for a director who continuously makes strong work.

The internet loves a clean rise-and-fall narrative, especially when it fits neatly into a screenshot. But zoom out, and this take doesn’t hold up. Fincher is still making deliberate, controlled, technically sharp projects on his own terms. And, if Mindhunter ever returns, which I have serious doubts about, this whole conversation is going to look even more ridiculous in hindsight.

If you turned on any type of screen this year, it’s likely you saw Seth Rogen, and had a good laugh. He popped up multiple times over on our 2025 TV schedule, including through his own award-winning humorous take on Hollywood, The Studio. Yet, as we’ve come to know the funnyman over the years, we know he can take on serious roles a la The Fablemans or Steve Jobs. So why haven’t we seen Rogen pull an Adam Sandler-like transition into more titles with heavy-hitting directors?

As a part of GQ’s “Men of the Year,” the Superbad creator shared all about his goings on when it comes to Tinseltown. During the conversation, he revealed why his resume doesn’t have as wide an array as Adam Sandler movies has or reflect the variation of Emma Stone's greatest performances. The reality behind it is simpler than we’d all think: he takes them when they come, and he puts his other titles aside, saying:

Seth Rogen's response in how he nabs the projects is even funny, as the thought of Blockers vs. any of Fincher’s movies is a great juxtaposition, though no hate to the 2018 comedy. In all seriousness though, it has been interesting to see him evolve over the decades and shed his past skins. I think Rogen's been shifting dramatically, and The Studio seems to be a catalyst for this coming phase.

Fortunately though, I don’t think we’ll ever have to part with the funny side of the Knocked Up star. Humor seems to be intrinsically sewn into Rogen's DNA since he had a great response to the Emmys misspelling his name. On top of that, one of the 2025 movie calendar entries he was in, Aziz Ansari’s Good Fortune, tows that line of humor and drama. (Though it’s much more comedy leaning and has a surprising RT score.)

So it’ll be interesting to watch Rogen’s resume now that the reasoning is officially out there. Fingers crossed that some directors have perked up after catching wind of the sentiment. Personally, I’d love to see him shake it up with something dramatic among the smattering of comedies he has. After all, Adam Sandler (and many others) carved this exact path for new generations of comedians to showcase the depths of their talents.

If you’d like to watch either of Seth Rogen’s comedy series, The Studio or Platonic, you can stream both with an Apple TV+ subscription.

When it comes to David Fincher/Brad Pitt collaborations, the first movies that likely come to people’s minds are Fight Club, and Se7en. And, look, I get it. Fight Club is still arguably David Fincher's best movie.

Not only that, but Se7en is one of the best horror movies of all time. So, it makes sense that Pitt + Fincher = either one of those two movies in people’s minds. The thing is, there's a third movie that they worked on together, and that's 2008's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which I'm upset that nobody really talks about these days.

Which is surprising, because at the time, the film was highly lauded. Well, Fincher and Pitt are actually coming back together again for a Once Upon a Time in Hollywood follow-up, but until then, can I please gush over this movie?

On The Surface, It Doesn't Seem Like A Dark Film, But It Is

I actually tried reading the F. Scott Fitzgerald short story that this movie is based upon, but I put it down after only a few pages. So, from my short read, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a better movie than book. That said, you might be wondering why I didn't finish the short story, and the answer is simple - I didn't like the tone.

You see, even though the concept of a man aging backward seems quite silly on paper (and, from what I read of the short story, it reads silly in Fitzgerald's version), the movie treats this scenario seriously, which is completely on brand for Fincher.

The story concerns a baby who looks like an old man, and eventually ages backward, so that when he learns to walk, it's with crutches. When he meets a young girl named Daisy (played by Elle Fanning as a child, but Cate Blanchett as an adult), he becomes fast friends with her, because he IS a child, even though he looks decrepit.

This doesn't sound like a dark story, but it is. Benjamin and Daisy eventually fall in love, but it's only when they both reach the middle of their lives, meaning that there's so much lost time between them. By the end of the film, Daisy is taking care of a “young” Benjamin who has dementia, and it's almost overbearing in its sadness. It's a great film, but man is it depressing.

Brad Pitt Gives The Performance Of A Lifetime

Though Benjamin Button isn't often referred to as one of the best Brad Pitt movies, it's certainly not one of the worst, either, that’s for sure. However, one reason why I think a lot of people don’t frequently talk about this movie is because even though the performances are all very good, they’re also very subtle.

There are no grand, sweeping performances like Daniel Day Lewis in There Will Be Blood. No eccentric, off-the-wall performances like Johnny Depp in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. No. Every character in this film is quiet and understated, and Pitt does a great job of providing a somber performance.

Because even when Benjamin is happy, he seems sad. Or rather, there’s a certain sadness to him. Even as a “child,” with his wrinkles and arthritis, he seems to have a weary, traveled look to him, which doesn’t lessen when he gets “younger.” In fact, he appears even more weary throughout the passage of time, which seems obvious, but again, this is a story about a man who is aging backward, not forward, and he’ll eventually be a teenager with the brain of a moribund man.

Pitt somehow pulls it off. You genuinely feel tired by the end of the movie, and I think it’s because of his understated and quiet performance. There’s no Tyler Durden or Aldo Raine here. I actually think this role might be even better. It certainly feels more difficult.

Cate Blanchett Is Also Wonderful

This almost sounds silly to even mention, as when is Cate Blanchett not wonderful, but she’s also phenomenal in this movie. In fact, I’m actually quite surprised to learn that she wasn’t nominated for the Best Actress Oscar, as the film was nominated for 13 Academy Awards (and won three, which I’ll get into next).

Her performance might be even sadder than Pitt’s, because she’s really the lynchpin of this entire movie, which is, in fact, a romantic fantasy. As mentioned, her character, Daisy, and Benjamin just can’t seem to meet at the right time in their lives. Daisy wishes to be a dancer, and lives out her dream. But, after a horrible accident, she can’t dance anymore. Still, it is not the right time for her and Benjamin, and they go through many years where they don’t see each other.

It is only at a specific point in their lives when they can truly love each other, and it doesn’t last long enough. Yes, they have a child together, but since Benjamin is aware that he likely won’t be a good father, he leaves Daisy and his child with money to live out their lives. But, you get a sense that Daisy would be willing to weather the storm if it meant that they could all be together.

It’s a sad performance, and one that Blanchett handles effortlessly, which, as already mentioned, is expected from such a master actor.

Its Visual Effects Are So Good They Make Me Want To Cry

Not too long ago, Godzilla Minus One took home an Oscar for Best Visual Effects, and believe it or not, I was upset. Now, I wasn’t bummed because I think it shouldn’t have won in this category, as it definitely should have. However, I thought it should have been nominated for (And won!) Best Picture as well. I’m still upset that it didn’t.

The same actually goes for Benjamin Button, as while it did win 3 Academy Awards, it was all in the visual department, those accolades being: Best Art Direction, Best Makeup, and Best Visual Effects. That said, even though I think the film should have won more (Perhaps Best Supporting Actress for Taraji P. Henson?) I really do think that the special effects in this film add to the story, because they make me want to cry!

Watching Pitt age down really is astonishing, even to this day, but the true miracle is watching the other characters age up. The contrast is startling, as watching a child Daisy turn into a woman, then into an elderly person, all while seeing Pitt get younger and younger, just doesn’t feel right.

However, the visuals themselves do a lot of the storytelling, and I think the makeup tells its own narrative, which is something I can’t say for many other movies outside of this one.

Over The Years, This Almost Feels Like Fincher's Hidden Gem

Every great director has a hidden gem in their filmography. For Scorsese, I think it’s After Hours, and for Kubrick, it’s none other than Barry Lyndon. But for Fincher, I think it’s The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which seems strange, because again, it was nominated for THIRTEEN Academy Awards.

But, who talks about it anymore? That’s a problem for me, as it feels completely forgotten, and it shouldn’t be. It’s unlike any other film in Fincher’s filmography, as it’s almost meditative in nature.

That alone is special, but the story, acting, special effects, and score also make this film one for the ages. If you haven’t watched it in a while, watch it again. Fincher was firing on all cylinders with this one.

What do you think? Have you seen it in a while? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

If you’ve seen the 2025 movie schedule release Weapons, you already know it’s packed with haunting imagery and disturbing body horror sequences. However, what you might not know is that the flick is genuinely funny at times, rivaling some of the best horror-comedies of all time. And according to Josh Brolin, the star of the blockbuster hit, one particular line of dialogue stood out so much that none other than David Fincher gave it the ultimate compliment. And yes, it involves an f-bomb.

Brolin revealed the story on the new podcast On Film…with Kevin McCarthy, where he couldn’t resist sharing the anecdote about Fincher’s reaction. According to the Goonies star:

For those who haven’t had the chance to watch the ​​new horror movie, the moment in question comes when Brolin’s character suffers a surreal and horrifying dream, only to suddenly wake up and blurt out a bewildered, perfectly timed: “What the fuck?!?!”

The American Gangster actor seems to believe the beauty of the line was in its raw simplicity, which is an honest reaction to chaos rather than a neatly scripted speech. The fact that Fincher, one of the most meticulous directors in Hollywood, singled it out as one of the top movie f-bombs of all time only amplified the impact.

As Brolin explained, the comment came after Cregger reached out to Fincher to get his thoughts on the film. The Fight Club and Gone Girl director reportedly watched Weapons closely but had almost no notes. As the Avengers: Endgame star tells it:

A throwaway curse word to be so well-regarded might sound a bit strange, but as Brolin explains in the full interview, which you can watch below, he sees it differently. Those raw, honest reactions and the specific kind of comedy really stick with people, and in a flick as bizarre and unsettling as Weapons, that shocked “What the fuck?!” is kind of like a pressure release for the audience. This interplay of horror and comedy is something Weapons director Zach Creggar is becoming a master at.

It also doesn’t hurt that Fincher has spent his career crafting some of the most quotable R-rated dialogue in film history. From Se7en’s infamous “What’s in the box?!” to the cutting barbs of The Social Network, he knows the power of a line that captures a character’s emotional breaking point.

Zach Cregger’s well-reviewed Weapons, his highly anticipated follow-up to the chaos of Barbarian, has quickly become one of the standout horror films of 2025, and it’s been dominating at the box office. Josh Brolin’s “Fincher-endorsed” f-bomb is just one reason audiences are connecting with the film.

Love it or not, the buzz is undeniable, and if you’re a movie fan, you owe it to yourself to head to your local theater, arms outstretched like the missing kids in the movie, and experience Weapons on the big screen while it’s still playing.

Well, it feels like everyone who has seen Fight Club has broken the first two rules of Fight Club, which are “do not talk about Fight Club.” However, it’s one of the best movies of the ‘90s and a classic in David Fincher’s filmography, so it’s hard not to break them. So, for years, I’ve avoided the film because I knew the admittedly mind-blowing plot twist.

However, I decided to give it a shot recently, even though I knew the biggest surprise about it, and I’m thrilled to report that I was still very shocked by this movie.

Fight Club And I Are The Same Age, And I Couldn’t Avoid The Spoilers

I was born in 1999, and Fight Club came out in October that same year. Basically, the entire time I’ve been alive, this Edward Norton and Brad Pitt film has been around and talked about. Therefore, as a film enthusiast-turned-entertainment-journalist, I couldn’t avoid its biggest spoiler and one of the best plot twists ever.

For years and years, I’ve known that Pitt’s Tyler Durden was Edward Norton’s Narrator. In other words, I’ve known the Ocean’s Eleven star’s character wasn’t real. And I’ve known it was Norton’s character running the whole entire show. Therefore, I didn’t really see the point in watching the film if there was no surprise, especially since I’m not really into this kind of intense, hyper-masculine movie anyway.

However, it’s a classic, it’s one of Norton and Pitt’s best movies, and it felt like not giving it a chance was a disgrace. So, I decided to give it a watch with my HBO Max subscription, and by golly, did it surprise me.

I Was Shocked By The Narrator's Whole Relationship With Marla

The surprises started right at the start of the movie. Obviously, I knew Helena Bonham Carter was in the cast, however, I didn’t know how pivotal her character, Marla, was to the story. I also didn’t realize how wild her plotline was or the bizarre way she met the Narrator.

So, shock number one came when Norton’s character met Marla. The fact that they came into contact because they were both attending support groups that they really had no reason to be at was hilarious and incredibly odd. However, it immediately told me that they were on a similar wavelength, and it developed their connection in a clear and memorable way.

Then, shock number two was sustained throughout the rest of the movie as I watched Marla’s relationship with Tyler grow while the Narrator spectated. Although I knew, and Marla knew, that she was actually with Norton’s character, not Pitt’s, knowing that made these interactions even better and more surprising.

Watching Pitt and Bonham Carter dance in and out of scenes with Norton was masterful, and I was enthralled by the way her relationship with the men ultimately illustrated the plot twist to me. That, my friends, was unexpected.

I Didn’t See The Terrorist Group Coming

Now, I might have known about Fight Club because everyone talked about it. However, I had absolutely no idea it would turn into, essentially, a terrorist group. So, that led to a level of jaw-dropping that likely mirrored the one I could have had at the Tyler reveal.

I mean, talk about escalation. I knew this film made comments on the idea of toxic masculinity in a big, bold and violent way. However, going to the extent of starting a cult-like group in that dilapidated house and blowing up literal buildings was something I did not see coming at all.

Terror and rage were two of of the primary emotions I felt when this turn happened. I was overwhelmed by the toxic masculinity, and couldn’t quite believe the lows these men had fallen to. It was sad, horrifying, and lame of them. And I realize that’s what the movie wanted me to feel.

I knew Fight Club had been misunderstood by many when I sat down to watch it, and I knew it was a satire of sorts. That became abundantly clear when Project Mayhem came into the picture. It took the extremes of this movie to a whole new level, and it highlighted how these men had resorted to violent actions because they couldn’t cope with their lives in a healthy and productive way.

Overall, it was a fascinating, disturbing and surprising examination of toxic masculinity through a very extreme and jarring plotline that I didn’t see coming at all.

The Ending, Where He Shoots Himself And Kills Imaginary Tyler But Not Himself, Surprised Me

If you don’t know what’s coming with Fight Club, the scene where it’s revealed that the Narrator and Tyler are one and the same is by far the most unexpected part of the movie. However, if you know that’s going to happen without knowledge of anything else (which was my case), I’d say that the moment where Norton’s character essentially kills Pitt’s character is the biggest shocker.

Now, here’s what I saw: the Narrator got into a battle with Tyler, and then shot himself. We see the bullet go through the back of Tyler’s head, and the Narrator manages to survive, seemingly by shooting the gun in a way that made it so the bullet missed his brain. Then, the film ends with Marla and the Narrator standing hand-in-hand, looking out the window, watching the city explode.

It seems like the Narrator let Tyler go and banished that part of himself from his mind. Then, he faced the inevitable by watching the buildings explode, and he was forced to take in the consequences of his actions.

However, I also can’t shake how ambiguous this all was. Like, how did the Narrator survive? Can he actually kill a figment of his imagination? What happened with his relationship with Marla?

All this and more has kept me thinking about the wild ride that is Fight Club, despite knowing the plot twist before I started watching it. So, in the end, I’m very happy I finally sat down to watch this 1999 classic, because even though I knew the biggest twist, I was still very, very surprised by it.

You thought Squid Game, one of the most bingeable shows on Netflix, was over? Well, think again.

Now, in the grand scheme of things, the show as we knew it is over. The three-season series, which hailed from South Korea, finally ended as part of the 2025 TV schedule. We saw the rise and fall of certain characters, the expansion of LGBTQ+ representation in the show, and how Gi-hun faced off against the Recruiter in Season 2, ultimately falling apart in Season 3 – it was epic.

The finale was sad in many ways, but that might not really be the end of Squid Game. In fact, numerous rumors have circulated that an American version of the show is in development. Although nothing has been confirmed, considerable speculation and chatter has surrounded it. Let's talk about what's been said so far.

Squid Game Ended With A Tease Of An American-Based Game

I think one of the biggest hints that an American-based Squid Game might happen was the actual ending of Squid Game Season 3.

There were a lot of things about the third season that fans didn't like, from the inevitable deaths of characters to how Gi-hun's story concluded. Still, a huge moment that everyone was talking about was when Cate Blanchett suddenly showed up as an American recruiter when In-ho (The Front Man) visited NYC to deliver Gi-hun's clothing to his daughter, as well as the money.

This was a significant moment that sparked numerous discussions among fans, with many speculating that it could be a potential tease for an American version of the games. However, that's not necessarily the case.

While the ending does show that the games are in America, the creator of the show, Hwang Dong-hyuk, confirmed in an interview with Variety in June 2025 that the ending does not connect to the rumored American series at all:

Which makes sense. The creator has said in the past that he really has no interest in developing spinoffs, so I doubt that he would be willing to include a whole tease for an American version that isn't even his own. This was the ending he wished for the show.

It would be shocking if Blanchett were somehow already signed on as the official recruiter for an American-based game. I'm all about Cate Blanchett's best movies, but for some reason, her in this franchise doesn't necessarily do it for me.

Either way, even if that ending wasn't exactly the tease we expected, there are other things we could point to.

In October 2024, It Was Announced That A David Fincher Spinoff Was In Development

The most significant piece of evidence that we have about an American-based Squid Game series is that it was announced to be in development by Deadline in October 2024. Academy Award-winning director David Fincher would direct the show.

