Fight Club (Two-Disc Collector's Edition) Reviews

• The most underrated film of the last year

  
  By A2WDSO1DQZ7J03 on 2000-02-10
  When I'm looking at the Top Ten list's of America's critics and the nominations of the DGA,WGA and all the other guilds and press associations, I terribly miss David Fincher's outstanding film "Fight Club", which is possibly the best film of 1999.

  Not only is the film visualy stunning, it is also very thought-provoking, wickedly funny and, above all, extremely entertaining. Only few films managed to be so many things at once. David Fincher, in my opinion one of the most exciting directors of the decade, fills his movie with so many ideas that it would be sufficient for three more movies, and they are not just gimmicks for their own sake, they all mean something. Edward Norton and Brad Pitt are brilliant in the leads and the soundtrack by the Dust Brothers fits perfectly to the images.

  Many reviewers thought the film was fascist. I think you can only call this ridiculous, since that assumes Fincher sympathizes with Tyler Durden's project mayhem. In fact, he invites us to form our own opinion, like Stanley Kubrick did in "A Clockwork Orange". "Fight Club" hands over the resposibility to the viewer. This may be uncomfortable to some, others (like myself) will embrace this.
  
  

• This Movie is Why "Professional" Critics Must Go

  
  By A1AAN285FE45GP on 2000-04-29
  I didn't see this movie in the theaters because it had gotten very mixed reviews from the so-called professional movie reviewers. But, when it hit the local vidoe store, I thought I would give it a try. WOW, what a kick in the teeth, interesting, and fast moving journey into one man's mind. The path this movie takes is fantastic.

  Norton and Pitt are perfectly cast, and supported by a crew of fight club members that make for a well-acted show. Meatloaf, Ed Gil, Jared Leto, et. al. are great in support as the members/followers of the leads. Helena Bonham Carter has the only real female role in this film and is perfectly cast. But as much as the acting, this movie is made by the story. Unconventional, with a great twist at the end, the whole movie kept me on the edge of my seat. As with many great movies, it is hard to classify the genre (action, comedy, drama), as there is a sampling of all in this film. In the end, I would just classify this as a great film.

  Much was made of the violence of this movie when it first hit the theaters. Those critics overstated the case. There is blood and violence in the movie, but it is not excessive and it serves the plot well.

  If you missed this in the theater, see it now. If you saw it once, see it again. I will.
  
  

• Misunderstood Masterpiece

  
  By A5S45GL725BLN on 2000-02-10
  This is one of the most thought provoking films in recent memory. The negative remarks and ignorant backlash from select critics and groups should not deter the potential viewer. I would question anyone who is quick to dismissively criticize this movie. Director David Fincher's vision is extraordinary, teamed with an all-star cast in top form, including the greatest actor to ever grace the screen, Edward Norton. Technically, every aspect of the film is a wonder. Everywhere from the editing to the cinematography, the screenplay to the soundtrack.

  First and foremost I feel that this is a movie about self exploration and self discovery. The title, and the rumored malicious violence, should not discourage one from seeing this movie. The fighting is minimal and at the very least, secondary. Its usage in the story is metaphoric (amongst many other ideas in the movie). The violence has been unfairly misrepresented by the media as well, (1980's Raging Bull had much more excruciating violence, which by the way, is now considered a classic by most). Yes, the movie satirizes today's society, but the accusations of fascist views and endorsement is ludicrous! If anything I feel that in the end, the alternative, or the "antiestablishment" is made a bigger mockery of. I think the second half blatantly emphasizes that. The "plot twist" that many of the reviewers have so rudely eluded to is just a further illustration that the struggle for identity, relationships, and self discovery is an internal battle.

  One day we will look back on this movie and respect it for what it is. A very unique, intelligent satire. A sure fire classic.
  
  

• "Fight Club" and Francis Fukuyama's "End of History"

  
  By A2KG8WLR1AKO12 on 2000-09-04
  The late director, Stanley Kubrick's masterpiece, "Clockwork Orange" is a better movie than "Fight Club." This fact, though, should not deter one from viewing this film that includes the incredibly talented actors, Brad Pitt and Edward Norton. These two artistic masters alone mandate that a serious person take a chance on this challenging and very disturbing story.

  Francis Fukuyama's book "The End of History" came to mind while viewing this dark satirical film. Fukuyama argued a few years ago that perhaps our society will evolve to the point where we have essentially accomplished all that can be hoped for in satisfying our essential needs. This satiation of all our everyday basic wants and desires could leave us bored and existentially empty. Do homo sapien males especially have an innate urge to risk their lives? What if there are no wars to be legitimately fought? Is it possible that the male gender will always feel an incumbent need to seek an alternative option to express the violent side of their nature? Edward Norton portrays a white collar yuppie about 30 who doesn't have much of a life. He buys unnecessary consumer goods merely to give himself something to do and add to his sense of security. Norton's character earns a living cynically investigating when it might be better for his employer to pay off on an individual accident claim instead of ordering a far more expensive automobile recall. I usually dislike movies with a strong anti-Capitalist message. This is the economic system which has greatly improved the lives of many throughout the world. Nonetheless, I put aside this rational prejudice to see if the director, David Fincher, could offer some insights into the mind set of those self absorbed males inclined towards violence merely to alleviate the boredom of their meaningless lives. My investment in Fincher was amply rewarded.

  The Italian Fascist, Benito Mussolini, had a deep intense hatred for logical thinking and the values of democratic civilization. Mussolini argued that violence for its own sake has redeeming and cathartic value. True manliness demanded a cold indifference towards human suffering and a callous disregard for the rights of others outside one's immediate social group. "Fight Club" never directly refers to Mussolini, but Fincher's vision provides us with a window into the soul's of those attracted to a lifestyle rightfully perceived as commonly alien and disgusting. Fincher refuses to romanticize the converts to the "Fight Club" therapeutic culture. We do not in anyway envy or wish to emulate these sick and pathetic creatures. On the contrary, we are left at the end of the film hoping that such angry and frustrated males exist primarily only in fiction. Alas, unfortunately "Fight Club" mirrors at least a bit of what occasionally occurs in the real world. I strongly urge the reader to immediately obtain the 1990 non-fiction book, "Among the Thugs: The Experience, and The Seduction, of Crowd Violence" by English writer, Bill Buford. This superb study of British hooligans who relish beating up innocent people at soccer games complements "Fight Club." Buford's book deals with males who embrace the "Fight Club" morality as their very own. We can only pray that this film does not prove to be prophetic for the increasingly affluent and "End of History" American society beginning the 21st Century.
  
  

• Love it or hate it, it's a masterpiece.

