This is one of those movies that's great to rewatch again and again, there's TONS of subtle hints about Tyler not being real right from the very start. If you ever feel like giving it another watch, DO IT. You'll pick up on so many tiny details that you totally missed the first time (hell, we all did)
@@alexdelpiero4974 yes she is. Unlike Tyler/the narrator, which are only acknowledged one or the other, her presence is acknowledged by third parties throughout the film, also when Tyler/the narrator is present
@@trulybtd5396 How then is she in a testicular cancer support group? And also she sits smoking in a support group for people who want to quit smoking? Nobody notices her. Norton says that her lie is an extension of his lie. The film is much more complex than it seems.
@@camannwordsmith She is not. She crosses the road and the cars do not even slow down so as not to knock her down. And there are many more hints that she exists only in his head.
One of my favorite lines is when Marla says he’s the worst thing that ever happened to her. Knowing what we know about her, that’s really saying something
Fight Club, American Beauty, The Matrix, and Office Space all came out in 1999 and they all share similar themes of cubicle workers growing bored of their existences and rebelling against the work force/the man/the establishment/societal standards etc. As Tyler said, that generation of men grew up without a great war, without a great depression, without great causes to fight for. Their paths had just been go to school, go to college, get a job in the corporate machine etc. Just existing on autopilot with no purpose. That's why these films were basically a religion to people back in the day.
Men are no longer aloud to be men, because men are no longer needed... That's the way i always saw it, instead we're just trying to fit in to this "new" society where there is no need for us anymore...
The marketing campaign for this film really didn’t give anything away, and it’s part of why it wasn’t hugely successful on release. I know I didn’t see it until about a year later based on word-of-mouth recommendations. It was WAY more interesting than I expected. 1999 was a cool year for movies….Being John Malkovich, Fight Club, The Matrix
@SHH the whole movie is a comment on toxic masculinity. In how his alter ego presents Cinema therapy did a whole part about it.. th-cam.com/video/MWDeRcXevic/w-d-xo.html
The psychic tension in the audience while watching this movie at the theater built and built ( and BUILT! ) until the epic reveal, at which point I felt the whole theater relax, as if a bubble had been popped, and take deep breaths because they could now say to themselves: "Ohhh, he's just crazy." Up until then, they were having their whole lives, and reality itself, put on trial for being too materialistic and for being sheep. For me, until the reveal, I kept thinking: this movie is SO subversive, how the hell did they get the funding to make it? When the reveal came, I almost jumped out of my seat because of the genius move of letting everyone off the hook with the excuse that he was just crazy. Yet, the subversion was in, set deep like a layer cake under the crazy excuse.
But... the film also shows that people are sheep no matter what. The fight club members go from being mundane cogs in a capitalist system to being literally nameless cogs in a terrorist organisation. It's not like it's an improvement, you know?
@@nordiskkatt ...correct! Absolutely NOT an improvement. Arguably, worse. A cog is a cog, regardless of where they are. I would hope that lesson is as clear as the primary one...though considering how many people will reject that first layer, few get to the next layer. Most people refuse to accept the responsibility of thinking for themselves, forming their own opinions and examining their own assumptions.
The flash images you see at the start of the movie are images of Brad Pitt, they represent Ed Norton slowly building the alternate ego that is Tyler/Pitt, that is why after Pitt appears you don't see them anymore because he has manifested. A superb movie, fun, thought provoking, keeps you thinking all the way to the end.
I went to see this movie when it came to theaters in Finland. There were like 6 guys in a wan as we drove home. It was silent. The one of us said: "I just wanna fight so much!". We all laughed and said the same thing. And we didn't fight. We're not stupid. This movie is a masterpiece! It raises feelings!
@@bigbake132 In Finland we read subtitles. Even many of the cartoons are in English on TV. We've never dubbed other than cartoons. The thing was, in -99 we still had video & movie censorship laws, so I think this was cut for the first couple of years here.
@@bigbake132 Finnish people understand and speak English very well, to the extent that we keep hearing that Finnish is so hard to learn because nobody speaks it with those that are learning, instead we just switch to English for comfort. We may have pronounciation difficulties, so called "rally English" at times, but because we've kept hearing non-dubbed audio since childhood everyone has a solid base.