At first, it seems like this might be an idea that people would be very hesitant to watch, being an American version of a highly successful and hugely popular South Korean drama series. But if it's from Fincher, I, for one, don't mind it as much as I usually would.

Fincher is responsible for bringing some of the biggest movies to Hollywood over the last few decades. When it comes to David Fincher's films, some of his best include Fight Club, Seven, Gone Girl, Zodiac, The Social Network, and many, many more.

The director has also maintained an ongoing partnership with Netflix, working on several things for them. One of my personal favorites is Mindhunter, even if it never got Season 3 (and was vastly underappreciated), where he worked as a producer and director. He was also an executive producer and director on House of Cards. He even co-created Love, Death, and Robots, one of the best adult animated series on the platform.

If Fincher were to create an American Squid Game, it might work well.

Nevertheless, no further news has been released about this series. According to What's On Netflix, rumors have been circulating that production on the show could begin in December 2025; however, this remains uncertain as of mid-July.

The Creator Has Said He Would Watch And Support It

While Hwang Dong-hyuk has said that he isn't interested in creating spinoffs, he isn't opposed to Fincher making a series. In fact, he's in full support of it.

In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter in June 2025, the creator said that if the series were to happen, he would be the first one to watch it and click "play" the moment it dropped on the streaming platform:

Frankly, this is a big deal. I can't count how many times the original creators of works have been adamantly against anyone adapting it, because they're afraid the vision will become lost. So, the fact that the creator is totally open to this happening is a major green flag.

Actors Even Have Comments On How It Could Connect

Actors from Squid Game have even commented on how a spinoff like this could connect to the original.

While Gi-hun's (played by Lee Jung-jae) story has come to an end, In-ho (the Front Man, played by Lee Byung-hun) is still very much in the universe. In an interview with Radio Times in July 2025, the actor openly said that diving into In-ho's story would be a "no-brainer" because the fans want more, and there's still more story to tell with him:

Now that would be a remarkable connection – and one that would make a great deal of sense. I am here for something like that.

While it will be some time before we hear anything about this possible new show, I'm going to be champing at the bit for some latest news. I suppose I'll rewatch Squid Game until then and feel the pain all over again.

The streaming wars have been going for years now, and showing no signs of slowing down. Those with a Netflix subscription were treated to David Fincher's gripping crime drama Mindhunter, although there was disappointment when the third season never came to fruition. But actor Holt McCallany recently offered hope that the story might finally continue. Let's break it all down.

While Netflix claimed Mindhunter was too expensive to give a third season, there are still dedicated fans who want to see the acclaimed series finally return to the small screen. Fans have been bummed for years since Mindhunter was put on hold back in 2019, but in a conversation with CBR offered hope that more content might be coming. As he shared with the outlet:

Do you hear that sound? It's the Mindhunter fandom collectively holding their breaths that these movies will happen over on Netflix. After all, the story and performances of the series were endlessly captivating, and the show ended too soon as a result of Netflix's penchant for cancellations. Seriously, some of my favorite shows have gotten the cut too early includingThe OA, Human Resources, and Girls5Eva.

The high budget of Mindhunter might be surprising for those who watched the show. Because while Fincher is a legendary filmmaker, most of the series focused on characters at a desk talking to each other. It didn't have the large cast, big production, of special effects from other titles like Stranger Things.

Of course, Holt McCallany's comments about the possible Mindhunter movies is far from an official confirmation that they're happening. But Netflix has done this type of move before for cancelled projects. Sense8 was given a finale movie after fans complained about it being dropped after such a huge Season 2 cliffhanger. While it's been years since Mindhunter was dropped, it would definitely make headlines if Fincher's two movies were actually green lit.

While there's no guarantee that the Mindhunter finale(s) will actually be produced, the fact that scripts are actively being worked on by David Fincher is a thrilling, albeit unexpected, update. If Netflix ultimately decides not to move forward with these movies, perhaps the Gone Girl filmmaker will be able to shop the idea to other streamers. A number of titles have pivoted from one streamer to another in this way over the years, so it's not exactly unheard of.

The first two seasons of Mindhunter are streaming now on Netlfix. While no new episodes are on the 2025 TV premiere schedule, hopefully we get an update about those potential movies soon.

Fans of both Brad Pitt and David Fincher have been waiting for the Se7en and Fight Club duo reteam for some time. While the 2025 movie schedule is not the venue that’ll make it happen, there’s apparently a project that’s making the rounds that intends to do what World War Z 2 couldn’t. As Quentin Tarantino’s scrapped script for his Cliff Booth-centric sequel to Once Upon a Time…In Hollywood is now being given new life, there are two major issues I’m pondering now that we know it isn’t a prank.

What We’ve Heard About This Once Upon A Time In Hollywood Sequel

When news of this project was first shared by The Playlist, I have to admit that the one true question I had was “Is this real?” April Fools’ Day isn’t exactly the best time to drop breaking news, but as more and more publications ran with certainty, this enterprise became more of a reality. With that uncertainty out of the way, here’s what the pitch process involved, and what the main thrust of the film is supposed to be, per Deadline's confirmation:

February 2024 seems to be where this project started to pivot into its current form, as that’s when Brad Pitt and Quentin Tarantino’s rumored reteaming began to make the rounds. Beginning as the script previously known as The Movie Critic, Tarantino dropped out of the project last August, which led to this potential Pitt/Fincher reconnection.

So with all of these plates of speculation now spinning, it’s time to ask two really big questions about what the future holds for Cliff Booth. The first query of the moment is one we kind of have an answer for, but would depend on the constant creative challenge we know by one word: “canon.”

Which Version Of Cliff Booth’s "Misadventure" Will Be Canon?

One of the lingering questions after Once Upon a Time…In Hollywood’s release was “Did Cliff Booth kill his wife?” The way Quentin Tarantino presents the event in the picture left that subject open for massive interpretation, especially because we didn’t see the death take place.

However, when Tarantino’s expanded/revised novelization answered that question, it was an emphatic “Yes.” In fact, the gory details given through "Chapter 10 - Misadventure" more than kind of change how we might feel about this good time buddy of Rick Dalton. So if we’re getting a sequel that follows Booth through his later career, does this mean we should keep in mind the cinematic version of things?

Since Quentin Tarantino’s literary version of events plays out differently from the picture it’s based on, one could assume that movie and book canon are separate. Still, I’d like to know for sure which version of events QT used to further the story of Brad Pitt’s world weary stuntman.

What Does This Mean For Other Once Upon A Time In Hollywood Projects?

Since we’re on the topic of this 2019 hit, the next question to ask would be if this could be a sign that Netflix will go all-in on Tarantino’s further plans connected to the plot at hand? More specifically, there’s a pair of projects that would benefit from this discussion, the first of which is the teased extended cut of Once Upon a Time…in Hollywood.

Much like what the writer/director did with The Hateful Eight, a Netflix debut of the four-hour cut has been bandied about. Whether it’d become a miniseries like The Hateful Eight: Extended Version, or play out as a singular entity could also be up for debate. That being said, and from someone who’s still burned by the long-promised home video version of Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair, I need to know for sure.

That brings us to the other pitch Quentin Tarantino has in the hopper for this universe: that Bounty Law series adaptation. Now, if Netflix wants to promote this Brad Pitt/David Fincher sequel, having the extended cut mentioned above is an easy move. But if this Cliff Booth follow-up hits with critics and crowds, would that be a sign to snag Leonardo DiCaprio back for the five episodes already written?

Both of those major questions, and the tangential concerns they inspire, fall back into line - as there’s one thing we should all be asking ourselves: is this actually going to happen? Let’s not forget that Brad Pitt and David Fincher’s defunct World War Z sequel had us all on the hook for some time, dreaming of the possibility of a Ouija: Origin of Evil-style redemption, via a potentially superior sequel.

Though Once Upon a Time…in Hollywood isn’t something that needs to be improved upon, I have to say that if this concept somehow does falter, I’ll be pretty disappointed. For now though we’ll all have to be content with the fact that on June 27th, F1 will bring us Pitt driving absurdly fast cars for the director of Top Gun: Maverick, with an awesome supporting cast along for the ride. That should be distracting enough for the moment, yes?

It's not unusual for directors to star in their own movies. Alfred Hitchcock famously made cameos in almost all of his movies and Quentin Tarantino appears in all of his in one way or another. It's rarer for a director to appear in a fellow director's movie. It's hardly unheard of, as we found plenty of interesting examples. So without further ado, here is our list of directors who appeared on other directors' movies.

Steven Spielberg - The Blues Brothers

Before the tragic accident on the set of The Twilight Zone, John Landis and Steven Spielberg were good friends. So good, in fact, that Spielberg showed up in a cameo in the Landis classic The Blues Brothers. Spielberg plays the Cook Country Accessor at the end of the movie who takes payment from Jake and Elwood.

David Lynch - The Fablemans

In a very meta moment, David Lynch plays another great director, John Ford, in Steven Spielberg's The Fablemans. The late Lynch didn't show up in movies often, even his own, so it's a fun moment in a movie by a legend, starring a legend as a legend.

John Landis - Spider-man 2

John Landis has twice done cameos in Sam Rami movies, both times appearing as a doctor, the most famous of which was in Spider-Man 2 where he plays a doctor killed by Doctor Octopus after performing surgery on the villain. It's a super quick moment and one that is easy to miss.

David Fincher - Being John Malkovich

David Fincher has occasionally popped into his own movies, including playing the voice of John Doe on the telephone so as to not give away the surprise later. He also has shown up in other directors' movies, specifically as a puppet expert in Spike Jonze's Being John Malkovich.

Roger Corman - The Silence Of The Lambs

Legendary B-movie director Roger Corman has a habit of showing up in other directors' work. It makes sense as he's a huge hero to many filmmakers who grew up watching his movies. In Jonathan Demme's The Silence of the Lambs, Corman plays the FBI director in one scene.

George Lucas - Beverly Hills Cop III

Beverly Hills Cop 3 is a pretty terrible movie, though thankfully the franchise was redeemed decades later with Axel F. Still, there is a pretty funny cameo in the movie when none other than George Lucas pops into the movie as a disgruntled patron of the amusement park that is central to the story.

Tim Burton - Singles

Tim Burton is not a director that shows up on the other side of the camera very often. In fact he has fleetingly few acting roles, but he does appear in Cameron Crowe's Singles. Crowe also has a cameo himself in the film.

Sam Raimi - Miller's Crossing

Sam Raimi is a director with a lot of acting roles on his resume, in his own film and in the movies by friends of his. One such cameo is in Miller's Crossing, a movie by the Coen Brothers. Raimi also has a cameo in another Coen Brothers movie, The Hudsucker Proxy.

Gus Van Sant - The Canyons

Gus Van Sant has a bit more than just a cameo in The Canyons, a movie that flew way under the radar when it was released in 2013, starring Lindsey Lohan. Van Sant plays a psychologist in the movie and has more than a couple lines, unlike many on this list.

Quentin Tarantino - Sleep With Me

Quentin Tarantino is always happy to cast himself in his own movies, but even before he was one of the premiere directors in Hollywood, he was popping up in movies he didn't direct. In Sleep With Me, by director Rory Kelly, which came out a month before Pulp Fiction, Tarantino has a memorable moment as a chatty party guest who breaks down the movie Top Gun in a very unconventional way.

Martin Scorsese - Quiz Show

Martin Scorsese's most famous on screen moment is as a rider in Travis' (Robert De Niro) cab in his own movie, Taxi Driver. He also shows up in Qui Show, directed by Robert Redford.

Tobe Hooper - Sleepwalkers

Tobe Hooper is a horror movie legend for his work directing the slasher classic The Texas Chainsaw Massacre in the 1970s. In 1992 he popped up in a cameo working alongside Stephen King in the adaptation of King's novel Sleepwalkers.

John Waters - Something Wild

Director John Waters has been in many of his own movies, but he occasionally shows up in other movies as well, like Something Wild by director Jonathan Demme in 1986. Waters plays a sketchy car dealer in the movie and is one of the most fun parts of the movie.

Amy Heckerling - Into The Night

1985's Into the Night was John Landis' return to directing after being cleared of manslaughter charges as a result of the on-set tragedy during the filming of The Twilight Zone movie. In the movie, another director, Amy Heckerling, shows up in a cameo as a waitress.

Jonathan Demme - That Thing You Do!

Appropriately Jonathan Demme, who had a number of directors appear in his films, plays a film director in That Thing You Do! It's a brief role, of course, and it is one of the only times the late Demme appeared in another director's film. Into the Night by John Landis being another.

Roger Corman - The Godfather Part II

Roger Corman, one of the most influential directors of all time had a few cameos over his career with one of the most memorable coming in The Godfather II, where he played one of the senators grilling Michael Corlene (Al Pacino) in the Francis Ford Coppola classic.

Spike Jonze - The Game

Before David Fincher returned the favor for Spike Jonze in Being John Malkovich, Jonze appeared in Fincher's The Game, one of the most underrated movies by a big-time director.

Wes Craven - Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back

The late Wes Craven appeared in movies or TV shows as an actor 24 times according to IMDB, though most of his movie appearances were in his own movies. One exception was when he appeared in Kevin Smith's Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back playing a version of himself directing a cartoonish version of Scream.

Frank Oz - Spies Like Us

Frank Oz has appeared as an actor in a bunch of movies, including The Blues Brothers, Trading Places, Knives Out, not to mention all his puppet and voice work over the years. One of his best cameos came in Spies Like Us where he played the proctor of a civil service exam. It's truly a classic and maybe the funniest moment in the movie.

Cameron Crowe - Minority Report

Cameron Crowe has a very brief cameo as a man on riding public transportation in Minority Report by director Steven Spielberg. If you blink - or aren't sure what he looks like - you're sure to miss the moment, but it's there. In fact, another Cameron, Cameron Diaz, is in the background of the same scene.

Robert Downey, Sr. - Boogie Nights

In his day, Robert Downey Sr. was pretty famous. Of course, that fame has been eclipsed by his son, but that doesn't mean he did carry a lot of respect within the industry even late in his life. Like when Paul Thomas Anderson worked him into a cameo in Boogie Nights.

Frank Darabont - King Kong

For many, The Shawshank Redemption is the best movie of the 1990s. It's director, Frank Darabont, doesn't make a cameo in Shawshank or any of his other movies, but he is very briefly in Peter Jackson's King Kong. It's another "blink-and-you-will-miss-it" kind of role.

Lawrence Kasdan - As Good As It Gets

Writer and director Lawrence Kasdan is most famous for writing both Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. He's also directed movies like Grand Canyon, The Big Chill, and Silverado. On rare occasions, he's taken acting roles like he did in As Good As It Gets, by director James L. Brooks of Simpsons fame. Kasdan plays a psychologist in the movie.

James Cameron - The Muse

The Muse, directed by Albert Brooks, features a handful of cameos by famous directors including Martin Scorsese and Rob Reiner. In a rare appearance on the other side camera is also director James Cameron, who only has a few acting credits to his name.

Mel Brooks - The Muppet Movie

it's certainly not surprising to see Mel Brooks on the big screen, but it is rare to see in a movie that he didn't write and direct. That's part of what makes his cameo in The Muppet Movie so much fun. The legendary EGOT winner plays the evil Professor Krassman who is working to control the minds of frogs. It's worth noting that despite his delightful performance, it's not one that contributed to his EGOT.

Eli Roth - Inglourious Basterds

Eli Roth is as much an actor as he is a director, though in recent years he's concentrated on the latter. Sure he appears in his own films, but he's also been a collaborator with Quentin Tarantino a couple of times, first in Death Proof and then in a more prominent role in Inglourious Basterds.

Jim Jarmusch - Sling Blade

Director Jim Jarmusch has a unique style as a director and so it makes sense he would appear in a movie with its own unique angle, Sling Blade, by director and actor Billy Bob Thornton. Jarmusch plays the server at a food truck in the movie, serving up French fried potaters.

David Cronenberg - Jason X

David Cronenberg has a long history with the Friday The 13th franchise, having directed an episode of Friday the 13th: The Series in 1988. He shows up in a cameo in Jason X.

John Sayles - Malcolm X

John Sayles has directed some great movies over the years including Eight Men Out and Passion Fish. He's also occasionally done a bit of acting, mostly in cameos like as a memorable FBI agent in Spike Lee's classic Malcolm X.

Werner Herzog - Jack Reacher

German director is never shy about being in front of the camera as he often appears in his own films and occasionally acts in other stuff, like playing a wonderful role on The Mandalorian on Disney Plus. He also makes a great cameo in the Tom Cruise-led Jack Reacher from 2012.

Martin Brest - Fast Times At Ridgemont High

Before Martin Brest hit the big time as a director of such '80s classics as Beverly Hills Cop and the criminally underrated Midnight Run, he scored a small acting role as a coroner in Fast Times At Ridgemont High by director Amy Heckerling.

Orson Welles - The Muppet Movie

Mel Brooks has a fairly substantial role in The Muppet Movie, but he's not the only director to appear in the movie. Hollywood legend Orson Welles also appears in the movie. Welles was a huge fan of Jim Henson and the Muppets and worked with them on more than one occassion as well.

