장면이 영상이 너무 좋아서 돌려 본 부분, 도심의 하이에나. 빛이며 그림자며, 걸음걸이 음악 연출, 너무나 매료된다. 격한 사냥도 신비한 구애의 장면도 아닌데, 그저 어딘가로 걸어가는 이 동물들이 저 공간안에 있다는 것만으로도 너무나 훌륭하고 탁월하다. 저 빛을 받으며 저 그림자를 저 각도의 벽에 흘린다는 것이 .. 왜인지 운명적인 장면 같다.
BBC Planet Earth Season 2 가 끝나버렸다, 이 슬픔은 너무나 갑작스러운 것. 일곱부작이라니, 너무나도 터무니 없이도 짧게만 느껴지지만, 이만큼의 분량을 위해 얼마나 보다 길고 긴 시간들이 들어갔는지를 생각하며 감사하고 좋으다. 너무나 좋았다, 다시 봐야지.
어쩌면 영화조차도 현실따위도 예상에서 크게 벗어나지 못하고 거기에서 거기, 라는 아쉬움. 그녀는 가정을 이루었고 결말은 하나일 수 밖에 없고, 현실되지 못한 행복과 사랑은 어쩌면 존재하지 않음에 보다 아름다울 수 있는 것일지도.
우리가 다른 선택을 하였더라면 지금에 비하여 보다 편안하다거나 환상적이라거나, 보다 다를 것이라는 상상은 검증 할 수 없는 착각들일 뿐. 그 가치는 거기까지, 제한되어있다. 우리는 현재 선택에 만족하고 행복하며 시간을 돌릴 수도 없거니와 그러고 싶은 마음을 갖는 것 조차 어쩌면 누구에게는 혹시 무례 할 수 있는 일이다. 만약을 상상하는 것은 그것을 동경하는 것은 개인의 자유이고 어쩌면 의지와도 무관한, 앞으로만 흘러야하는 시간의 제한적인 방향처럼, 어쩔 수 없는 비극일지도 모르겠다. 그 제한된 테두리가 만들어내는 알 수 없는 것의 아름다움, 그 아쉬움조차 완벽한 현실.
우리는 지금, 아니 나는 지금 행복하고 어쩌면 그 일부의 이유는 행복해야하기 때문에, 나의 선택이기 때문에 행복해야한다, 라는 생각은 나만의 것인가.
할리 넘나 핫해. 그저 그런 히어로 스토리에, 정말 뭐 없는 액션에, 볼거 없는 영상에, 빛나는건 할리와 조커 뿐. 뻔한 스토리가 한 둘이랴. 보다 아쉬운건 이 좋은 비주얼 컨셉을 살리지 못 한 동선이며 비주얼 .. 마음이 아프다.
그래도 죽어나는 영화를 살린건 할리와 조커 그리고 사운드 그리고 할리 할리 할리 핫한 할리. Mad Max 후로 가장 핫한 아니 그보다도 핫한 여신 캐릭터. 침묵 와중에 인사를 날리고 어둠속에서 미소를 흘리며 하고싶은대로 휙휙 휩쓸리는 듯 싶다가도 틈만나면 조커생각 러블리 러블리 할리 <3
그나마 흙속에 꽃이 피었다면 칸예로 시작해서 퀸으로 마무리 짓는 사운드 트랙, 볼건 없어도 들을건 간간히 쏠쏠.
Superfoods are a special category of foods found in nature. By definition they are calorie sparse and nutrient dense meaning they pack a lot of punch for their weight as far as goodness goes. They are superior sources of anti-oxidants and essential nutrients - nutrients we need but cannot make ourselves.
We all may be adding more salads and vegetables to our diets, but concern over the quality of foods grown on mineral depleted soils makes Superfoods an intelligent choice. For more information on how to use Superfoods in your day to day life please have a look at ourour superfood greens and browse the pages on 5 most important categories of superfoods below.