Three points I’d like to make - In the background in the scene where the Narrator has Marla get on a bus, there is a theater advertising the movie SEVEN DAYS IN TIBET, which stars Brad Pitt. A lot of people like to think that the reason Tyler looks like Brad Pitt is that the Narrator is unconsciously imagining himself as one of the most popular and handsome actors alive. Also, Marla says in the film, “I haven’t been fucked like that since grade school.” That was a retake for another line, “I want to have your abortion.” Because HBC is from England and the way school is organized is different than in the States, she didn’t realize what grade school actually meant! HBC comes down the stairs at one point and says, “The condom is the glass slipper of our generation,” naturally bringing to mind “Cinderella”. HBC would later go on to be the Fairy Godmother in Disney’s remake of CINDERELLA, who gives the title character her glass slippers. Also, because they bought Fox, FIGHT CLUB and CINDERELLA are owned by Disney.
Actually, behind-the-scenes for number two, it's the other way around. Originally, Marla was supposed to say "I want to have your abortion." One of the producers came by and objected to the line, saying it was way too strong and wanted it changed. David Fincher, the director, gave her an ultimatum that he had final say on what to replace it with, and he'd only do it once, to which she agreed. Hence, "I haven't been fucked like that since Grade School". The producer objected more harshly, demanding the original line back and David replied "Nope, sorry. Only once. Part of the deal."
I saw this 3 times in theaters, then read the book, then bought the movie and have watched it over 100 times since. At the time, the movie was criminally under-rated, but has since built a HUGE cult following.
@@Madbandit77 Bigger. Rocky Horror is a very specific cult-- it doesn't appeal to most people. Whereas Fight Club was basically a religion to an entire generation(s) of young men (and some women).
The movie is meant to be set in Wilmington, DE where almost every major bank has a headquarters (I live here and work in banking). The banks fought against it being set here and there had been talk of filming it here because of the implication of the last scene. There are still some hints left in with the mentions of fight clubs being setup in Delaware City & New Castle, both Delaware towns.
Question: How do you feel about movies based around bank robberies? Like: The Town, A Place Beyond the Pines, and lets say Point Break? I worked in banking for 10 years and I LOVE all three of these plus many more robbery movies. I was utterly miserable the whole time so maybe that's why...
@@HaveL0veWillTravel Well I work back office instead of customer facing with data analysis and more or less db admin on credit card portfolios which is also more in line with Fight Club. What they did wouldn't really accomplish what they tried in the movie of cleaning the slate anyway since most banks don't have the data warehouse servers on site and/or have multiple backup locations. Haven't seen the first two but have seen Point Break a ton of times and plenty of other bank robbery movies and never really thought about it much. I worked out of extra office space at a branch for a year while our offices were being renovated, and what to do if there was ever a robbery was an occasional topic of conversation amongst my group. Fortunately we never had to find out but there were some weird or unruly customers we'd hear about from the tellers during lunch.
@@HaveL0veWillTravel I think the last exciting bank robbery movie I saw was Set It Off and Dead Presidents. Lol. I can’t remember if there were any after those.
Most credit card companies and banks are incorporated in Delaware, but not many are actually headquartered there. Bank of America, for example, is headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina, though the bulk of its credit card division was in acquiring a high-end credit card company called MBNA which was Delaware-based. JP Morgan Chase is headquartered in New York. The credit card bureaus are mostly out west. I always thought Delaware was the implied setting just due to the corporate benefits that have so many large corporations incorporate there and the generic, bland quality to the setting and lack of landmarks and so forth in the city shots. Taking away from it being set in Delaware is the airport. To get to the Bank of American facility in Delaware requires flying into Maryland and then driving.
LOL! All you east coast people think the world revolves around you. Well, the author of the novel is from Portland, Oregon. So, maybe you should ask Chuck?
