The idea of the auteur is a somewhat romantic notion. The term suggests that a director is the sole author of his work, putting an artistic imprint on a film or television show that is so singular, that the vision is solely theirs. However, accepting the idea of auteurism means ignoring the collaborative nature of filmmaking, and the many happy accidents, mistakes, or unavoidable changes that happen along the way to the finished product.
David Fincher‘s films undeniably contain a number of trademarks that are attributable to the director, but don’t you dare call him an auteur. The filmmaker, whose latest effort is the incredible Netflix series “Mindhunter,” reveals to Little White Lies exactly why he doesn’t like the term “auteur”:
My distaste for the term was exactly the intention. Like, what the fuck? What is he talking about? The problem with auteurism is that it presupposes that one person can impress upon 95 people, so clearly, that the manifestation of whatever it is going on in your head can be clearly attributed to them. The reality of moviemaking is, y’know, it’s a rat fuck. Every day is a skirmish, and you might escape every skirmish, but there are injuries and there [are] losses, and there are things that you had 10 meetings about that go off perfectly, and there are things that you’ve had no meetings about that ended up taking eight of the 12 hours in the day because you didn’t think it was going to be so complicated.
So the notion that someone calls this perfect, idealised version of the scene… It’s like the jet-propulsion industry, the idea that something is wind-tunnel tested and is gonna go off the way it’s supposed to – it never goes off the way it’s supposed to. My issue with auteurism is, how do you attribute a master plan to a happy accident? There are certain things that you can count on. You have to work at it, and you have to know what it is you’re trying to do and impart that to an army of people who all have their own ideas about what’s important.
Everybody who comes on to a set looks at it from a slightly different standpoint. You can’t say to the third violinist, ‘This is what the totality of the thing should sound like.’ You just need them to get them to do their thing. When you hear it, it either moves you or it doesn’t, so you have to figure if it needs a little bit more of this or that. That’s happening in the rehearsal, it’s happening in the coverage throughout the day. You hone in as you get tighter and tighter and tighter on people, but you’re also getting tighter in terms of time. You’re honing in on one little thing, and then you do the same again in the edit, with the sound effects, with the music, with the colour grading. Suddenly all this stuff comes together, and the notion that anyone could say, ‘This is precisely what it’s going to look like,’ to me is amazing.
Fincher is not alone in his dislike of being called an “auteur”; Jim Jarmusch echoed many of the same sentiments last year. It’s nice to see Fincher share the success of his work to the team around him, and acknowledge the thousands of steps along the way that are required just to get one scene right. The entire interview is a great read, so if you need to help digesting those Thanksgiving leftovers, make some time for it.