you’re able to’t break a perplexing news story on April Fool’s Day and not expect collective skepticism. The announcement thatDavid Fincherwill be directing a spin-off/sequel toQuentin Tarantino’s most recent film,Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood, has all the hallmarks of a prank on April 1. Not only does it sound ridiculous, but it lacks any logic for either party. While we’re still on guard, waiting to be fooled, all signs indicate that this project for Netflix is a green light. Truthfully, we want to believe this is an April Fool’s prank, because a sequel to Tarantino’s unique and remarkable love letter to cinema is unwarranted. If Tarantino, who had already expanded the world of Hollywood in 1969 in novel form, werecontinuing the story of Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt), we could be bought in. Fincher, who can often be somewhat of a cold filmmaker, might not have the emotional sensibilities required for a sequel to Tarantino’s most wholehearted film.
David Fincher’s resume is unimpeachable. A distinct visionary behind a handful of modern classics, such asSeven,Zodiac, andThe Social Network, Fincher’s reputation will never be tarnished in the film community. The only bad thing you can say about him is that he has resigned to indefinitely attaching himself to Netflix, a company he helped launch into a streaming empire withHouse of Cards.It’s a travesty thatGone Girl, which was released almost 11 years ago, will remain his last widely-released theatrical film for the foreseeable future. Proving to be more of a loyal business partner than a filmmaker curating the best scripts possible, Fincher was recently attached todevelop an English-languageSquid Gameseries for the streamer.
Fincher is notorious for attaching himself to projects that he abandons or never come to fruition, so there’s a world where the announcement of aOnce Upon a Time… in Hollywoodmade-for-Netflix sequel will just be recalled as a bad dream. First reported byThe Playlist,Deadlineconfirmedthat Fincher will be resurrecting a Quentin Tarantino script that will seeBrad Pitt— who has starred in three films by Fincher —reprising his Oscar-winning roleas the washed-up and possibly murderous stunt double, Cliff Booth.Tarantino, who is so protective of his legacy that he is holding himself to a self-imposed 10-movie limit, is stunningly giving Fincher and Netflix his blessing to adapt Cliff’s unrealized adventures and exploits.
David Fincher Lacks the Proper Sentimentality To Direct This Quentin Tarantino Sequel
Between his exploits with fightingBruce Leeand the allegations of his domestic homicide (with theOUATIHnovelization more or less confirming that he is guilty of murdering his wife), there is plenty of lore to unpack in Cliff’s life. However, Tarantino’s novelization already serves as the propersupplement to his 2019 film, particularly with the Cliff mythology. Furthermore,The Movie Critic, Tarantino’s abandoned 10th and final film, by all accounts, would’ve seen Pitt returning as the stunt performer in a story about a Tarantino-esque cinephile working in Hollywood in the ’60s and ’70s.David Fincher adapting leftover material by another acclaimed director is a grave disservice to his own specialized talents. Without Tarantino’s direct guidance, additionalHollywoodstories would feel like empty filler content, much like most of Netflix’s library.
The genius behindOUATIHis that, to everyone’s surprise, Tarantino shied away from the gruesome shock and horror ofSharon Tate’s (Margot Robbie) murder and instead celebrated her promising career and elevated her as someone beyond a footnote in American history. Inhis most sentimental effort, the film romanticizes the overlooked C-tier actors like Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Hollywood in its last days of innocence. Fincher, on the other hand, is hardly a romantic. If anything, he would’ve likely told the story from the perspective of the Manson murders.
The Bloody Ending of This Epic — But Flawed — John Woo Action Sequel Inspired Quentin Tarantino
“You don’t like my rice?”
Rather than cherish Hollywood’s swan song, Fincher’s artistic mode would be to examine the downfall of the classic institution through the lens of greedy capitalists, akin toThe Social Network. Despite also being a filmmaker drawn to violence and nihilistic tendencies,Tarantino possesses a warmth for Hollywoodand the art of moviemaking that Fincher lacks.Based on his inclination towards being a streaming-only director, full embrace of digital photography, and his overall modernist deconstruction of the form, it doesn’t seem like Fincher is the kind of cinema enthusiast required for theHollywoodworld.
Quentin Tarantino, who claimedOnce Upon a Time… in Hollywoodis his “best movie,” suggests in his decision to expand upon the film’s lore that he wishes it was his swan song, andto see him sell off his magnum opus to another voice for a streaming release is dispiriting. Diluting the impact ofOUATIH, a glorious ode to cinema, by creating an unnecessary streaming sequel feels like a perfect encapsulation of all the problems with the industry today.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
A faded television actor and his stunt double strive to achieve fame and success in the final years of Hollywood’s Golden Age in 1969 Los Angeles.