Like pretty much everyone, I went into this movie not expecting what it turned out to be and I LOVED it. Fincher is one of my favorite directors for a reason. The man is next level. That being said, while I'm with the ideas of seeing through the mass hypnosis of consumer culture, dealing with the fact that life is often struggle and pushing to live your best, most authentic life, I'm sad that so many people have misinterpreted the message of the movie and believe that it's holding up Tyler's philosophy of chaos, egocentrism, and forcefully "waking up" the people around you by destroying their lives as the truth and the right thing to do. They miss all the "be awake" part and instead interpret it as "Life is pain so go out and seek pain, embrace pain, and cause pain to others to wake them up to (what you personally believe to be) reality. They miss the part about self-awareness and responsibility and instead interpret it as a license to be an a-hole and act like an animal. Those people seem to have missed that Tyler is the villain in the movie, his philosophy goes off the rails, and he's defeated in the end by the protagonist. The movie isn't saying that Tyler is right and a bunch of toxic people IRL should be following his example... it's saying he had some points at the beginning about consumer culture but then the madness takes it WAY too far and he has to be stopped. And he is. Meanwhile, people who don't get it watch the movie and think, "I want to go punch somebody now!" and "Yeah, domestic terrorism is what we need to wake people up!" These are the same sad people who watch "The Joker" and take it as a prescription for life. Even Chuck started out with a less toxic philosophy when talking about his book but, since the movie blew up and he became a celebrated writer (and hasn't had as big a hit since), he's really embraced the angry, toxic masculinity that people misinterpreted from his work. Now he's running with it because, let's be real, that crowd is who has made him the most popular. Which, when you think about it, is the exact opposite of the philosophy in both the book and the movie. Chuck talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk, as they say. Nor would I expect him to. He's a writer who wrote a story, not a cult leader starting a new religion. Unfortunately, a lot of people base their selfish, self-centered, survival-of-the-fittest philosophy on this book and/or movie and make the world worse for it. Still, I love David Fincher, I love the cast, I love the filmmaking, and I'm definitely a supporter of people seeing through the consumer game. E.g. Why do people feel the need to buy new clothes every season (or year) to replace their still perfectly good clothes just because the people selling the clothes tell you that styles have changed? If you bought a pair of blue jeans, they'll last you for years but the people who make jeans can't have you only buying jeans every 5 years or so. They NEED you to buy more jeans so, every season or two, they tell you your old, still perfectly good jeans are 'out of fashion' and you'll look like an idiot if you wear them, so you better go buy some new style jeans for lots of money if you want to keep up and fit in with the people around you. It's a scam to sell you things you don't need because that's how they stay in business. In those cases it's good to remember that the people selling you the clothes and the people telling you which clothes are in fashion are all working in the same biz and getting paid from the same pile and they'd all be out of jobs if fashion trends didn't change much and you only bought new clothes when your old clothes fell apart. That doesn't mean you should go out and blow up the buildings where they make jeans or that you should buy a gun and shoot a fashion designer. It means you should realize that everything they tell you is to sell you something rather than believing that it's a fundamental truth of life. At that point, it's up to you whether you want to participate in consumer culture but, even if you do, at least you're doing it consciously instead of being tricked into thinking you're "less than" if you don't have the latest and greatest thing they're trying to sell you. And, if you choose to participate in consumer culture for whatever reason, it's not up to your anti-social, shut-in neighbor who hates his life to set your house on fire and "wake you up." They should be making their own choices for their life and leaving yours up to you.
I so agree with you. The violence isn't the answer it's just another escape, and tyler is definitely the villain. The fact that so many guys see the violence as a good thing is scary to me as a female. They totally missed the point of the movie
100%, the satire and irony is completely missed on a lot of people who watch this film and actually buy into Tyler's ideology. They are no better than Project Mayhem's mindless followers in the film lol. Fight club & Project Mayhem are clearly depicted as an increasingly nihilistic and chaotic descent into violent madness. It is quite obviously not being offered as a reasonable solution to people's feelings of emptiness and purposelessness in a dehumanizing corporate system. Tyler's ideas, and Tyler as a character in general are the grand delusions of a desperate and clearly mentally unstable man creating a personality that is his opposite extreme to pull him out of his comfort zone of tedium and emptiness. This is a dark comedy not a rule book to follow and anybody taking Tyler's impassioned monologues at face value needs to consider their own psychological issues lol. With that said, I also don't think the film is condemning rebellion, uprising or violence, but simply painting a satirical and darkly funny portrait of what can happen when people (in this case, particularly men) lack direction, purpose and fulfilment in their lives and society at large
One of my favorite movies. I pull my DVD of it out about once a year. Every time I watch it I catch something new. One of my favorite scenes is where Tyler is looking into the camera talking and the frame shakes. There seems to be such rage in that scene.