  
  By A3O55KI6ZMQ4DW on 1999-12-21
  Many of the people I know who didn't enjoy this movie simply didn't get it. Some were threatened by the attitude towards consumerism. Others found the violence too much, or even worse, over done. But no one came out of that theatre with something they'd expected or something they could forget about. Those who went in for an action flick were forced to watch a literate, existential, art film with violence that they couldn't get excited about because it had meaning. Those who wanted to see Brad Pitt saw Brad Pitt and paid little mind to the brilliant story brought to us by one of the finest new American authors, Chuck Palaniuk. And the rest were offended by the negative attitude toward their favorite coffee chains, clothing stores, and/or furniture outlet. I say good.

  Some wonderful things about this movie, not giving anything away, are that the characters that are fighting the above mentioned institutions are also willing participants in making them as successful as they are, and the body count is as low as a big budget Hollywood film has been in years. Don't believe me? Check it out.

  As a film, it stands out as one of the most creative and beautifully shot movies this year. David Fincher, not being bound by convention, made one of the best adaptations from novel to screen ever with Fight Club.

  This film will speak to everyone. To some it will say horrible things they do not want to hear. To others it will touch a place you never knew you had in you. Read the book if you want to really know the philosophy. See the movie for a demonstration.
  
  

• DEVASTATING AND POWERFUL!
  By A2ZLROGIL2V7GV on 2001-03-06
  This has to be one of the best movies ever made! Fight Club tells the tale of an insomniac who is losing his grip on reality. Then, he meets Tyler, and that is when all hell breaks out! The naration given by Edward Norton is powerful and haunting, and it makes the suspense and terror seem that more realistic. This is the kind of movie where you cannot tell the story to others too much without giving the whole movie away. The ending is one of the best I have ever seen in a movie since Usual Suspects. This is a powerful movie which will make you believe that chaos can end all existence. I think EVERYONE should see this movie. It is gruesome and violent at times, but it's worth it! It's a shame that I can only give it 5 stars. It really should be 100 stars, or even more! Fight Club is without a dobt one of the best movies ever made!
  
  
• This Movie doesn't care what you rate it...
  By A3DHNYGUNKPJ8V on 2006-01-24
  It's a number. A star. A rating. Tyler knows that. He doesn't care. He's just pleased to know that in a world where even God doesn't know most people's name, there's another man who knows who Tyler Durden is.
  
  Tyler Durden lets Big Lou punch him repeatedly in the jaw, while laughing maniacally, mocking him and infuriating him. At the end of the scene, Tyler seems to make the point: Real men don't always beat the crap out of other men, Real Men laugh silly at other men who try their best to make them feel pain, but only fail repeatedly. How would you feel if you sucked in all the power you had, landed a blow on a dude, and he laughed in your face as if to say, "That's your best shot?" Not very good, I think.
  
  Tyler Durden [Brad Pitt] is the manifestation of every man's fantasy. Good-looking, brash, arrogant, fights like a tank, takes a beating like a tank, ****s like a machine and doesn't do any REAL work.
  
  The Narrator [Ed Norton] is the manifestation of most modern men's reality. Plain-looking, dead-end job, no stable relationship, a decent collection of lifestyle accessories and sheer boredom.
  
  When the two meet, you might expect the movie takes the usual route where the two men get to learn from each other, and find that each person's life has as many highs as pitfalls, and that your life is what you make of it. Err...no. Tyler is an enigma. A revolutionary of sorts. Hell, he isn't here to "learn" about the Narrator. He's here to "Jack" his life!!! Tyler Durden is a bigger, larger-than-life figure than James Bond, the Terminator or even Neo. He could easily steal any one of Bond's potential bed-mates from right under his nose. He could easily program the Terminator to believe its existence was useless and that it should self-terminate. He might even make Neo give-up and dump the whole "Because I choose to.." talk.
  
  This movie may not "change" your life, but it will affect it. You will develop a liking for red leather. You will start working on a new walk. You will start sizing people up everywhere you go. You will stop caring about the fact that you're a 6-foot 120-lbs weakling with 13" biceps. You will start to think, "I'm sure I could throw ONE good dislocating punch at a 220lbs biker even after I take 4 punches to my face". You will want to be in better shape. You will cringe at the idea of a woman having any kind of control over your life. You will want to learn the art of dead-pan sarcasm that scares your boss out of his/her wits. Watch this movie, and you will wish that someday, people will ask, "Say, Who is (insert your name)?"
  
  One of the better "mainstream" movies to have come out of Hollywood in recent years. Unless you exclusively like movies with a "Made for Oscars" plot [Disabled dude learns to appreciate life, WWII/Vietnam Veteran learn the value of human life,Gay Dude stands up against the system, etc.], you will have a hard time wondering why this movie didn't win a few dozen awards. In Tyler, You Can Trust.
  
  
• The year's best satire
  By A4QG6MAN84A4K on 2000-02-03
  FIGHT CLUB arrived in the US with a blaze of publicity stressing its violence and nihilism; some critics (and those close to the production) countered this with the suggestion that it was an anti-materialist jeremiad. On a second viewing, it seems like neither -- it's easier to see it as a smart, committed and complex piece of filmmaking. David Fincher once again dazzles with his direction, which is as intelligently energetic as the acting of Brad Pitt and, especially, Edward Norton. What's really impressive, however, is the way that the film manages to flirt with an anti-materialist, hyper-masculine primitivism even as it suggests that we're all a little too sophisticated to buy it (as it were).

  FIGHT CLUB may hold that we're not the clothes we wear, or the credit cards in our wallet, but it's savvy enough to realise that our paths of thought and modes of organisation are almost entirely contaminated by the world we've created. Is the solution to destroy that world? Well, that's an option -- but watch closely in the movie's second half and see how subtly and hilariously Fincher undermines this: the anarchists begin to chant management-speak, to dissolve into a collective identity, and to form franchises as if they were selling frappucino rather than revolution. Norton is especially horrified at all this, and his wonderful reactions to the disintegration of 'Project Mayhem' are the calm (and moral) centre of the film. Rather like ANIMAL FARM, Fincher tells us that we can have our revolution, but it's going to cost us dear; perhaps even the individuality and reason which we'd hoped to gain from our actions.
  
  

• Who is Tyler Durden?
  By A1NQF8UIYTYTG7 on 2000-05-29
  Fincher's Fight Club opens in a mysterious semi-darkness, both comforting and disquieting, autistic and boundless, vaguely familiar. But it is only when we are expelled from this strangely biomorphic womb-like place we realise that we have been within the deep recesses of our protagonist's mind. In a shaky pullback we emerge from Jack's mouth that has the barrel of a gun jammed inside it.

  Jack is a loner, a man going nowhere fast, an angst-ridden emasculated wage-slave with terrible insomnia. He seeks solace, rather bizarrely, in victim support groups, feeding off the misery of others Sleep comes to him at last and he becomes addicted to the self-help ethos. That is, until he is exposed by another fake attendee, Marla. Without the group empathy and misery-fix to soothe his troubles, Jack hurtles deeper into depression, culminating in his apartment exploding. In his deep dark night of the soul he turns to Tyler Durden.