Very few people work forever. Why should they? We all head into a job or a career looking to do the best that we can for a designated amount of time, and we almost immediately start dreaming of retirement. We can move to a warmer climate. We can fish, and drink, and not worry about the responsibilities of the gig. Or, as The Social Network and Seven director David Fincher recently explained to CinemaBlend as part of an exclusive interview:

When all is said and done, David Fincher will go down as one of our greatest filmmakers. His meticulous attention to detail. His uncompromising approach to storytelling. His uncanny ability to draw the best from his actors. All of these skills have contributed to one of the most intoxicating bodies of work from a contemporary director, which I’d argue contains more than a few pristine masterpieces, including Zodiac, The Social Network, and the movie that he’s currently promoting, the 1995 thriller Seven. Warner Bros has given Fincher’s classic a 4K UHD release, available for purchase now.

I didn’t bring up retirement while speaking with David Fincher because I want him to hang up the camera. Quite the contrary. I hope Fincher keeps making movies until he’s old and more grey than he currently is. But while revisiting Seven for the purpose of the interview, it struck me how much I now related to Morgan Freeman’s Somerset character, who’s on the verge of retirement. The veteran detective comments that he just doesn’t understand the city he is sworn to protect, that it had gotten too ugly for him to process.

I posed the question to Fincher, asking if he might look at the film industry and feel the same way. The business has changed significantly since Fincher arrived on the scene. And he was fighting for the purity of his vision 30 years ago on Seven! But as he reflected, he told CinemaBlend:

Fincher isn’t wrong. Directors like Martin Scorsese (82 years old) and Sir Ridley Scott (87 years old) are the exceptions that prove the rule. And Scott is such an anomaly, pumping out multiple movies in a year, and still aiming for massive epics like his most-recent adventure, Gladiator 2. For all of these storytellers, it comes down to material. For as Fincher explained to us:

And what bums me out is that one day, for directors like Steven Spielberg, David Fincher, James Cameron, Spike Lee, Chris Nolan, the Coen Brothers and more, they’re going to reach the end of their professional roads. It’s inevitable. Quentin Tarantino has been talking about it for a few years now. And as Fincher tells us:

And I can’t blame him. Here’s our full conversation with David Fincher on behalf of Seven, now available on 4K UHD.

Now start planning your next trip to the movies by scanning our list of the upcoming 2025 theatrical releases, filled to the brim with exciting choices for movie lovers of all tastes.

Rain drenches an anonymous street in Los Angeles, which is standing in for an anonymous city that won’t be named. Two A-list actors, playing polar opposite detectives assigned to a frightening and ominous case, stand around and wait for their turn to step on set, where they’re poised to discover the next atrocity left for them by a mysterious serial killer named John Doe.

But in this specific moment, director David Fincher is just trying to figure out how to get the body of character actor Michael Reid McKay, transformed into the victim we’ll come to know as Sloth, onto the set without disrupting the man’s intricate makeup job.

That’s just one of many unexpected challenges facing David Fincher (Fight Club, The Social Network, Zodiac) as he labored on Seven, the mesmerizing dark-noir thriller that cast Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman as cops tracking a killer whose victims are modeled after the Seven Deadly Sins. It’s an ingenious hook, designed by screenwriter Andrew Kevin Walker. But it was Fincher’s meticulous execution of the crimes that burrowed under the skin of moviegoers back in 1995, and helped make Seven an unforgettable achievement that earned its place in the pop-culture pantheon of contemporary masterpieces.

I’m not sure Fincher knew he was creating a masterpiece at the time of filming. The former music-video director was coming off of a disastrous shoot with Alien 3, was focused on establishing himself and his own voice, and had to deal with a difficult schedule attached to one of his leading men. (More on that in a second). And then, there was this damn Sloth body… the one that wakes up mid-investigation, and scares the daylights out of John C. McGinley (Scrubs).

Speaking with CinemaBlend on behalf of a 30th anniversary 4K UHD release of Seven (which arrives on January 7), Fincher started reminiscing about that particular Deadly Sin, telling us:

Insanity. And that’s only one Deadly Sin – and only one of the more amazing stories that David Fincher happily shared about the making of his magnificent detective thriller. Dive into CinemaBlend’s exclusive conversation about the making of Seven.

‘We only had 58 days with Brad.’

The beauty of Seven lies in its economy. Scripter Andrew Kevin Walker relies on a few familiar detective tropes to plunge us into the story – an inexperienced but eager hotshot cop (Brad Pitt) gets paired with a grizzled detective (Morgan Freeman) trying to survive one last case – but then takes the narrative through some unforeseen, disturbing avenues that helped Seven stand apart from the crowd. Walker and Fincher weren’t afraid to pull back the curtain on the darkest sins of humanity, holding up a mirror to some truly disgusting people that had us asking difficult questions about the victims, the killer, and even the cops investigating the crimes.

Speaking with Fincher about his relationships with these memorable characters, and how he made them more than their archetypes, the director told CinemaBlend:

It’s one portion of the job. The rest often comes down to solving impossible problems as you keep the entire production on schedule. As mentioned, Fincher and Walker seemed to strip the Seven narrative down to its essence. Over the course of one week, Detectives Mills (Pitt) and Somerset (Freeman) would encounter a new victim every day of the week, leading to a confrontation with the Big Bad. Fincher had a vision. But as a relative newcomer to the world of feature films, he found that he had to fight tooth and nail for each supplement he hoped to add.

Here’s an amazing example. During our conversation, Fincher spoke about the riveting finale in the desert, where Mills and Somerset agree to accompany John Doe (Kevin Spacey) to a pre-determined location. The cops are accompanied by an entourage of law enforcement… only, Fincher said he ran into one major obstacle. He told CinemaBlend:

Can you imagine the Seven finale without the aerial shots of the helicopters surrounding Mills and Somerset as they play the final mind game with John Doe? That feeling of hovering over the action, almost struggling to keep everything in focus because the helicopters are moving, adds to the dread and uncertainty that Fincher establishes in the moment. Of course, there’s the brilliant moment when Mills learns what’s in the box. But after he kills John Doe – and completes the serial killer’s mission – we get that incredible improvisation of John C. McGinley shouting into the helicopter headset microphone:

Thankfully, as David Fincher explained to us, Pitt’s schedule cooperated. And New Line executives realized what kind of a gem they had in their hands, because they relented. A month after Pitt wrapped shooting on 12 Monkeys, New Line approved nine days of pickup shots, sending Fincher and crew scrambling back to the desert to complete the project. As Fincher recalled:

I’ll never be able to think of that scene without hearing McGinley’s exasperated plea. And now I won’t watch the scene without thinking that the helicopter shots almost weren’t part of it. Because that would have been a huge mistake.

‘John Doe has the upper hand.’

Of course, one of the more legendary moves pulled off by Seven was the casting of Kevin Spacey as John Doe, and then hiding his identity until the final-act reveal. Yes, we now know that Spacey appeared earlier in the movie, and got chastised by Mills for photographing a crime scene. But the reveal of Doe’s true identity matched up with some other late-game twists that were happening at the movies at that time… and also involving Spacey.

Did you realize that Bryan Singer’s crime thriller The Usual Suspects, with Spacey in a pivotal role, opened in theaters one month before Fincher dropped Seven? Because Fincher knew. And as he told CinemaBlend, it caused him more than a little agita. The director explained:

It’d be difficult to imagine anyone but Spacey in the part of John Doe now. Just like it’d be really hard to look at a cardboard box on the set of Seven and not picture the head of Gwyneth Paltrow inside of it. Don’t expect Fincher to have the actual box on shelf somewhere, ready to be added to The David Fincher Museum when that exhibit is one day established.

As he tells CinemaBlend:

Everyone will be able to see it again, this time in 4K, when Warner Bros. puts Seven out on 4K UHD beginning on January 7.

David Fincher’s Se7en has been a benchmark for the best horror movies and one of the best '90s flicks–proving its staying power nearly three decades later. With its meticulously crafted atmosphere—complete with relentless rain—gripping performances and haunting themes, the film is as chilling and unforgettable today as it was in 1995. The upcoming 30th-anniversary 4K Ultra HD release, set for January 7, offers fans the chance to experience this dark classic with stunning new clarity. Rewatching it in preparation for the re-release made one thing clear: John Doe is still one of the most terrifying villains in cinematic history. Here’s why his interpretation of the seven deadly sins still hits harder than any modern horror antagonist.

The Crimes Are Personal and Tailored

Per Bloody Disgusting, Se7en is getting a killer 30th anniversary 4k release, which made me itching to rewatch the flick. After my re-viewing, I was struck by how, unlike the random violence often seen in even the best slasher films, John Doe’s murders are disturbingly personal. Each crime is meticulously designed to reflect the victim’s perceived sin, making them deeply symbolic and horrifyingly specific. For instance, the gluttony victim isn’t just killed—he’s force-fed to death in a grotesque display of excess. Similarly, the greed victim, a lawyer, is given a cruel choice to mutilate himself or die. A harrowing scenario serves as a grim allegory for his avarice and, interestingly, evokes the kind of twisted moral dilemmas seen in Saw, a franchise that Se7en clearly inspired.

This precision makes the killings feel more intimate and targeted. Whether supernatural or not, modern horror villains rarely achieve this level of psychological depth.

A Mission That Chills to the Core

The villain, played by Kevin Spacey in an unnamed role, has an unwavering belief that he’s carrying out divine justice, setting John Doe apart from most other cinematic baddies. In his eyes, he’s not just a murderer—he’s an instrument of God, delivering retribution to a sinful society. This fanaticism adds a layer of menace absent in most horror villains, who often kill for revenge, sport, or chaotic impulses.

Doe’s calculated, ideological drive makes him more than just a psychopath; he’s a moral extremist, forcing the characters and viewers to confront uncomfortable questions about guilt, morality, and justice. His terrifying commitment to his “mission” makes his evil feel grounded and, therefore, all the more unsettling.

The Lack of Supernatural Elements Makes It Real–Terrifying

Most upcoming horror movies tend to lean towards supernatural elements to amplify fear—look no further than the Se7en’esq 2024 release Longlegs. But Fincher’s 1995 crime masterpiece thrives on realism. John Doe isn’t an unkillable monster or a ghost haunting his victims—he’s just a man—a disturbingly brilliant and patient man.

This lack of supernatural flair makes his actions feel plausible, which, in turn, makes the film all the more terrifying. There’s no safe distance created by otherworldly elements. Instead, Fincher’s grounded approach forces viewers to confront the idea that someone like John Doe could exist in the real world.

Unforgettable Symbolism and Visual Impact

Every crime scene in Se7en is a meticulously designed tableau of horror. From the grotesque remains of the sloth victim to the horrifyingly bloated body representing gluttony, each scene feels like a macabre work of art. The grim visuals, paired with Howard Shore’s haunting score, create an atmosphere that’s impossible to shake.

The final act, where Doe reveals himself as envy and manipulates Detective Mills (Brad Pitt) into embodying wrath, is one of the most unforgettable climaxes in film history.

John Doe Implicates the Audience With His Actions

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of Doe’s crimes is how they implicate the audience. Viewers are forced to question their own judgments and biases as his motives unfold. Did the victims “deserve” their fates? What sins do we overlook in ourselves and others? Unlike many horror films, where the villain is a distant figure of pure evil, John Doe forces us to confront our own morality—it’s a profoundly unsettling experience that stays with you long after the credits roll.

Relive Se7en’s Horror With The 4K Release

With its 30th-anniversary 4K Ultra HD release on the horizon, Se7en has never looked better—or more terrifying. Under David Fincher’s supervision, the new restoration enhances the film’s haunting visuals with HDR10 and updated audio. Special features, including multiple commentary tracks, deleted scenes, and alternate endings, provide even deeper insight into this masterpiece.

This release is a must-have for fans and newcomers alike. Whether you’re revisiting it or experiencing it for the first time, Se7en remains a harrowing exploration of human darkness, and it's worth picking up whenever it drops on January 7, 2025. Until then, check out our 2025 movie schedule to see what other horrifyingly good new movies are set for theaters in the new year.

David Fincher is one of our greatest modern directors, and I’d put him right up there with Quentin Tarantino, the Coen brothers, and (my personal favorite), Paul Thomas Anderson.

He's made so many great movies that it's kind of difficult to pick his best. In fact, my colleague, Alexandra Ramos, settled on The Social Network as being her personal favorite of his.

However, when it comes to Fincher, there can only be one number one movie for me. Released early in the director's career, I'm pretty sure that Fight Club (with that twist!) will always be my favorite David Fincher movie, and here's why.

It Truly Represents A Time And A Place Better Than Any Of His Other Movies. Yes, Even More so Than The Social Network

Believe it or not, but Fight Club came out 25 years ago. That’s right. It’s part of that very exclusive club of movies that came out in 1999, the same year as The Matrix, The Sixth Sense, and The Talented Mr. Ripley (Which I wish somebody had told me just how good it was all those years ago).

However, of those aforementioned films, none of them (Besides maybe The Matrix) really represents that late ‘90s, early 2000’s vibe for me. Nowadays, Fight Club is seen as an excellent film–an important film. But, back then, I remember the very meathead attitude people had toward it.

My friends, all in high school at the time, watched the movie and totally missed the point. We formed a fight club in my friend’s basement, and would warn each other not to tell anybody else about our new club…only to immediately tell other people about our new club.

But, can you blame us? Much like in the film, the idea of masculinity was changing. Calvin Klein ads featured images of men in their underwear, and we were slowly but surely leaving the muscle-bound men of the early ‘90s behind for something much more…urbane? Maybe even introspective?

Even though the film was actually critiquing that reflexive attitude toward this shift, none of us really got that at the time, and I feel like Fincher perfectly encapsulated the zeitgeist better than any of his other movies. And, I’m talking even more so than The Social Network, which is often considered Fincher’s most on-the-pulse film, since it centers on the inception of Facebook.

Given how much social media has changed, though, since 2010 when The Social Network first debuted, I feel like Fight Club truly represents a time and a place more than any of Fincher’s other films. It just perpetually lives in the late ‘90s for me.

It Is Fincher At His Most Playful, Which You Don't Often See In His Work

In our list of the best horror movies of all time, we put David Fincher’s Se7en, at number three, beating out such horror classics as Jaws, Alien, and even The Exorcist. And, keep in mind, Se7en is not often categorized as a horror movie, but rather, as a crime thriller film. That’s just how damn dark the movie is!

But, Fincher just has a tendency to go dark. Zodiac, if it’s to be believed, is even darker than Se7en, and most of his films, from The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo to Gone Girl, lean more into the darkness. Sure, films like The Social Network, and The Killer definitely employ elements of humor, but I truly feel like Fincher has never achieved the sheer playful puckishness that he has with Fight Club.

Tyler Durden, for all of his anarchistic tendencies, is also quite funny. He always has a smirk on his face, and many people (especially young people like myself at the time) interpreted this as cool. As we all know now, Tyler is just a projection of our narrator, but our narrator is also quite funny in a droll sort of way himself.

This seeps into the overall tone of the film, which feels whimsical, even amidst all of the darkness. In that way, Fight Club still feels like Fincher’s most accessible film, and, in my opinion anyway, also his greatest.

It Also Pulls Out Arguably Brad Pitt's And Edward Norton's Best Performances In Their Entire Careers

Speaking of Tyler Durden and our narrator, I don’t think this movie would be anywhere near as effective if not for Brad Pitt and Edward Norton, respectively.

You have to remember. The year was 1999, and Brad Pitt was not the 60-year-old (But still hot) Oscar-winner that he is today.

No, back then, with his six-pack abs, and super ‘90s haircut, he was picture perfect of what was supposed to be the “ideal man” (Which, as I mentioned earlier, the film is taking the piss out of as Brad Pitt very much looked like “the ideal man,” even though Norton’s character criticized that whole sculpted physique–while, at the same time, shaping his whole personality around it).

And, Norton plays the perfect schlub-turned-tough guy. His transformation is subtle, but effective. Even more so than the one in American History X, where he plays a neo-Nazi. Honestly, as an immense fan of both actors, I have to say that Fight Club is both of their best performances, and by a wide margin.

It Is One Of Few Adaptations That's Arguably Superior To The Book, Which Is Also Excellent

You know, for a time, I read every novel by Chuck Palahniuk (Who himself is gay).

I stopped at Damned, but I was an avid reader for well over a decade. Still, I think Fight Club is probably my second favorite novel of his (My first being Survivor).

That said, I think Fincher’s adaptation is one of the few examples of a movie that is superior to the book.

The wry tone is definitely present in the novel, but I think it’s magnified in the movie. Norton is also pitch perfect casting for the protagonist, and I think he’s even better in the film than his character is in the book, who sometimes feels needlessly aloof. I also really like how the events play out in the film, as I just think it has better pacing.

So, in every way, I feel like the film version of Fight Club is better than the book. In fact, It's one of the few instances that I would tell people to just watch the movie if they don’t have time to read the novel.

It Has Only Grown More Respected And Revered Since It Initially Came Out

Lastly, even though most of Fincher’s films have a great shelf life, I feel like Fight Club is the one film of his that has become the most revered.

And, I think this is because it was heavily misinterpreted when it initially came out, just as I said earlier. Fight Club is a story that was way ahead of its time, and it’s taken years for people to finally catch up to it.

