On their fifth wedding anniversary, Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck) comes home to find his house disheveled and his wife Amy (Rosamund Pike) missing. A media hurricane ensues, in part because Amy was the subject of a series of children’s books authored by her parents, but largely due to Nick’s suspicious behavior during the first 48 hours. What’s more, Nick is oddly evasive while helping the police follow the clues Amy left for their anniversary scavenger hunt. As the film also reveals Amy’s diary entries, it asks: Did Nick kill his wife?
As you saw from the summary paragraph, I’m going to do my best not to spoil any of the labyrinthine twists in the plot. In fact, the surprises in the film are so well navigated that I almost wish I hadn’t read the book first. There’s an element of almost unsettling tension in the film, even for a book-reader, and to that end I have to give kudos to Flynn for neatly adapting the structure and narrative of her novel into a finely tuned screenplay. At two and a half hours, I was never bored because the movie keeps turning and churning, meticulously crafted with all the tightness of a boa constrictor wrapping itself around you.
I could attribute much of the success of Gone Girl to the stellar cast, as well. Neil Patrick Harris is divinely unsettling as Amy’s suicidal first boyfriend, and who would have guessed that Tyler Perry’s turn as smarmy defense attorney Tanner Bolt would have been very nearly my favorite performance in the film? (He certainly gets the best line, a perfect tension-popper right near the end of the film.) That honor, though, goes to Rosamund Pike, who I’d say is looking at a very real Best Actress nomination once awards season rolls around. Her Amy is even better than the character I’d imagined, her uncanny stares giving her the ice queen quality for which Hitchcock would have killed. Affleck is a fine choice, too, but he’s exactly the Nick I pictured in my head; the film is Pike’s, and she owns it.
The individualist in me squeals with delight, though, at the fact that this film ultimately feels like the vision of a single person, plainly the product of the unmistakable eye of David Fincher. For my money (noncontroversial claim ahead), Fincher has never made a bad movie, so the winning streak continues. I love it when filmmakers so thoroughly retain their own style across projects, and as I grow older I’m really invested in movies that have that je-ne-sais-quoi “look” to them. Christopher Nolan does it quite well, especially with Wally Pfister (and, because of the Pfister connection, Transcendence had the Nolan-look, too), and David Fincher is the other master of a consistent, distinctive look. Marked by half-dim lighting and a loving lather of shadows, Fincher’s work always communicates visually the themes he intends to develop in the film proper. Of course, the vaguely unsettling score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross has become a Fincher staple; as sore as I still am about it defeating Inception at the Oscars, the Reznor/Ross score for The Social Network suited the movie snugly.
This is a Fincher movie, with all the promise and directorial grace that Fincher brings to the table, and I think we can even understand it as part of a thematic trilogy, with The Social Network and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, about sociopaths and the carnage they leave in their wake. The novel was a little bit more about the mutually destructive consequences of a dishonest long-term relationship, but the Fincher treatment is heavily inflected by the director’s own consistent theme of the banality of evil and the quotidian lurkings of the savage. Where the novel emphasized the dishonesty of its first-person narrators to broaden the range of suspicion in Amy’s disappearance, Fincher’s adaptation focuses more on the performance of normalcy, demonstrating that the suburbs is a site for disguise and deceit. Nick might be lying when he says he’s innocent, but so might his neighbor, who parlays a friendship with Amy into a tour of the talk show circuit.
There’s so much more to say about the movie, and maybe this isn’t the venue for it. This is a film that needs to be discussed, among people who’ve been through it. It’s an experience that shouldn’t be spoiled, maybe up to and including by the source material itself. I’d like to revisit this film once the spoiler embargo is lifted, but in the meantime I’ll probably be going back to the Fincher well and hit up some of my DVDs. For you, dear reader, if you’ve enjoyed any of Fincher’s recent work, Gone Girl demands to be seen.
Gone Girl is rated R for “a scene of bloody violence, some strong sexual content/nudity, and language.” A throat is cut in a very graphic sequence, covering both killer and victim in blood, but the color is manipulated so it looks more black than red. We see one woman topless twice, another nude from the side in the shower, and two male rear ends. Language consists of a few F-bombs and one monologue revolving around a crude anatomical synecdoche for a woman.
Oh, hey, tomorrow is the Double-Oh-Seventh of the month! Former Fincher collaborator Daniel Craig makes his MI6 debut in Casino Royale, so be back on Tuesday.
No comments:
Post a Comment