  Tyler Durden is the embodiment of pure id: an existential nihilist, a sociopath with terrorist inclinations, inhabiting a dilapidated decaying brownstone on the edge of existence. He scavenges human fat from liposuction clinics to make into soap to sell back to the rich ladies it came from; urinates in the soup of the restaurant in which he works; and, moonlighting as a projectionist, he splices single frames of pornography into family movies. The disruption of the social ethic is his prime motivation.

  When the two men get into a fight, Jack is amazed how exhilarated he is by the raw, unfettered violence. Consequently, the Fight Club is formed, a secret society of like-minded males prepared to go one-on-one with bare-knuckles. But, "the first rule of Fight Club is that you don't talk about Fight Club", and with the movie it's true too: here I depart from plot details. But let me say this: Fight Club is not a fighting picture (Van Damme fans be warned) and it is as far removed from the escapist blockbuster that people expected as it is possible to get (hence its box office failure). But, quite simply, Fight Club is, without doubt, one of the most subversive pieces of cinema, ever. And. With a denouement twist that is, unlike The Sixth Sense, impossible to guess.

  Based on a controversial novel by Chuck Palanhiuk, Fight Club is a relentlessly dark, tortuous journey of one man's self-discovery. Hoisted up to greatness by Fincher's incredible vision and by career best performances from both Norton and Pitt, it is one of those rare films that is quite unlike anything that has preceded it. It is intelligent, funny, ultra-violent, touching, repulsive, in equal measures: and, an excruciatingly accurate study of maleness and virility to boot (which, critics take heed, doesn't automatically make the film misogynist [in the same way the human soap factor doesn't make it anti-Semitic]).

  Throw aside your expectations, Fight Club is a modern masterpiece of the dark fantastic.
  
  

• Really, Really, Really Good.
  By A1TD9JUXG1DGW3 on 2000-10-19
  I very nearly did not watch this one, I bungee jumped head-first into the conclusion that it would be about some macho guys fighting to determine who was the most macho. I was so wrong. Edward Norton plays the main protagonist, a cubicle worker for a large corporation, a man who's so devoid of life-force he can only find peace by attending self-help groups for the terminally ill. On a business trip he meets Tyler Durden, an easy-going salesman. They find that fighting - simply fighting, with no animosity or purpose - fulfills a need within themselves. Others join them, until they eventually have a club as fascist and mindless as the corporations they scorn. Along the way, the plot delves into some very dark and masochistic places, and the surrealistic story not so much draws us in, as forcibly abducts us, and we are played with, teased, and disturbed. The acting through-out is excellent. Brad Pitt completely becomes the charismatic Durden, who serves as our guide to this warped Underworld. Helena Bonham Carter is the morbid and trashy Marla Singer, a kind of groupie to the dying. Another excellent job was done by Meatloaf. There is a lot of pain here, but the pain and ugliness gives rise to black and sardonic humour, and by the end every last part of my soul, no matter how hard and critical, had been touched.

  The questions this story asks are disturbing. How much pain are we inflicting on ourselves in order to feel alive? Are our comfortable modern lives at odds with, and at risk of being destroyed by, our innate need for struggle? When we reject one set of values do we fall prey to another? Oddly enough, given the violent theme and the black humour, there is no meanness here, and the characters are not set up to be made fun of, (which I felt was the case in American Beauty), nor do they need our sympathy. There is no intent on the part of the characters to destroy life, but rather to destroy that which prevents us from experiencing life. I loved it, I loved being held hostage by it, and I am grateful to the artists who made it.
  
  

• Huh-huh-huh, blowing stuff up is cool
  By A1NUNYRFNUF2JJ on 2002-08-02
  "Fight Club" tries to be provocative and oh-so-hip, but it's essentially an ugly, mean-spirited -- and worse yet, *pointless* -- tantrum.

  You can't help despising every one of the characters. Ed Norton plays a weak, neurotic nonentity. Helena Bonham Carter plays a thoroughly unpleasant lowlife -- the sort of woman who wouldn't care if she were wearing underwear even if she were hit by the proverbial bus (which, by the time she'd been in the movie ten minutes, I was devoutly hoping for). Brad Pitt (whose character "Tyler" inspired similar bus longings) plays an insufferable overaged brat. He's a smug, know-it-all windbag who spouts preachy anti-materialistic rants -- while wearing expensive trendy clothes -- but in garish colors, so we know that he's a "nonconformist". Luckily for Tyler, his physical attractiveness lends a specious credibility to his lectures, because their content was simplistic and hackneyed -- we've all heard it many times before, done better. If they'd cast, say, Dennis Franz in that part, the tirades would have had the underwhelming effect that they actually merited.

  The movie begins with the content and theme of a fair-to-middling "Dilbert" comic strip -- suburban white guys whining about how they can no longer assume as a given a life of effortless wealth, privilege, and power. Their jobs are dull and don't offer intellectual challenge, spiritual fulfillment, or satisfaction. In other words, because of evil corporations... or having been raised by single mothers... (or something)... they've been cheated out of what they'd considered their rightful due, and are now stuck with the same problems that everyone thinks normal when faced by women, African-Americans, and the working class.

  For some reason -- possibly because the filmmakers quite correctly surmised that a movie consisting entirely of anti-corporate sermons wouldn't sell very many tickets -- Tyler's solution is to reclaim their masculinity... or overthrow the corporate hierarchy... (or something)... by picking fistfights and blowing stuff up. This becomes popular with other suburban white guys with way too much time on their hands, who decide that they're all victims, too, and that they all want to pick fights and blow stuff up, too.

  This spirals out of control, Sorcerer's-Apprentice-like, and (d)evolves into a dystopian cult/army of suburban white guys; complete with rules, chants, and rituals (see what I mean about these people having way too much time on their hands?); every bit as dehumanizing as their jobs. The members of "Fight Club" start as sheep-like drones mindlessly obeying corporate bosses, and end as sheep-like drones mindlessly obeying rabid-dog sociopath Tyler. The movie has the nerve to try to pass this off as rebellion... or asserting their individuality... (or something).

  Granted, the movie is well made, well acted, and visually interesting. Granted, it makes points -- about the amorality of megacorporations and the inadequacy of consumer capitalism as a substitute for independence, worthwhile work, and fulfillment -- which are valid, and might even have been thought-provoking, had they not been delivered in such a God-awful heavy-handed fashion. Anyone intelligent enough to contemplate such issues doesn't need them pounded home with a sledgehammer.

  But a competent presentation of a ridiculous, muddled premise ("Single mothers"? Who is this -- Dan Quayle?) is worse than an incompetent one, because it's harder to dismiss. The filmmakers attempt to disguise/justify/redeem the movie's hateful, no-win false dichotomy (one can escape being a victim only by victimizing others) with trite thematic content (materialism bad), but all that does is make it prissy and hypocritical as well as thuggish -- like putting a doily over a Sherman tank.