I kind of liken it to Joker. A lot of people saw Arthur Fleck as being cool, which I don’t think was the director’s intention. In fact, I think Todd Phillips was kind of annoyed by this reaction, which was why he probably pivoted so hard with its sequel, Joker: Folie a Deux.

Now, I personally don’t believe Folie a Deux will be reappraised as some masterpiece in a decade’s time, but Fight Club has certainly been elevated to that status, and rightfully so!

And, that’s the list, my fellow soap enthusiasts. For more news on all things related to David Fincher, be sure to swing by here again.

Andrew Garfield has already had a long and wildly successful career, one that earned him an Academy Award nomination recently. While he's a household name, he largely came into the public consciousness thanks to David Fincher's acclaimed drama The Social Network. And the 41 year-old actor recently recalled how he and Jesse Eisenberg thought the movie was going to fail, even thinking "we screwed it up." Let's break it all down.

While fans are curious about The Social Network's sequel, details are still coming out about David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin's original movie. I had the chance to attend an In Conversation with Andrew Garfield at the Hamptons International Film Festival, where the chat eventually landed on the 2010 film. That's when Garfield got real about this self-doubt at the time, offering:

Well, that's surprising. While The Social Network was universally acclaimed and has aged like fine wine, it sounds like Garfield and Eisenberg weren't always convinced of its success... particularly when it came to their own performances. But it sounds like this might have been their way of coping with all of this new acclaim.

Out of David Fincher's filmography, The Social Network is usually up there for most moviegoers. Andrew Garfield's performance is one big reason the movie works, particularly in the epic scene where he confronts Mark Zuckerberg. Later in the same appearance at HIFF, the actor explained why he loves Fincher's way of working, saying:

This makes a great deal of sense, and shows the type of actor Andrew Garfield ultimately it. He's known for bringing all of his heart and talent into performances, so getting lots of takes while working with David Fincher didn't seem to bother him.

While Jesse Eisenberg's Now You See Me 3 is coming down the line, fans are left wondering about the development of the Social Network sequel. It should be interesting to see if that project comes together, and which members of the cast return. For now, check the 2025 movie release dates.

Much to my chagrin, Andrew Garfield didn’t get an Oscar nomination for his legendary turn as Eduardo Saverin in The Social Network back in 2011. However, his performance in the film about Facebook is one of the elements that is still taking the internet by storm. For example, his laptop smashing scene went super viral on TikTok earlier this year, and now the actor is sharing his surprisingly deep thoughts on those videos.

At the moment, Garfield is promoting his romance on the 2024 movie schedule, We Live In Time. However, along with chatting about that and topics like taking a break from acting, he’s also opening up about his older films, like The Social Network. During an interview with THR he was asked about the viral TikToks of people lip-syncing to his “I’m sorry, my Prada’s at the cleaners…” speech, and his response was amazing as he said:

He makes a fabulous point. The scene in The Social Network, which serves as the film’s climax as Eduardo finds out that his shares in Facebook have been diluted, is loaded with emotion and rage. Plus, when you mix this amazing performance from Garfield with the masterful direction of David Fincher and a quick-witted script from Aaron Sorkin, you get a masterpiece. It’s no wonder thousands of people created TikToks that were socred with the actor screaming the following:

I know I’ve certainly been entertained by TikToks like the one below (which has well over 1 million views, by the way). I also think Garfield is right, “subliminally” and consciously it is great to see someone searching for justice and smashing technology.

While the scene these folks are recreating is ultimately about diluted shares (of all things), deep down it’s also about betrayal, loss of friendship and sticking it to the man. So, I get where Garfield is coming from.

On top of that, this scene and movie are simply a masterclass in filmmaking. The Social Network cast is top tier as it's led by Garfield and Jesse Eisenberg, who played Mark Zuckerberg. It’s also easily one of David Fincher’s best films as he turned a story about the origins of this popular social media into an intense thriller.

Even though the film is almost 15 years old, it’s still ever-present in pop culture. People like Dylan O’Brien have made viral videos recreating it, while many others took to using the dialogue for their TikToks a few years later.

Overall, while Andrew Garfield’s filmography is loaded with highlights – like Tick, Tick…Boom!, Hacksaw Ridge and more – The Social Network is one of the crown jewels in his career. And it’s partially because it resonated with so many people likely for the deep reasons he stated above.

To go back and rewatch this movie that inspired thousands of TikToks with millions of views that Andrew Garfield responded to in a very eloquent way, you can stream The Social Network with a Max subscription. Then, make sure to catch the actor’s latest project We Live In Time – which has also caused quite the viral conversation on social media – when it hits theaters on October 11.

Seven, directed by David Fincher, is one of the best movies of the 1990s. A big part of the reason for that is Seven's iconic ending. It’s dark and twisted, just like the rest of the movie. But apparently the film's finale could have been significantly different and might have ended up that way had it not been for Brad Pitt getting certain details about the script in his contract.

Friends and frequent collaborators Brad Pitt and George Clooney spoke to GQ recently and Pitt talked about the process of becoming a lead in movies, and how he started to take ownership of his projects. He reveals that after a previous bad experience, he made a point in Seven to make sure nobody changed parts of the film he thought were important to the story, by actually making Gwyneth Paltrow's head-in-the-box part of his contract. Pitt explained…

Brad Pitt doesn’t mention “the movie before” which caused him to think this way, by name, but we know that movie was Legends of the Fall. It was Pitt’s project immediately before Seven, and the film’s director Edward Zwick, published a book earlier this year in which he revealed he and Pitt constantly battled on the set of Legends. He specifically mentions a clash over scenes that he cut from the film that Pitt was not in favor of removing. Zwick now agrees that Pitt was right.

Seven’s ending is quite dark, and while that fits the film as a whole, it’s certainly not in line with your average Hollywood movie. George Clooney then asked Pitt if there were attempts to change the box scene, Pitt said that’s not the only thing they tried to change, but could not because of his contract. He continued…

Seven is one of many movies that almost had very different endings. It’s difficult to imagine a version of Seven where John Doe kills a dog or one where Pitt’s character stops before becoming “wrath.” The ending of a movie is always what we’re thinking about when we leave it, and no matter how good the rest of Seven was, if the ending had faltered, the movie probably wouldn’t be remembered so well today. So thank you Brad Pitt, I guess.

In 2013 Alfonso Cuaròn’s Gravity won several Oscars in technical categories thanks to the way it created a true feeling that Sandra Bullock was alone in the vacuum of space. Gravity was seen as a major special effects achievement that pushed the boundaries of what we thought filmmaking could do, and it turns out that basically nobody, including James Cameron, thought it would be possible to do in this way.

Cuaròn recently discussed his attempt to get Gravity made. After coming up with the story and the screenplay the Children of Men director realized he wasn’t sure how to actually make the movie with the available technology. He went to two other accomplished directors, David Fincher and James Cameron. Per what he revealed to Deadline, the first told him it simply couldn’t be done. The second told him it could be done, but it was going to make it the most expensive movie ever made at the time. Cuaròn explained…

One of the biggest issues for the director was that his last film Children of Men had been a financial flop (though critically acclaimed). The simple fact was that, while a studio might give James Cameron $400 million to make a movie, they weren’t going to give that kind of money to Alfonso Cuaròn, especially at that moment in time.

While movie budgets are never publicly disclosed, it’s estimated that Gravity actually cost somewhere around $100 million, with $20 million for Sandra Bullock's salary. While actual space programs cost less, whatever James Cameron had in mind for making the film would have quadrupled the budget. It would have made the production more expensive than Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, which was -- at the time -- recognized as the most expensive movie ever.

The director did eventually find his “own way,” utilizing new technologies as well as animation to put Sandra Bullock in the darkness of space. Those methods weren't without their own costs. Robert Downey Jr. was originally going to co-star in Gravity, but he had to drop out because he had difficulty with some of the techniques being used for the zero gravity effects. George Clooney would replace him.

While test audiences, who saw incomplete visual effects, were apparently less than thrilled, when the movie was actually done and being shown at festivals, things changed. Gravity would go on to gross over $700 million on its $100 million budget. That’s a blockbuster success story if ever there was one. If the director had wanted to make $400 million movie at that point, he might have had a shot.

It's a cliche, but Se7en is a movie where the setting is its own character. The unnamed city is a dark and dreary place that provides a perfect background to the macabre investigation conducted by Detectives Sommerset and Mills in the story, and the intense volume of rain featured in key sequences is a big part of the film's mood. Given the effectiveness that all the precipitation has on the tone of the beloved horror film, you'd think that it was the result of a purposeful choice by director David Fincher – but the reality is that it the terrible weather was the result of bad luck experienced by the production that also happened to be really expensive.

A new 8K IMAX version of Se7en is set to premiere this coming Friday at the TCM Classic Film Festival in Los Angeles, and it was while recently speaking with the Los Angeles Times that David Fincher revealed the behind-the-scenes story about all of the rain in the film. The interviewer inquired about troubles that the movie faced during production, and the director explained that one key issue was unexpected weather. Said Fincher,

Apparently, the various downpour scenes in Se7en would have been shot on clear days had Mother Nature permitted it, but that didn't end up happening. As the production schedule and weather forecast clashed, the small movie opted to proceed with filming exterior sequences... but that required adding to the budget in the long run.

After it was established that it was raining in certain sequences, the movie had to keep the water coming down on days when they were shooting with clear skies.  This meant using water tanks and sprinkler systems, which was not cheap. Fincher added,

As we all now know, things worked out. The rain added to the challenge of making Se7en, but it's ultimately a powerful mood enhancer – whether the protagonists are driving to a crime scene or stalking the killer John Doe through an alley.

If you now find yourself in the mood to watch Se7en and you can't make it to the TCM Classic Film Festival screening, the good news is that many options are available to you. While the 1990s classic isn't currently available on any subscription services,  you can rent or purchase it digitally from online outlets including Prime Video, Fandango At Home and Google Play. Physical media fans are still awaiting a 4K UHD release (perhaps it will come following the premiere of the new restoration?), but the film can be easily found for purchase on Blu-ray.

While I was a self-proclaimed scaredy-cat for the majority of my life, I’ve learned that I actually have a pretty thick skin, and I can handle a scary movie. However, Zodiac got me. Obviously, I knew what I was getting myself into with this film starring Mark Ruffalo, Jake Gyllenhaal and Robert Downey Jr. that’s considered one of David Fincher’s best, but it hit me so hard that I was genuinely haunted by it. 

Why Zodiac Is The Scariest Movie I’ve Ever Seen

After watching Zodiac, three major elements made it truly horrifying: the violence, the fact that this actually happened and its unsatisfying ending. Through these three things, Zodiac cemented itself as not only one of the best mystery movies but one of the most suspenseful films ever. 

Let’s start with one of the first things we see in Zodiac, violence. Immediately, we witness two young people brutally murdered by the serial killer, and Fincher does not hold back in showing their deaths. They were painful and gruesome, and throughout the film, other moments of extreme violence reiterate the brutal tendencies of this killer. You are never allowed to forget just how ruthless the Zodiac is, from the terrifying letters to the killings, you never really know when he’ll strike, and when he does, you see it. 

That mixed with the fact that the Zodiac killer was never actually found in real life – despite reports that he may have been identified decades later  – made me think about this film for hours after the credits rolled. Since Robert Downey Jr.’s journalist Paul Avery, Mark Ruffalo’s inspector David Toschi and Jake Gyllenhaal’s cartoonist and author Robert Graysmith couldn’t definitively prove who the killer was, despite being fairly confident it was Arthur Leigh Allen, Zodiac’s ending is left open-ended. 

After years of investigating, the three men – along with other reporters and detectives – couldn’t conclusively prove who the Zodiac was. The film just kind of fizzles out, the guys try to move on (except for Gyllenhaal's character), the investigation comes to a halt, and they basically have to give up. Meaning, the killer is still out there. 

Knowing that, and understanding that they weren’t able to find the evidence needed to arrest the killer left me feeling very scared. However, it also was the final blow that helped prove why Zodiac is a great movie. 

Why That Makes Zodiac An Amazing Movie 

Zodiac is one of the best movies of the 2000s, and it’s arguably one of the best mysteries and thrillers of all time. From David Fincher’s relentless pacing that never lets up on the investigation, even when its characters do, to the brutal way these crimes are depicted, you feel what is happening in this movie deeply, even though the events happened decades ago.

Overall, Zodiac provides a terrifying look at the criminal justice system and the difficulties of catching bad people. As I said, what makes this film scary is it’s inspired by a real cold case. It’s hard to fathom that these people were so stumped and the system was so complex that they weren’t able to catch the criminal. 

The way it fizzles out at the end, reiterates that point, and it left me unsettled, which is exactly how I was supposed to feel. 

In the end, I was truly shaken by Zodiac, and it’s a film I’ll be thinking about for a long time because along with it being the scariest movie ever, it’s also one of the best. 

The directors on this list are among the greatest in the history of cinema, with films that are considered the best of all time; films that will never be forgotten. What about those movies they brought all their tremendous talents to, but which aren’t remembered as well? Here is our list of great movies, by great directors, that don’t get talked about enough these days. 

The Frighteners - Peter Jackson

The Frighteners is such a great movie, and it’s criminally underrated. No, it's not as sprawling or overwhelming as Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings films, but it has all the heart and more. Michael J. Fox leads as a con man/exorcist who can see and interact with ghosts. The Frightners is really funny, well-paced, and delightful. 

The King Of Comedy - Martin Scorsese 

When you think of Martin Scorsese, “comedy” is not usually the first word that pops into your head, but The King Of Comedy is really a pretty great movie, and while it’s technically a comedy, it’s really dark. Goodfellas has some comedy in it, like Joe Pesci acting like a clown… but a true (dark) comedy? This Robert De Niro and Jerry Lewis-led film stands alone in Scorsese’s canon. 

Peggy Sue Got Married - Francis Ford Coppola

Peggy Sue Got Married is a deceptively simple film. Unlike Francis Ford Coppola’s more-talked-about epics like The Godfather films and Apocalypse Now, this film, starring Nicolas Cage and Kathleen Turner, is smaller, but that doesn’t mean it’s lesser. It’s a weird time-travel tale, but at its heart, it’s really a love story, and while it's not Coppola’s best work, it’s well worth a watch and should be talked about more often. 

Jackie Brown - Quentin Tarantino

Quentin Taratino has famously said that his next movie, his 10th, could be his last. Whether that holds true or not remains to be seen, but it’s a safe bet Jackie Brown will still be his least talked about.

Strange Days - Kathryn Bigelow

Kathryn Bigelow’s won Oscars (for The Hurt Locker) and she’s directed cult classics (Point Break). Strange Days is certainly closer to the latter. In it, Bigelow dabbles in science fiction, a rarity for her, but it’s unsurprising, as Strange Days was written by her then-husband James Cameron. It doesn’t have the iconic quotes that Point Break has, nor is it as white-knuckle as The Hurt Locker, but it is a great time capsule to filmmaking in the mid-90s and well worth remembering. 

Amistad - Steven Spielberg

Wedged between The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Saving Private Ryan in Steven Spielberg’s filmography, is Amistad. It’s easy to understand why this powerful historical drama revolving around a landmark court case regarding the slave trade is overlooked, but it shouldn’t be. It’s a moving story, told expertly as only Spielberg can, with a monster cast including Matthew McConaughey, Anthony Hopkins, Morgan Freeman, and Djimon Hounsou, among many others. 

Clockers - Spike Lee

Let’s be clear here, Clockers is not Spike Lee’s finest work. It doesn’t reach the heights of movies like Do The Right Thing or Malcolm X, but it's still a really good movie. It gets lost in Lee’s stellar filmography, which is understandable. It’s also a testament to just how good Lee’s career has been. 

Talk Radio - Oliver Stone

Talk Radio has everything you expect from an Oliver Stone movie. Its pacing and storytelling are perfect, it’s a fascinating and terrifying story that pulls from the real-world events of a murdered radio show host. It also has a healthy dose of conspiracy, as any great Stone film does. 

The Bling Ring - Sofia Coppola

Sofia Coppola’s The Bling Ring is a meta-tastic heist film that is not only a ton of fun to watch with celebrity cameos and great acting performances, but it also touches on some of the emerging trends that exploded in the years after the movie came out, notably influencer culture. It’s too often overlooked in Coppola’s stellar filmography. 

The Game - David Fincher

David Fincher is a master, and his filmography is full of great movies, like Se7en and Fight Club. The movie he made between those two classic is The Game with Sean Penn and Michael Douglas. Understandably, it’s overshadowed, but it’s an amazing film that is every bit as good as those two more talked-about movies. Even when people watch Fincher’s whole body of work, The Game gets overlooked and it shouldn’t. 

Casualties Of War - Brian De Palma

Casualties of War was released in 1989, which was the tail end of a slew of excellent Vietnam War movies released in the late ‘80s, like Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, and Hamburger Hill. Despite earning well-deserved praise from critics, the Brian De Palma film bombed, and as such, it's unfortunately one of the director’s least talked about movies when it should be one of the most. 

Matchstick Men - Ridley Scott

Usually, when movie fans talk about Ridley Scott, it’s his sprawling historical epics like Gladiator or Napoleon that dominate the conversation, along with sci-fi classics like Alien and Blade Runner. Matchstick Men is a smaller movie, a dark comedy about a con man with a myriad of personal problems played by Nicolas Cage. It’s a wonderful performance by Cage, and despite not performing well at the box office, it’s been well-reviewed over the years.

