posted
I just finished reading the book, I really liked it, and was wondering if the movie is worth renting. Is the movie any good?
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The movie's far better than the book, in my opinion.
I never got far in the book. Never more than two thirds of the way through. Honestly, it just disgusted me--not in a visceral way, as some sort of physical description that was revolting, but more in terms of philosophy. It made me feel physically ill, and I wanted no part in it.
Posts: 767 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't read the book. I did see the movie and liked it very much. I didn't expect to like it and was very pleasantly surprised.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I apologize. I seem to have forgotten the second rule as well. I apologize. I really do.
(I'll go out and rent IT. I was somewhat worried because Entertainment Weekly didn't give it a very good review, and they are usually a reliable source for that kind of thing.)
*opens can of frozen orange juice concentrate*
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I usually disagree with Entertainment Weekly's reviews. Other than OSC, who I sometimes disagree with too, I can't find a reliable source for reviews.
Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Definitely one I need to rent. And, if I like it, purchase it at Wal-Mart for $13.72 (I can't believe I know how much it costs! I looked at it ONCE! Just once. That is crazy.)
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
All right, gotta ask. Are there any parts of the movie that might be considered objectionable? Like, excessive vulgarity, intense violence, or nudity? I do want to watch it, but I don't care for that kind of stuff.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are a lot of scenes of people beating each other up, lots of language, one sex scene (mostly CGI, but still), if you rent it (esp DVD) there is more nudity, but it is pretty brief. Best as I recall anyway.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It really depends. I know a lot of people that were VERY offended by the movie for various reasons. Some because of the seemingly unnecessary violence, blood and language, others by the ideas presented.
Either way, if you're sensitive to that sort of thing...think twice.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think I'll be alright. I don't think my mom will want to watch it with me though. My dad might, he was asking about it the other day.
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's some very short flashes of full frontal male nudity in the movie. It's in reference to working as a projectionist and splicing a few frames from porn films into children's movies. Most go by so quick you don't see anything, but there is one very, um, noticeable one at the very end.
posted
I didn't expect to like the movie, and so I didn't see it in the theater. A friend of mine forced me to see it, and I think it's brilliant. (I think they marketed it totally wrong, though.)
If you are at all sensitive about vulgarity, violence, or genitalia, then this is likely not a movie for you.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love that movie. Except I cannot understand WHY a person would want to join a fight club or
spoiler
follow a complete and total lunatic. I also read the book too, and it's one of those rare instances where I liked the movie a bit better. Let me know what you think of it. But it is a bit violent, which is an understatement.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Join a Fight Club, you mean? I probably would. Its something for people who have anger problems but contain them. Let off a little steam. Who cares if you get a few battle scars in the process?
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
Actually, what I think is unfortunate is that a lot of people who saw the movies were adolescent males who were unable to grap the subtleties of meaning and humor in the movie--present company excluded, of course; I'm thinking here of my students--and just saw it as a glamorization of actual fistfighting. I would say we had a spike in fights in the five years or so after that movie came out.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm an adolescent male. Are you saying I won't be able to grip the subtleties of meaning and humor in the movie? Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I tend to agree with what Porter said earlier. Everyone seems to be all in a tizzy about this movie, but I think it's kinda blah now.
I'll be honest though, when I first saw it I thought it was great, and cool, and laaaaa.
But after watching it a couple more times it really wore on me, and I started to dislike it altogether, and now I think it's a lot more hype than substance.
It didn't have the staying power of say, Donnie Darko or Boondock Saints.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I saw the movie and then read the book and I also liked the movie much better than the book. To me, the message was completely different. The book is blatant nihilism, but the movie seems more hopeful and existential.
I don't know what it is about Palahniuk, but I've read three of his books (Fight Club, Survivor, and Lullaby) and I remember all of them incredibly vividly. In fact, I don't want to read any more of his books because of this. I have enough of his ideas in my head for a lifetime. :-P
quote: It didn't have the staying power of say, Donnie Darko or Boondock Saints.
I don't understand the love of Donnie Darko that everybody seems to have. It didn't do much for me. I liked Boondock Saints for one watch, but I wouldn't sit through it again.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
Funny you should say that, Donnie Darko got from excellent to frustrating for me in three viewings. First time I thought the "unexplained" parts were in fact due to my "narrow" vision of the movie. Second time I was wondering if they didn't forget about a quarter of the movie. Third time I was sure they forgot it. I still want to see the director's cut, heard everything is way better explained.
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've only seen the director's cut, I never saw the other version, but now I am curious to see it to know what was left out.
