It's like fincher created the movie so that no 10 minute sequence could be uploaded to YouTube and attract comments about how clever the killer was, or how he clearly has some kind of honor code, or has great weapons technique. Choose any sequence and it's always utterly confounding.
I thought the film is a dark comedy - the Killer is utterly clueless, and terrible at his job. He screws up the first hit, misjudges how long his boss has left to live, gets beaten half to death in Florida...... a string of mistakes and failures.
I can’t get over the fact that this was all a direct reaction to an extra $150k fee. That seems wildly low for every reason; he’s a billionaire, you’re screwing over a super successful hit man you personally know, you send two others, on a private jet, they also fail to a large degree, and on and on. Nonsense.
Fincher is such an amazing technical director, his greatest successes depend on the quality of the source material and screenplay. Still, even his minor works (the Game, Panic Room) are intriguing in their craftsmanship and casting. Oh, who am I kidding - I thought Panic Room was AMAZING.
"6. Self-aware": That's a hoot. Like other "rigid and hierarchical social typologies", this scheme is ridiculous, and no genuinely self-aware person would embrace it.
The movie industry has a weird history of presenting "hit men" as exotic consultants, something like medical specialists. I found "The Irishman" far more plausible in this regard (i.e., regardless of whether the real-life Frank Sheeran actually did murder the real-life Jimmy Hoffa). Frank Sheeran isn't some independent professional. He isn't even an "officer" in the "army" he serves. He's an "enlisted man" who rises through the ranks by doing what he's told and not getting caught. But only so far. In the end, he's under the thumb of his boss, Russell Bufalino. And both Sheeran and Bufalino are vicious bullies who fade into broken, lonely old men.
However, I appreciate intelligent satire, so maybe I'll give "The Killer" a watch.
Totally agree on "The Irishman"--like Fincher I think Scorsese is very good at using new work to comment on and complicate his previous movies, as "The Irishman" really beautifully does.
I'm not quite sure I'd call Killer "satire" per se, at least not any more than "Fight Club"... just as it's not admiring of its main character it's not precisely scornful of him, either; his favorite attitude (besides "contempt") is "ambivalence"
I'm not sure how much I would ascribe to the screenwriter — I haven't seen the movie, but it sounds as though the dialogue and ethos of the movie was directly taken from the (repetitive and often boring) graphic novel. The killer is insufferable in it!
Interesting! Apparently Fincher has been trying to adapt it for years—clearly something about "insufferable anal freak muttering to himself as he kills people" has always appealed to him.
This is great! I would love to hear how you think the client guy that he ends up not killing at the end fits into it. I am obsessed with the outfit they gave him -- the Sub Pop t-shirt, the knit hat worn indoors, the converse lowtops or equivalent, all worn at the gym (?). Is he like Fincher, a boomer/Gen X cusp who was hip to the kids back when Gen X were kids, but not really into alpha masculinity as such, maybe a proto-sigma in his own right?
If you want to take the 4channish reading really literally, I think there's something interesting in the way the sigma-male hitman reaches a sort of detente with a tech-exec master of the universe--essentially an agreement not to bother each other too much. But I think taking that too far probably makes my reading a bit too 1:1 allegorical. I mean, quite literally, from a plot perspective, as someone else points out in these comments, he doesn't kill the guy because his face is caught on camera in the elevator--another example of the character's frequent slips.
Fincher et al seemed to enjoy messing with our expectations - just when we thought he wouldn’t, he would and vice versa. So when we expected the killer to kill the billionaire, of course he didn’t. That’s too simplistic, but I think that’s part of the answer.
It's like fincher created the movie so that no 10 minute sequence could be uploaded to YouTube and attract comments about how clever the killer was, or how he clearly has some kind of honor code, or has great weapons technique. Choose any sequence and it's always utterly confounding.
I thought the film is a dark comedy - the Killer is utterly clueless, and terrible at his job. He screws up the first hit, misjudges how long his boss has left to live, gets beaten half to death in Florida...... a string of mistakes and failures.
