| Author | Message | ||
     Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.153.144.61 |
Just watched this. It should have been a Jim Carrey comedy, seriously. A film this serious and skilled containing the idea it did makes you not believe it, whereas comedy makes some things more easy to accept. Also the score was awful; so gloomy at times when we could see there was another mood in the film. And it never varied. Fincher sometimes mistakes tasteful, careful shooting as an equivalent to good directing. I'm not opening up the 'Fincher is good' debate, btw, because as is his career IS a mixed bag - he can be great, but he can make gaffs. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.31.33 |
"Fincher sometimes mistakes tasteful, careful shooting as an equivalent to good directing." As do most directors these days. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I agree with you, Tony. David Fincher is one of the greatest and most frustratingly mercurial directorial talents at work today. But when he clicks... wow! | ||
| James Armstrong (James_armstrong) Username: James_armstrong Registered: 10-2010 Posted From: 86.148.164.134 |
I watched this film for the first time yesterday. SPOILERS!!!!!!!! Was just coming on here to search for any past discussion on the subject then saw this - strange! I agree that Fincher is hit and miss. I thought The Social Network was one of the best films of last year (I'd even go so far as to say of the last decade). On the other hand I found The Curious Case of Benjamin Button tedious, cliched and forgettable. At times I found The Game eerie and entertaining, at others I found it frustrating and the wrong kind of baffling. I liked the idea of the company's omnipresence and wished Fincher had kept this feeling of paranoia running all the way through the film, but as you say, Tony, even that might have worked better within a darkly comedic context. I also hoped for a much more bleak ending; not a twist but just a bit more ambiguity. As it turned out I found the ending to be unintentionally (I presume) sinister. All that light-hearted back-slapping and champagne seemed more than a little misplaced in light of Van Orton's massive existentialist (and definitely undeserved) mind-fuck. Does Fincher want us to sympathise with him? It shouldn't need to be asked but I felt confused by a didacticism that didn't seem to know what it was aiming for. | ||
| James Armstrong (James_armstrong) Username: James_armstrong Registered: 10-2010 Posted From: 86.148.164.134 |
Bugger! Just realised my above post could do with a spoiler alert at the top. Is there any chance of adding one if you read this Gary? Cheers! | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 99.126.164.88 |
I rather liked The Game myself, and thought it one of the films that definitely improves upon a re-viewing. I felt it to be horror, through and through, even that surreal ending; the "light-hearted back-slapping" as you call it James, I think, hides sinister intent, hides something dark and insidious. The game may not have ended, and of course, the game may not have been a game. If you want to see a similar film, James - it immediately comes to mind when I think of The Game; similar in its dark subtlety, probably one of the most subtly dark and sinister films I've seen - watch Lucrecia Martel's masterful La Mujer Sin Cabeza ("The Headless Woman," 2008). | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I found 'The Game' frustrating and unconvincing as a thriller. There was a lack of tension to the picture that left me wondering what the point was. One of Fincher's misfiring efforts imo. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 129.11.76.229 |
We have means, James . . . | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.183.127.208 |
SPOILER>>>>> How did they know which side of the building he was going to jump off at the end? | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
I really enjoyed The Game - left the cinema feeling twitchy and paranoid (I was going through a rather shitty time back then, though). The cop-out ending was tacked on, guys: studio interference. I remember Fincher saying so in an interview at the time. 90% of the film is a paranoid masterclass, but the ending softens the blow. I love the bits with the clown doll, and Penn's performance as the junkie brother. I've really liked everything of Fincher's I've seen (that's everything but The Social Network, I believe). | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Hang on, how can a person be paranoid when they already know they're out to get you and that no real harm is going to come of it anyway? Mick's right. The ending is a logistical nonsense. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
He doesn't know that. That's the whole point of the film. Like I said, the ending was tacked on at the studio's insistence - and, yes, is a bit rubbish. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
He's told at the beginning that his brother has got him this adventure for his birthday, or something like that. Been years since I've seen it but that's how I gathered the set-up. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
Yes, and then it turns into something more sinister...that's the point. He thinks its a game; it turns more serious; then, in the admittedly daft ending, it actually is a game after all. But the whole thrust of the film is that he isn't sure if it is a game, or what's part of the game, until the end. Hence: tension. If the ending hadn't been a cop-out, it would be a tremendous film. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.35.248.2 |
I wasn't frightened for a second. My feeling is it needed to be done differently - a hint of the company's reality or motives at the begining, a clue the game has been going on BEFORE the gift is given, maybe. There's so much more that could have been done with it. It didn't feel interested in itself. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
Horses for courses again, innit? I was a paranoid wreck at the time, though, so that probably helped me experience the film differently. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
But I was always aware throughout the movie that this was nothing more than a cleverly wrought trick being played on the protagonist which kind of negated all semblance of tension for me. The ending merely confirmed my dissatisfaction, in the most unconvincing way possible. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.35.248.2 |
It should have gone more balls-out, the game being VAST. Maybe a Godlike thing. Yeah, Zed - a mood can really affect a film, it's true. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
It would have worked better as a Dickian sci-fi movie or as a satirical comedy, as you say, Tony. As a straight Hitchcockian thriller it just didn't work imo. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.35.248.2 |
Another prob; Douglas just didn't seem too changed. We needed a Capra moment! | ||
| James Armstrong (James_armstrong) Username: James_armstrong Registered: 10-2010 Posted From: 86.148.164.134 |
More possible spoilers below. The ending did seem quite apart from the rest of the film. I really tried to find something sinister in it but realised I was just doing that to fulfill my hopeful expectations. On the DVD commentary, Fincher (I think, could be the screenwriter) comments on how the film could - for all intents and purposes - have ended with him hitting the crash mat and that they rewrote the ending countless times. Personally, I think the film should have ended as Van Orton falls to an unseen fate whilst we see the flashbacks of his father's death. As it was, the sentimentality seemed absurd - Van Orton scared and tormented out of being a bit of a miserly arsehole and then grateful of such a "valuable" life lesson. I also felt the same as you, Tony; him offering to split the bill with his brother and having a little cry were the only indicators of an altered personality. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.35.248.2 |
It was Scrooge, wasn't it? And apparently John Fowles nearly sued because it took so much from The Magus (the reason I watched the film). I think the cheery ending was meant to make us go WTF. To be honest, I've seen the same reaction in Beadle's About (which the film strongly resembled), people in horror and dread and anger becoming suddenly all cheery and forgiving once they saw Jeremy dressed as a policeman or whatever (the best Beadle ever was one where they convinced a poor bloke he was some religious deity - the man believed it wholeheartedly and looked quite shattered when he found out the truth at the end. If only the film had done something like this!). |