Happy you finally got to this. Certified classic. I saw this when it came out, was OBSESSED, and I'm STILL learning new things about it. You don't even know the rabbit hole you've stumbled into. You probably have a lot on your plate, but you need to rewatch at least once at some point. The WHOLE movie is a completely different experience the second time.
1999 was one of the best years in movie history. All expressing discontentment with the American dream and deconstructing materialism. Fight Club. American Beauty. Office Space
"We don't talk about Fight Club." Lol! Also the scene where Edward Norton hits Brad Pitt in the ear was real and Pitts reaction was genuine. Fincher, I heard, cracked up laughing at the scene.
This movie's themes are centrally: how rebelling against conformity can lead to similar conformities, and toxic masculinity and how masculinity is perceived by ourselves and others. The youtube channel (folding ideas) has a great video on this movie and how many people miss its meanings.
It’s also about how empty a sterile homogenous lifestyle can be for the average male. Being neutered by your boss and society into becoming a docile drone worker bee without any control of your life.
Are you seriously citing the guy who disables dislikes and comments on his videos because everyone is telling him how he's analyses are fallacious? Ironically, some of the people who have missed Fight Club's point the most are precisely those who bloviate about "toxic masculinity". That is quite literally the most superficial approach one can take, besides thinking it's about boxing.
Another movie with similar out of control weirdness based on a Palahniuk novel is 'Choke' starring Sam Rockwell. Well worth a watch, with fantastic performances, but at the same time shocking and hilarious.
I've seen this film more times than I can count yet I've never considered Shanelle's reading of it being about death before, I've always just taken it's message of anti-consumerism and anti-materialism as the main point of it all.
Anti consumerism.. But I thought the narrator was dead already.. fighting made him feel alive. But I always thought it was funny. If only he had called Marla in the beginning the whole movie would have been very different.
It’s more about how modern society has lost LIFE most people are sheeple and just follow the course of doing nothing except CONSUME look at your life now how many huge corporate conglomerates you support with your small wages and for what I’m happier in a field without any technology or money This film is showing that we have all turned in to purchasing zombies who live to just spend money
I never thought about metaphors for organized religion, but then again, I was a teen when I saw this for the first time and just enjoyed the mayham 🤪😉 May I recommend to react to '12 monkeys'? another psychodelic movie with a crazy Brad Pit performamce, and Bruce Willis is pretty always great to see
I also left a comment when she asked about Brad Pitt suggestions. A pretty good Character by Brad Pitt, and perhaps the finest performance of Bruce Willis' career.
12 Monkeys is like a puzzle I've been putting together ever since the year I saw it in the theater. I think I understand it better than most, but I'm not quite there yet. And if I watch people react their guesses and theories are going to make me crazy, and even worse, the comments lol
I also found that the dvd commentary (both norton and pitt) was amazing. It was like having them over and just hanging out while talking about the different themes, consumerism, etc. They both had an extremely interesting and fascinating conversation during this film and its the best dvd commentary I’ve ever heard. It almost feels like you’re getting to know both of these actors as people.
You only get that ending blind one time, and it's beautiful. Just that reaction says it all, that mouth-covered "this shouldn't delight me but it does" feeling. The Chinese censorship board changes the end of the film to cut off the explosions and announce that Tyler and Marla went to the police who defused all the bombs safely. Tells you everything about why the ending is so powerful and satisfying.
