I do agree you can't just make movies three hours long for no apparent reason. For a romantic comedy to be three hours long, that's longer than most marriages. Show less «

[on The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011)] I think this movie is more about sexual politics. Mikael Blomkvist moves freely among women and doesn't have any problems with them, but his relationships aren't always mature. I think you can say that about a lot of male-female relationships. The men are not really present. Show less «

I am a contrarian by nature, so all it does is make me want to take real risks. I am like, 'If we are not out on the ledge juggling chain saws, then we are doing ourselves a huge disservice.' Show less «

[on his preference for unconventional characters] I don't know what 'likable' is. I know people who are doting parents, who give to charity, drive Priuses, all those things, who are insufferable assholes... I like people who get shit done. Show less «

You're supposed to have an idea of what it is you're trying to do, right? Aren't you being overpaid to have that? My job is to know what the fuck I want. Show less «

People will say, "There are a million ways to shoot a scene", but I don't think so. I think there're two, maybe. And the other one is wrong. Show less «

[observation, 2014] Right now, people are discovering television because it's where all the most interesting characters have gone. Show less «

Directing ain't about drawing a neat little picture and showing it to the cameraman. I didn't want to go to film school. I didn't know what the point was. The fact is, you don't know what directing is until the sun is setting and you've got to get five shots and you're only going to get two. Show less «

You cast movies based on critical scenes. In Gone Girl (2014) there's a smile the guy has to give when the local press asks him to stand next to a poster of his missing wife. I flipped through 'Google Images' and found about 50 shots of Ben Affleck giving that kind of smile in public situations. You look at them and know he's trying to make people comfortable in the moment, but by doing that he's making himself vulnerable to people having other perceptions about him.(...)In Ben's case, what many people don't know is that he's crazy smart, but since he doesn't want that to get awkward, he downplays it. I'm sure when he was a 23-year-old and all this career-success shit was happening for him, he was like, "I just want to go to the after-party and meet J. Lo." I'm sure he said a lot of glib shit and people went, "Ugh, fake." If you have a lot of success when you're young and good-looking, you realize it's okay to let people write you off. It's the path of least resistance. You don't want to be snowbound with them anyway. I think he learned how to skate on charm. I needed somebody who not only knew how to do that but also understood the riptide of perceived reality as opposed to actual reality. Show less «

As a director, film is about how you dole out the information so that the audience stays with you when they're supposed to stay with you, behind you when they're supposed to stay behind you, and ahead of you when they're supposed to stay ahead of you. Show less «

[on getting at least 60% of what you want on a film set] . . . I think that's probably on a good day. I would say probably, on a given film, Fight Club (1999) is probably closest to what we wanted to do. It's about 75% of what we wanted. I think Panic Room (2002), even though it was storyboarded within an inch of its life, was probably 60%. The Social Network (2010), I wasn't transposing what I had in my head on it, because I was really following the text, and following these kids, so that movie was, y'know, about 70-75% of what I thought it was going to be. This movie is probably about that. I think you're doing pretty good if you can get 70% of what you want. Show less «

[on Fight Club (1999)] We opened at the Venice film festival, and I think to say they hated it would be an understatement. Let's put it this way: the youngest person in the screening was Giorgio Armani. They called for our hides and we split town. We thought it was funny. Actually, Helena Bonham Carter's mother was three seats down from me and she was just laughing and laughing - she was the only one. She's cool. I'm always surprised at how seriously people take movies. It always surprises me what people get their bowels in an uproar about. It's a movie. It was interesting to me, the critics who felt they had a moral obligation to 'the broader audience' to warn them. But it didn't surprise me that some people didn't think it was funny. It didn't surprise me that some people thought it was morbid. It surprised me, the people who went out of their way to save other people from this experience. I thought that was kind of silly. It's a cult movie - it's just that it's a big cult. Here's a tricky thing: if you spend $15m, it's not even a pimple on the ass of that kind of multinational media conglomerate. But if you spend $67m, they gotta release your movie. That's a big number, they can't write it down. I happen to know that the movie's in the black, but there's receipts and there's worth. They are two different things. Because there are movies that make money and there are movies that are worth money, and sometimes the movies that are worth money make money later on. I honestly believe Fight Club is a title 20th Century Fox knows is going to make money for them in perpetuity. Show less «

You know I don't try to piss people off, right? It's just always been the right thing to do.