Greens are good, Green Superfoods are even better! Green superfoods have the highest concentrations of easily digestible nutrients, fat burning compounds, vitamins and minerals to protect and heal the body. They contain a wide array of beneficial substances including proteins, protective photo-chemicals and healthy bacteria helping you to build cleaner muscles and tissues, aid your digestive system function and more effectively protect you against disease and illness.
Fruit and nut superfoods are high in anti-oxidants that fight free radicals in the body. Free radicals may sound a little like an extremist terrorist sect evading capture and wreaking havoc across the globe and in fact within the context of your body this would be right. They are, in part, a natural occurrence through metabolism however extra and unnecessary free radical load can be put on our bodies by external factors including pollution, cigarette smoke, radiation, burnt foods, deep fried fats and cooked foods.
The Egyptians wrote about it back in 5500 B.C., the Indians used it for their religious ceremonies in 1000 B.C. and even the Babylonians have been noted to use it in their medicinal practices. The western world actually discovered the benefits of bee superfoods by accident during an investigation of native Russian Beekeepers who regularly lived past 100 years of age who ate raw honey, rich in bee pollen, every day.
Seaweeds are the most nutritionally dense plants on the planet as they have access to all the nutrients in the ocean. They can contain up to 10 times more calcium than milk and eight times as much as beef. The chemical composition of seaweeds is so close to human blood plasma, that perhaps their greatest benefit is regulating and purifying our blood system.
Herbs as nourishment offer the body a whole host of nutrients it may not have received either because of poor diet or environmental deficiencies in the soil or air. Herbs as medicine are essentially body balancers that work with the body functions so that it can heal and regulate itself. Herbs have been used for centuries as part of the wisdoms of natural healing methods.
세 시간이라는 시공을 한 배경에서 채워 먹는다는 것이 참으로 대단하다, 인정. 한 공간에 구겨 갇혀 사람 대열 명 모아놓고 한 극에서 다른 극으로 오가는 그림, 심지어 집중도도 높았다. 격히 웃긴 대사하며 훌륭한 연기따위는 볼거리. 딱히 뭐 없는 비주얼은 현실묘사의 구실정도만 한다.
같은 목적지를 향해 가는 사람들인데 제각 원하는 것이 다르고 공유라는 것은 서로에 대한 혐과 의심. 죽음이 무섭지 않은 시대이지만 분명 변해가는 시대이다. 같은 죽음이어도 정당성이 가려진다는 따위의 철학을 논하고, 더럽혀질 손이지만 이유를 부여하겠다는 목적으로 모욕과 수치를 쏟는다.
흑백 사이에 흐르는 적대감이 어쩌면 최고에 닿았을 이 시대의 모습은 정말 이러했을까, 평시 생각지도 못 했을 시대를 기억하게한다. 링컨의 편지따위로, 그것 만으로, 삶의 질을 조작 할 수 있었다는, 너는 나의 삶을 모른다 말하는 잭슨. 내가 시키는 것을 모두 다하였는데도 네 아들은 천조가리를 바라다 죽었다며 숨넘겨 웃는 그 모습에 손가락질을 할 수 있는지는 미지수. 나는 모르지만 누군가는 겪었을, 그리고 겪고 있을, 희멀거진 어느 날의 역사.
하지만 역사의 그림과는 다른 화면의 모습, 결국 마지막 웃는자는 역사를 역하면서도 반영한다. 다수의 백인 속에서 멸시당하던 유일한 흑인은 결국 목숨을 끝까지 끌어간다. 그것이 승리인지는 모르겠다, 이 더러운 구덩이에서 먼저 죽은 미니가 승자일지도.
번잡하고 흐지부지한 메세지의 완벽치만은 않은 연출. 그래도 웃겼으니 난 좋음.
그나저나 혼자 연기 다 해드시는 잭슨님, 그 까만 피부에 흰 눈동자 굴려가며 얼굴 근육 하나하나 치열하다, 감탄.
아무도 보지 않았어도 모두가 본 영화, 우리는 이영화를 보지 않았어도 보았다, 그럼에도 관객을 만족시키는 이 독단적인 영향력은 유일무이. 내가 본 유일한 스타워즈는 이십여년 전에 첫 편이지만 그러한 나에게도 보이는 연결고리. 새 시대와 구시대를 동시 공략의도.
아무튼 나는 이 영화를 모르는데 나름의 재미. 골수팬덤은 어찌 반응했을지 모르지만 나 따위의 관객을 잡으려던 의도는 성공적인가, 미지수. 이 시대의 모든 트렌드를 나름 다룬 세련됨은 보인다. 리더는 여자이며 영웅은 흑인이며 독제를 규탄하려는 내부고발자로인해 승산을 거두는 사회구조. 대체적으로 훌륭한 연기었다는 전체적 평을 나는 이해치 못한다. 어설픔은 없었지만 훌륭함의 포인트또한 보이지 않았다. 츄이의 귀여움 따위를 제외콘 별 것 없는 유머.
무엇보다 굉장함은 이 여자, 저 그렁그렁 눈빛이며 눈빛이며. 그냥 이 여자가 화면에 잡히면 그냥 좋으다. 독립적이지만 가족에 대한 깊은 그리움을 안고, 정많고 씩씩한 완전한 완벽 캐릭터. daisy ridley
사람들과의 관계, 예술과의 관계, 현실성과의 거리 등 모든 것을 적당히 적절히 표현한 예술. 더불어 시청각적 환상은 행복의 공식.
아버지와의 어색한 관계, 흔히보는 아버지의 이루지 못 한 꿈을 쫓는 혹은 아버지의 명성을 따르지 못하는 따위의 진부함은 없다. 되려 가족관계는 예술을 이해치 못하는 오히려 흔할 법한 그림. 그렇다고 아버지의 대신을 찾지도 않는 주인공과 그것을 그럴싸하게 체워주지도, 노력 조차 없는 교수. 이러한 괜함없는 관계들의 동선은 존재하면서도 하지 않는듯 흐름을 도울 뿐. 이러한 발란스를 어찌 완벽이라 할 수 없는지.
한계는 존재하지 않는 듯한 예체능의 세계. 그 미지의 세상에서 한할만 학교라는 뉴욕이라는 배경. 연습이라는 범위 없는 수행에 집중한 영화의 포인트는 매우 훌륭타. 더불어 그것을 극으로 밀어넣는 교수의 캐릭터는 미소짓게되는 선택. 보이지 않는 선을 넘나드는 캐릭터들의 선택과, 그것을 허용하는 예술이라는 세계. 주제를 헛되이 낭비치 않는 스토리라인, 그 정점을 마지막에 위치한 플롯은 그저 감탄.
이 모든 기초에 적절한 재미를 두고도 수준을 두어 층 올리는 것은 배우들의 연기와 음악. 눈빛, 손가락의 움직임 만으로도 볼 만한 거리를 만든다. 영화 중 어느 10초를 떼어두어도 볼 거리 들을거리가 가득, 환상의 정석.
이 따위가 높은 평을 받는 이유를 알 수는 없지만, 이 만큼의 관심과 나의 분을 산다는 것 자체로 점수를 주리. A.I. 인공지능이라는 흥미로울 수 있는 현 시대의 주제로 예측 가능 할 만큼의 지루한 영화를 만든 것을 넘어 보다 저질인 점은 주제의 추악함만을 흥미요소로 관객들에게 던진다는 것. 사람과 신의 범위 따위의 뻔한 주제를 던져두고 그것에 대한 탐험을 연구조차 하지 않았으며 시간을 투자한 부분은 결국 혼란 속에서 중심을 잃은 개인들의 더러움 뿐.
'인간은 무엇인가' 라는 질문은 누구나 할 수 있는 쉬운 질문. 답이 미묘하다하여 질문 또한 그러하지 않다, 아무나 던질 수 있는 질문을 던진 것일 뿐. 그것이 이 만큼의 관심을 부르는 것은 관객의 수준을 드러내는 것인가.
search engine database 라는 현 시대의 관심사를 중심에 두고도 이런 겉 핥기 식 로보트를 만들어 낸 것은 실망 자체. 무한한 정보의 조합이 결국 인간의 성적 취향만족이되고 최종적 목적이 인간의 복제라는 투어링 테스트 따위라는 것 - 그것이 비판받을 목적인지는 별도의 질문이지만 굉장한 실망. A.I. 보다 흥미로운 data 라는 주제를 인간이라는 틀에 구겨넣은 것은 죄일 지다.