I was a projectionist and I got to show this. Those "cigarette burns" haven't been used in years as movies lay out on giant flat discs.There are 3 levels of discs. It's basically a HUGE film reel on its side. You thread the film from the disc to the projector at the top, then down through the project, then back to the discs and thread it to the middle of an empty disc. As the movie plays, the film slowly fills the empty disc and will be ready to be threaded again. Back in the OLD days, film was extremely flamable and the projectionist had to be there to watch over it. The reels were 20 mins long and had to be hand threaded at the end of the 20 mins, hence the change over dot. The reels still came to the theater in 20 min reels, but you could easily attach the end of one to the beginning of the next reel eventually laying the whole movie on its side as one giant reel. The discs would hold about 4 hours worth of film. Oh and BTW if you ever did splice in a still like that, you would go to jail. That is like the golden do-not-break rule. Plus people would notice and the would complain immediately. Hell, people complained about just normal movies. They would yell at us for not warning them about certain scenes, they would yell at us when we did warn them (usually if they had kids with them).
It seems that this is not on IMBD, but if you watch the director's commentary, he says that Marla's post-coital remark was originally, "I want to have your abortion." Naturally, the studio didn't like this, and after some back and forth, they told the director to put in anything else. I suspect they didn't like the final version either.
Now that you’ve seen it you really should watch it again. You will be amazed at all the clues you missed and the scenes that play out different now that you know the surprise!
After Tyler & Marla have sex; it was originally in the script " I want to have your abortion " but was changed to "I have not been ****** like that since grade school "
I was a projectionist at a theater during this time in films. The 90's - early 2000's were some of the best of cinematic history, back when there were original and unique ideas still. I miss those days. The newest movie that blew me away was JoJo Rabbit. If you haven't seen it, I HIGHLY suggest a viewing.
tyler pops in, in single frames, in the early movie. sorta foreshadowing that the narrator is starting to imagine him. leaning against edward, standing or laying down in the back grounds
When Norton is beating himself up in front of his boss, he says, "for some reason I thought about my first fight with Tyler" ... since he was also beating himself up then. Love that little line.
All of Fincher's films in the 90s are dark, gritty classics with beautiful cinematography, and yes, that definitely does include Alien 3 (Assembly Cut)! A shame his output since has been to a much lesser standard and frequency.
I think he just likes pulp material. My problem with his latest stuff is that the shoots it all with the same color palette. Everybody raves about GONE GIRL but it was very pedestrian when compared to say, ZODIAC or PANIC ROOM. Hell, even GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO was on par with most of his '00s output.
@@Theomite Yeah I thought Gone Girl was actually quite poor and the Swedish GWTDT film starring Noomi Rapace and Michael Nyqvist was perfectly good and it had the authenticity of actually being a Swedish film. I've seen both and I would always go back to watch the original if I had a choice.
@@inmate1614 I like watching the American version and then watching the Swedish sequels. Every now and then I'll switch it up and watch the Swedish original (director's cut, naturally) and follow through. But I like both versions, actually, which I'm grateful for.
Despite this movie being a masterpiece, it sadly got barely any Oscar or other awards attention (just nominations for special effects and sound editing - NONE for acting, directing, cinematography, etc). At the time it was released, many critics and mainstream film buffs simply didn't understand the philosophy it was conveying, or recognize the top-tier filmmaking that went into it. A lot of them didn't even realize that the film was ultimately *criticizing* toxic masculinity (by showing how easily it leads to cruelty, violence, and destruction). So they ended up writing it off as just a weird film about some crazy dudes fighting and making chaos. Only as years went on did the film gain recognition for all its artistic merits.
It wasn't about "toxic masculinity". That wasn't part of the zeitgeist back then and you won't find any quotes of Chuck Palahniuk talking about it in any of his interviews back then. Lots of people like to say that's what its about now, but that's just modern culture trying to view it through its own ideological lens. You can say that some of the themes of the book overlap with some conversation about "toxic masculinity", but Palahniuk didn't sit down to write a book trying to address it. Nor did Fincher make the film with that intention either.