Inherent Vice - Paul Thomas Anderson

Inherent Vice from Paul Thomas Anderson is a complicated movie, based on a complicated book by Thomas Pinchon. It’s easy to understand why it’s not as talked about as some of Anderson’s other movies, like There Will Be Blood and Boogie Nights, but it’s every bit as good as those, featuring great acting performances and wonderful cinematography. 

Out Of Sight - Steven Soderbergh

Steven Soderberg is known for stylish filming techniques with snappy dialog and interesting plot twists. It’s all right there in Out Of Sight, but the movie still gets overlooked. It was Soderbergh’s first big-budget film, and maybe that’s why it doesn’t get talked about enough. It was also his first collaboration with George Clooney, which makes it even more confounding that it’s not more popular. 

Barry Lyndon - Stanley Kubrick

It’s hard to really argue that any of Stanley Kubrick’s films are not talked about enough, but Barry Lyndon comes the closest here. It’s most revered for its cinematography, but it’s also a wonderful story. While it doesn’t have the panache of A Clockwork Orange or the scope of 2001: A Space Odyssey, it’s still a Kubrick film and it’s one of the best ever made. 

Stardust - Matthew Vaughn

Matthew Vaughn has quietly put together one of the finest resumes in Hollywood. The Kingsman movies are a hot franchise, he’s dabbled in Marvel, and may have inspired the choice of Daniel Craig as James Bond after directing him in Layer Cake. Stardust seems to get lost in the shuffle, but it’s maybe, low key, his best film. 

Ryan's Daughter - David Lean

David Lean is rightfully most remembered for three films, The Bridge on the River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia, and Doctor Zhivago. Lost in the discussion of those films is Ryan’s Daughter, a retelling of Madame Bovary set at the end of World War I. It was the last film Lean directed for 14 years and we can only wonder what he might have done had he not semi-retired. 

Fantastic Mr. Fox - Wes Anderson

Wes Anderson has developed one of the most distinct styles in film history, which translates brilliantly to animation, as well. Anderson’s first foray into the genre was Fantastic Mr. Fox, starring George Clooney, Meryl Streep, and Bill Murray, among others. While it may never outshine his live-action classics, it should be discussed more as one of his best works. 

Bound - The Wachowskis

The DNA of the Wachowskis is very evident in Bound, their first movie. It was made on a shoestring budget, so it doesn’t have the over-the-top effects of The Matrix series, but you can see where they were headed in their filmmaking. 

Intolerable Cruelty - Coen Brothers

When you have a filmography like the Coen Brothers, inevitably, some of the movies won’t get talked about as much as others. Intolerable Cruelty is one of those that gets lost in the mix, behind movies like The Big Lebowski and others that are among the best movies of the ‘90s and beyond. 

Insomnia - Christopher Nolan

Christopher Nolan is among the most beloved directors of the 21st century, creating what feels like independent films, but with monster budgets. That DNA was on display early in his career with Insomnia, which has everything you’d expect from a Nolan movie, but with less than half the budget of Oppenheimer. 

The Fan - Tony Scott

There are few better action directors in Hollywood history than Tony Scott. Most remembered today for classics like Top Gun, and Days of Thunder, The Fan should be talked about more. It’s not a perfect movie, but De Niro’s performance is terrifying (in a great way) as a baseball fan obsessed with Wesley Snipes' character. It’s action horror, and it’s great. 

Vincent And Theo - Robert Altman

Robert Altman had one of the most up-and-down careers in Hollywood history. After a string of successes in the ‘80s, his career was almost sunk by Popeye. It took years for him to rebound, but he did with Vincent & Theo. That led to a career revival, but it’s hardly remembered anymore, overshadowed by his early and later films. 

She's Having A Baby - John Hughes

One of the biggest reasons John Hughes is so loved by people who came of age in the ‘80s and ‘90s was his ability to write and direct genuine teenage characters. That extended to a young married couple starting their lives together in She’s Having A Baby. It’s not as quotable as some of Hughes’ other movies, but it’s still sharply written and a fun watch. 

Only The Lonely - Chris Columbus

Chris Columbus has some directed some huge films in his career, most notably Home Alone and Harry Potter And The Sorcerer’s Stone. He's also got movies like Mrs. Doubtfire and Adventures in Babysitting on his resume. One film that is not talked about enough is Only The Lonely starring John Candy as a man looking for a wife, but dealing with a controlling mother. 

Beowulf - Robert Zemeckis

Generations of high schoolers have been confounded and frustrated by Beowulf. Some love the old English classic, but many hate it. It takes a bold director to take it on as a movie. Robert Zemeckis makes it work, and work well. Still, given the material, it’s not a surprise it’s not talked about as much as Zemeckis’ more popular movies like Back to the Future. 

Great Expectations - Alfonso Cuaron

Director Alfonso Cuaron has made some of the best movies of the last 20 years, including Roma, Gravity, and Y tu mamá también. One of his films that doesn’t get talked about much anymore is 1998’s Great Expectations starring Gwenyth Paltrow and Ethan Hawke. It’s a bold modernization of the classic Dickens novel that can be polarizing, but still worth talking about more.

Ed Wood - Tim Burton

Of all the movies Tim Burton has made, it’s unsurprising that Ed Wood is one of his least discussed. It’s a love letter to legendary B-Movie director Ed Wood, and despite being filled to the brim with great performances, it's not as popular as many of Burton’s other works. 

Midnight In The Garden Of Good And Evil - Clint Eastwood

Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil is not exactly the kind of film you might expect from Clint Eastwood, but you should. Some of his best work is when he strays away from the tough guy movies he’s so well known for and this is a great one, starring John Cusack and Kevin Spacey. 

Away We Go - Sam Mendes

Sam Mendes is best known for movies that cover heavy topics, movies like American Beauty, 1917, and Road to Perdition. That's probably the reason 2009's Away We Go with John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph isn't talked about as much, but it's a sweet movie about a couple dealing with major changes in their life and how to handle them. 

Sleepers - Barry Levinson

Sleepers is a dark, dark film. It's also really, really good. With an all-star cast that includes Brad Pitt, Dustin Hoffman, Robert De Niro, Kevin Bacon, and many more, it's surprising it doesn't get talked about as much as some of director Barry Levinson's other work, but given the subject matter, it can be a very hard watch.  

High Anxiety - Mel Brooks

Mel Brooks is a living legend and his filmography is filled with some of the most quotable movies of all time. One that doesn't get quoted much, or even talked about much, is High Anxiety. It was, believe it or not, the first time Mel Brooks also played the lead in one of his movies, so that alone should garner more attention. 

Great directors usually have long filmographies, so it's only natural that some of their finest work would be talked about less than their most groundbreaking or biggest films. That said, many movies should be talked about as much as those classics, but aren't. Here's to that changing now! 

From Fight Club to Zodiac, Gone Girl to The Killer, having the name "David Fincher" attached to a project makes it seemingly guaranteed for success, but the filmmaker claims that hasn't always been the case.

Fincher's acclaimed-but-cancelled Netflix series Mindhunter, on which he acted as a director and executive producer, is a notable example, with fans hoping for a Season 3 of the psychological crime thriller being disappointed to learn that Fincher was putting the series on hold while he pursued other projects, like the Herman J. Mankiewicz biopic Mank. 

That indefinite "hold" ended up being permanent cancellation, with the streamer citing the show's high budget. Netflix gave Fincher a proposition: either reduce costs or "make it more pop," i.e. broaden the show's audience appeal. He refused, a move that he recently told France's Première Magazine stemmed from a reaction he once received to that famously shocking ending (no spoilers here!) of his classic 1995 thriller, Se7en. Per an English translation courtesy X user @FincherAnalyst, Fincher said:

Just as the movie subverted both audience and genre expectations with Se7en's notoriously brutal ending, Fincher cites Mindhunter as a more of a "risk" to make than his other Netflix thriller series, the politically minded House of Cards, which starred Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright and ran for six seasons on the streaming platform. 

The expense, for one, was an issue on Mindhunter, but the drama was also darker and, yes, weirder than more straightforward procedurals like CSI and Criminal Minds, the director claimed: 

So, alas, we won't get to see more tension-filled criminal profiling from Mindhunter's Holden Ford (Jonathan Groff), Bill Tench (Holt McCallany) and Wendy Carr (Anna Torv) at the FBI's Behavioral Science Unit. But at least Fincher is sticking to his guns and not compromising his creativity. 

You can stream the tremendous two seasons of Mindhunter with a Netflix subscription, and if you want to revisit that grizzly finale of Se7en, the Fincher favorite is available to watch with a Max subscription. 

David Fincher, the legendary filmmaker behind modern classics like Fight Club, Gone Girl, Se7en and The Social Network, is back with his latest movie The Killer. After it first premiered at the Venice Film Festival in September and hit select theaters a couple of weeks ago, the crime thriller is now available to stream with a Netflix subscription. Audiences at home have already made The Killer the No. 1 movie on the streaming service, and they can’t stop collectively commenting on one specific thing from the movie. 

The Killer is an adaptation of the French graphic novel of the same name by Alexis "Matz" Nolent and artist Luc Jacamon. It follows a professional assassin who becomes a target himself after one of his hits go terribly wrong. Since the movie’s release, audiences have taken to Twitter to share their thoughts and so many of them are about the constant inner monologuing of Michael Fassbender’s titular character. 

As it turns out, the director made the decision to employ Michael Fassbender’s inner monologue as a voiceover throughout the film, and it’s either throwing people off or they are really digging it. Here’s another notable reaction: 

The Killer is David Fincher’s first movie since 2020’s Mank, which incited some mixed thoughts among audiences and is also available to stream on Netflix. This new film has similarly been met with both positive and negative reactions from critics and audiences. CinemaBlend’s The Killer review had our own Eric Eisenberg giving the film a three out of five, calling it a “disappointing” cinematic experience.  

As one can surmise by the above tweet, the fact that Michael Fassbender’s character inner monologues throughout the movie makes it prime territory for the creation of some memeable internet moments. The one screenshot of Fassbender’s killer on a bus looking depressed among subtitles of the movie reading “living amongst the ‘normies,’” for example, is already making the rounds. This comment additionally sums up what some people think about the narrative device Fincher chose for The Killer: 

Prior to the release of The Killer, David Fincher shared that Michael Fassbender actually chose to try not to blink while filming sequences for The Killer, which only adds to the creepy tension of the thriller. Although many jumped to joking about The Killer’s inner monologues throughout the movie, a lot of people were really into this element of the movie. Check out this reaction:  

David Fincher has an epic filmography thus far, so of course there’s going to be a lot of eyes, ears and words on his latest movie. Fincher was plotting the adaptation of The Killer as far back as 2007, so as you can imagine, the voiceover element is just as calculated as the leading character’s killer instincts. 

One doesn’t need a film studies degree to understand the appeal of assassin protagonists to storytellers. As far as plot is concerned, it’s a career that is specifically about conflict, comes pre-packaged with life-or-death stakes, and inherently features elements of secrecy; with the main character, there is moral dubiousness to play around with that is generally paired with a personal code of ethics formed by dangerous past experience. Mix in a love interest who compromises the work, a handler who may or may not be trustworthy, a powerful/unusual mark, and a mysterious/ rich client, and the rest is just details. It’s a well-worn cinematic formula, but with enough ingenuity and creativity also applied, it can manifest phenomenal results.

That extra mile portion of the job, however, is not made a priority in director David Fincher’s new thriller The Killer. Based on the comic of the same name by writer Alexis "Matz" Nolent and artist Luc Jacamon, the movie instead opts for a minimalist approach – operating with a simple six chapter structure and a lead character without a name. The exciting style of the director alone makes it engaging, along with a compelling, stoic turn from star Michael Fassbender, but it’s also not a film that provides you with much to chew on once the end credits roll, and it suffers from being too familiar.

The story begins in Paris where we are introduced to The Killer (Michael Fassbender) as he awaits his moment to execute a job. Occupying a WeWork office across the street from a hotel, he practices yoga, listens to The Smiths, keeps an eye on his heartrate, cleans his gear and monitors his protein intake, and passive voice over narration takes us inside his mind as he meditates on his craft and its requirements. The first act operates with a deliberate pace that foregoes splashy action in favor of patient internal exploration.

The protagonist dryly boasts about his perfect record (save for a heart attack that beat him to the punch), but, of course, this is the job where that goes to hell. The target arrives, the curtains are wide open, and the silenced rifle is targeted, but the shot misses, and personal security springs into action too quickly to allow a second try. The Killer is able to successfully slip away and out of the country, but, true to formula, this isn’t a career path that casually accepts mistakes. Consequences are initiated, and in riposte, the assassin initiates a four-part revenge mission.

Though minimalism is the intention, The Killer is too simple for its own good. 

The Killer marks a special reunion between David Fincher and screenwriter Andrew Kevin Walker, who previously collaborated to give us one of the best serial killer films of all time in 1995’s Se7en – but while that movie is remembered for its horrifying seven deadly sins-based murders and killer twist ending, their latest work together lacks a matching inventive spark. There is an efficiency in the plotting that is clearly meant to reflect the mindset of the lead character, but the A-to-B-to-C-to-D structure can’t quite shake off feeling rote. Each chapter has its own energy, as The Killer’s confrontation in Florida with The Brute (Sala Baker) is quite different than his showdown with The Expert (Tilda Swinton) in New York, but it all still tastes like Neapolitan ice cream: just the basic flavors.

Beyond the familiarity issues, the film also struggles to perfectly land the minimalist aesthetic that it’s clearly going for, like obvious cuts in a movie presented to be a single shot. The voice over is one of the best aspects of the film, particularly thanks to its continued use throughout the story and the excitement that comes paired with The Killer’s repeated mantra as he gets down to business – but it does minimize the “showing instead of telling” efforts and sees its effectiveness diminished whenever the character actually converses in a scene (which isn’t often, but does happen).

David Fincher's stylistic trademarks as a director are all over The Killer.

Elevating the uncomplicated material is the unmistakable auteur style of David Fincher. There are few if any filmmakers today who work better in darkness and shadows, and it’s a perfect world for The Killer to operate in. Be it an evening getaway in the streets of Paris, a restrained brawl through a small, darkened home, or a tense conversation in a candle-lit restaurant, Fincher’s collaboration with cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt yields rich visuals that beautifully reflect the movie’s tone.

The film is additionally a rich experience for the years. A soundtrack packed with songs by The Smiths leads to fun play with diegetic and non-diegetic music – taking us in and out of The Killer’s mind – and those tracks do nothing to take away from yet another successful team-up between David Fincher and composers Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross. As we’ve seen from the musicians time and time again, the score is a tremendous accent that both builds and adds to tension, and it plays off the meticulousness of the protagonist.

There is a fair amount to appreciate in the aesthetics of The Killer, but it also feels like a spartan effort coming from the insightful mind that brought us masterpieces like Zodiac, Fight Club and The Social Network. Expectations that David Fincher would do more with a traditional assassin story are not met, and while it’s not a dissatisfying cinematic experience, it is a disappointing one.

Although Spider-Man made his film debut in 2002, there had been efforts to bring Marvel Comics’ web-slinger to the big screen prior to director Sam Raimi coming aboard. In addition to James Cameron developing his own take on Spidey in the early 1990s, David Fincher of Fight Club and The Social Network fame had his own chance to tackle the character. As it turns out though, calling Spider-Man’s origin story “dumb” ended up costing him this directing job.

Fincher is back on the filmmaking scene with The Killer, the Michael Fassbender-led movie that Netflix subscribers will be able to stream following its limited theatrical release. While discussing the movie in an interview with The Guardian,  Fincher revealed that he pitched a Spider-Man movie idea that would have skipped over Peter Parker’s origin and begun with the superhero as an adult, as the director didn’t care for the “bitten by a radioactive spider” aspect. He continued:

So Fincher was perfectly fine telling the story of a man who has the proportional strength of a spider, can crawl on walls and has a special sense alerting him to danger, but showing Peter being bitten by the radioactive/genetically-altered spider was going too far for him. To be clear, not actually showing Spider-Man’s origin story on film isn’t strange, as this was done for Tom Holland’s Spidey in the MCU. However, at least the source of Peter’s powers remained the same, so it’s unclear if Fincher’s Spider-Man movie would have simply not been addressed the spider or if he would have changed the reason for why Peter became a superhero. Who knows, maybe Peter’s set of abilities also would have changed.

Whatever the case, the studio heads were not keen on David Fincher deviating this far from the source material, so they decided he wasn’t the person to helm a Spider-Man movie. Although it’s unclear when specifically Fincher pitched his idea, it’s reasonable to assume it was sometime in the mid-late 1990s, after he’d made Alien 3, Seven and The Game, and perhaps even following his work on Fight Club given that Sam Raimi didn’t board the project until the beginning of 2000. Raimi’s Spider-Man movie ultimately began filming in January 2001, came out on May 3, 2002, and quickly became a critical and commercial hit, spawning two direct sequels and kicking off a continuing line of Spider-Man movies.

Fincher still hasn’t made his superhero movie debut, and considering how critical he’s been of the genre, one shouldn’t get their hopes up of him lending his talents to Marvel or DC. That said, The Killer is based off the same-named French graphic novel by Alexis "Matz" Nolent, so he has at least dipped into the comics pool. You can see how The Killer turned out on Netflix starting November 10, and the next Spider-Man move up is the animated Beyond the Spider-Verse, which is currently undated after previously being set for March 29, 2024.

