Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Your First Looks At David Fincher's THE PANIC ROOM!!!

Hey folks, Harry here with two looks at David Fincher's THE PANIC ROOM. First off some things you need to know. Number One, this isn't due out till February of next year... so that's an eternity away, so problems and timing and stuff like 'the visible windmachine' will most likely be completely and totally gone. This was David testing the film on out on an audience. The second reviewer actually was 'offended' by a shot of the World Trade Center in the film, calling it tasteless... When, most likely, just like every other film we're hearing about, that will be digitally removed so over-reaction doesn't come up like it does in that second review. Lastly, several of AICN's regulars went, but have early spy missions in the morning, and couldn't file a report tonight, but the overall reaction is mixed. Some liked it, some did not and one hated it. We'll be hearing more, but for now, we have one positive and one negative for ya... Personally noone could ever write a review to keep me away from a Fincher flick, I read enough retarded diatribes against FIGHT CLUB to fill a bathtub... and they were about as wrong from my p.o.v. as you could possibly get. We'll see this time out.... but not for quite some time...

Hey Harry,

Moose Malloy here.

Just wanted to give you a brief review of “Panic Room” from a test screening last night in La Canada - Fincher was in the house.

They said it was the first time it had been shown to an audience - that it was a rough cut and that it would be video projected. But the film looked great - crisp image, all timed, no timecode or edge numbers. The only sign of the film not being complete was the temp music - a lot from “Se7en” - and a few of the transitions within effect shots needed a touch more blending.

I’m not gonna give away too much but I will say that I enjoyed the movie a lot. The film is basically a suspense tale that has Jodie Foster and daughter hiding away from three bad guys in the Panic Room or “safe” room - of their new house - that is supposedly impenetrable, while the bad guys - Forrest Whitaker, Jared Leto, & Dwight Yokam - try to get in and get the mad cash that’s in the safe inside.

It has good suspense, good violence, and just a little gore. The film does start off a little slow with the introduction of Jodie Foster and her daughter as they look at and move into the house - although it does the necessary job of establishing the geography of the house - which is where we spend all of our time. In the early moments you would have a hard time knowing it was a David Fincher film, but once the bad guys start casing the house all the dope camera moves start coming our way.

Jodie Foster is - as expected - very good and has a couple of nice “Ripley - Get away from her you bitch!” moments.

Fincher rocks the house. Heapings of suspense.

My only real problems with the film was some of the dialogue between the bad guys - it wasn’t as sharp as it could have been - and Jared Leto was a little annoying - but maybe that’s just me.

So, not as bomb as “Se7en” and “Fight Club” but a good flick none the less. People will gasp. People will cheer. Popcorn will be eaten. *An interesting note - the film had two D.P.’s listed and two MVP’s at that - Conrad Hall and Dari ous Khongi (I have no idea how to spell his name). Don’t know what happened there or how that worked. Maybe one shot all of the stuff in the panic room and the other shot everything else. Don’t know.

So, that’s my take. Enjoy... Word? Word.

Moose Malloy

And now for a totally different take that really didn't like it.

I was able to see The Panic Room by lying. I am actually working member of The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

I wrote down that I was a food service employee. I got in.

I'll cut to the chase.

I was able to see David Fincher's newest effort excitingly entitled The Panic Room tonight. This will be a basically be a spoiler free review as I tend to think people should experience things for themselves.

David FIncher's latest outing (The Panic Room) is a predictable [and sometimes entertaining] film that is more style than substance.

The Panic Room stars Jodie Foster as a woman who is just coming down off a tumultous marriage and she is buying a overly large and creepy brownstone house in Manhattan for her and her 13-14 year old daughter to live in.

That is the premise of the film.

Basically that's it, a woman who has lost everything buys a huge scary mansion in Manhattan's upper east side for her and her 1 daughter to live in. However much this setup seems intriguing it's not, every step is contrived, the mother who happens to have a fear of confined spaces ends up in that confined space. The daughter who is a tom boy know it all and by the way is a diabetic and of course there is terror in the panic room as she is without her insulin, {oh my gosh}.