  The movie has no African-American, Hispanic, or blue-collar characters, although those groups face at least as many difficulties and injustices as the middle-class office workers depicted. The lone woman character is physically and personally repellent -- worse, her only purpose is as a spittoon for the men. So if I understand correctly: The movie has no blacks, no Hispanics, no working-class people, only one woman (who's a caricature, and loathsome as well), and crypto-Nazis (Tyler actually confesses he renders soap from human flesh -- but it comes from fat people, so that's supposed to be hilarious and cool -- apparently he's not quite subversive enough to deconstruct mainstream esthetics), setting bombs and beating people up as a solution to depersonalization... but it *does* rag on Ikea. REAL progressive!

  Get a clue, fellas. If your self-worth and autonomy depend on a "masculinity" defined as brutality, a dull job is the least of your problems. It's supposed to be shocking news that jobs are unrewarding sometimes? Companies are in business to make money -- period -- and *nobody's* life is fun every minute of every day. Imbuing your life with meaning is *your* responsibility, not your employer's. If you're bored or unfulfilled -- paint a picture, climb a mountain, volunteer at the homeless shelter -- do whatever matters to *you*. If you hate Ikea -- don't buy their stuff. If you hate consumerism -- throw your cellphone in the trash and wear your 1980s-vintage stonewashed jeans until they fall apart. Or wouldn't that be trendy enough?

  Testosterone run amuck and mindless nihilism have cathartic appeal to angry, frustrated adolescent boys of all ages, but they don't make for a good story, nor interesting filmmaking. Despite pretending to be a Deep Meaningful Parable... (or something), "Fight Club" is still very obviously a movie about picking fistfights and blowing stuff up, and not much more. Presenting bombings and beatings as self-empowerment is reprehensible enough without also insulting the viewer's intelligence with a smokescreen of "moral" posturing -- to say nothing of the infuriatingly condescending assumption that those who disagree "just don't get it".

  Even Brad Pitt with his shirt off can't make this movie watchable -- and I am a person who likes looking at Brad Pitt with his shirt off. Unless you prefer your dimwitted violence with a side order of sanctimonious rhetoric, skip this movie and watch "Beavis and Butthead" -- at least they're funny.
  
  

• I guess you have to be a White guy to get this movie.
  By on 2000-03-16
  Most minorities have other things to worry about than "boredom" in American society. Our everyday existence is a challenge so there's no way we get bored and have to form a fascist fight club to relieve the boredom. I'm reading a lot of reviews--probably by White guys--who say they can't understand why more people don't appreciate or understand this movie. Why don't you look at it from a non-White guy point-of-view? Most minorities who I talk to are sick and tired of Hollywood making movies about White guys and their insignificant problems--especially Fight Club, American Beauty. All throughout Fight Club, I felt like slapping Ed Norton and saying, "Snap out of it. Get on with your life. If you're so bored--why don't you do some charity work or something useful. That'll make you feel better about yourself." That's what Hollywood needs to do--make films about bored White guys who help out at soup kitchens instead of whining about their stupid problems. Then I'll like the movie.
  
  
• A savage, subversive, insightful entertainment
  By ARH9IQEMFKR6M on 2000-05-25
  Fight Club has to be one of the best films I have seen in years. A complex, well acted, beautifully flimed drama about one man's descent into madness, it is alive with dark humor, violent action, emotional turmoil, skillful plotting and really insightful commentary on social life and society at century's end.

  Ed Norton and Brad Pitt are exceptional. As different as night and day, it isn't possible to compare their performances, but since they exist in the film as foils for one another's characters they create together a wonderful balance - an edgy give and take that is at the heart of the film's exciting dynamic. Helena Bonham Carter, free for once of the aristocratic pretensions of her usual film characters, can't begin to measure up. She doesn't have the heat on screen that Norton and Pitt bring to their parts. Meat Loaf, in a surprisingly touching characterization, brings more to the screen - in every sense - than Carter does.

  It isn't fair to try and elaborate on the plot because the twists and ambiguities are a large part of the fun - and of the darker purpose of the film. But it is worthwhile to point out what the film is not; it is not a typical "guy" film. It uses the boy-centered, testosterone fueled theme of the 'fight club', a club that exists strictly for the purpose of providing guys an opportunity to fight, to make a valid critical statement about urban societ today - men feel isolated, adrift, untested, worthless and tame. Fight club gives its members confidence, provides a chance for them to express their anger and aggression, creates contact and bonding, fills the emptiness and gives them purpose. Watching the fight club go from an informal gathering for a few to a rule based movement spreading like wildfire across the country is almost surreal.

  There is lots of savage humor in this film. Many of Pitt's lines and a lot of Norton's voice-over narration are both memorable and funny. But this is definitly not a comedy and not for the faint of heart. If you've got the stomach for it, this is one great entertainment and a fine serious film at the same time. I highly recommend it.
  
  

• One of the Best over-looked films of 1999
  By A11HESQXNWF5V6 on 2000-02-22
  I walked into the theater expecting to hate this movie...but walked out thoroughly amazed. This is one of the most under-rated brilliant films I've seen in a long time. The directing and editing style is top notch that keeps pace with the interesting characters and ever-developing plotline. -- People hated this movie, yet LOVED the "Sixth Sense." I don't get it. -- "Fight Club" is a wonderful satire in the age of "Men are from Mars." Over-the-top violence seems to be consistantly misunderstood (see: "Natural Born Killers" as an example) and it appears to have happened again here. A great story, snappy dialogue...plus, Edward Norton continues to demonstrate himself to be one of the greatest actors of his generation...This movie is a must-see for anyone who loves movies. I can't wait to get the DVD so my friends and I can end the raging debate about all the flash frames in the beginning 20 minutes of the film.
  
  
• I want you to hit me as hard as you can
  By A1VCPMT1RRS7K0 on 2006-02-07
  The special edition bonus DVD is pretty indepth. There is plenty of bonus material to keep you busy for a while. There are deleted scenes included and you can actually choose the angle at which you will view some of them. Pretty cool. There are many short featurettes for which you can also choose the audio and visual options. Overall, the special edition is a good step up from the original DVD. The case is a cool matte finish and it folds out neatly.
  
  I genuinely enjoyed this movie. It lets conservative people live out their fantasies through the character of Tyler Durden, much like Michael Douglas did to a degree in "Falling Down". Edward Norton and Brad Pitt are truly remarkable together in this movie and they each seem to be irreplaceable in their respective roles. The scenes are gritty, grimey and nearly morbid, for the most part- which lends it a certain lure. This film appeals to the primal part of most people. I, personally, thought it was wonderfully different and very enjoyable.
  
  Definitely recommended viewing.
  