For a while, director David Fincher and Brad Pitt had an exciting reunion planned. The filmmaker and actor previously produced magic making movies including Se7en, Fight Club, and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and there was a long stretch of time when both of them were set to reunite for World War Z 2. That ended up not happening, and according to Fincher, it's for the best given that the project tread upon a lot of the same ground as The Last Of Us.

The latest David Fincher film, The Killer, is set to be released in limited theaters domestically this weekend, and the filmmaker has spoken about the not-meant-to-be World War Z sequel while on the press tour for the movie. GQ recently inquired about his "ideas" for the project, and the director explained why he's glad that it isn't happening. Said Fincher,

The Gone Girl director is referring to the very first scene of the HBO series The Last Of Us, which features two scientist characters played by John Hannah and Christopher Heyerdahl on a 1960s talk show. Decades ahead of their time, they predict the fungi-based apocalypse that ultimately unfolds and destroys the world.

David Fincher didn't go further into details about the abandoned idea for World War Z 2 beyond saying that the plan wasn't to make a movie more like the Max Brooks-authored book on which the original film is (very) loosely based. His comments make me wonder if the project was going to be another riff on the Lone Wolf And Cub dynamic, with Brad Pitt's Gerry Lane acting as a paternal figure and shepherding a ward through the zombie apocalypse. Pop culture has certainly seen a lot of that lately, with other recent examples beyond The Last Of Us including the Star Wars Disney+ series The Mandalorian and movies like Gareth Edwards' The Creator, James Mangold's Logan, George Clooney's The Midnight Sky, and Clint Eastwood's Cry Macho.

For what it's worth, Brad Pitt has previously lamented not getting to make the movie, saying that it was a "really strong story."

Whether or not we'll actually ever get to see a World War Z 2 is an unknown at present. The first film celebrated its 10th anniversary this summer, and film fans will remember that it made over half-a-billion dollars the summer it was released. J.A. Bayona was hired to direct a sequel, but he dropped out in January 2016, and that's what opened the door for David Fincher. Then-Paramount chairman and CEO Jim Gianopulos confirmed in spring 2017 that the Social Network director was helming the project... but then it spent a lot of time in development hell. It was finally reported in February 2019 that the plug had been pulled on the project.

We'll have to wait and see what the future holds for World War Z 2, but for now, audiences can check out the latest from David Fincher. Starring Michael Fassbender, Tilda Swinton, Charles Parnell and Arliss Howard, The Killer will be in theaters this weekend and will be available to stream for Netflix subscribers starting November 10.

If you want to watch World War Z as part of your Spooky Season 2023 screening plans, it's among the horror movies you can stream on Paramount+.

David Fincher is a director I know decently well, but I decided to watch all of his filmography – and I'm genuinely shocked about which movie became my favorite. I am young. It's not that big of a deal, but that means I haven't gotten the chance to view every fantastic movie a director has made. However, in my never-ending quest to become more knowledgeable in the world of film, I have been going on personal journeys to watch certain directors' entire filmographies to understand their art, and Fincher was up next on that list.

I started with Wes Anderson's movies, then moved on to Christopher Nolan's films (with my favorite still being Interstellar). However, I had never given David Fincher a shot. 

I had seen a few of his movies before this marathon. Se7en, Fight Club, and Gone Girl were the three I remembered viewing decently well, the last of which I saw in theaters. I also have seen The Social Network, but it was so long ago I didn't even remember most of it. 

So, I decided to not only rewatch the ones I'm familiar with but check out the others as well. My favorite actually surprised me – and I have to talk about it. 

Gone Girl Used To Be My Favorite – Specifically For Rosamund Pike's Acting

As mentioned in the introduction, Gone Girl was hands down my favorite Fincher film before I watched all of these. Granted, I had never gotten the chance to read the original novel the movie is based on before I watched it, but I was enamored by the film the moment it started. 

The story is extremely intriguing, but I'll be honest – I was there for Rosamund Pike's acting. Gone Girl is hands down one of Pike's best movies. She fully dedicates herself to the role, and her performance is iconic. While she's evil in I Care A Lot, there's no denying how menacing and amazing Amy is. 

But after watching all of these movies, it's not my favorite anymore. It's good, don't get me wrong, but Fincher's other films have officially taken over. 

Alien 3 Was A Decent First Attempt At Directing But It's Not My Favorite

Look, I love horror movies. I like sci-fi horror movies, too. While I enjoy a more psychological story in horror, I can dig sci-fi horror in the right circumstances – and with plenty of popcorn. But Alien 3 was…not it. 

I love the first Alien and its sequel, but Alien 3 was just off. Maybe it was because it was Fincher's first time directing a full-length feature, and it certainly had its growing pains. It could be a better story, and the acting isn't my favorite, but the visual effects were good. I'll give it that. 

It’s not Fincher’s best, and that is further proven when you consider how it wasn't even his film in the beginning, he took over as the director – he even opened up about what went wrong.

Panic Room, Mank, And The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo Are Fine But I Don't Need to Watch Them Again

Honestly, these three movies rank low on the list. 

One of them was nominated for Best Picture (Mank), and even then, I still felt surprisingly uninterested while watching Panic Room, Mank, and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. They all had terrific casts and well-thought-out stories, but they didn't grab me like other Fincher films. 

I don't know what it was that didn't capture me. It's not that I don't like slower films, because Gone Girl was one of my favorites, and that movie is slow but in a thrilling way. I think these three just moved a bit too slow, and they didn't have the payoff I was looking for. 

These three didn't sit well with me - maybe I'll rewatch these films down the line and enjoy them, but who knows? For now, they sit at the bottom.

Zodiac And The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button Were Surprisingly Intriguing, But Not My All-Time Favorites

I had never seen Zodiac or The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, most likely because they came out when I was a child, barely ten. But they were super good. 

I liked these a million times more than many of Fincher's other films. Zodiac was one of my favorites, especially since I'm a true crime lover who probably spends too much time watching actual crime shows and movies. I've done so much research on the Zodiac Killer that watching a film dedicated to that subject matter was exactly what I needed, and Fincher delivered on that and more. 

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button caught my attention in a similar way, coming from someone who isn't that big of a romantic drama person. The story of someone aging in reverse is fascinating, and both Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett brought excellent performances. 

I didn't expect much, but I really enjoyed both of these.

Fight Club and Se7en Will Forever Remain Classics

Fight Club and Se7en were two other movies I had seen before this marathon, and they stood out as iconic entries. There's just something about the late 1990s Fincher that makes me smile. 

Fight Club has so many cool behind-the-scenes facts that make this film so enjoyable, and the story still captivates me now; I learn something new every time I watch it. Also, the pairing of Edward Norton and Brad Pitt is actually legendary.

The same is true with Se7en, one of the best horror movies of all time. There are plenty of incredible behind-the-scenes facts about the movie, and don't even get me started on the cast – Brad Pitt, Morgan Freeman, and Gwyneth Paltrow, all in the same film and rocking it in so many ways. And that twist at the end -- there's nothing like it out there. Nothing that will rock your core as much.

There's so much to love about these two movies. But one movie reigns supreme – one I didn't expect to like as much now as an adult.

However, The Social Network Actually Became My Favorite Out Of All Of Them

I didn't expect to walk out of this marathon loving The Social Network, but here we are. 

I saw this movie for the first time years ago, back in my first year of high school. I thought it was fascinating to watch because it talked about Facebook, but I never thought I'd see it again because I didn't have a vested interest at the time.

But now, I appreciate it even more. Not only is the music superb, the cinematography on point, and The Social Network cast some of the best out there (all of whom have gone on to have some pretty awesome careers), but the story makes even more sense now. 

In a world where social media has taken over our lives, this movie means more now than anything. It documented the beginning of the information era we live in, and it captured the beginning of how social media would change our world, for better or worse. 

It's more relevant than ever, and it's something that everyone needs to watch. Its nomination for Best Picture was well-deserved. 

And Now I'm Eager To See What The Killer Will Bring To The Table

With all this in mind, I'm eager to see what David Fincher's next film, The Killer, will bring when it becomes available to those with a Netflix subscription.

From the trailers I've watched and the reactions I've seen, it feels like an amalgamation of several of Fincher's past works combined into one epic movie, which is something I'm always down to see. Now, if November 10 would come sooner, that would be great. 

David Fincher has undoubtedly cemented himself in today's film society as a director who will live on forever with his exciting and creative movies that speak to the mind and dazzle the eye most of the time. I didn't quite understand his way of directing until now, after viewing all of his films, and I surprisingly became a huge fan. 

I will be hopping on this Fincher train – and I hope there's no stopping after The Killer comes out on the 2023 movie schedule because I need more. 

David Fincher’s The Killer is the famed filmmaker’s first feature since Mank in 2020, but he apparently started working on this graphic novel adaptation long before that. It was way back in 2007 when he began developing Alexis Nolent and Luc Jacamon’s story of an assassin with a change of heart, and now his efforts have been seen by critics, as the film premiered September 3 at Venice Film Festival. Those critics are now weighing in on Fincher’s latest, and they seem to appreciate what the director has brought to the table.

Michael Fassbender stars as the titular assassin, leading an impressive cast that also includes Tilda Swinton, Charles Parnell, Arliss Howard, and Sophie Charlotte. The film will be available to stream with a Netflix subscription in November, so let’s take a look at David Fincher’s psychological action thriller, starting with GamesRadar’s Jane Crowther. She rates it 4 out of 5 stars, saying if you’ve ever wondered what Fincher’s James Bond would look like, this might be it:  

Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian rates The Killer a perfect 5 out of 5 stars, calling Michael Fassbender the right pick for the leading role of a yoga-loving assassin in the “horribly addictive” thriller. Bradshaw continues: 

Rafaela Sales Ross of The Playlist grades it a B- and calls Michael Fassbender “eerily effective in his embodiment of utter emotionlessness,” but they note that for a story lifted from a graphic novel, the movie lacks visual playfulness. The critic writes:  

Lex Briscuso of IGN rates The Killer a “Good” 7 out of 10, writing that Michael Fassbender is smart and stylish in the title role, and the violence is captivating. The critic continues: 

Ryan Lattanzio of IndieWire says that while there’s nothing especially new here, watching a master filmmaker and actor operate in a revenge rampage story could never be a bad thing. The critic grades the movie a "B," writing:  

We still have a couple of months of waiting before The Killer makes its way to Netflix, but if you want to see David Fincher and Michael Fassbender work their magic, circle November 10 on your calendar. In the meantime, see what else is new and coming soon to Netflix, and you can start planning your next trip to the theater with our 2023 movie release schedule.  

David Fincher is not what one would call a prolific film director. Since making his big screen debut with Alien 3 in 1992, he's helmed a total of 11 movies – which averages out to a feature every three years. That being said, with his last effort, Mank, having arrived in 2020, that means we are due to see a new addition to the Fincher filmography in 2023 – and we are beyond stoked that The Killer will be fitting the bill this fall.

Netflix has debuted the first trailer for the upcoming thriller, which is a new movie adaptation of the comic series of the same name by Alexis Nolent (a.k.a Matz) and Luc Jacamon. The story centers on an assassin, played by Michael Fassbender, who sees his employers turn on him when a hit goes wrong. The outstanding supporting cast includes Charles Parnell, Arliss Howard, Sophie Charlotte and the brilliant Tilda Swinton, and the film marks the first time that David Fincher and screenwriter Andrew Kevin Walker have collaborated on a feature since Se7en in 1995.

It's particularly exciting to see this movie come together, as it's a project that David Fincher has been trying to make for over a decade. He first became attached to make The Killer when the project was set up at Paramount Pictures in 2007 (to provide some context, this was between the releases of Zodiac and The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button). That version of the film never ended up being made and the director moved on to make movies like The Social Network and The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, but circumstances changed in the wake of the release of Mank. 

With Fincher already having a long established relationship with Netflix (a history including Mank, House Of Cards, Mindhunters, and Love, Death & Robots), it was reported in February 2021 that the adaptation was reenergized at Netflix with Michael Fassbender and Andrew Kevin Walker attached.

Despite being produced by Netflix, The Killer will be the first Fincher-directed movie to play on the big screen in nearly a decade (the last time being 2014's Gone Girl). The new thriller, which premieres this week at the Venice Film Festival, will be made available for Netflix subscribers to stream on November 10, but that will only be following a release in select theaters starting October 27. Based on the look of this trailer, it seems like the big screen experience will be worth seeking.

Be on the lookout here on CinemaBlend in the coming days, weeks and months for more previews of The Killer, which is unquestionably one of the most exciting features set to be released in the last few months of the year. To learn about all of the films set to come out, head over to our 2023 Movie Release Calendar, and you can consult our 2023 Netflix Release Calendar for everything coming from the streaming service.

Mindhunter was one of the best crime thrillers on television in the past ten years, so it's absolutely crushing to hear that there's no chance of Season 3 ever happening at Netflix. Famed director and executive producer David Fincher's recent comments suggest there's someone to point a finger at for this, and now I'm furious at almost everyone involved. 

David Fincher recently gave an interview for the French outlet Le Journal du Dimanche and officially put to bed why Mindhunter won't be returning for Season 3. The director explained the situation and noted that he had no ill will toward Netflix after "parting ways" (via TVLine):

David Fincher might be fine with the fact that Netflix couldn't justify the budget for another season of Mindhunter, but I certainly am not. Granted, I may be a journalist with no accurate idea of the cost of the average Mindhunter season vs. viewership, but knowing all of that doesn't get me any closer to seeing Holden, Bill, and Wendy back in the basement of Quantico interviewing some of the most dangerous serial killers in America! 

I can't be entirely mad at just Netflix, however, as I know there are plenty of true crime fans out there who apparently didn't check out Mindhunter with their Netflix subscriptions at a high enough rate to justify the streaming service bringing it back for Season 3. There haven't been many shows like it to hit television since, so it feels like we've truly failed a unicorn of a series. 

I think it's also fair to say that even David Fincher deserves a bit of blame here as well, as he signaled in past interviews Mindhunter's downfall was in part due to the inability to agree on a budget for the season. Fincher, who has been busy on other projects, told Vulture that Netflix asked to do Season 3 on a reduced budget, but the director pushed back, asserting he couldn't do it for any less than he did in Season 2. So, when I say I'm furious at almost everyone, I kind of mean it. I can't be mad at Jonathan Groff, though, as the actor managed to keep fans' hopes alive for a renewal when all hope seemed lost. 

At the same time, the reason behind Mindhunter's effective cancellation also feels like white noise at a time when streaming services are drastically dialing back their outputs of expensive streaming shows and even removing previous originals entirely. Even if the series would've survived to Season 3, it's hard to imagine it could've gone on much longer without becoming the massive mainstream success that it seemingly wasn't.

The good news is that Mindhunter Seasons 1 and 2 are still available to stream on Netflix, and it's totally worth binging even if the series ended well before it should have. Cameron Britton's performance as Ed Kemper alone is worth the time spent watching, so anyone who missed out should certainly give it a look. 

How do famous people react around other famous people? Some of you might assume that Hollywood is an insular community where the elite hobnob, and everyone knows each other. But there are talented people who have been working in the industry, sometimes side-by-side for almost the same amount of time, whose paths have never crossed. Take Kevin Smith, for example. The Clerks director came up during the Indie film boom of the 1990s, and has stayed relevant and prolific ever since. But even though Fight Club director David Fincher burst on the scene at roughly the same time – and the two directors have worked with some of the same actors – the storytellers never met until the bumped into each other at Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez’s wedding. 

Kevin Smith made some headlines when he traded in his trademark hockey jersey for a fashionable white outfit so that he and his wife Jen Schwalbach could attend Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez’s highly-anticipated wedding. Smith and Affleck go all the way back to Mallrats, and have collaborated on some of the Dogma director’s best movies… including Dogma. And David Fincher coaxed a brilliant performance out of Affleck for his chilling adaptation of the bestselling novel Gone Girl, so it makes sense that the Seven director also got to attend. 

But when Smith ran into Fincher, he’d never been properly introduced to the man behind Zodiac and The Social Network. And Smith, being an enormous fan, had to share a story with Fincher. While appearing on CinemaBlend’s ReelBlend podcast, Smith opened up about his experience meeting the celebrated filmmaker, and told us:

The longer they talked, the more Kevin Smith was able to share how much one of David Fincher’s recent movies meant to him. The Netflix film Mank was directed by David but written by his father, Jack Fincher. The film is a loving homage to Old Hollywood, through the realistic lens that Fincher casts on all of his dramas. And Smith says he was incredibly affected by a line in the script that goes, “This is a business where the buyer gets nothing for his money but a memory. What he bought still belongs to the man who sold it. That's the real magic of the movies.” 

According to Smith, he was so happy to be able to tell Fincher about the significance of that realization during the Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopezz wedding. As he explained to ReelBlend:

We will have the rest of our conversation with Kevin Smith up on the ReelBlend channels on Friday, September 9, so subscribe to our podcast feed, sub to our YouTube channel, and enjoy the show!

Creative liberties come with the territory when it comes to adapting stories. In the case of David Fincher’s Fight Club, the ending of his movie differed greatly from what happened at the end of Chuck Palahniuk’s original novel, though it arguably retained the same spirit. However, the same can’t be said for a version of Fight Club currently streaming in China, which has a bizarre new ending.