Fight Club bothered me because people I think, keep trying to make it into more than it is, and keep trying to find more to it than there really is. The same could be said of many people and Donnie Darko too, but I'm not sure. I haven't watched DD enough times to be sure there isn't something there. Everytime I DO watch DD though, I'm always left contemplating something at the end.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I see more in Fight Club than you do, who's to say I'm "trying to make more of it than it really is"? If I see it, isn't it really there, and aren't you the one who simply doesn't see it?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
That's entirely possible. Then again, a lot of people saw a homosexual relationship between the Hobbits in Lord of the Rings. Now, I'm fairly positive Tolkien didn't intend for that to be there, and I really don't see it, but a lot of people do. Could it be the rest of us are missing something and there really is a homosexual element to it? Or are they just reading more into it than there is to be seen?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I liked Fight Club a lot, it's really worth a watch.
I've been wanting to read the book but I keep forgetting to look for a copy of it. Maybe this thread will help me remember in the future Posts: 459 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fight Club seems a bit homoerotic to me... The book made it clearer. In L of the R they just love each other a lot though and are good close friends. Very close friends, as they kept nearly dying together.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Fight Club bothered me because people I think, keep trying to make it into more than it is, and keep trying to find more to it than there really is. The same could be said of many people and Donnie Darko too, but I'm not sure. I haven't watched DD enough times to be sure there isn't something there. Everytime I DO watch DD though, I'm always left contemplating something at the end.
I think this is true of a lot of movies, especially movies with complex psychological motifs like the two mentioned.
Also, most people that didn't fully enjoy the theatrical release of Donnie Darko found the Director's Cut to be a much, much more satisfying experience. The hardcore types, on the other hand, despise the Director's Cut because they feel it clarifies too much.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I tend to dislike things that are purposefully so cryptic that they almost don't want you to understand them. I dislike them in the same sense that I dislike elitists who pretend to understand deep philosophy just so they can look down on people who don't, or who don't care, or who think it's all crap.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had no idea what I was in for seeing Fight Club for the first time and absolutely loved it. I still love it. It's, in my opinion, one of the best movie adaptations ever made. And the movie does have certain elements to it that the book can't compare to. But I think in the end the book is superior.
Though this is coming from a huge Pahlaniuk fan. I love his writing and so naturally appreciate reading the book more than watching the movie.
Icarus, you're right about them marketing the movie totally wrong. And you're also right about how a lot of people missed the point of the movie, as well as the book. I used to post on a Palahniuk forum and some of the people there were ridiculous. I couldn't believe how off the mark people were about it. I had to stop posting there.
Corwin, if you own the original dvd, the directors cut is mostly just deleted scenes from that disc reincorporated back into the movie. There's also some close up shots of the "philosophy of time travel" book, showing the text of the pages. You can also find that in the special features of the original dvd. Then there are a few minor(but important) things that were created solely for the directors cut that really change(or fully explain) the backstory a little more.
I love both versions, but the biggest thing that keeps me from re-watching the directors cut is the change of opening song for the movie.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I often wonder to myself whether or not the people who go around saying 'most people just didn't *get* Fight Club' actually understood it themselves?
It is a pretty open call to arms -
It's not satirizing anything, it's an argument for Anarchy. It's a very political book.
Palahniuk is an Anarchist and he has an ax to grind against traditional American values. There is no doubt about that.
I wonder if the line between people who loved Fight Club and the people who didn't would be better characterized as: people who embrace Palahniuk's Anarchist message, and people who don't, rather than: people who get Fight Club, and people who don't. Honestly I'm not sure there're a whole lot of people who "didn't get" Fight Club.
It's all pretty open and obvious.
Choke, Survivor, Invisible Monsters, and Fight Club are all making the same arguments, by the way. His message is very definitely and very obviously, "Hey, let's scratch this culture out and start over, kids."
I think the people who hate fight club are the people who object to that message.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also loved DD because it introduced me to Gary Jules' "Mad World" which I think is one of the best songs ever. And it was used to well in the movie.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
TL, in Fight Club, doesn't it matter at all to the overall message of the story that in the end, the anarchist (Tyler Durden) is defeated? Palahniuk has said that he views Fight Club as basically a romance story. In a dark and very twisted way, I tend to agree, about Fight Club and his other books as well, though I haven't read Invisible Monsters yet.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
He's not defeated. You've read the book? The hospital ending?
And I thought sort of the point of Fight Club was that Tyler Durden started something that the narrator couldn't control, no matter how badly he might have wanted to.
In the end, Fight Club was going to grow, and Project Mayhem was going to continue -- they didn't need Tyler Durden anymore.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even if you forget about the book, and just consider the film version --
Project Mayhem acheives their goals; they bring down the buildings. They destroy what they set out to destroy. Tyler Durden wins, even though he no longer exists.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