  
• Entertaining & Enlightening
  By A2YERZIIW4HRSB on 2000-05-19
  Fight Club" an aggressive, confrontational, often brutal satire that is quite possibly a brilliant masterpiece. Taking the "Choose life," anti-consumerism rant at the beginning of "Trainspotting," and carrying it to its logical -- albeit extreme -- conclusion this is a big budget, mainstream film that takes a lot of risks by biting the hand that feeds it. The film's narrator (Edward Norton) is an insignificant cog in the drab, corporate machine, dutifully doing his job and what he's told without question. He's an insomniac slave to his IKEA possessions and only finds joy in going to as many self-help/dealing with terminal diseases sessions as he can. It provides him with an escape from his sleepless nights. That is, until Marla Singer (Helena Bonham Carter), a trashy chain-smoking poser, enters his life and upsets his routine. The narrator also meets Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt), a charismatic soap salesman whose straightforward honesty, candor and sleazy lounge-lizard outfits are a breath of fresh air. One night, after the two men have bonded over beers, Tyler asks the narrator to hit him. At first, it seems like an absurd request but after they pound on each other for a bit, a strange feeling overcomes them. They feel a kind of release and satisfaction at inflicting pain on one another. In a world where people are desensitized to everything around them, the physical contact of fighting wakes them up and makes them feel truly alive. Others soon join in and pretty soon Fight Club becomes an underground sensation. However, it becomes readily apparent that Tyler has more elaborate plans than just organizing brawls at the local bar. David Fincher has taken the dark, pessimistic worldview of "Seven" and married it with the clever plot twists and turns of "The Game" and assembled his strongest effort to date. "Fight Club" is a $50+ million studio film that remains true to its anti-consumer, anti-society, anti-everything message -- right up to the last, sneaky subliminal frame. What makes "Fight Club" a subversive delight is not only its refreshing anti-corporate message but how it delivers said message. As Fincher has explained in interviews, you don't really watch the film but rather download it. Its structure is extremely playful as it messes around with linear time to an incredible degree. The narrative bounces back and forth all over the place like a novel, or surfing on the Internet -- even making a hilarious dead stop to draw attention to itself in a funny, interesting way that completely works. Yet Norton's deadpanned narration holds everything together and allows the viewer to get a handle on what's happening. This is the way films should be made. Why must we always have to go through the A+B+C formula? "Fight Club" openly rejects this tired, clearly outdated structure in favour of a stylized frenzy of jump cuts, freeze frames, slow motion and every other film technique in the book that only reinforces its anarchistic message. A film like this would have never been greenlighted by a major studio if Brad Pitt had not been attached to the project. Once you see the film, it becomes obvious that he was the only choice for Tyler Durden. Like he did with "Kalifornia" and "Twelve Monkeys", Pitt grunges himself down and disappears completely into his role to a frighteningly convincing degree. During many of the brutal fight scenes, he is transformed into a bloody, pulpy mess that'll surely have the "Legends of the Fall" fans running for the exits. It is an incredible performance -- probably his best -- for the simple fact that he becomes the character so completely. If Pitt has the flashy, gonzo role, Edward Norton is his perfect foil as the seemingly meek yet sardonic narrator. It's a deceptively understated performance as the last third of the film reveals but Norton nails it perfectly. He is clearly our surrogate, our introduction into this strange world and his wry observations on our consumer-obsessed culture are right on the money. They are the perfect setup for Tyler's introduction and his view on the world which is clearly a call to arms of sorts, a manifesto that rejects the notion that we are what we own. And ultimately, that is what "Fight Club" tries to do. The film is a cinematic punch to the head as it challenges the status quo and offers a wakeup call to people immersed in a materialistic world where those who have the most stuff, "win." I think that Fincher's film wants us to tear all that down, reject corporate monsters like Starbucks and Blockbuster, and try to figure out what we really want out of life. It's almost as if the film is suggesting salvation through self-destruction. And it is these thought-provoking ideas that makes "Fight Club" a dangerously brilliant film that entertains as well as enlightens.
  
  
• Why do I love thee. . . . let me count the ways
  By A24AAZLXP428VG on 2000-09-02
  I am Jack's sense of utter disbelief. How is it that the general America public completely missed the boat on a movie that struck dead center as a perfect parody of our society? I have to draw the conclusion that Fight Club was received relatively poorly at the box office because most people could not understand its primary themes and messages.

  I'm a 30-something male living in 'middle' America and from what I see; our society is tittering on the edge of self destruction. Children are rampaging through schools with shotguns reenacting scenes from Quake and the consensus solution is - take away guns? The polar caps are melting and the news reports that scientists still have no proof of global warming? The population is growing at an exponential rate as our health care system approaches financial melt down attempting to sustain every human life.

  What does this have to do with Fight Club? Obesity is at an all time high in this country, and it serves as a flawless metaphor of America - Fat & Happy. Fight Club puts America (in all of its ugly glory) right in your face, and it appears that the majority of the public is too close to the forest to see the trees. Fight Club says "We'll take their liposuction fat, repackage it in a nice wrapper and sell it back to them as soap". That's an ugly concept that most people don't want to even think about.

  I have asked a number of people what they though this movie was about, and they essentially respond - guys with mental problems who start a club to act as a venue for macho brawls. Were my peers sleeping during their viewings?

  It was reported that when this movie was first screened at the movie studio, the executives involved were concerned about being investigated for promoting fascism. This movie takes aim at "the system", "the man", "the establishment" and strikes dead on. On the DVD, there are supplementary commentaries from all the major players involved with Fight Club. At one point during the dialog, Ed Norton says that when he read the script; he was amazed by the depth, complexity and originality of this movie. After the movie was released, he was criticized along with Pitt for pandering to Hollywood's violent tendencies.

  It may be true that the only reason Hollywood green-lighted this picture was because of the violence, but I don't think they truly understood what they had authorized. If you choose to watch this movie for the first time (or repeatedly which I highly recommend) focus on getting past the violence. The fighting is used as a concept vehicle - we all live in a stress-induced coma that is perpetuated through the daily trials and tribulations of life. The way that the characters wake up from their coma is by experiencing primordial pain - fighting. Once they are awake, they recognize that they have been asleep all of their lives. Oddly similar to The Matrix, but the similarities end there.

  By endorsing this movie, I'm not purporting that we are all silently asleep at the wheel. Neither movies nor their reviews can completely cover complex concepts in a nice simple package. As Norton touched on in the commentary, this movie has more thought provoking ideas than almost any other I can think of. The sad part about Fight Club is the fact that it has become a self-fulfilled prophecy. Its mediocre showing at the box office reinforces Hollywood's perception that the general public is becoming increasingly comatose - we want intellectual Big Mac EXTRA value meals as opposed to Steak au Poivre.

  Could you make sure to put heavy violence and low thought on that Big Mac? Fincher, Norton and Pitt all proved that they had big coconuts to make this movie, and I don't think anyone even noticed their contribution. If you like a well trimmed New York strip steak topped with cognac peppercorn demi-glaze then bon appetit!
  