Ex Machina leans heavier on ideas than effects, but it's still a visually polished piece of work -- and an uncommonly engaging sci-fi feature. rotton tomato공감 할 수 없는 반응이 더욱 당황스럽. 아이디어를 꿰 뚫을 자신이 없었다면 이펙트라도 재미를 주어야하는 것 아닌가.
영상면으로도 자연의 경관 외에는 감탄 할 요소가 없다. 푸르름과 강박함 따위의 대조만을 제시. 그 조차도 재미진 볼 거리는 무. 거리감이나 각도의 움직임이 새롭지도 완벽히 클래식하지도 않으며, 그러하다고 배우들의 연기로 모든 것을 불구하고 볼만한 영화가 되지도 못한다.
이것이 대중의 안목인 것인가, 믿기 어렵다. 믿고 싶지 않다, 무엇인가 흥미의 요소가 하나라도 있을거라는 희망으로 후반을 접어들었지만, 값 싼 피 따위로 클라이막스를 찍는 플롯은 영화를 끄게 만들었다.
Four years ago, my newborn son, Leo, was given a diagnosis of a very rare and incurable disorder known as Ondine’s Curse. Also called Congenital Central Hypoventilation Syndrome(C.C.H.S.), the disorder prevents the thousand or so people known to have been born with it from breathing while asleep, and sometimes also while awake. Though the disorder is manageable when treated, our son is likely to need a ventilator for the rest of his life.
This documentary follows my first few months of parenthood — as my wife, Magda, and I confronted the realities of our new life. After Leo finally came home from the hospital, with a collection of medical equipment, we worked hard to tame our fears and slowly adapted to our circumstances. Gradually our perception of Leo changed, too: He evolved from a “curse” (a term we took from the disorder’s name), an alien creature with lots of medical noisy equipment, into our truly beloved son, without whom we could no longer function.
That period of our lives was depressing and devastating. But shooting this film helped us a great deal. It kept us going; instead of succumbing to depression, we could direct our energy into something creative. At the time, we were not sure if we were going to show this film to anyone – it felt much too intimate and private. However, after a few months I realized that we had gone through the universal process of coping with any obstacle, even one that seems impossible at first. It was then that I felt that we should share this experience with others. I decided to complete the film.
For me, the most important thing in editing this film was to trace our emotions as closely as possible and to present the whole story honestly, as we really experienced it. We wanted to show that that even the worst moments of life can be turned into something positive, provided you do not lose hope. For us, the story of our family is one of overcoming the worst, and ultimately, of being truly grateful for what we have.
In December, Leo turned 4 years old. He is a cheerful young boy with a wonderful sense of humor, and is doing very well in school. His speech is still a bit delayed, but we’re helping him with it and I’m sure he will overcome this too – because our son is a real fighter.
Directed by David Fincher. Starring: Rosamund Pike, Ben Affleck, Carrie Coon, Kim Dickens, Neil Patrick Harris, Tyler Perry, Missi Pyle, Casey Wilson, Emily Ratajkowski.
Cert 18, 145 mins.
Can someone vanish if, in the first place, they were never truly there? A missing-person thriller might not seem like a likely forum for this kind of metaphysical grappling, but David Fincher, the director of The Social Network, Fight Club and Zodiac, is not a filmmaker prone to swaddling his audience in the consolations of the likely.
Fincher’s 10thfilm, Gone Girl, is based closely on Gillian Flynn’s best-selling 2012 novel which used a page-turning plot line – the sudden disappearance of a smart, pretty, married woman called Amy Elliott-Dunne (Rosamund Pike) – to unpick the modern mania for presenting a perfected version of ourselves to others, even as the truth roils and bubbles underneath.