As those who’ve seen Fight Club will remember (and if you haven’t, SPOILER alert for a movie that came out in 1999), it wraps up with Edward Norton’s Narrator realizing that he and Brad Pitt’s Tyler Durden are one and the same. The Narrator kills Tyler after firing a gun through his cheek, but in the movie’s final seconds, he and Helena Bonham Carter’s Marla Singer watch as Project Mayhem lives on, with the explosives planted earlier destroying the nearby buildings that contained credit card records.

That’s not the case in the version of Fight Club that’s available on the Chinese streaming service Tencent Video. Instead, this Fight Club ends before the buildings explode and displays the following text in the final seconds:

While it’s unclear if this Fight Club edit was a result of self-censorship or being mandated by China’s government, Vice heard from a source that the edit came from the copyright owner, and then was approved by the government before sold to streaming services for distribution. Regardless, this is quite the 180 from the rest of how Fight Club flows. Instead of Tyler Durden’s scheme still unfolding, not only do the police manage to foil it, but the Narrator (identified as Tyler, even though we never learn his true name) is sent to a mental hospital for over a decade.

The altered Fight Club ending was met with disappointment by many on Chinese social media who enjoy the original cut. Still, given how strict China often is with censoring movies, TV shows and other forms of media, this isn’t too much of a shocker. So if you want to watch Fight Club in its original form in China, you’ll have to make do with finding a bootleg copy. Those of you located in the United States can stream it on Amazon Prime Video.

Although Fight Club was met with polarizing critical reception when it played in theaters and only made a little over $101 million off a budget somewhere between $63-65 million, it experienced more success on home video and settled in nicely as a cult favorite. Last summer, author Stephen King watched David Fincher’s fourth directorial endeavor for the first time, though to be fair, he’d suffered a terrible accident when Fight Club was originally released, so it make sense he missed out on it. Sadly, one of the members of the Fight Club cast is no longer with us, as Meat Loaf, who played Robert Paulson, passed away last week at the age of 74. 

Looking to the future, David Finch’s next movie on deck is The Killer, which stars Michael Fassbender and Tilda Swinton. Production began in November and the completed product will premiere on Netflix. As always, keep your eyes locked on CinemaBlend for all the biggest news concerning upcoming movies.

After playing superheroes like Daredevil and Batman throughout his lengthy career, one would think Ben Affleck’s superpower lies within the realm of comic book heroes. In reality, the Oscar winner can’t actually use his radar sense to detect nearby threats or fly across the streets of Gotham. However, his real "superpower" is a decidedly more human skill. 

Ben Affleck has been making the press tour rounds and chatting about his new film The Tender Bar. Amid this, he also spoke on his "biggest superpower" as an actor. While he may not be able to shoot lasers from his eyes, Ben Affleck does have a handy talent when it comes to filming movies. He said during his interview with The Boston Globe:

Considering his decades-long gig as a Hollywood star, some may be surprised to find that the actor has such a humble outlook. After all, he’s received critical acclaim for his acting, screenwriting, and directing prowess. Films like the Matt Damon and Robin Williams-led Good Will Hunting and espionage thriller Argo are prime examples of his talent.

It could be difficult for Ben Affleck, given his skills, to concede to another artistic vision during the filmmaking process. Luckily, he clearly knows when to shelve his ego and let another professional take the reins, like he did when David Fincher directed Gone Girl and George Clooney helmed The Tender Bar. Affleck has expressed his love for working with Clooney before, so it probably helped that he was able to work with an admired colleague. 

Ben Affleck will continue to use his acting superpowers when he appears in The Flash, an upcoming superhero movie that will feature the return of his version of Bruce Wayne. He’ll have to share the role with Michael Keaton, whose iteration of Batman will hail from an alternate universe. Given Affleck’s biggest superpower, he should be able to rise to the challenge. 

The Tender Bar is now available to stream on Amazon Prime Video. Ben Affleck stars alongside Tye Sheridan, Ron Livingston, and Lily Rabe. 

In 2010 writer Aaron Sorkin and director David Fincher came together to create a movie that many would regard as one of the best movies of this millennium. The Social Network, which tells the story of the creation of social media giant Facebook, is seen by many as a movie that becomes only more relevant the more times goes on and the bigger Facebook has become. Many fans and critics have suggested that a sequel should be made at some point. It sounds like Aaron Sorkin is potentially still on board with that, but he would like to see David Fincher also return to direct it.

While Aaron Sorkin made his name in Hollywood as a writer, he’s recently turned his focus to also directing the movies that he writes. He’s previously been behind the camera for Molly’s Game, The Trial of the Chicago 7, and most recently his new film, Being the Ricardos. But, while Sorkin says he loves directing, he recently told our own Reelblend Podcast that, if The Social Network 2 actually did happen, he wouldn’t want to direct it himself. He explains... 

Considering that Aaron Sorkin’s last three film projects have been movies that he both wrote and directed, one might think that he was done writing for anybody but himself. There’s certainly an argument that if you want something done right, you should do it yourself. Nobody is going to have a better idea how to direct one of Sorkin’s scripts than the man himself, but he says he wants to continue working with other directors as well, and clearly he’d be happy to work with David Fincher at least one more time. 

When you think about just how big, and controversial, Facebook has become, it’s hard to argue that there isn’t more story to be told. While it seems more than likely that story will be told in movie form at some point, doing it as a direct sequel to The Social Network, bringing back that cast, as well as the writer and director, makes a lot of sense.

And while Aaron Sorkin admits that he hasn’t really done any work on a potential sequel, he’s clearly on board with the idea on a conceptual level. He thinks it should happen. At the same time, this idea has been kicking around for a while, and there’s been little to no forward momentum. While there might be some interest, it doesn’t seem it’s in the right places, at least not right now. 

Last night saw the 78th Golden Globe Awards unfold on NBC, and among the nominees this year were filmmakers David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin, who previously collaborated on 2010’s The Social Network. This time around, Fincher and Sorkin both had skin in the Best Screenplay category, and while the latter ultimately emerged victorious, the former handled the loss quite well with a trusty adult beverage.

In case you missed the awards ceremony, David Fincher stood in for his late father, Jack Fincher, who penned Mank, while Aaron Sorkin was nominated for writing fellow Netflix movie The Trial of the Chicago 7. When it was announced that Sorkin won the Best Screenplay trophy, Fincher responded by taking a shot, as you’ll see below (courtesy of Uproxx writer Mike Ryan).

Hey, if you’re going to take a loss in good spirit, you might as well do so with alcohol. To be sure, I’m sure David Fincher would have been happy to accept the Best Screenplay Golden Globe on behalf of Jack Fincher, who passed away in 2003. But he also didn’t seem to broken up about Aaron Sorkin winning for The Trial of the Chicago 7 instead, and since he was in the comfort of his own home, he was free to indulge in the libation of his choice. The others nominated in the Best Screenplay category were Emerald Fennell for Promising Young Woman, Florian Zeller and Christopher Hampton for The Father, and Chloe Zhao for Nomadland.

It’s worth noting that David Fincher didn’t simply take a shot because he lost to Aaron Sorkin. Later in the night, he took a second shot when he lost the Best Director award to Chloe Zhao. At least he’s consistent, and this time, Fincher could take comfort knowing Aaron Sorkin lost that award as well, with the other nominees including Emerald Fennell for Promising Young Woman and Regina King for One Night in Miami. Not to worry, David Fincher, with the Oscars still to come, Mank still has other opportunities to shine this awards season.

While The Social Network marks the only time David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin have worked together, it was an impressive outing for the duo, with Fincher directed and Sorkin writing the screenplay. Chronicling the founding of Facebook and starring actors like Jesse Eisenberg and Andrew Garfield, The Social Network was met with critical acclaim and made nearly $225 million worldwide off a $40 million budget. Among the accolades it received were three Academy Award wins (including Sorkin getting the Best Adapted Screenplay trophy) and nominations in five other categories. Considering that Sorkin has expressed interest in doing The Social Network 2 if Fincher directs again, fingers crossed that project comes together someday.

It’s a good bet that both Mank and The Trial of the Chicago 7 will get some Academy Awards love, though we won’t know for sure until the nominations are announced on March 15, with the ceremony itself following on April 25. Keep checking back with CinemaBlend for more news concerning those movies and many more. You’re also welcome to discover what’s on the way with our 2021 release schedule.

This poll is no longer available.

SPOILER WARNING: The following article contains massive spoilers for both J Blakeson’s I Care A Lot and David Fincher’s Gone Girl. If you have not seen either or only one of the movies, proceed at your own risk!

Over the years, Rosamund Pike has regularly proven herself as a consummate performer with awesome range, but there does seem to be one thing that she is remarkably good at: playing a totally evil bitch. A little over six years ago she dropped jaws around the world with her stunning and insane performance as the maniacal Amy Dunne in David Fincher’s Gone Girl, and this weekend memories of that character are coming to mind thanks to her devilish turn as Marla Greyson in J Blakeson’s I Care A Lot (which just dropped on Netflix).

Thanks to Rosamund Pike’s amazing work, it’s very likely that the two titles will wind up being tied together in pop culture history, and that’s mostly because of a compelling question: which character is more evil?

Cinephiles will likely come up with different arguments (even Rosamund Pike has thoughts on the subject), but to celebrate the release of I Care A Lot we’ve decided to break it down and determine a firm answer.

The People They Hurt

Evil doesn’t just happen in a vacuum. It becomes apparent through the pain that one is willing to inflict on others in order to achieve selfish goals. This is true for both Marla and Amy, though they have very different targets.

Who I Care A Lot’s Marla Hurts

Much like how ferocious wolves feast on helpless lambs, Marla’s method of attack is to go after the weak and helpless in society – specifically older men and women who find themselves with no recourse out from under her “care.” She has a company with an entire business model dedicated to bilking seniors out of everything they have after they are sent away to live the rest of their years in a prison-like retirement home. It’s never made explicitly clear how many individuals she has targeted in her career, but the number certainly has to be in the hundreds (certainly the thousands by the end of the film).

Who Gone Girl’s Amy Hurts

The core conflict in Gone Girl is an extremely personal one, with Amy Dunne working dutifully to destroy the life of her husband, Nick, by expertly framing him for her murder. This isn’t to say that she doesn’t hurt other people – as her disappearance takes a devastating toll on her parents; she totally manipulates her neighbor, Noelle; her awful history with Tommy O’Hara is revealed; and she straight-up slits Desi Collings’ throat – but she has one prime target in the story, and that’s Nick.

Motivations

Perspective and context are important when it comes to judging a character. They don’t necessarily excuse a person’s actions, but understanding a deeper reason for why they do what they do can at least add an important dose of logic into the mix when evil actions otherwise just seem chaotic and random. Marla and Amy do have particular motivations for doing what they do… but they aren’t exactly pretty.

What I Care A Lot’s Marla Wants

There is a one word explanation for what Marla Greyson is all about: greed. In her own words, she was poor once, and it didn’t agree with her. She believes that the idea of playing fair is for suckers, and as such feels absolute freedom to game the system as much as humanly possible so that she can make as much money as possible. She does clearly have love for her partner, Fran, but you also get the sense that if push ever really came to shove, she would choose her business over Fran’s life.

What Gone Girl’s Amy Wants

Another one word explanation: revenge. As Nick Dunne discovers, Amy isn’t the kind of woman who just shirks away from conflict when she discovers that her spouse is cheating on her. Due to what seems to be some kind of undiagnosed personality disorder, she goes totally nuclear on him, executing her sinister plan that is meant to get back at him not only for infidelity, but also uprooting their life in New York and not remaining the same man that she first fell in love with.

Sympathy For The Devil

Sympathy is a potential outcome when you consider the knowledge of an individual’s actions weighed against the knowledge of their motivation for carrying them out. It’s not necessarily a persistent thing, as the scales can constantly shift, but the question here is if there is a point in either I Care A Lot or Gone Girl where you actually connect with what Rosamund Pike’s characters are doing.

Is I Care A Lot’s Marla Sympathetic?

Is it considered sympathy when you wonder if a drowning death in a sinking car is perhaps too torturous a death for an individual? Because that’s pretty much the extent of what Marla is able to conjure in I Care A Lot. She does earn a touch of respect for being a powerful woman excelling within the patriarchy, and, again, she does seem to have genuine love for Fran, but beyond that you really do spend most of the movie keeping your fingers crossed that she meets a violent end (P.S. thank you, movie!)

Is Gone Girl’s Amy Sympathetic?

It never feels wrong to cheer for the woman who dumps her boyfriend’s clothing and belongings out a window after she discovers his mistress, but what Amy does in Gone Girl is sincerely overkill. She isn’t exactly innocent when it comes to all of the conflicts in her marriage with Nick (they have some real communication problems), and it’s hard to stomach the terrible trap she snares him in at the end of the film. You feel for Amy in that Nick definitely deserves to be punished for his adultery, but he doesn’t deserve anywhere near the level of what Amy doles out, and that definitely takes away sympathy points.

Gone Girl Vs. I Care A Lot: Which Rosamund Pike Character Is More Evil?

Amy Dunne is unquestionably a dangerous sociopath, and there is no doubt that her survival at the end of Gone Girl is one of the reasons why we love to hate her so much… but if we’re being really real here, this isn’t actually much of a contest. Amy may be deeply scary, but at least she limits the pain she causes to only those who have the misfortune of entering her life and getting close to her (not to mention those who make the mistake of slighting her). I Care A Lot’s Marla Greyson is not only indiscriminate when it comes to her cancer-like operation, but it’s her aim to destroy as many lives as she possibly can. It’s really the vast contrast in scale alone that separates the two, and makes Marla distinctly the more evil of the two Rosamund Pike characters.

Do you agree with our assertion here, or do you think there’s a piece of the puzzle we’re missing? Answer our poll below, and hit the comments section with your thoughts!

This poll is no longer available.

The horror genre has been in an exciting renaissance for years, to the delight of moviegoers. And while a variety of original projects have hit theaters, we've also seen the return of franchises like Halloween, Child's Play, and Scream. This trend will continue with Spiral, which is a spinoff on the ultra gory Saw films. The delayed movie is produced by and starring Chris Rock, and it turns out that his pitch was actually influenced by an iconic thriller: David Fincher's Se7en. And now I'm even more excited for the horror flick.

Spiral: From the Book of Saw will be directed by long-time franchise writer Darren Lynn Bousman, but it sounds like Chris Rock's vision is very much at the heart of the mysterious horror movie. His concepts for the Saw franchise have been teased as revolutionary by those involved, and it turns out that said vision named dropped David Fincher's Se7en. Bousman recently spoke to this dynamic, saying:

Color me intrigued. While Saw movies have always brought the gore and scares to screen, it's rarely a character-driven story. But that'll change with Spiral, at least according to director Darren Lynn Bousman himself.

Darren Lynn Bousman's comments to Empire are sure to make horror fans very happy, especially those who might be apprehensive about Saw returning to theaters just a few years after the release of 2017's Jigsaw. But Spiral has been teased a story about Chris Rock's protagonist Detective Zeke Banks, as well as his relationship to his father Marcus (Samuel L. Jackson). And considering the pedigree of Se7en, the new movie has the potential to standout in quality to its predecessors.

David Fincher's Se7en hit theaters back in 1995, and continues to be apart of pop culture in the years since. The movie was tense and character-driven, while also including some terrifying moments and that iconic "what's in the box?" scene. We'll just have to wait and see how Spiral channels the flick.

Obviously Spiral is expected to include plenty of gore and violence. After all, that's what the long-running property is known for. But this time the traps will be helping to move a more emotional story forward, rather than featuring unnamed characters being sliced to bits. The specifics remain a mystery, but the first trailer for Spiral is moody and exciting. Check it out below.

Hardcore fans of the Saw movies will notice a few things noticeably missing from that limited first footage for Spiral. Namely Tobin Bell's John Kramer and the iconic Billy the Clown. Despite the character's death back in the threequel, every installment has featured Kramer in one way or another-- especially his iconic voice that is usually instructing his victims.

Spiral: From the Book of Saw was originally supposed to be released last spring, but was delayed a full year when theaters were shut down. The horror flick is far from the only project that went his route, as studios attempt to hold off in order to make a profit at the box office. Hopefully the current date works, and new trailers for Chris Rock's movie arrive soon.

Spiral is currently set to arrive in theaters May 21st. In the meantime, check out our 2021 release list to plan your next movie experience.

Not too many directors have the career that two-time Oscar nominee David Fincher has had. His transition from doing music videos to feature film was seamless. One of his most notable films is the polarizing Fight Club, starring Brad Pitt. Upon its release, the film elicited varying responses, including one from fellow director Paul Thomas Anderson. After years of silence, Fincher has finally spoke on Anderson wishing him testicular cancer after seeing Fight Club.

David Fincher spoke about his longstanding career with Rolling Stone. He delved into his start as a music video director, as well as other career highlights, while promoting his latest film, Mank. The interview eventually turned to the cult classic Fight Club. While talking about the film, Fincher was reminded of when director Paul Thomas Anderson wished him testicular cancer after only seeing 30 minutes of it. The Oscar-nominated director decided to finally respond to Anderson after two decades, saying:

Despite Paul Thomas Anderson’s comment, David Fincher sympathized with his fellow director. He even spoke on his father, the late journalist Jack Fincher, not caring too much for the controversial film. In Fincher's words:

David Fincher managed to address Paul Thomas Anderson’s comment without tearing him down. Anderson’s scathing statement came as a response to the killing of one Fight Club character who had testicular cancer in the controversial film.