  

• Brutal and raw
  By A3CWH6VKCTJAD on 2000-06-11
  `Fight Club' is a superb filmmaking achievement. It is brutal, innovative, raw, realistic, and extremely powerful. You could not ask more from the actors. Edward Norton once again portrays a psyche in delicate imbalance with potent and believable intensity. Brad Pitt moves to the far side of diabolical and excels in making his character both warped and charismatic. Helena Bonham Carter also shines as the Tyler's pathetic and parasitic girl friend.

  `Fight Club' takes some of the most pernicious elements of societal dysfunction and wraps them up into a single imaginative well crafted and entertaining film. We have elements of gang behavior, cultism, anarchy, terrorism and debauchery all glorified in the name of iconoclasm. Exciting, seductive and subversive. How utterly cool and hip!

  So now comes the twist. I hated this film. It is a monument to everything that is wrong with filmmaking today. It is clever and technically superb but philosophically and socially bereft. Its attempt at social satire, while effective and visceral, was destructive and noxious. I also can't help but notice the extreme irony of using satire against consumerism as the theme for inducing the masses to buy tickets to consume your film.

  At what point does a film cross the line between art and depravity? `Fight Club' is a brilliant but dangerous film that begs the question. If art is a reflection of a society's culture and values, then when I look at this film I have to be frightened at what is staring back at me. When I reflect on some of the most popular films of the last five years, I can't help but notice the accelerating celebration of random and impulsive violence, depravity, decadence, and pure bad taste. `Fight Club' has pushed the envelope once again to find a new pinnacle (or should I say nadir) in the portrayal of these corrosive elements of societal dissolution.

  It's comical how many people think it is avant-guard to attack the establishment, as if this is a concept only recently conceived. `Fight Club' is just the latest rallying cry to anarchy in a long line of such cries that have plagued society throughout human history. It always seems to be a romantic notion for everyone to be totally free and just live "naturally" (like animals) until one of those animals decides that it is you whom it might be fun to kill today. It doesn't seem to occur to those who extol the sardonic message of such films, that they simultaneously promote and lionize societal destabilization, and that anarchy and mayhem are much less fun in real life than when you are watching them in the air conditioned comfort of your local movie house. Just ask the kids at Columbine High School.

  I like dark movies as much or more than the next guy, but this film simply goes too far. There is nothing wrong with criticizing the establishment. Constructive criticism is the only way to bring about progressive change. But this film is merely vulgar cynicism that suggests that mayhem is preferable to imperfect culture. That is grossly irresponsible.

  So I am placed in the paradoxical position of admiring this film while I must condemn it. As a flickjunkie I must stand in awe of it as a filmmaking accomplishment. But as a human being concerned with the greater good of the species, I must cry out against it. How far are we willing to go in the name of entertainment? Are we so myopic as to demand entertainment at any cost? I guess we will see when someone raises the ante and the next shock treatment comes to a theater near you.
  
  

• Uniquely Unsettlingly Gripping Fable
  By A16358DSH3LW21 on 2000-07-21
  Fight Club, for many reasons, was one of the best films of 1999, and disappointingly overlooked. The author of the book on which this film is based (Chuck Palahniuk) introduces us to the main characters in a horifying scene in which Brad Pitt is about to blow Edward Norton's head off at close range, with the gun in Norton's mouth. Confused, the audience is lured into the story which roams through the recent history that explains the opening scene's situation.

  The lead characters, played by Edward Norton, Brad Pitt and Helena Bonham Carter, are all quirky, neurotic archetypes of the 20th century - each personality clearly nurtured and twisted by the materialism and violence and dissatisfaction of urban American life. Their roles are woven together incestuously as their characters are developed and unfolded through Fight Club.

  The club that emerges in the movie becomes more than just a support gathering, and seems to take on a life of it's own, like some computer system gone awry - like HAL in 2001. At last, no one is the leader, and all are bound to be led, to be destroyed.

  Does this at all make you curious? Are you intrigued by the film at all? Have I successfully avoided giving away the important bits of action and revelation?

  The most significant thing about Fight Club is how shakingly close to home the subject matter hits. While we drug ourselves into indifference with chemicals and furniture and busy-ness, we lose sense of life itself. We lose power over our environment and over our own individual existence. Let go - find out what else there is down deep below the surface of your perfect shimmering facade.

  See Fight Club
  
  

• Hate it if you will...but STOP CALLING IT FASCIST
  By on 2003-01-27
  I have no problem with people disliking this movie. Everyone has different taste. But when people start bashing it because they think it advocates a political position that they obviously don't even understand, I get angry. Countless reviews have called the Fight Club/Project Mayhem group in the film "fascist" or "skinhead". Ebert, the amazon editorial review, and countless viewer reviews have made this assertion. I find this both amusing and incredibly frustrating, because they could not possibly be more wrong in their placement of FC/PM on the political scale. Here is a dicitonary definition of fascism:

  fas·cism
  n.

  1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
  2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
  3. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

  In other words, fascists are ultra-conservatives. They believe that people cannot possibly govern themselves and require the guidance of an absolute dictator to retain order. Since this political view is as far right on the political spectrum as you can get, ultra-conservatives are considered extremists. This, I believe, is where the confusion lies. FC/PM is also an extremist group, but their beliefs are on the far LEFT of the political scale. They are anarchists, and want the complete dissolution of governmental control. If you want to argue about the irony that the organiazation itself is run by a single absolute leader, fine. But if you think that the overall group has fascist goals, you are an idiot. And about the assertion that FC/PM is a "skinhead" organization, that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. The group's members shave their heads as part of the destruction of their individuality ("You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake..."), not as a statement of racism. If you paid any attention to the movie at all, you would notice that there are several black members in Fight Club. That hundreds or even thousands of people have made their descision on whether or not to view this movie based on the incorrect statements of several prominent reviewers annoys me to no end. And by the way, just because there are some anarchist/extremists views expressed in this film does not mean that the writer or director actually advocate anarchy or disorder. The movie is meant to make us look at the way we live, not to convince us of some twisted political agenda. Read the Chuck Palahniuk novel, and this will become even more clear.

  There is nothing in this world that pisses me off more than ignorance.
  And just so you don't think I'm saying that I know more than everyone else, I'm even more pissed off when that ignorance is my own.
  
  

• nothing else like it
  By A1BKMU7Z6D856N on 1999-12-24
  This is a movie unlike any I have ever seen, and a story unlike any I've ever heard of. The direction, writing, acting, shooting, and music are all brilliant. It's a shame that the violence (I admit I looked away once) and the rather extreme and original plot turned so many people off. Edward Norton is amazing--he is one of the best (if not the best) actors of his generation. Brad Pitt also turns in a great performance, certainly proving he is a consumate actor and not simply nice to look at. Helena Bonham Carter is wonderfully trashy, quite a switch from the beautiful women of period films she's known for playing. I think the thing that struck me most about this film, though (other than Norton, as I haven't seen any of his other movies yet) was the way it was shot. Did anyone else notice Tyler (Pitt) popping up on screen every once in a while for split-seconds before he actually showed up as a character? So brace yourself if you need to and check out this fabulous movie. Violent, yes, but also (and moreso) intelligent, creative, and actually often hilarious.
  