I second the film is NOT addressing toxic masculinity. It rails against mindless consumerism, being a cog in the corporate machine, following the standards that society expects you to follow etc. Where the hill are people getting this arrr-tahhhhhhrd idea that it's about toxic masculinity? As stated, that was NOT in the public conversation 25 years ago.
If you think this film is primarily about anti-consumerism, you're missing a lot. Please tell me what's the point of the entire third act? Anti-conformity is a closer fit, but that's twofold-against "normal" society but also against counter-cultures, given the portrayal of Fight Club/Project Mayhem's development into a cult. Still, anti-conformity doesn't account for everything either. Anti-consumerism and anti-conformity apply to everyone equally. Why is Fight Club for men only? Why does Tyler say that thing about being raised by women and if a woman is the answer they need? Why does the Narrator's relationship with Marla both propel him towards Tyler's persona and eventually draw him back from it? What is the function of the Narrator's relationship with Bob? His rivalry with Leto's character? Masculinity is clearly essential to the theme. Tyler says, "All the ways you wish you could be, that's me." If that's so, why is he so focused on self-destruction, hitting bottom, losing everything? If Tyler is what he wants to be, why does Tyler and Marla's relationship resemble his parents' dysfunctional marriage? Why does Tyler become the antagonist in the film's final third? Why does the Narrator kill him? Clearly, there was something wrong with "all the ways you wish you could be." It's an enormously complex movie. I think it's reductive to say it is "about" toxic masculinity, but it undeniably explores ideas of masculinity extensively and finds a healthy measure of fault.
@@noodle_fc I think it definitely explores the male experience in modern society and Palahniuk did say he wrote the book to target men. But I think there's a significant difference between the book/film's themes dealing with masculinity in society and it being a story attempting to address toxic masculinity. And I think its the modern lens that leads people to believe that its a story about finding fault with masculinity. I mean of course a modern culture that basically defines all forms of traditional masculinity as "toxic" is going to determine that a story dealing with masculinity must be a criticism of masculinity. How could it be anything but when coming at it from that perspective. But I don't think that was the intention of the author or Fincher. There's a subtle, but very distinct difference between saying masculinity is toxic in the modern world and the modern world is toxic to men. And I think modern attitudes have flipped that script and don't even realize they're doing it. The book/film is about the latter, not the former. I mean it seems like you see Tyler Durden as the representation of masculinity here that "Jack" is striving for and has to kill in the end. But if that is what Tyler is supposed to be, why is Tyler so antihierarchical? Why is he so anti-social? Why does Tyler deal with the owner/mafia guy by letting him beat the shit out of him instead of kicking his ass and dominating him traditionally??? Sure, Tyler is very assertive and sexually aggressive. And while its easy to to see those things as indicators that Tyler is supposed to represent "toxic masculinity", especially if you're coming from the perspective that views those things as toxic, I think there's another explanation that fits ALL of Tyler's traits, and not just some, AND aligns with the other themes in the film like consumerism and corporatism. It makes far more sense to view Tyler as "Jack"'s uninhibited self and the ideal personality to reject everything he finds wrong with the world than to view him as some kind of representation of "Jack"'s idea of a man. He doesn't imagine Tyler to be some big CEO, that fucks a lot of women, makes a ton of money, and excels in normal society. He imagines Tyler to a self assured, anti-social (in the true sense of the world, not how people incorrectly use it), radical terrorist. He describes him as a "night person" that works various part time jobs in which he fucks with the status quo by doing anti-social things like splicing porn into family films. He imagines him as a guy posing as a soap salesman so he can make bombs out of the soap. Tyler isn't supposed to represent traditional manhood. He's the fantasy personality of a guy who hates his job, hates the consumerist corporate culture around him, and hates himself for being so attached to all all of it that he can't even sleep unless he attends a bunch of support groups for diseases he doesn't have just to feel a bit of release. Tyler isn't ultra assertive and self assured because he's supposed to represent some kind of toxic behavior in men. He's that way because "Jack" hates himself for just passively going along with a job, culture and life that he can't stand. Tyler doesn't have crazy sex with Marla because he's supposed reprsent "Jack"'s toxic desire to sexually dominate women or anyhthing like that. "Jack" doesn't even show any sexual interest in Marla when they meet. He's unable to even see her in that light because he's too preoccupied with his own self loathing. instead he sees her as the external embodiment of his own problems and hates her as an extension of his own self hatred. Tyler has crazy sex with her because Tyler can just enjoy her for who she is, someone similar to "Jack". Something "Jack" might be able to do if he actually accepted himself. "Jack" doesn't kill Tyler at the end because he's killing his "toxic masculinity". He kills him, because he comes to terms with himself and doesn't have the need for the anti-social lunatic side of him anymore. He loses the desire to tear down society and everything about himself. That's what he's killing the in end. He's not killing his masculinity.