Of course, the film takes place mostly on a dark and gloomy night as the rain comes pouring down and the thunder clapps. And unbelievably enough, in one scene you could see the wind machine blowing the trees around on the streets of Manhattan, I was shocked.

Never have I been so let down by a director who has done nothing but blown my expectations in each of his previous such as Alien 3, Fight Club, The Game and Seven. The beauty of a FIncher film is that you never know what you're going to get. In The Panic Room the audience knows exactly what it's going to get and when. It's a thriller, nothing to figure out, nothing to wonder about.

Jared Leto turns in one of the worst performances I have seen in a long time as one of the intruders over acting in every scene he is in. When his screen time is over, it is a welcome relief. He was AWFUL!!!!!! What was he trying to prove?? Perhaps the director thought that to make Jared look mean and evil he should have corn rolls and a beard, then he will look scary. Oh My God I was so threatened by him.........PLEASE Jared Leto is a pretty boy and he knows it, the world knows it. Lately he has been trying to play that down by taking roles that seem to want to squelch any evidence that he is a beautiful person.

Jodie Foster turns in another great performance in a hollow role along with Forest Whittaker and Dwight Yoakam who both play 2 of the three intruders. Again, like Ms. Foster, Yoakam and Whittaker do the best they can with very one dimensional roles. A woman who has seemingly lost everything doesn't have much more to loose does she? The terror can be seen ten miles away as the house scary from the get go.

There's not much more to say about this film. What hurts the most is that I love Fincher, I have been followng his career for years now and to see shoddy work like this really is a letdown. I'm not sure what he saw in this script. Even the look of the film is typical Fincher, dark greens and browns and camera movements and tricks taken directly from elements of the far superior film, Fight Club. Darius Khondji is Fincher's DP on this film and has been for most of FIncher's films and it's so evident. That's not a bad thing but, it's like, "Okay Fincher, we know your style, now do what you do best and show us something different and askew."

I am the kind of person that wants to like every film I see but I did not like this film, it was not successful. I hung around outside in the hallways of the theater waiting for my friend to finish his questionaire forum and Mr. Fincher was out there with a couple of people. I made a distinct effort to lock eyes with him and I am sure if he saw a 2wenty-something dude with a fifty-esque shirt on with white strips of embroidery down each side staring at him ever so often he would for sure know who I was.

I saw him as he discussed spending 25,000 more on another aspect of the film while one of his brown-nosing friends went on about how amazing the film was. Still though there is this nagging in me that wants to like the film, that maybe, just maybe before the formal release there will be enough changes made to say, "It's a decent film." I dunno though. There's always hope.

Last but not least I will mention the final scene in the film, and this is my only spoiler. After the climax is over and breathing has returned to normal we find Jody Foster sitting with her daughter and the camera is panning back and back and low and behold the World Trade Centers are standing erect and beautiful. It was a disturbing and tasteles contrived thing to do, clearly to get a reaction from the audience. As someone who is close with others who lost friends in the horrible disaster I was creeped out and offended. The fact that this story was about a terrible incident that happens in New York also did not sit well with me either.

You can call me Chamberlain, and that's my report.

Here's someone that is clarifying the charge that Chamberlain just made...

Harry,

I was at the screening last night in La Canada. Your second reviewer is dead wrong about the World Trade Center shot at the end. I thought it was at first, but then realized from Central Park you could not (have) seen the towers. It was one building that from first glance kinda looked like both towers. (It actually looked like the WTC with a third tower superimposed in the center.) But, it's all mute. From Central Park the view is not even an issue.

Call me ... Fansom

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Sept. 26, 2001, 5:54 a.m. CST

    Oh, I'm sure...

    by woemcats

    That Finch rushed to include the final shot of the WTC just to offend people. Asif the tragedy wasn't horrible enough, now we have to deal with people being self-rightous about it? As if David Fincher knew no one in the complex.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 5:57 a.m. CST

    Corn Rolls??

    by UncleHulka

    Nothing to loose?? Oh yeah, I trust this person.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 6 a.m. CST

    Fincher can't make a bad film...

    by prince kamal

    ..seriously, it just seems impossible to me that he could or ever will- and all arguments I've heard against him and his films simply fail to hold any water. So Fincher will therefore never fade away. Which is a nice thought in today's cinematic climate. And stuff.

  • That's about all I have to say about that.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 6:23 a.m. CST

    Why consider the opinion...

    by Veidt

    Of someone idiotic enough to get in a huff over a shot of the World Trade Towers that was surely in the film from the get-go - and not a deliberate inclusion on Fincher's part with the purpose of being provocative or exploitative. You know, up until two weeks ago the WTC was just a part of the NY skyline. So it shouldn't be surprising that films made in NY prior to that would actually feature them in a shot or two. Some in fact might LIKE to see the WTC still appear in the films that have already been shot. Why remove the last cinematic appearances of icons that will never be able to grace a film again? But, as Moriarty says, by the time films like this and Spider-Man hit the screen, they'll reflect NY's newly diminished skyline. As for Panic Room, I expect this'll be Fincher's version of a "popcorn" movie. Kind of like when Scorcese did his remake of Cape Fear. Can't wait to check it out.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 6:25 a.m. CST

    is this in real-time?

    by talkbacktornado

    can't remember... someone plz clear this up. and wheres the prob with the wtc? IT HAS EXISTED FOR MORE THAN 25 YEARS. Realize it. ya can't erase the memory of it if you erase it from all the movies out there. thats BS

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 6:32 a.m. CST

    Jodie

    by VarietyWriter

    If the on-the-set photos that appeared on this site are any true indication, at least Jodie will look ultra-cool in this flick. Good thing she didn't do "Hannibal." Man, that was certainly one of the shittiest films this year in what has become the year of shitty flicks.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 6:39 a.m. CST

    The Freud Room

    by VarietyWriter

    A thought I've had about this film for a while: Jodie Foster, lesbian. Daughter in the film is a "tom boy." A house with long, narrow darkened corridors, and three men who attempt to "penetrate" this place. Maybe this movie will be best appreciated if viewed within this Freudian angle. And maybe Fincher himself saw this and he and his DPs intentionally played it up. I don't know, I've been up all night.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 7:08 a.m. CST

    What is wrong with a shot of the WTC?

    by maradona

    I do not understand the rabid obsession with removing every shot of the WTC from upcoming movies. If the movie is about terrorism, or if the shot entails some kind of destruction of NYC, I can completely understand it. But folks, the WTC buildings are part of our history, they are sketched in our memories, and no bit of clever film work is going to change this. I for one think a shot of the WTC standing tall would be nice to see. Yes, a bit sad, very sad, but thats okay. It reminds us of what happened, of the people that were lost, and the end of an era. Maybe its just me, but I don't think this is all necessary. maradona

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 7:14 a.m. CST

    Why there were TWO Cinematographers...

    by SteelyMax

    Someone close to the filming of The Panic Room said that Fincher was having all sorts of problems while shooting that movie - not the least of which was having to replace the lead actress (it was originally Nicole Kidman). But according to some of the crew, he was becoming exceptionally abusive and most of the lighting crew just walked - with Khonji walking too. Conrad Hall had to replace him for the remainder of the filming. Fincher has a reputation of being a complete bastard, but even people who were used to working with him couldn't take it this time...

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 8:09 a.m. CST

    Normaly I don't chastise others in here... but Chamberlain is a

    by Elwood Blues

    I mean, come on, Fincer rushing out at the last minute, creating digital WTC (since he obviously couldn't go and film it) so he could place it in the background of the end shot of his movie is the most ludicrus thing I've ever heard. I don't have any faith in the rest of your review that STUPID opinion at the end. God, you're so stupid. And thats all I have to say about that. Oh yeah, and you're a total idiot.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 8:37 a.m. CST

    I am outraged and appalled!!!

