• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Fight Club - I gave up a bit more than part-way through

Gaith

Vice Admiral
Admiral


fightclub.jpg



Roger Ebert:
Although sensible people know that if you hit someone with an ungloved hand hard enough, you're going to end up with broken bones, the guys in "Fight Club" have fists of steel, and hammer one another while the sound effects guys beat the hell out of Naugahyde sofas with Ping-Pong paddles.

... Helena Bonham Carter creates a feisty chain-smoking hellcat who is probably so angry because none of the guys thinks having sex with her is as much fun as a broken nose.... Women, who have had a lifetime of practice at dealing with little-boy posturing, will instinctively see through it; men may get off on the testosterone rush.​
Well, at least one man didn't - Nathan Rabin, AV Club:
A tremendous technical accomplishment, a masterpiece of set design, editing, scoring, and precise direction. [But...] Everything about it conveys a smug, adolescent nihilism that's as emotionally powerful as it is shallow, and while it may be interpreted as an anti-fascist/anti-cult parable, it also draws most of its power from the same conformist, hyper-masculine ideology.

... [It] never really has any humanity to speak of.​
One of the pleasures of reading Ebert's reviews is that of watching him toss off piercing insights, such as the one about Carter's Marla Singer. Why does the unnamed protagonist (a cheap writer's trick that must be offset with genuine dramatic energy to work; see, Ewan McGregor's lovable rube The Ghost Writer) not forget all about Tyler Durden and lose himself in the delights of such a lithe and pliant barbie doll of a Hollywood Love Interst? The movie doesn't bother to offer an explanation, which can only be interpreted to mean: "because the plot requires him not to." At their cores, both The Ghost Writer and Fight Club carry sophomoric and hollow statements about the World at Large, but only one of them bothers to wrap it in a compelling narrative and lively characters.
 
^ It was in my top five of the nineties. This thread makes me think about watching it again in order to re-evaluate it. Always loved the unusualness of the twist, not only because it happens well before the end of the movie but also because it actually explains and adds rewarchability to it. You actually need to see it twice to fully appreciate it.
 
Last edited:
Great movie, if only for having a twist and not shouting from the rooftops that it had a twist meaning I didn't know there was a twist and hence didn't spend the film figuring out what the twist was. Hence when the twist showed up I was genuinley surprised!

That doesn't happen often enough these days...
 
I haven't seen it in forever, but I'm quite sure that Fight Club would place The Ghost Writer in a head lock and then slam it into a pillar.
 
At their cores, both The Ghost Writer and Fight Club carry sophomoric and hollow statements about the World at Large, but only one of them bothers to wrap it in a compelling narrative and lively characters.

It's unclear from your thread title... Did you finish Fight Club? If not, then, you've missed a bunch of answers.

If you did... meh, sorry you didn't like it.

It's a great movie.
 
Why does the unnamed protagonist (a cheap writer's trick that must be offset with genuine dramatic energy to work; see, Ewan McGregor's lovable rube The Ghost Writer) not forget all about Tyler Durden and lose himself in the delights of such a lithe and pliant barbie doll of a Hollywood Love Interst? The movie doesn't bother to offer an explanation, which can only be interpreted to mean: "because the plot requires him not to."

Uh, if you reach the end of the movie, this becomes pretty clear. Even towards the beginning, it's obvious that the appeal of sticking with Tyler Durden is he is what Ed Norton is not. The main character looks up to him and sees him as a salvation from his monotonous life of depression, insomnia, and unfulfilled hopes and dreams.
 
Great film!

I disagree with the reviews listed, but to each his/her own.
 
I didn't think that I'd like Fight Club, but I caught it on TV one night, about 10 minutes in, and was drawn in to the story surprisingly easily. Great film, especially the ending.
 
Well, I'd had the big reveal spoiled beforehand, so I was fully aware of it the whole time...

:cardie: :cardie: :cardie:

Wow... :p

It's unclear from your thread title... Did you finish Fight Club? If not, then, you've missed a bunch of answers.
Got bored. Read plot summary and reviews. Sticking to my conclusions. Not sorry. ;)


Why does the unnamed protagonist (a cheap writer's trick that must be offset with genuine dramatic energy to work; see, Ewan McGregor's lovable rube The Ghost Writer) not forget all about Tyler Durden and lose himself in the delights of such a lithe and pliant barbie doll of a Hollywood Love Interst? The movie doesn't bother to offer an explanation, which can only be interpreted to mean: "because the plot requires him not to."

Uh, if you reach the end of the movie, this becomes pretty clear.
What, Narrator can't fancy a shag because only the Tyler part of him has any kind of sexual desire? I guess that's a plausible explanation, but it would further justify Rabin's point that the movie is woefully short on humanity.
 
Why does the unnamed protagonist (a cheap writer's trick that must be offset with genuine dramatic energy to work; see, Ewan McGregor's lovable rube The Ghost Writer) not forget all about Tyler Durden and lose himself in the delights of such a lithe and pliant barbie doll of a Hollywood Love Interst? The movie doesn't bother to offer an explanation, which can only be interpreted to mean: "because the plot requires him not to."

Uh, if you reach the end of the movie, this becomes pretty clear.
What, Narrator can't fancy a shag because only the Tyler part of him has any kind of sexual desire? I guess that's a plausible explanation, but it would further justify Rabin's point that the movie is woefully short on humanity.

More confidence than desire, but basically yes. I don't think it's so much short on humanity as it suggests that society has sucked people of humanity (or, really, of a cause).
 
Gaith said:
What, Narrator can't fancy a shag because only the Tyler part of him has any kind of sexual desire? I guess that's a plausible explanation, but it would further justify Rabin's point that the movie is woefully short on humanity.
More confidence than desire, but basically yes.
Narrator didn't have to have any confidence whatsoever in the breast examination scene.

I don't think it's so much short on humanity as it suggests that society has sucked people of humanity (or, really, of a cause).
I don't see those statements as contradictory. The suggestion it indeed makes is facile bull, the self-pitying bleating of the rich and privileged - as the ending itself acknowledges.

It remains my favorite movie twelve years later. How anyone could give up on it part-way through...
What can I say, not a big fan of sophomoric mediocrity. Zodiac, on the other hand, now there's a great film. ;)
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top