[on the character of Amy Dunne in Gone Girl (2014)] In my head I saw her as Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy. I had these images of before and after - of Carolyn as an 18-year-old and as a 20-year-old, the notion of someone self-made. She crafted herself, she re-invented herself, and invented that persona. That's where I began. Show less «

[on "the roadblocks that prevented him from making" 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea] You get over $200 million - all motion picture companies have corporate culture and corporate anxieties. Once we got past the list of people we could cast as the different characters in the film, once we got past one or two names which made them very comfortable, making a movie at that price, it became this bizarre endeavor to find which three names you could rub together to make platinum. I wanted Aronnax to be French, God forbid! It got to be a little too confusing to me. I had this argument with a studio executive one time where he said to me, 'why is it that the actors always side with you and we're paying them?' And I said, 'I think it's because at some level, they know that my only real allegiance is to the movie.' And because that's very clear and it never wavers, they may not agree with the image of the movie I have in my head, but they know that's what I'm after. They've seen me for 100 days take the long way around. I think that when you're trying to put together a handful of people to deliver all those facets of humanity and who work well together, it has to be in service of the narrative and not in service of the balance sheet. It became very hard to appease the anxieties of Disney's corporate culture with the list of names that allowed everyone to sleep at night. I just wanted to make sure I had the skill-sets I could turn the movie over to. Not worrying about whether they're big in Japan. Show less «

I have a philosophy about the two extremes of filmmaking. The first is the "Kubrick way," where you're at the end of an alley in which four guys are kicking the shit out of a wino. Hopefully, the audience members will know that such a scenario is morally wrong, even though it's not presented as if the viewer is the one being beaten up; it's more as if you're witnessing an event. Inversely, there's the "Spielberg way," where you're dropped into the middle of the action and you're going to live the experience vicariously - not only through what's happening, but through the emotional flow of what people are saying. It's a much more involved style. I find myself attracted to both styles at different times, but mostly I'm interested in just presenting something and letting people decide for themselves what they want to look at. Show less «

I don't know how much movies should entertain. To me, I'm always interested in movies that scar. The thing I love about Jaws (1975) is the fact that I've never gone swimming in the ocean again. Show less «

My idea of professionalism is probably a lot of people's idea of obsessive.

[on the 2001 case of German cannibal Armin Meiwes:] I heard about a German man who put an ad on an internet site saying he wanted to devour somebody. Someone [Bernd Brandes] actually answered the ad. The guy videotaped himself anesthetizing the willing victim, segmenting his body and consuming him. Before the victim died, they ate his genitals together. I don't know if it was some bizarre psychosexual fulfillment, but it's one of the most disturbing things I've ever heard. When you can't count on somebody to even fight for his life, when he goes willingly-well, it's so out of left field, it's not even on my radar. Even though that was the most troubling thing I'd heard in a long time, the things that interest me in cinema kind of work the same way. I like starting with an idea that unlocks a whole Pandora's box of other ideas. Show less «

[on losing his father, Jack Fincher] I remember the experience of being there when he breathed his last breath. It was incredibly profound. When you lose someone who helped form you in lots of ways, who is your 'true north', you lose the barometer of your life. You're no longer trying to please someone, or you're no longer reacting against something. In many ways, you're truly alone. Show less «

I don't know anything about Academy consideration. I don't know what an awards movie is.

Everything seems really simple on paper until you take a camera out of the box. Then ninety people are offering up solutions to the problems those pages create. You're trying to make something very clear in this maelstrom of activity, with all this anxiety about how much money is being spent. I don't think you can ever make it the way you have it in your head. Show less «

I'm totally anti-commercialism. I would never do commercials where people hold the product by their head and tell you how great it is, I just wouldn't do that stuff. It's all inference . . . The Levis commercials I did weren't really about jeans, the Nike commercials weren't about shoes. The "Instant Karma" spot was some of the better stuff I got offered, and it was never about people going, "Buy this shoe, this shoe will change everything," because I think that's nonsense. Anybody looking outside themselves to make themselves whole is delusional and probably sick. Show less «