    by peltzer

    I've just heard that Warner Brothers is going to take advantage of Aaliyah's recent tragic death and put her in some upcoming movie called "Queen of the Damned." It's bad enough that they are putting her in a movie with such an exploitative title with a naughty word in it (what's wrong with "Queen of the Darned"?). They are just exploiting her death and tainting her legacy by sticking her in their stupid movie. I shudder to think how they're going to do it. They're probably going to create a digital "synthespian" that looks just like her and insert her into a couple of scenes. And for what reason other than to shock and disturb us?!? Why can't they just let her rest in peace?!?!?... okay, end of sarcasm... for now.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 8:44 a.m. CST

    wtc

    by Blurredplacebo

    i totally agree with maradona,talkbacktornado and Veidt . Ok the wtc bombimgs hurt but also at the same time its getting a little silly. it was there when it was filmed so it should be there when it gets released. remember movies are ficton not real life, leave the world trade centres they are always gonna be there in peoples minds so why cant they be there in the movies? ive had my whinge. blurredplacebo.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 8:46 a.m. CST

    utter madness

    by Frank Black

    It is possible that Fincher might make a lackluster film, but highly unlikely. As for him being abusive, well that is also possible and there have been rumours to suggest he is "abrassive", but that he was so abusive that he drove away his entire crew including someone who has worked with him repeatedly prior to this film, well this too is unlikely. The truth is that Nicole had an accident at some point that prevented her from continuing with the film. A shame, but it happened. It pushed back production, only slightly, and the film was finished. I was not that excited about "Fight Club" from the earliest trailers, but was soon satisfied and believe it is an incredible film despite arguments to the contrary by people who some fair, but subjective points. I can't wait to see "Panic Room" and any other film Fincher gives and and furthermore if he wants to hire me to work on one of his films, he can beat the ever loving shit out of me every single day and he'll get no complaint. Sissy film crews. As for this World Trade Center thing, NYC was my home for over seven years and the Battery Park area in particular, and I have to say this nonsense of deleting the images has to stop. We need to be sensitive to those who lost loved ones and friends, but let's not go crazy. Thank God my jackass friend was late for work that morning and wasn't in the building when it exploded, but a lot of people were not so lucky. We should celebrate the images of those towers because they were so incredible. I would stand beneath them and just be mesmerized at their enormity. They were just unbelievable. We shopped in the ground floor stores, but I never, ever went up in the buildings. They freaked me out at just the thought and fear that they could come down while I was in them. The morning I watched them collapse, I just about passed out. Who is to say what is an appropriate course of action concerning those buildings in films, but I will never forget them regardless. The poster who was offended isn't so bad because of his ignorance, he's a jerk because he got to see the new Fincher movie before us. Damn him.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Cow Pooh > Fight Club

    by webslinger48

    Fight Club was the worst example of wannabe pretentious filmmaking..."satire" my ass. Anytime a film describes itself as "satirizing violence" means it's a dumb brainless movie containing violence that does not service the plot and needs to be rationalized somehow. For further examples, see "natural born killers" and "starship troopers." In order to fend off activists who attack such films for "glorifying violence" the filmmakers invoke the "satirizing violence" defense. Utterly pathetic. Fincher is among the disciples of such drivel. Demote this guy back to music videos!

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 11:31 a.m. CST

    I'm Pissed

    by USSJONES

    I'm a first time talk backer, and I am on the verge of tears! I am both shocked and shagrined that the letters "W" "T" and "C" are still a part of the english language! I mean, people might get offended if they see those letters in the future. They might remember the horror of Sept 11 and be catapulted into a never ending malaise that will effect the US military, our economy, and late night talk show hosts!! We can not let this happen America! Stand and fight for a 23 leetter alphabet. . .or we could at least ad an um laut or something! Jeez

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Darius Khondji

    by Pizza King

    Thats the guys name, Darius Khondji. He has only done one movie before Panic Room" with Fincher, "Seven". Darius did not DP "Aliens 4", "Fight Club", or the "The Game". Just a little info.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 12:22 p.m. CST

