You will be redirected back to your article in seconds

Good Or Bad Idea? Gillian Flynn Writes Completely New Ending For David Fincher’s ‘Gone Girl’

Good Or Bad Idea? Gillian Flynn Writes Completely New Ending For David Fincher's 'Gone Girl'

As the first glances are unveiled of David Fincher’s highly anticipated adaptation of Gillian Flynn’s novel “Gone Girl,” there’s no question that the “Zodiac” director is up to his usual, intensely dedicated approach. An average of fifty takes per scene was reported during filming, and just this week Entertainment Weekly showed off a cover on the film that Fincher shot himself. But Flynn has remained heavily involved as well by taking screenplay duties on the adaptation, and now it appears her and Fincher are tackling a major change to the narrative together.

In the same EW issue (print edition) that presented “Gone Girl” leads Ben Affleck and Rosamund Pike on the front, a feature on the film revealed (via The Dissolve) that Fincher’s adaptation will build to a different conclusion than that of the book’s, and that Flynn handled the new third act herself. “Ben [Affleck] was so shocked by it. He would say, ‘This is a whole new third act! She literally threw that third act out and started from scratch,’” the author told the magazine.

This writer hasn’t yet delved into the book, which follows a husband (Affleck) and wife (Pike) as dueling perspectives sort out the wife’s disappearance, but it’s unclear on the surface exactly what elements of the original ending displeased Fincher enough to change it. The fact that Flynn—and only her—stuck around erases any panicked “World War Z” parallels, however.

Our writer Oliver Lyttleton argued that the book “doesn’t quite stick the landing” back when we assembled a dream cast for the project, but for those who have similarly read the book and anticipating the film (which opens October 3rd): does this new direction intrigue or repel you? Should Flynn have skewed more Frank Miller and stuck with a direct translation? Let us know below.

This Article is related to: News and tagged ,


Comments

Beth S

The author of the article needs to stop using "her" when he means "she."

jwj

Thank God she's changing the ending. The original was a non-ending if there ever was one; just fizzled and absolutely didn't stick the landing (much the same way SK didn't stick it in "Under the Dome"). I'm glad the author is making this decision herself and it makes me want to see the movie even more, especially with Fincher at the helm.

Quin Browne

Wait. What? It was a great ending! This will drive me crazy!

simon

the ending was TERRIBLE!! great idea!

Ugh

Without having seen what she did. Or even have a hint of what she's done besides "it's different" it's kinda pointless to even discuss whether this is a good or bad decision. It's curious.

Gianni

There were several directions that Flynn could have gone with the ending, will be interesting to see which she took. I'm in.

J

It's a great idea. As half the world has read the book, this gives those of us who see no reason to go watch it as we know all the surprises, a reason to go watch it. The plot is the reason to see this movie. It's not like its Jane Eyre.

mk1213

Very good idea! And rewriting 3rd act – even better one.

Sparky

No, no, no! To alter the book's ending is to alter the whole theme of the book. Bad idea.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *