didn't know R. Lee Ermey felt this negative about working with director David Fincher (1 Viewer)

[Matthew_V]

The other day I was suddenly interested in looking online for some interviews with R. Lee Ermey. I stumbled upon this:

 

[Matthew_V]

His comments (about the process of working with directors) in the latter half of this second interview might shed some light on why he said what he said in that preceeding quote.

Bloody Disgusting - Interview Texas Chainsaw Massacre Prequel: Star R. Lee Ermey

 

[Andy Sheets]

IIRC, Jake Gyllenhaal had similar issues with Fincher on Zodiac. Fincher's an excellent director but he's got that control freak reputation.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Works for me. I love Ermey. And I LOVE Fincher. Control freaks tend to make great or terrible films. Fincher's tend to be great.

 

[PaulDA]

He must have HATED working with Kubrick, then. I know of no more fanatical "control freak" in cinema.

 

[TravisR]

That's my view on it too.

I can see that if you're an actor, you would want to 'explore' the character and maybe make some changes or try something different and I'd imagine it's frustrating when you can't but that's the breaks when you work with a guy like Fincher.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I heard they got along great, actually. I remember reading that Ermey was the only one on the "Full Metal Jacket" set who was allowed to improvise or change his dialogue, and that he and Kubrick often spoke at length about Ermey's real life experiences, etc.

 

[mattCR]

Kubrick and Ermey got along incredibly well, because Kubrick asked him often to "play it up as if this were real" and Ermey chewed it up.

The thing with Fincher is that he's famous for being a true control freak, not just about dialog, etc. but about everything.. Jake Gyllenhaal was the one who went on and said something about doing multiple takes because he used a contraction instead of separated (can't instead of can not) and how anal and annoying he thought it was.

I get that. I like several of Fincher's films. But I can get how being a control freak like that could also be super annoying.

 

[photogray]

Wow that is pretty harsh! lol

 

[JonZ]

"He must have HATED working with Kubrick, then. I know of no more fanatical "control freak" in cinema."

Thats what I was gonna say - though Keir Dullea and Gary Lcokwood had mentioned how Kubrick was very lenient with them, was always open to suggestions and allowed them alot of room to improvise or be creative.

"Jake Gyllenhaal was the one who went on and said something about doing multiple takes because he used a contraction instead of separated (can't instead of can not) and how anal and annoying he thought it was."

Didnt Kubrick ask Tom Cruise to walk through a door for like 50 takes because he was "waiting for something interesting to happen "?

 

[PaulDA]

Ask Shelley Duvall about working with Kubrick on The Shining (better yet...don't. She might just kill you where you stand.)

As for Kubrick being freer with other actors, it's news to me, though I have no reason to think they'd lie about it. It's just surprising.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

It was rare, but it would happen if he trusted the actor and felt they really connected with the material, or thought they might go somewhere interesting if he let them run wild. See: Sellers, Peter.

 

[Brian Borst]

I think from the things I read about Kubrick that he wasn't as much as a control freak when it came to actors, but that he didn't knew what he wanted. He would just do a scene over and over again until he saw something good appearing in a scene. You can't explain or recreate it, but it's there. On The Shining, Jack Nicholson would to the first couple of takes in a regular way, then in a slightly more disturbing way, then crazy, and then after a while Nicholson couldn't think of another way to do it, and would just do the scene without thinking it. Of course, Kubrick wasn't very nice to Shelley Duvall, but he did it that way because he wanted a certain performance out of her. And it worked.
With Fincher, I think, it's more the case of literally sticking to the script, and I can't find anything wrong with that. Cameron does it, the Coen brothers always do it. It's nice that you can improvise, but sometimes sticking to the script can be better.

 

[Matthew_V]

That's along the lines of what Martin Sheen said in one of the extras on the Wall Street DVD. I don't remember his exact words, but he wanted sometimes to improvise. Oliver Stone didn't want that because what was in the script was in a sense the finished product in that the script was 100% what Oliver Stone intended to put on the screen. At the end of this DVD extra, Martin Sheen was nice enough to add that later on he reflected on things and agreed that Stone's choice on not deviating from the dialogue in the script for Sheen's character worked out better for the character.

 

[Jeff Adkins]

Ermey also gave an interview a few years ago with Radar online where he claimed Kubrick felt that Cruise and Kidman ruined Eyes Wide Shut.