    "good violence" and "blown my expectations...Alien 3"

    by Fatal Discharge

    You gotta love this site...where no matter how inept your review is, it'll still get posted. The teens who despise "pretty boys" like DiCaprio or Leto (jealousy, anyone?) and think it's corn rolls (what your momma bakes) instead of corn rows. Of course, Harry calling them first looks rather than first reviews is apt because these aren't reviews.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Fight Club was overrated.....mostly overrated by little white ge

    by Smugbug

    really. And I mean that. The only saving grace of that movie was Ed Norton's performance. Now that man is a very good actor. And I don't understand the love affair with Seven either. I have never found it to be particularly "scary" or "disturbing". And Kevin Spacy's portrayal of the "bad guy" is overrated. Mr. Spacy seemed to think that talking really slow would be mistaken for menacingly disturbed. If you want a word to describe Seven that would be "gross". I found The Game to be a little more interesting and worthwhile. With all of this: I cannot understand all this "Fincher Love" on this site. From my perspective he was better with music videos and TV commercials and anything that lasts more than 5 minutes he has problems with. But let me add, that I think the Fight Club DVD to be pretty cool because of the "special features".

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 1:25 p.m. CST

    wtc bullshit!!!

    by TylersAndrew14

    I am so tired of you people getting offended whenever you see the world trade center on camera, you goddamn easily offended people... your driving me crazy. What happened was horrible but it should NOT impact the way films are made, and when they will be released. There is absolutley nothing wrong with violence in films and the world trade center being shown in films.In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Fincher hadn't added in that shot of the wtc deliberately, after all he is a master provacatier, and has a bit of f*%$ing common sense in his head. That idiot second reviewer there... I mean what a F%$#ing idiot!!!

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 1:50 p.m. CST

    Chamberlain needs to lighten up...

    by C_Brenn

    God damn! What a tool! For starters, I sincerely doubt that the ending for this movie was shot in the last two and a half weeks since the attacks. But then again, some people will always find something to bitch about. Frankly I think it is in much poorer taste to frantically rush to try and pretend that the towers never existed in each and every movie out there. I can understand for yet to be released movies in some instances but now they are even running to revise history in films that are going to video and DVD. Why? Are we all really that insecure? I know that there are millions that were traumatized by this experience. But pretending like they never existed doesn't seem like the healthiest way to work through these issues. Incredibly poor taste isn't the supposed shots of the WTC, it is the whining at the end of your review.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 3:37 p.m. CST

    I AM CHAMBERLAIN

    by jamesmprater

    As I said in a recent email to Harry, OUCH!!! I apologize for being oversensitive. I know I can be that way sometimes. I do not feel however that my review was whining. I know we all have different takes and views about movies and in retrospect I wonder whether I should of submitted my review at all. I do take offense at being called an idiot and f%#@##$ stupid. I take grave offense at that. I think we forget that there are actually real people behind the words and that comments like that hurt. I know this is the way it goes but I feel that the comments I received were un-needed. In closing let me paste the email I had just sent Harry [I know he won't post it]. Hey Harry: Chamberlain here. Well, OUCH!! It hurts to be called stupid and an idiot. So much for freedom of opinion. Anywho, Never was it made clear that Jodie Foster and the girl who played her daughter were sitting in central park. They were on a bench and some trees were visible. It doesn't seem fair to post that last bit ofthe guy who corrected me denying that the towers in the film were the WTC. THere are no other buildings that size and shape and look in NY. It WAS the World Trade Center and to back up my claim I will give you an excerpt from a conversation a couple of studio heads were having. Suit#1 We need t o discuss the World Trade Center Image at the end. Suit#2 The crowd seemed to be pleased with it. Suit#1 We will talk about it more. So I just think it's fair to mention that. The towers seen WERE a representative. Now I don't think Fincher and his crew went out and shot the WTCbuildings, but I think that shot had already been taken and was placed intentionally. Chamberlain

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 4:08 p.m. CST

    David Fincher- No Controversy Involved

    by SilentClerk13

    I can see how you can start an argumt with David Fincher sparking controversy when placing the World Trade Center in the film, if it really is the WTC. What I don

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 5:01 p.m. CST

    I love Fincher but he ain't perfect.

    by slaps_Forehead

    I love 7, the game and Fight Club. They all make it into my top ten movies of all time. But being a religious Aliens fan I truly hate Alien3 and it is most probably one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Though I'm not really sure if Fincher should bear total responsablity for that debacle. I'll still go and see the Panic Room but I won't expect it to be Finchers best.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 10:06 p.m. CST

