Talk:David Fincher

message: Please find below the most damning review of Fight CLub that I have ever seen. It is uncited. 
"Fight Club (1999) is a screen adaptation of Chuck Palahniuk's 1996 novel about an insomniac office worker who opens up a club devoted exclusively to bare knuckle fighting for men. Featuring Edward Norton, Helena Bonham Carter, and Seven collaborator Brad Pitt, the film was an early disappointment at the box-office and received mixed reviews. Fight Club was panned by several critics and alienated audiences leading to its box office failure in the United States.[citation needed]"
However, one only needs to go to IMDB to see that Fight Club is voted by users to be the Tenth Best Film of All Time.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.110.239.227 (talk) 16:11, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fight Club, citation needed 

message: http://www.filmjunk.com/2011/07/22/robert-rodriguez-acquires-rights-to-heavy-metal-remake/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.244.106.164 (talk) 18:57, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fincher is no longer involved with Heavy Metal remake 

message: Or is there some reason why nobody has posted a picture of D. Fincher? 
(Just wondering before I go ahead.)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karllsky (talk • contribs) 02:32, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can we get a picture? 

message: David Fincher might be the guy in the background of :Image:Finch 2.jpg, but he's not the main subject. Compare photos of him at , , , and other results from a Google image search for "David Fincher." I think this photo was mislabeled by the original publisher. FreplySpang (talk) 00:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed picture 

message: Parts of this article was added last year by 213.42.2.11 (diff: ). It looks like at least some of this edit was taken from somewhere else, e.i. , , ..  Some of it has been removed for copyvio(diff ), but I suspect it still needs a cleanup? (e.g. "Fate finally came knocking on Fincher's door with Andrew Kevin Walker's screenplay for a grisly detective story titled Se7en"). Zarniwoot 21:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright infringement? 

message: As per guidelines, the trivia section needs to be removed and the content integrated into the article.  One target I have in my sights is the whole "14 theme" which is unsourced, speculative, and OR.  If there are no references for those assertions, and the director has not acknowledged any significance, it should all go.  That would reduce the trivia section by at least half.  Any thoughts? ---Cathal 14:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia section 

message: The subsection for Zodiac claims that it was the first film to shot entirely digitally.  I believe Attack of the Clones was the first.  There's no source, so I'm going to remove that; revert if I'm wrong.  Cerebellum (talk) 02:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: First film shot with the "Thompson Viper" camera or some similarly named camera system. I know for a fact that 28 days later was shot on the Canon X1 (all digital) several years prior to Zodiac if being picked up by Fincher. There are always going to be "breakthrough" camera systems, lens technology, lighting and digital effects concepts that directors like Fincher use for the first time. Maybe it's good stuff to make note of. - Gwopy 20:58, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Zodiac first film to be shot entirely digitally?

message: Edited article to remove stylized tone and style.  Added a few reference links. Mtbraddick (talk) 23:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone editing 

message: Even though Fincher is not a pop star, shouldn't we add that he was married and has a child? 79.84.235.144 (talk) 10:06, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Personnal life

message: Why the commercials are not in chronological order since films and music videos are? --Mika1h (talk) 14:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commercials 

message: What's the deal with that section? It lists way too many, even ones that have already been finished by other directors.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.49.118.60 (talk) 05:29, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is something that should probably be cleaned up across the board on Wikipedia. Directors get "attached" to certain projects so that studios can then attract starts, screenwriters, whoever is missing in the process, etc. Unfortunately, I don't think there's a "typical" structure to the process.  - Gwopy 21:01, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future projects 

message: Can anyone explain how  is of any encyclopedic value and adds to the reader's understanding of the subject that cannot be conveyed by text in the article body? All he did was work with Fincher a few times. And who doesn't know what Pitt looks like?Shirtwaist (talk) 11:26, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Brad Pitt?

message: What should be a classification for a cast member that deserves to be listed here? for example, Angelina McCoy, only listed in two, is just a background dancer in both? What? Fincher probably never met her, on either set. Just seems random to me, and adds clutter. Atleast prominently featured? (atleast extra with close-up/speaking role, etc.) 206.211.150.206 (talk) 09:09, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Cast table

message: Should a mention of his possible involvement in a new series called House of Cards be mentioned.  It has been reported on numerous websites that he and Kevin Spacey will more than likely be involved with an original television series on Netflix.  Gothamghost (talk) 14:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Netflix TV Show 

message: I seem to recall that Fincher viewed his whole experience with Alien 3 as so disastrous that he not only refused to participate in the  Alien Quadrilogy DVD release (there is no introductory statement by him and no commentary audio track, in contrast to the three other directors) but omits, or at least used to omit, the film entirely from lists describing his work (for example, in the DVD "extras" sections of some of his other movies). That could be added to the Alien 3 section of the article, if anybody were to find a source. FungusFromYuggoth (talk) 15:35, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fincher and Alien 3 

message: The gratuitous praise ('He is widely considered one of the greatest filmmakers of his generation") does not belong in this kind of article. Please keep it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.137.119 (talk • contribs) 
:I agree that this hyperbole was not appropriate, and your removal was correct. However, you are misrepresenting the case of this further removal made by you, which is not that Fincher himself is considered great but that his films are highly rated by Rolling Stone and the BBC. I think these important third party assessments should be returned to the article. Binksternet (talk) 02:50, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've semi-protected the article for a week. Please discuss the issue here and try to find a consensus on whether to include or exclude the information. Anarchyte (work | talk) 14:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

text: I'll concede that the BBC "Greatest Films of the 21st Century" list may be appropriate, since it has been referenced in other articles. However, vague mentions of how certain films are considered 'the greatest' of a specific decade aren't common in the opening paragraphs of articles about directors.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.137.119 (talk) 23:08, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: We need to address this hagiographic WP:PEACOCKing, which appeared to begin when an anon IP made this edit on March 29, and it has gone in and out since — meaning there is no consensus on it to stay. Moreover, the simple fact that it is clearly the same editor sock-puppeteering with multiple anon IPs means this needs to stay out, since we do not reward sock-puppeteering. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:14, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please keep out the gratuitous praise 

message: In the “Fight Club” section of the article, a citation is needed about how it is considered to be one of the best films of the 1990’s and Fincher’s career.  This is a biased statement, you could have just said that, “Fight Club is often ranked as one of the best films of the 1990’s and Fincher’s career” and then provided some sort of source ranking his movies. A citation is also needed at the end of “The Game” paragraph, I have no idea where this information  is coming from. Your "Alien 3" section should be more developed. There is a lot more to that story that shaped Fincher as a filmmaker. This experience is why he has such a distaste for studio films and why his films are so unique. There are plenty of articles on this topic and I feel like you could have used them to your advantage. 
A lot of the citations were proper and they made sense.  I checked out a bunch of the references and they seemed reliable and unbiased (outside of Fincher’s own bias in interviews). However, there is one very biased source. When talking about Fincher’s directing style, I noticed that you used a Youtube video as the citation. This video used sources, but I would have looked for those interviews directly instead of relying on somebodies biased video. Videos are great tools for learning but I found these interviews myself, and there is a lot more information then what was in the Youtube video. You could developed this section a lot more if you used more direct quotes from the director himself. 
Other then that, the information is up to date and it is showing his latest work. Some questions I have for you, are where did you locate your sources? Also, why didn’t you talk about his personal background more? This area also seemed a bit lacking in my opinion.Samuelrmartin (talk) 16:51, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Critique