In Fincher’s hands, that smart but arguably undisciplined story becomes something even wilder and yet perversely also more controlled – a neo-noir thriller turned on its blood-spattered head. Here, it’s the homme, rather than the femme, who has the fatale aura, and what comes out of the past only serves to further cloud the murky present.
But above all, it's a delicious exercise in audience-baiting: what begins as a he-said, she-said story of mounting, murderous suspense, lurches at its fulcrum into the kind of hot mess Brian De Palma might have cooked up 20 years ago in his attic. Reports that Flynn had, while writing the screenplay, dramatically reworked her original ending, are accurate, but only after a fashion. The plot is essentially unchanged, but every screw has been tightened, and a new confrontation scene delivers a brutal, yet agonisingly un-final, showdown.
The film begins cryptically, close to that end-point, before looping back to the morning of Amy’s disappearance from the home she shares with her husband Nick, brilliantly played by Ben Affleck as a man who has finally realised his life will never quite live up to the promise of his jawline. This is recession-era America, old and tired, and even the dawn inching over the shuttered shops looks stale.
We learn that Nick and Amy lost their New York-based writing jobs in the downturn, now he and his twin sister Margot (Carrie Coon) run a bar in the town where he grew up, while she sits at home, gathering dust.
These scenes are stern and crisp, underscored not with music, but the dust-dry buzz of air-conditioning and fluorescent light. We hear it when Nick comes home to find the living room furniture turned upside down and his wife of five years nowhere to be seen – and again when he’s taken in for questioning by Detective Rhonda Boney (Kim Dickens), who wonders if there’s more to this man than meets her already sceptical eye.
Soon, though, via an entry in Amy’s diary, the film flashes back to the couple’s first meeting at a chichi New York party. The voluptuous, Angelo Badalamenti-ish score, by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, aches and swells, while Amy and Nick’s conversation snaps along to a seductive, screwball beat. Afterwards, they go walking arm in arm through the city at night, when they’re suddenly enveloped by clouds of icing sugar that come billowing out of a baker’s window. They stop and share a sweetened kiss in the tawny moonlight. The past, for these two, looks like a sugar storm.
The film shuttles between these two time periods, and Fincher’s masterstroke is in making neither ring entirely true: the director is so adept at crafting concretely plausible fictions, he knows exactly which details to tweak to throw the balance slightly off.
In the present, Amy is nowhere to be seen. In the past, she’s everywhere. Pike, who’s so often quietly admirable in films of varying quality, has waited more than a decade for a role this juicy, but what amazes you is how methodically she seizes on it: not with the hungry pounce and rip of a wild cat, but the rhythmic constrictions of an anaconda. Amy is the best thing Pike has ever done: her performance is taut and poised, and at times almost masque-like. While her diary voiceovers swoon with emotion, her face gives you almost nothing.
It’s possible that Amy’s darker monologues may induce in female viewers the same double squirm felt by men listening to Edward Norton’s Fight Club voiceover: the shock that someone would ever dare to say such things out loud, coupled with a pit-of-the-stomach throb of recognition. There is a key speech in the novel in which Amy describes the fate of the "cool girl" – the archetypal sexy girlfriend who morphs, unbidden, into a pliant wife — that Pike delivers with a note of venomous triumph that makes you want to cheer.
The revealing of Amy’s fate, which takes place not at the end of the film but at its centre, with a mad magician’s flourish, is expertly handled, re-energising the plot while ushering in some fun new characters, not least of all Neil Patrick Harris as Amy’s WASP-y ex-lover and Tyler Perry as a grandstanding lawyer. And for all its simmering malice and buried secrets, it’s worth remembering that this is David Fincher in fun mode: unnerving, shocking and provoking for better and for worse, in sickness and in health, but mostly sickness.
나 자신과 별개인 나의 표현. 둘의 거리와 그것을 공유하는 존재들 - 가족, 그에 따르는 혐오와 거리감.