[on Alien³ (1992)] There were a lot of enormously talented people working on that movie. It's just a movie starts from a unified concept, and once you've unified the concept it becomes very easy to see the things you're not going to spend money on. And if a movie is constantly in flux because you're having to please this vice-president or that vice-president of production .. . I think a movie set's a fascist dictatorship--you have to go in and know what it is you want to do because you have to tell 90 people what it is you want to do and it has to be convincing. Otherwise, when they start to question it, the horse can easily run away with you and it's bigger than you are. So that was a movie where the time was not taken upfront to say, "This is what we're doing, and all of this is what we're not doing." So as we were shooting, a lot of people--I suppose in an effort to make it "better" or "more commercial" or more like the other ones they liked as opposed to the one that you liked--took to being extremely helpful, so that this could be more James Cameron than James Cameron. And of course you're sitting there going, "Guys, remember I don't have any guns. I don't have any tripod guns or flamethrowers or any of that shit!" If a movie gets off on a wrong foot, when you've never done it before you assume everyone is going to be there to help you right the ship, but really you're beholden to a lot of banana republics. I worked on it for two years, got fired off it three times and I had to fight for every single thing. No one hated Alien 3 more than me; to this day, no one hates it more than me. It was a baptism by fire. I was very naive. For a number of years, I'd been around the kind of people who financed movies and the kind of people who are there to make the deals for movies. But I'd always had this naive idea that everybody wants to make movies as good as they can be, which is stupid. I thought, "Well, surely you don't want to have the Twentieth Century-Fox logo over a shitty movie." And they were like, "Well, as long as it opens." They didn't care. Show less «

[on what he gets from doing many takes:] Part of the promise when I work with actors is that we may be on take 11 and I'll say, "We certainly have a version that we can put in the movie that will make us all happy. But I want to do seven more and continue to push this idea. Let's see where it goes." Now, I may go back to them after those seven takes and say, "It was a complete fucking waste of effort, but I had to try because I feel there's something to be mined from this." That's a lot of extra work for an actor, and sometimes it pushes them out of their comfort zone. In some cases they're not getting paid as much as they would on another movie. I go out on a limb, and people work harder for me than they do for other people. But I want them to be happy with the fact that we were able to do something singular, something unlike anything else in their or my filmography. Show less «

I always thought of Star Wars (1977) as the story of two slaves [C-3PO and R2-D2] who go from owner to owner, witnessing their masters' folly, the ultimate folly of man... I thought it was an interesting idea in the first two, but it's kind of gone by Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983). Show less «

I think Gillian Flynn's book is talking about marriage and hiding it in an absurdist confection. When you peel back the layers and get to the kernel, you think, Wow, I feel queasy for a whole different set of reasons than I thought I would. Remember the 1970s 'National Lampoon' record "That's Not Funny, That's Sick" ? That was what I wanted to go for in terms of performance and tone. That and Lolita (1962), because both are unbelievably funny and unbelievably naughty. They're about disturbing ideas and very disturbed people and their facades of normalcy. There are moments when you find yourself torn by what the characters in Gone Girl (2014) have done in service of their urges. They're kind of irredeemable and yet intensely human. Show less «

I don't think of myself as difficult. We're expected to do stuff that's awesome. That means we're going to have to push each other. Show less «

[on the prevalence of violence in modern society] I think civilization is an agreement, and once in a while you're going to run into people who didn't get the memo. Show less «

[on Gone Girl (2014)] Most interesting to me was the idea of our collective narcissism as it relates to coupling, or who we show to our would-be mates and who they show to us. Show less «

Part of my testiness is that I feel I make fifty compromises a day. When people come to me to say 'Why can't you compromise?' I'm like: 'What are you talking about? The fact that we're having this conversation means that we've compromised'. Show less «

Panic Room (2002) is a movie as opposed to a film. A movie is made for an audience and a film is made for both the audience and the film-makers. I think that The Game (1997) is a movie and I think Fight Club (1999)'s a film. I think that Fight Club is more than the sum of its parts, whereas Panic Room IS the sum of its parts. I didn't look at Panic Room and think, "Wow, this is gonna set the world on fire". These are footnote movies, guilty pleasure movies. Thrillers. Woman-trapped-in-a-house movies. They're not particularly important. Show less «

I went to a place called the Berkeley Film Institute for a summer program with a grade-school friend of mine, and we just thought it was a joke. It was very impressionist, very Berkeley. There were all these people who were there to communicate and change the world, to do all these lofty things--and then they made these really shitty, stupid little movies. And we were kind of like, "I'm not here for this, I'm just here to pull cable." We were the youngest people there and we ended up being the grips and electrics on everybody else's movies, and it was pretty good those six or seven weeks, we got to shoot Panaflex cameras and make a married print--it was in black and white and you made these little cheeseball movies, but at least you were making "something." It was kind of like film school in that way, but those who can't do, teach, and those who couldn't teach, taught there. They tried, they just didn't want to get dirty with it, they didn't want to get in up to their necks. It was all very patrician. Show less «

I don't want to tell you how to do your job, but somebody has to.

[about the personality traits that helps in being a director] Belligerence certainly helps. And there's a requisite paranoia. There's fear--fear of failure--and an overwhelming urge to be liked. Show less «

People always ask why I don't make independent movies. I do make independent movies - I just make them at Sony and Paramount. Show less «