    Light-less scripting

    by LiquidNitrate

    Darius walked b/c of Fincher's conroversially experimental lighting scheme... he wanted the lighting to feel lifelike, which in the case of a power outage means you can't see a dang thing and have to rely on your other senses... these sequences Darius couldn't agree too, because if Fincher's daring creative ambition backfired and everyone hated the fact that the screen goes dark and you're listening to actors in THX but not really seeing them, that Darius would get blamed for being an irresponsible DP. As for the complaints of this movie not being up to par with Fincher's others, realize that this story and screenplay were written by David Koepp, the guy who wrote THE SHADOW (Alec Baldwin's comicbook masterpiece), THE PAPER, and THE LOST WORLD. Obviously with those sorts of narrative instincts in charge, Panic Room's not going to have the depth or intellect of Fincher's other movies. Fincher hasn't had a genuine hit in 6 years so his career needs a box-office boost -- and a blatantly commercial popcorn thriller like Panic Room will draw a bigger audience than his previous, more original fare.

  • Sept. 26, 2001, 10:26 p.m. CST

    The real problem with seeing the WTC towers in a film (at least,

    by LlGHTST0RMER

    ...is that it will automatically kind of "date" the film, not to mention the fact that it is simply impossible (again, right now) for an audience to spot them and not take notice of them. It would be like the movie "SpaceCamp" taking place in the Challenger, half a year after the explosion. It's just too easy for people to become distracted by seeing the buildings. If you saw SpiderMan in a theatre in the next 3 months, and the towers hadn't been removed yet, you'd hear the whole crowd start to murmur (or, God, do you think some would laugh?) when they show up on the screen. The filmmakers don't want such tragic irony taking people "out of the film." Plus, as I mentioned, it seems to date the movie. Even if a movie is supposed to be set in present time, the buidlings would be --please don't anyone think I'm slighting the tragedy involved -- an anachronism. It's time-inappropriate. Now... all that having been said... whereas older films with shots of the WTC in them are involved -- I think it's foolish to go back and try some inane, retroactive revisionist history. Hell, I just saw "Something Wild" for the first time this weekend, and I counted no less than eight shots where the buildings were very prominently displayed. Now you're gonna say it would be a good idea to go back and either re-edit the flick, or re-touch it digitally to remove the towers? Are you nuts? It would be like re-editing American history textbooks so that future generations would believe there was never any slavery, no civil war, or that we got along just fine with the indians as soon as we stepped off the ships. It's insane, I swear. Whoever decided the best way to remember the precious lives lost on September 11th would be by trying to delete them from our national consciousness either had no foresight at all, or was simply trying too hard to make things right.

  • Sept. 27, 2001, 3:08 a.m. CST

    I think I'm paranoid

    by mooch

    Firstly, I'd like to know more about the DP(s) situation on this film, if anyone has any information. I am finding it difficult to believe that Khondji walked in the middle of a film because he didn't like Fincher's "experimental" ideas. Secondly, maybe I'm just way too paranoid, but didn't that second reviewer sound like a plant trying to (for some... um... hard to come up with reason) turn people against Fincher? I mean all those mistakes in his review and the general sloppiness seemed deliberate. Like twice referring to the director as 'FIncher', when he didn't seem to have any shift-key related problems with the other capitals he used. And that WTC speech was beyond ridiculous, it was learned-ridiculous! Trying his best to whip up some sort of reactionary storm among fan boys who he clearly believes are easily led. Unless I'm wrong. Obviously. I dunno, the big sore-thumb mark of a planted review was always supposed to be that it was too well spelt and grammatically correct to be genuine! And then the guy posts a response in talkback with only two mistakes in it? Just makes me suspicious, that's all. Oh well. Pro'ly go now.