내가 아는 개체와 현실적 그 존재의 차이 - 나는 과연 그를 아는가 , 그러하다면 그 정확도는 어느 정도인가. 사람들은 무엇을 보는가, 무엇을 바라는가. 왜 사람들은 서로에게서 무엇을 보고싶어하는가, 그것은 사회에 어떠한 영향인가. 이것은 문제인가, 그러하다면 어느 정도 중요한 문제인가.
내가 바라는 그것은 타인과 어떠한 관계가 있는가, 그것은 중요한가. 보이지 않는 진실은 거짓인가, 다수의 움직임은 최상의 선택인가, 그러하지 않다면 최악의 선택인가, 그러하지도 않다면 어느 선에 서있는가.
연기, 음악, 소품 - 그림도 소리도 훌륭했던 영화. 더불어 연기마저 완벽함이 아닌, 거짓말과 진실의 사이의 기이한 접전을 걷는, 훌륭함.
No Job, No Money and Now, No Wife
Movie Review: Ben Affleck in David Fincher's ‘Gone Girl’
“Gone Girl,” the latest from that dark lord of cinema,David Fincher, opens with a man softly talking about his wife’s head. The image of his hand caressing a woman’s sleek blond hair in close-up indicates that it’s a lovely head, a lovely wife, too. Yet the violence of his words — he speaks of cracking her skull open and “unspooling” her brain — wakens an unease that trembles throughout this domestic horror movie. Those familiar with Mr. Fincher’s work may wonder, perhaps with a shudder or a conspiratorial smile, whether this head will share the fate of another head belonging to another pretty wife, a gift that was boxed and delivered in one of the hellish circles girdling his shocker“Seven.”
Unspooling is such an inapt word — can brains, after all, be unspooled? — that it immediately puts dread in check. No matter how brutal the images generated by these words, surely there’s more in store than blunt-force entertainment. Well, yes and no, which is sometimes the case with Mr. Fincher. One of those filmmakers whose technical prowess can make the mediocrity of his material seem irrelevant (almost), Mr. Fincher is always the star of his work. His art can overwhelm characters and their stories to the point that they fade away, leaving you with meticulous staging and framing, and edits as sharp as blades. It’s no accident that the first time you fully see Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck), the man who had been discoursing so vividly about his wife’s head, he’s alone.
(“Gone Girl” opens the 52ndNew York Film Festivalon Friday and opens in theaters next Friday.)
“Gone Girl” is set in the recessionary present in a small fictional Missouri town, North Carthage. Around the time you meet Nick, Mr. Fincher folds in some typical snapshots of desperate Anytown, U.S.A.: empty shops, vacant streets and homeless people tramping into the void. Nick and his wife, Amy (Rosamund Pike), aren’t headed for Brokesville quite yet, but they’re clinging hard to the status quo. They’re leasing their big, ugly house, and their bank account is running on fumes. The screenwriter, Gillian Flynn, adapting her novel of the same title, was a television critic for Entertainment Weekly who was laid off, and her characters share the same hard-knock fate: Nick, some kind of magazine writer, lost his New York job, as did Amy, who wrote quizzes for women’s magazines. (Was that a job? A. Yes, B. No, C. I doubt it.)
Times are hard, kind of, for Nick and Amy, but, as you discover in a series of flashbacks, they moved to North Carthage only when Nick’s mother received a cancer diagnosis. She died, and shortly after, so did the bloom on the marriage, though how it fades depends on who’s confessing and complaining. In the book, the narrative duties are fairly evenly distributed between Nick and Amy, who recount alternating versions of their happy times and unhappily ever after, with him taking you through events as they happen in the first person, while her point of view comes into focus partly through her detailed diary entries. The movie more or less duplicates this he-says, she-writes pattern, although with a critical difference: Nick’s story doesn’t unfold wholly through his first-person account.
Mr. Fincher, for all his modern themes and bleeding-edge technologies, is a classicist, and in “Gone Girl,” he creates a sense of Nick’s subjectivity the usual way, mostly by placing the camera next to the character and deploying point-of-view shots that are seamlessly integrated with shots of, and generated by, other characters. Shortly after the movie opens, the plot fires up, as you watch Nick return home to find that Amy has gone missing. You see him pick up their cat and watch him fling open doors, roam the halls and discover a broken glass table. In other words, here you know what Nick knows, which, as it will turn out, isn’t much. Amy is gone, and as Nick, the police, the town, the news media and the country shift into progressively more hysterical crisis-and-circus mode, she stays gone.
Mr. Fincher’s compositions, camera work and cutting are, as always, superbly controlled. Working again with the cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth and the production designer Donald Graham Burt, he fashions an ever more haunted, haunting world that wavers so violently between ordinariness and aberration that, as in his other movies, the two soon blur. Nick may feel at home in North Carthage, but, from that first shot of him alone in front of his house — and from his first conversation with his sister, Margo (Carrie Coon), in which they trade insults about Amy — he comes across as alienated, lost. Mr. Fincher underlines that isolation by showing Nick both alone in the frame and in his house, where he’s at times dwarfed and almost swallowed up by its generic, oversize rooms.
Amy’s voice-overs disrupt the movie’s inaugural seriousness. In flashbacks introduced by her scribbling in her diary, she reveals that she’s the inspiration for a beloved and profitable book series about a girl, Amazing Amy, created by her psychologist parents, Rand and Marybeth (David Clennon and Lisa Banes). Like Hannibal Lecter (a psychiatrist), Amy’s parents have profited from messing around in other people’s heads. (Your parents plagiarized your childhood, Nick says with husbandly commiseration.) They’re cartoons, but then, so is Amy, whose narration Ms. Pike delivers in an affectedly hushed, conspiratorial voice that’s so arch that you can picture Amy’s lips curling at the edges. Mr. Fincher doesn’t show you her sneer; he doesn’t have to. It imbues every word she says, instantly casting her as an unreliable narrator.
Given that the first half of“Gone Girl”is structured as a mystery, this unreliability presents a problem because it throws everything Amy says into doubt. Along with Mr. Affleck’s supple, sympathetic performance, Amy’s voice-over tips the scales so far in Nick’s favor that it upends Ms. Flynn’s attempt to recreate the even-steven dynamic from her book. Then again, the movie is on Nick’s side from the start, making the case for him, from the way he services Amy sexually to the gentle way he treats their cat. He sometimes explodes, as when he throws a glass to the floor while talking to two cops, Boney (an excellent Kim Dickens) and Gilpin (a dryly funny Patrick Fugit). The Nick here, like so many noir heroes, is simply, too simply, a decent, deflated, ordinary sap with serious woman problems.
The same is true of this movie. At its strongest, “Gone Girl” plays like a queasily, at times gleefully, funny horror movie about a modern marriage, one that has disintegrated partly because of spiraling downward mobility and lost privilege. Yet, as sometimes happens in Mr. Fincher’s work, dread descends like winter shadows, darkening the movie’s tone and visuals until it’s snuffed out all the light, air and nuance. As Nick becomes mired in the search for Amy, she confides how romance gave way to marital dreariness, accusations, his mounting loathing, her growing fear. One minute, he was leaving empty takeout containers strewn about and playing video games; the next, she says, he was raising a hand to her and she was cowering in their bed. She has the victim thing down cold.
By the movie’s second half, you may wish that Amy would stay gone. Ms. Pike has some fine scenes in this section, notably with a pair of hilariously sly lowlifes, Greta and Jeff (Lola Kirke and Boyd Holbrook), who, taken with a pompous, wealthy fool (Neil Patrick Harris as Desi), suggest that the movie is about to go deeper, that it will surprise you or stir you or say something, anything, maybe by making good on its scene-setting images of empty American stores. That never happens, and instead, the movie just hums along like the precision machine it is, even after it shifts tones again and enters Grand Guignol territory, with a flashing knife, gushing blood and surveillance footage of a seemingly tortured, horrifically abused and screaming woman. It’s a ghastly vision, although not for the reasons this movie would like.
“Gone Girl” is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian). Extreme violence.
have no concept of failure, become more aware of mortality as you get older, you're little and you're brave and you jump on a horse. as you get older you realize how fragile your life is and your job is and you become more careful.