  
• Cutting Edge
  By on 1999-12-22
  This movie dropped my jaw to the floor! I loved its dark humor, its razor sharp dialogue and voice over, and its slicing imagery. Definately fresh and original. With the exception of the fascist orginazation determined to bring down society as we know it I have to admit identifying with the Edward Norton character and have asked many of the same questions about our way of life that he did. And might I add that the ending ranks with The Usual Suspects and The Shawshank Redemtion for its unforseeable twist. Much better than the so called suprise ending of the Sixth Sense. After seeing Fight Club all I could think about for days was owning a copy of this on DVD and I am absolutely thrilled to see that Fox is offering such a well deserved menu of features. I cant wait to hear David Fincher's insights on his latest escursion into the unprecedented. I'm always a fan of deleted scenes and out takes. This is what DVD is all about. A great movie and then some! I cant wait to buy this one.
  
  
• A perfect 10!
  By A2H5R1W4XW7PX4 on 2003-11-17
  I will be the first to admit that I had doubts about Fight Club. When the movie was first promoted for its debut in theatres, the advertisements, I believe, gave a misrepresentative impression of the film's actual content. I thought, like many others, that Fight Club was going to be another lackluster production filled with all the clichés you would expect to see in a Van Damme-esque action misadventure. It took some goading but I finally decided to give this movie a chance, and I would highly suggest that anyone who has not should do the same.
  
  For anyone who is tired of the prefabricated plot lines that dominate today's movie industry, you know the ones for teeny-boppers and the sequels to movies unfit for original production, Fight Club is a refreshing alternative. The star-studded cast, Edward Norton, Brad Pitt, and Helena Bonham Carter, provide the perfect chemistry for this deceptively brilliant critique of the modern man. David Fincher, who also collaborated with Pitt in the movie Seven, captures the essence Chuck Palahniuk's novel with beautiful cinematography.
  
  The junior executive, played by Norton, is struggling to swallow his mundane existence. He suffers from a variety of ailments, from depression to insomnia. Norton's character, the narrator, whose name is never revealed during the film, an example of the subtle nuances that make this production so appealing, lacks a sense of identity, as is expressed in the following quote: "I'd look through the catalog and think, what kind of furniture defines me as a man?" Palahniuk, very cleverly, illustrates how disillusioned and materialistic society has become. Tyler's occupation of a soap salesman is yet another example. He sells his luxurious soap, made from lye and the pilfered fat from liposuction clinics, back to the very clients who supplied the materials.
  
  Underneath the comedy, the drama, and, at times, the brutal violence, lays an exceptional social satire. Norton's character and his partner in crime Tyler Durden, played by Pitt, revolt against the twenty-first century image of man. A prime example of Palanhiuk's contempt for the feminization of man occurs when the two board a bus. They see a Calvin Klein advertisement of a perfectly groomed young adult male devoid of imperfections and body hair. Tyler asks, "Is that what a man looks like?" They both laugh and express their sympathy for people following the path of superficial self-improvement.
  
  The film broaches some rather controversial social issues, which separate it from most conservative contemporary pieces. Many women, mothers especially, were offended by the line, "We're a generation of men raised by women; I'm wondering if another woman in my life is really what I need?" I thought that was a goal films; they are supposed to be about eliciting emotion.
  
  This film's cast and director combined to produce a film that will not be soon forgotten. From the horror of the Norton and Leto fight scene to the compassion and sorrow of support group scenes, Fight Club takes you on an eye-opening voyage through the mind of a man gone mad from banality. If you have not watched Fight Club yet and are tired of the same regurgitated garbage, check it out next time you have a chance.
  
  
• A Brilliant Collaborative Effort
  By on 2000-01-04
  Having had a chance to read the working screenplay and the book after seeing the film, I have to say that this is probably one the best adaptations (Jim Uhls, screenwriter) out of Hollywood in a very, very long time. The soundtrack (Dust Brothers) also is amazingly crisp and can easily stand alone as a finished work (Get the CD if you haven't already). Jeff Cronenworth's cinematography slides and pulls through an oily darkness that is almost palpable, and the camera's point of view prowls the fight scenes like a pacing caged animal. The post-production sound engineering by LucasFilm is hyper-detailed like some kind of twitchy, speedy paranoid high. There is not an actor out of place in this film... each shot and each action is remarkably balanced in creating the overall feeling in this amazing work. David Fincher did an incredible job pulling this all together, and I would recommend this film to anyone with a serious interest in what was one of the best films of the decade.
  
  
• Believe the Hype
  By A1RG9ZHTI0KHVW on 2000-05-25
  Beautifully photographed and exquisitely directed, David Fincher's Fight Club is a full-on assault to the senses. But don't get me wrong, this is not a bad thing. The central plot revolves around a bored yuppie portrayed by Edward Norton. In his quest to find some higher meaning in life he stumbles across two dominating characters, portrayed brilliantly by Helena Bonham Carter and Brad Pitt. The chance meeting between these individuals will forever change his life as he is propelled into a grimy world of support groups and bare knuckle fights. While this may not be considered a fun film to watch, it will stick with you long after it is over. Bonham Carter is devilishly good as the snooty Marla and Pitt is a fireball as the macho Tyler Durden. But again, it is Ed Norton who propels the film along.

  Although not a typical action movie, the pace moves very quickly despite the two hour running time. The fight scenes are indescribable as Fincher shows the reality of what happens after being hit in the face. Fight Club does have flaws but the end result will not disappoint.
  
  