  • Sept. 27, 2001, 7:35 a.m. CST

    By "Beautiful Person" you mean someone you envy/hate?

    by Drath

    What is it with us film geeks and hating even moderately good looking male actors? I know that many of them are getting by just on their looks, but that no longer seems to matter to deserve our disdain. The phrase "pretty boy" is thrown around like a four letter word or a synonym for unmanly, applying to just about anyone who looks better than ourselves. I mean, Mark Whalberg a pretty boy? Yeah, my large ingrown toe must count then. But how can you fault someone like Leto for NOT depending on his looks? Must we be a hipocracy? I've been impressed with Leto's choices, heck I didn't even know who the hell he was until Requiem for a Dream. I haven't seen Panic Room yet, I don't know if he falls flat on his ass or not, but that "he's just trying to beat his pretty boy image" remark reflects a certain prejudice we've got to get over. Freddi Prinze Jr. doesn't suck just because he's good looking, he sucks because he can't act worth shit but continues to get parts because the camera(and enough girls in the audience) like watching him. There's no talent involved, or any attempt to really DO anything but whore his mug around for money. I'd like to think the anti-Leto remarks come from objectivity, but I doubt it. This is film, and we are geeks afterall. I'll reserve judgment for that eternity away when I get to see this thing.*****Harry, THANK YOU for bringing up the bit about Fight Club's haters. I feel the same way about AI. In fact, why am I still reading reviews for movies? It doesn't pay. I know what I'm going and not going to see.

  • Sept. 27, 2001, 9:27 a.m. CST

    World Trade Center

    by Supascoopa

    What the fuck is that prick going on about having the World Trade center in the final scene? It's not as if they filmed it a couple of weeks ago. The print of the film he saw was probably done a few weeks before the disaster and they did'nt have time to take it out. I would'nt be surprised if he was a food service employee, if he is a member of The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences he should get the fuck out of it.

  • Sept. 27, 2001, 3:16 p.m. CST

    Get the FBI on Fincher

    by Dr Rosenrosen

    He obviously knew about the attacks, since he went and shot this finale BEFORE the towers were destroyed, playing up their existence just to piss us off now that they're gone. He's a cold bastard, and I hope he burns in hell.

  • Sept. 27, 2001, 7:42 p.m. CST

    USSJones... you know what's worse?

    by LlGHTST0RMER

    Has anyone noticed that in order to phone somebody in times of emergency, we still have to dial 911?! What the fuck?!?! What the hell is wrong with our civil services that they refuse to be more sensitive to the nation's sorrows? What if, say, my grandmother is eating some prunes, and she begins to choke on one of them? I don't know the Heimlich maneuver... I'd have to call for help. So I rush to the phone and I push those buttons... 9-1-... and then I realize the significance of the digits and I instantly flash back to the horror and sadness of the day that we all remember so well, and I become too wrapped up in my grief and my melancholy that I forget all about my poor dear granny, as she lies tits-up on the kitchen floor, now asphyxiated from the killer prune. I swear to God... America just isn't what it used to be. This madness must stop!

  • Sept. 27, 2001, 11:39 p.m. CST

    It's Dave, The boy can do no wrong.

    by Ozwolf

    Lets look at the track record here. The Usual Suspects Se7en Fight Club Anyone notice a pattern here. This film is gonna ROCK!

  • Oct. 1, 2001, 6 a.m. CST

    uhmm

    by harrizonn

    "So much for freedom of opinion"... My Opinion: yer a (*^@#(%# jackass.

  • Oct. 9, 2001, 4:14 a.m. CST

    WTC

    by eric_maran

    I personally feel that everyone's feeling regarding the world trade center border on disgusting. We can't sweep every image or memory of the buildings under the rug and pretend that they were never there. They're part of history. I will forever be reminded of the tradegy that happened on the 11th every time I see a film with the twin towers in the skyline. It makes me upset to think everyone just wants to pretend that they never existed and everything that took place is just a dream. What a bunch of cowards. You don't put all of the war vets in a closet so you don't have to deal with the reality of it. Come on people. If a film was shot and the buildings were there when it was shot, I want to see them as a memory of the people lost. - Eric Maran AND I'M A CANADIAN!

  • Nov. 19, 2001, 4 a.m. CST

    In Fincher we trust!

    by lawi

    I