I can’t get over the fact that this was all a direct reaction to an extra $150k fee. That seems wildly low for every reason; he’s a billionaire, you’re screwing over a super successful hit man you personally know, you send two others, on a private jet, they also fail to a large degree, and on and on. Nonsense.
Love this
As I was watching it I had the same thought that Fincher has gotta be at least glancingly familiar with the Patrick Bateman memes
I've been trying to land a Léon: The Professional Managerial Class joke for a few days but it kind of works? The plot is ultimately a CX issue.
Fincher is such an amazing technical director, his greatest successes depend on the quality of the source material and screenplay. Still, even his minor works (the Game, Panic Room) are intriguing in their craftsmanship and casting. Oh, who am I kidding - I thought Panic Room was AMAZING.
Is the dark triad man still around? He was always my favorite one of these guys
"6. Self-aware": That's a hoot. Like other "rigid and hierarchical social typologies", this scheme is ridiculous, and no genuinely self-aware person would embrace it.
The movie industry has a weird history of presenting "hit men" as exotic consultants, something like medical specialists. I found "The Irishman" far more plausible in this regard (i.e., regardless of whether the real-life Frank Sheeran actually did murder the real-life Jimmy Hoffa). Frank Sheeran isn't some independent professional. He isn't even an "officer" in the "army" he serves. He's an "enlisted man" who rises through the ranks by doing what he's told and not getting caught. But only so far. In the end, he's under the thumb of his boss, Russell Bufalino. And both Sheeran and Bufalino are vicious bullies who fade into broken, lonely old men.
However, I appreciate intelligent satire, so maybe I'll give "The Killer" a watch.
Totally agree on "The Irishman"--like Fincher I think Scorsese is very good at using new work to comment on and complicate his previous movies, as "The Irishman" really beautifully does.
I'm not quite sure I'd call Killer "satire" per se, at least not any more than "Fight Club"... just as it's not admiring of its main character it's not precisely scornful of him, either; his favorite attitude (besides "contempt") is "ambivalence"
He talks like Carles.
I listen to the exact same killer playlist while writing. Does that make me a sigma female...? 🤔 . Really appreciated this analysis!!
I'm not sure how much I would ascribe to the screenwriter — I haven't seen the movie, but it sounds as though the dialogue and ethos of the movie was directly taken from the (repetitive and often boring) graphic novel. The killer is insufferable in it!
Interesting! Apparently Fincher has been trying to adapt it for years—clearly something about "insufferable anal freak muttering to himself as he kills people" has always appealed to him.
I had to check whether the Peaky Blinders guy was actually named Peaky Blinder, because it seemed at least plausible. Too bad.
It is
"Spot of tea, Mr. Blinders?"
"Darling, please, call me Peaky."
Great show.
Small thing, but Gen Z barely just started hitting college a few years ago; the freshmen in college today are well within that cohort.
Look, I can't keep track of anyone younger than 30, it should be enough that I even acknowledge that these generations exist
This is great! I would love to hear how you think the client guy that he ends up not killing at the end fits into it. I am obsessed with the outfit they gave him -- the Sub Pop t-shirt, the knit hat worn indoors, the converse lowtops or equivalent, all worn at the gym (?). Is he like Fincher, a boomer/Gen X cusp who was hip to the kids back when Gen X were kids, but not really into alpha masculinity as such, maybe a proto-sigma in his own right?
If you want to take the 4channish reading really literally, I think there's something interesting in the way the sigma-male hitman reaches a sort of detente with a tech-exec master of the universe--essentially an agreement not to bother each other too much. But I think taking that too far probably makes my reading a bit too 1:1 allegorical. I mean, quite literally, from a plot perspective, as someone else points out in these comments, he doesn't kill the guy because his face is caught on camera in the elevator--another example of the character's frequent slips.
Fincher et al seemed to enjoy messing with our expectations - just when we thought he wouldn’t, he would and vice versa. So when we expected the killer to kill the billionaire, of course he didn’t. That’s too simplistic, but I think that’s part of the answer.
I’ve read the first several paragraphs without seeing any mention of this being an adaptation of a comic book, which seems like a pertinent detail.