• Manipulative
  By on 2002-01-29
  The problem with Fight Club, as Roger Ebert pointed out, is that it is basically talking out of both sides of its mouth. The movie begins with a fine piece of acting by Edward Norton, who plays a basic nobody, emasculated and ground down by consumerism and conformity. Fight Club carries this off pretty well, given how trite the theme is by now.
  At any rate, Edward Norton's character meets Tyler Durden (played by Brad Pitt), a truly liberated and empowered male, i.e. everything that Norton's character is not. Together, they come up with the idea of transcendence through "Fight Clubs" of men beating the living hell out of each other. Supposedly, this will put whiny Gen X-ers in touch with their primal, messier, emotional instincts, which society has breeded out of them. They'll be free men, finally. Unfortunately, it doesn't quite work out, things take a predictably fascist/terroristic turn, and then they get even worse.
  The problem here is the movie's moral center. Look, it says, consumerism is empty and bad. And the 'solution,' it says, is also bad. The audience is not supposed to hold a positive view of the fascist entity Project Mayhem eventually becomes. But while the movie's condemnation of consumer culture is scathing, the shots it takes at Project Mayhem are halfhearted at best. Why? Because it sells itself on scenes of gruesome violence rather than intelligence, and so it needs to show ever more guys pounding each other. It can't quite make the appropriate moral judgment of Pitt's character because it's partially in league with him and everything he represents.
  I can't buy condemnation of violence and terrorism from a movie that is chock full of scenes of violence and terrorism photographed so as to make high schoolers go, "Whoa, cool." It is unfair for a movie to bring out scene after scene of lovingly filmed violence for its audience to marvel at, enjoy, and buy tickets to see, and then at the very end, cough and say "Uhm, violence is bad. Well, goodnight, folks."
  Look, I have no problem with violence in film. I love action movies. But Fight Club tried some cheap cinematic sleight of hand to explain it's way into intelligence, while still shoveling more slop at the lowest common denominator.
  The film is well made, as far as it goes, and Norton is a great actor. But for the avid fans of Fight Club out there, let me say this: It's not that I don't understand or am offended by this movie. I understand it perfectly. Maybe better than you do. Believe me, I get it.
  And it still sucks.
  
  
• RUBBISH!
  By AKSEV4A4W9EZV on 2000-10-15
  This movie wants you to believe its message is that if you are if you are dissatisfied with our superficial, materialist society, you can find relief in squalor and violence. It is actually a movie for people who are entertained by pointless violence, but who need to believe that they are looking at something with artistic or intellectual merit. The movie is arresting, with good performances, but it is basically shallow and manipulative.
  
  
• I love IKEA.
  By ACAO2J1XCS4FL on 2000-06-20
  That "thought-provoking" mantra of 98% customer's reviews is very yawn-provoking. Do you really need to see the guys beaten into the bloody pulp to start the thinking process?

  What has prepared Mr. Fincher for his "penetrating" look at the modern society? Making music videos for Aerosmith, Madonna and - Oh my God! - Paula Abdul? Shooting commercials?

  I find it impossible to relate to any character, act or emotion in that film. It seems that for the director and the movie's fans only 2 alternatives exist - total boredom or extatic frenzy. You are either a mindless consumer or a fierce destructor. Nothing in between?

  Ever heard of contemplation, meditation, elation? Ever saw happy and content people living their meaningful lifes? I do not mean the populace of Nora Efron's idiotic paradise but real people living all around. Why is that fascinationn with marginals?

  The film starts with the main character's complaining. Let me translate it for you. - I am obsessed with that condominium! - In human language it means - I love my home so much! -

  - I leaf through IKEA catalogue ad nauseam.- It means: - I like IKEA's style - it's affordable, sensible and contemporary.-

  - All the contacts in planes and tranes are brief, one-time.- - So what? Some of these episodes are little gems that would be spoiled by prolongation. What do you want? To follow the guy you've spent a couple hours sitting next to to his home, meet his family, stay for a week, see the photos, take his grandma to the park?

  There are less infantile ways of seeing the world , dealing with the problems and letting the steam off. Want to kick and punch - go to a local dojo. It will take you years to learn the right moves.

  What is so charismatic about Brad Pitt's pissing-in-a-soup character? Do you giggle mischeviously seeing him insert a gigantic penis in a kiddie cartoon? That is nothing else but the result of postponed adulthood of the pisser and the gigglers.

  Do you fall for Helena Bonham Carter's heroine - the psyched-out punk with a small Neanthertaloid face and Halloween hairstyle? Want to share a room with her and listen to that - Hear me die...- creaking on a daily basis?

  You can argue that watching a movie about Hitler you do not necessarily enjoy what he is doing. But I've never seen Hitler played by a stud icon. Fight Club guides you where the real excitement is. The life outside is portrayed as a pitiful parody.

  What we see is a hellpless dualism, the love/hate relationship with consumerism. They either wallow in that or smash their head against that. No one is trying to use it reasonably, to enjoy the benefits. No one is strong and wise enough to be above - they either submit or attack.

  And the touch of conspiracy theory is added, the much-loved urban paranoia. No one wants to be alone in a big city, to accept the fact that the world around is mostly indifferent. So the notion of a club - however weird - is very appealing. And I am sure the film's fans consider themselves a club of a sort, the union of cool guys.

  One of the funniest things is the club's franchising at it's branding stage. When I see these chemical burn marks on the hands of the initiated I imagine Tylor going through that eye-to-eye routine hundred times: - Only when you are at the threshold...blah-blah-blah...you can not stop the pain...blah-blah-blah...- then the guy drops and he is all yours.

  The film has nothing to tell. All that contrieved pretentious nonsense is laughable in it's efforts to "tell the truth". Millions of dollars were spent to glamorize the freaks doing their freaky stuff and now the studio wants it's money back with the profit.

  Are you willing to contribute your time and cash? Better buy something useful from IKEA.
  
  

• Defies description
  By AFVI6OICZFKYF on 2000-06-14
  What an incredible story. This is NOT a film that glorifies violence. This is NOT a testament to anarchy or facism. This is a beautifully constructed piece of art that hammers against your senses from start to finish!

  David Fincher has an excellent track record with Alien 3 and Se7en and you can almost taste the darkness he brings to this story. Is it about a man's fall into insanity or his painful path towards becoming his true self? Is he the dichotomy in all of us or is this just a great visceral movie?

  You must see this and then decide for yourself (and then argue with all your mates).

  The first rule of this movie is, if you are going to have fighting, make it look like it hurts. The second rule of this movie is if you are going to have actors, pick Edward Norton and Brad Pitt. This is the best I have seen both of them. Brad shines like a light as the muscular, taut alter-ego and Norton gives the whole spectrum of a man going out of his mind to seek solace.

  Rule three is if you are going to make a DVD, package it likes this one.

  Like the fact that this is no ordinary movie, this is no ordinary DVD. It is wonderfully packaged and you actually get two discs. (Disc two contains outtakes, behind the scenes stuff publicity and more than I have seen on any other DVD.

  The final rule of this movie is that if you are going to make a movie, make it one that shakes everyone up and gets them arguing amongst themselves.
  
  

• The second rule of Fight Club
  By A3K0SD50XZCX79 on 2006-08-28
  Is that you should read the book, Fight Club: A Novel. And then you should read some more books, like Rabid: A Novel, Tree of Smoke: A Novel, andSurvivor.
  
  The movie is good. Brad Pitt as Twitchy Tyler is superbly cast, though I always pictured Tyler as black. The movie, however, has a different end than the book, and it's a big difference.
  
  The book's end is about taking power back for yourself. The movie's end is about losing power over your obsessions. This is large difference. The book is way better, and if you see the movie, you should read the book twice so you understand where Chuck is coming from.
  
  

• American History X
• Seven (Single Disc Edition)
• Snatch (Widescreen Edition)
• Pulp Fiction (Two-Disc Collector's Edition)
• Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels (Widescreen Edition)