For David Fincher, Fight Club has become one of his signature films. When it was released in 1999, Fight Club received polarizing reviews from critics and a lukewarm reception at the box office, despite the presence of actors Brad Pitt and Edward Norton. Despite its mixed reception, the film left a lasting cultural impact on film and television, giving it a unique standing in the Hollywood space.

Since the days of Fight Club, David Fincher has become one of Hollywood’s go-to directors. He has gone on to score multiple Oscar nominations for critically acclaimed films such as The Social Network and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. He has also helmed celebrated adaptations of novels, such as Gone Girl and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.

In recent years, David Fincher turned his attention to television as executive producer on the Emmy-winning series House of Cards and Mindhunter. Both series ran on Netflix. He also produced the animated anthology Love, Death and Robots for Netflix.

David Fincher’s understanding of Paul Thomas Anderson’s words proved that not only is he a visionary filmmaker, but a decent human being. You can check out his latest film, Mank, on Netflix.

David Fincher’s Mank features a number of actors playing icons of the 20th century – including not just Gary Oldman as Herman Mankiewicz, but also Arliss Howard as studio founder Louis B. Mayer, Charles Dance as publishing magnate William Randolph Hearst, Tom Burke as the legendary Orson Welles, Toby Leonard Moore as the brilliant David O. Selznick, and Tom Pelphrey as the great Joseph Mankiewicz. One person you almost surely haven’t heard of, however, is Rita Alexander, who was the titular’s writer’s secretary and played by Lily Collins. This is primarily because there is very little substantial information available the actual woman – which presented a certain challenge for the actor as she was getting into the role.

Taking dictation during the writing of Citizen Kane while Herman Mankiewicz is laid up following a car accident, Rita Alexander is a key character in the film, but I learned while speaking with Mank’s Lily Collins during the movie’s virtual press day last month that she didn’t have a great deal to work with when it came to efforts portraying the real woman with perfect accuracy. She still wanted to provide her performance with authenticity, however, which drove her research in other directions:

From a logistical standpoint, Herman Mankiewicz probably isn’t able to actually write Citizen Kane without the support he gets from the diligent secretary. As Lily Collins describes, Rita’s position is primarily to help Mank finish the script in accordance with the tight deadline he has been given, and she does that by transcribing his thoughts and organizing his notes, but she also has to work to save the writer from himself, as he is a hyper self-destructive alcoholic.

So while Rita Alexander may not appear in Mank exactly how she was in real life, Lily Collins did her best to capture her spirit and her contribution. It also very much helps that the actor is what might be described as an “outside-in” performer, which is to say that she uses external elements like costuming to help her fully encompass a role. Collins explained,

It’s a cocktail, but at the end of the day it works, and like all of her co-stars in Mank Lily Collins delivers a wonderful performance. If you haven’t seen the film already during its theatrical run, there’s good news if you’re a Netflix subscriber, as the David Fincher movie is now available to stream on the service. Check it out (you really, really should), and then head back here to CinemaBlend, as we’ll have plenty more coverage coming your way.

While Orson Welles’ Citizen Kane is not absolutely required viewing before seeing David Fincher’s Mank, there is nobody that would argue that the former doesn’t enhance the latter. Knowing more than just the plot synopsis for the 1941 classic allows for a greater appreciation for all of the details that Fincher bathes his film in (both in the story and aesthetically), and you simply leave the experience with a better understanding of what’s being said.

This in mind, it’s easy to believe that the entire cast of the Netflix movie did a Citizen Kane refresher before the start of production, but one actor who didn’t partake in that particular exercise and went a different path than her co-stars in preparation was Amanda Seyfried – who plays the key role of Marion Davis in Mank.

As captured in the video at the top of this article, I had the wonderful pleasure of interviewing Amanda Seyfried last month during the virtual press day for Mank, and my first question linked her part in the movie to Dorothy Comingore's Susan Alexander Kane in Citizen Kane. Given that Marion Davis was married to William Randolph Hearst, the newspaper magnate who served as great inspiration for the character Charles Foster Kane, I wondered if Seyfried used anything from Comingore’s performance to inform her own. As it turns out, the answer was “no” as a result of her not revisiting the Orson Welles film prior to production, which was a decision inspired by a particular superstition:

In Mank, one of the key conflicts that emerges in the story comes from the friendship between Gary Oldman’s Herman Mankiewicz and Amanda Seyfried’s Marion Davis. During the various flashbacks to the 1930s, Mank is anything but shy when it comes to demonstrating the contempt he has for William Randolph Hearst (played by Charles Dance), but his appreciation for Davis as a person is entirely genuine.

As alluded to earlier, the problems in their relationship stem from his work on the screenplay that is eventually brought to life as Citizen Kane. In the Oscar-winning film, Susan Alexander Kane is an aspiring opera singer whom Charles Foster Kane provides tremendous resources to further her career – but the problem is that she is not exceptionally talented, and the public perception is that she only gets opportunities because of her husband. Obviously this is something that doesn’t reflect well on Marion Davis well at all, though Herman Mankiewicz insists that the character isn’t based on her.

Reflecting on the relationship between the two characters and her discussions with David Fincher in the making of Mank, Amanda Seyfried told me that while there were clearly challenges in their friendship, she also felt it was ultimately strong enough to surmount suspicion. She explained,

The evolving and wonderful friendship between the two characters over the course of Mank is one of the many reasons why it is one of the best films of 2020 – and if you haven’t had the chance to see it on the big screen, your opportunity to watch it at home is coming up very soon. The Netflix film will be dropping on the streaming service this Friday, December 4, at midnight PST, so get ready to watch, and stay tuned here on CinemaBlend for more from my interviews with the movie’s cast!

When an actor is cast to play an icon in a Hollywood biopic, the general expectation is that said icon is going to be featured at the hight of their powers – with the movie presumably wanting to capture their life during the most compelling years. There are exceptions, however, with one being cases where an icon is featured only as a supporting character in another important figure's story. It's a strange situation, but also an interesting summation of the situation faced by actor Tom Pelphrey in the making of David Fincher's Mank.

In the new Netflix movie, the Iron Fist actor plays Joseph Mankiewicz, a man recognized as one of the all-time great American directors, but it also happens to be a story that is entirely set in the years before he took the helm of his first film. Instead, the feature puts all of its focus on Joseph's older brother, Herman Mankiewicz, and his journey writing the script for Orson Welles' Citizen Kane, rendering the younger sibling a side character in the tale. It created a strange challenge for Tom Pelphrey, which we discussed during the Mank press day last month – our interview featured in the video at the top of this article.

For those who don't know about Joseph Mankiewicz, the filmmaker spent the 1930s as a studio screenwriter, but by the 1950s he became one of the most prominent directors in the industry. In 1949 and 1950 he became one of the only filmmakers in history to win Academy Awards in consecutive years – winning both Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Director for A Letter to Three Wives and All About Eve – and he made two of the mid-century's most famous epics: 1953's Julius Caesar starring Marlon Brando, and 1963's Cleopatra starring Elizabeth Taylor.

That was all big stuff that Tom Pelphrey had to put aside in his mind, however, because all of that happened after the time period captured in Mank – which primarily chronicles Herman Mankiewicz's Hollywood experiences during the 1930s (his first scene actually features another character remarking that they didn't even know Herman had a younger brother). Fortunately, Pelphrey wasn't left totally flummoxed by the situation because he was given proper resources, namely author Sydney Ladensohn Stern's book The Brothers Mankiewicz: Hope, Heartbreak, and Hollywood Classics. The actor told me,

It's a funny case of timing, as Sydney Ladensohn Stern's came out the first week of October in 2019, and Mank began filming almost exactly one month later – evidently providing Tom Pelphrey will all of the time he needed to learn about the pre-fame Joseph Mankiewicz – and it pays off in his performance.

If you haven't already had a chance to see Mank up on the big screen, the goods news is that it won't be much longer until it arrives right in your living room. Following its theatrical release last month, the David Fincher film starring Gary Oldman will be hitting Netflix at the end of this week – specifically Friday, December 4. Be sure to check it out, as it's one of the best films of the year, and stay tuned here on CinemaBlend for more from my interviews with members of the cast!

There’s always that one friend who, should you be watching a movie with them, will point out some of the inaccuracies and flaws of the picture you’re watching. In a world where whole YouTube channels and web series are dedicated to pointing out what’s right and wrong in a film, it’s kind of hard to avoid such keen-eyed commentary. Whatever your thoughts on this subject may be, there’s one instance of this sort of entertainment that could make even the most jaded party take notice; because Brad Pitt and past collaborator/Mank director David Fincher totally have movie nights, and they’re just as intense as you’d think.

As it turns out, the man who brought us modern classics like Se7en, The Social Network and Zodiac is fanatical when it comes to training his honed director’s eye on any film he sees. Pitt himself confirmed it in a recent New York Times profile celebrating David Fincher’s “impossible eye.” But from the way he describes it below, the process of watching a movie with Fincher sounds like it’s the experience of a lifetime. In Brad Pitt’s words, this is what it’s like to watch a movie with David Fincher:

Football allegiances aside, bringing a movie you really love to a David Fincher movie night sounds like the ultimate trial by fire. The man has a definite type of film, and seeing him applying his thoughts to everything from Warner Bros’ Joker to tentpole culture at the movies on the whole is an equal opportunity for a roasting. Though it should also be noted that Fincher is able to look at his own work and poke holes in what went wrong as well, so it’s not like the man’s just out for everyone else’s blood.

However, if you’re looking for another take on watching movies with David Fincher, leave it to a fellow director to chime in. Steven Soderbergh, the director of films like the Oceans trilogy and Logan Lucky, has also had the honor of doing movie nights with Mr. Fincher. But his take is a little more intense, as his experience led to the following scenario:

If you’re ever invited to a movie night with David Fincher, you now have the knowledge from both sides of the coin to determine whether you’d accept or not. While it’s undeniably tense from either description, it would be a chance to see how a living legend of filmmaking sees the world of cinema. So be sure to have enough snacks, drinks and critical oversight to go around; and certainly don’t forget to see Fincher’s latest film, Mank, which is currently in limited theatrical release. Though if you’re looking to give the film the full David Fincher Movie Night treatment, you can also see it in the safety of your own home soon, as it’ll be on Netflix starting December 4.

This poll is no longer available.

One of the most talked about movies of last year was a little movie called Joker. And I do mean little, considering Todd Phillips’ drama was made on $55 million – making it one of the cheapest comic book films ever made. Joker, of course, went on to make over $1 billion (becoming the highest-grossing R-rated movie of all time), scored 11 Oscar nominations and took home two wins. There’s a lot of high praise here, but not every coat of paint on Joker dried evenly.

The Oscar and box office darling has also been criticised by many, especially in terms of how it handled mental illness. Famed director David Fincher, who made Fight Club, Zodiac and Gone Girl among an impressive body of work, is now opening back up that conversation with his own thoughts on Joker. Here’s what he said:

As David Fincher explains, Joker very much stands on the shoulders of Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight, which not only introduced a new kind of Joker to Hollywood but redefined what comic book movies could be. The version played by Heath Ledger certainly allowed viewers to think about the villain in a new context, but, in Fincher’s opinion Joker, was moreso a hodgepodge of old ideas, mixed in with what he calls a “betrayal” of the mentally ill to make a blockbuster hit.

Now, if you’ve been following along closely with Joker, you already know it was inspired by Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy. It’s been said outright by its filmmakers, and Robert De Niro even plays a role in the film -- following his starring roles in both those Martin Scorsese movies. It’s a point such as this that has bothered certain viewers of the movie, who believe it to be less original and revolutionary than the Academy and its fans have hailed it as. Fincher continued speaking to The Telegraph with these words:

1999 is the same year Fincher’s breakout film, Fight Club, hit theaters. Here, the filmmaker is reflecting on how Joker is very much a product of the time it was made in and could not have been made pre-Dark Knight. Think about it. An R-rated villain origin story based on a comic book at the turn of the 21st century? There’s absolutely no way. Sure, Tim Burton went dark (for its time) with something like Danny DeVito’s Penguin, but the genre was not ready to jump to the dramatic.

Take what you will from David Fincher’s comments, but it’s a valuable conversation to dive into going forward, following Joker’s viral success. David Fincher’s next movie (his first since 2014’s Gone Girl) is Mank, a period piece about the making of Citizen Kane. The film hits Netflix on December 4.

There are many different philosophies in the movie world when it comes to the number of takes that are generally taken for a scene. Some directors, like Clint Eastwood, typically never ask for more than one or two; but others, like Stanley Kubrick, will get into the triple digits if they feel its necessary. David Fincher is a filmmaker who is famously in the latter camp, and apparently it created a bit of tension on the set of his latest feature, Mank.

Charles Dance, who plays notorious media mogul William Randolph Hearst in the Netflix film, recently spoke to Total Film about his experience working with David Fincher on the project, and he recalled a particular day when there was some friction created between the director and star Gary Oldman. The cast and crew were shooting a scene that is crucial to the climax of the story, with Oldman's Herman J. Mankiewicz crashing a dinner party hosted by Hearst, and at one point the Oscar winner seemed to hit a point of exhaustion. Said Dance,

The scene in question here is a big one for Gary Oldman, as Mankiewicz drunkenly stumbles around a room while pitching an idea for what is essentially a rough draft of Citizen Kane. It must have been a ridiculous challenge for the actor, as it can be hard to do normal things ad nauseam let alone something as incredibly hard as delivering a pages-long monologue.

Of course, the other side of the coin is that David Fincher is a perfectionist who demands the most out of the details of his movies, and getting what he wants means asking for a lot out of his performers. This also wasn't a methodology special to the making of Mank, as Fincher has a long-standing reputation of massive take counts on his projects.

Amanda Seyfried, who plays actress Marion Davies in Mank, has previously spoken about doing takes upwards of 200 times in the making of the movie, and she reiterated her sentiments to Total Film expressing how difficult hte production was. Said Seyfried,

Doing all of the hard work only to discover that the movie is bad surely would have seriously stung, but fortunately that is not the case. Instead, Mank is actually one of the best films that David Fincher has ever made, and truly every contribution to the movie is phenomenal. And the aforementioned dinner party scene? It's arguably the greatest in the whole piece.

Mank is arriving in theaters for a limited release starting this weekend, and in a few weeks it will be launching exclusively on Netflix (on December 4 to be specific). Given that it's one of the best movies of 2020, you can expect us here at CinemaBlend to be discussing it quite a lot in the coming weeks and months, so get excited!

Modernity has done a lot to change the function of the movie industry. Entertainment is now available to people in more ways than ever before in history, and both what gets made and how its gets made has evolved a great deal as a result. While there are some positive aspects to it, there are also some stark negatives, and director David Fincher has pointed at a massive one in a recent interview.

The filmmaker has been making the press rounds in recent weeks promoting the upcoming release of his new film, Mank, and while talking with Total Film the conversation led him to discuss the fact that the big screen experience has become a kind of binary thing in the modern world, which is to say really only available to massive blockbusters and the award season fodder. Said Fincher,

One could make the argument that David Fincher is forgetting about the wave of "micro-budget" titles (which is to say movies that are made for less than $10 million) that have become a big part of the release calendar, but the core of his point is wholly factual. With studios ever more focused on massive investments or guaranteed prestige pictures, movies that aim for a budget in the $30-50 million range have become hard to get made and, as a result, rare.

Mank is a perfect example of this issue. Being a movie that couldn't be made properly with a seven-figure budget, David Fincher struggled for years to get the support he needed to get the project made. Fortunately he was able to find a proper partner in Netflix (with whom he previously worked with on shows including House of Cards and Mindhunter), but it's still immensely frustrating that a work with such remarkable potential would have issues getting made. Fincher expressed a similar sentiment thusly:

Based on a script written by David Fincher's late father, Mank tells the story of Herman J. Mankiewicz – who notably co-wrote the script for what is considered one of the greatest films of all time: Citizen Kane. The movie chronicles not only his journey penning the classic, but also his experiences through the 1930s working in Hollywood and the inspiration he found for the story.

Mank stars Gary Oldman, Amanda Seyfried, Lily Collins, and Arliss Howard, and following a limited theatrical release that is set to begin this weekend the movie will have its Netflix streaming debut on December 4. The film is very likely the best feature to be released in 2020, so do yourself a favor and check it out as soon as you possibly can.

David Fincher’s upcoming Netflix film “Mank” (starring Gary Oldman, Amanda Seyfried, Lily Collins, Tom Burke, Charles Dance) tells the story of the production of Orson Welles’ masterpiece “Citizen Kane.” However, it will have a hard time breaking through to mainstream audiences. Here’s CinemaBlend Managing Editor Sean O’Connell’s spoiler-free review of the film.

You can see “Mank” in select theaters November 13, or stream “Mank” on Netflix December 4.

Timestamps

• 00:00 - Intro
• 00:50 - It’s A Rich Recreation Of Old Hollywood
• 03:02 - It’s Catnip For Film Historians
• 05:14 - Casual Audiences Won’t Care A Lick
• 07:17 - Final Thoughts & Star Rating