@@moonlitegram Our perspectives are not as different as you might think. In particular, I agree that the film is not an attempt to address toxic masculinity specifically (same goes for the book). I also agree that it's a mistake to read Tyler as a personified representation or critique of masculinity, toxic or otherwise.† You wrote, _"It makes far more sense to view Tyler as "Jack"'s uninhibited self and the ideal personality to reject everything he finds wrong with the world"._ I would modify that in a subtle but I think essential way. I think Tyler is the Narrator's _flawed attempt_ to construct an ideal self. As events unfold, the failings of that attempt show themselves. When thinking of who he really wants to be, the Narrator got it neither completely right nor completely wrong. Regarding the ending, I agree in part with your assessment of the Narrator's motivations for killing Tyler. He has "come to terms with himself," sort of, in that he's ready to make an earnest attempt to change _as himself_ rather than adopting an alter ego. I think that the Narrator will take what he learned from Tyler; I disagree that that he is rejecting or discarding Tyler as a whole and don't think Tyler was primarily an "anti-social lunatic." Addressing Tyler at the end, he says, "I'm grateful to you, but this is too much. I don't want this." (probably not verbatim, but close to that) He still wants to be like Tyler in many respects, but without Tyler's excesses. Relatedly-not to delve too deeply into what I think you get wrong about the meaning of "toxic masculinity"-, I'll mention that a similar thing applies to critiques of masculinity. Like Tyler, concepts of masculinity contain valuable qualities to retain as well as flaws or excesses that should be left behind. As just one example, traditionally man is seen as the family breadwinner. It's absolutely a good thing to provide for one's loved ones-no one is telling men to stop supporting their families, right? However, if a husband feels threatened by his wife's career, if the desire to have _greater_ professional success interferes with the _partnership,_ that is a problem. In art as in life, it's a case of not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. †Now, having agreed that Tyler isn't some kind of allegorical stand-in for masculinity, let's acknowledge that he _is_ a male character in an influential piece of pop culture, one that is already in the business of social commentary specifically concerned with and meant for a male audience, and which many men cite as an important formative influence. Therefore, it makes a lot of sense to consider Tyler in the context of modern social attitudes regarding masculinity. As the narrative itself finds flaws in Tyler, it shouldn't be wholly surprising that certain toxic _aspects_ of modern masculinity are represented in Tyler. And for the record, it's not exclusively a function of hindsight. I absolutely considered themes of desirable/undesirable traits and attitudes in the late '90s when viewing the movie and reading the book, even though the term "toxic masculinity" wasn't yet in vogue.
Blew my teenage mind when I saw it in the theater. Life changing cinema. One of my favorite things to look for when rewatching are Helena's facial expressions and dialog once she starts having a relationship with the narrator; if you imagine her perspective, every scene she is in blatantly gives away the entire plot twist, but the audience never catches it. It's genius writing, directing, and acting.
Yeah I saw it in the theaters with some college friends when it came out. The general reaction of the theater was like WTF?!? Except my one friend who figured it out 1/3 through the movie who Ed Norton and Brad Pitt were both Tyler. Mind you this is the same friend we’re in the theater watching 6th sense and figured that plot twist out as well.
Patrice O'Neal saw Fight Club, he said: "it's self hate, guilt, the burden of white guys who can't be men and the burden of dishonesty". His description was right on the money.
It's amazing watching your take on these movies. You're where I was like 20 years ago. I saw this in a theater - riding in the backseat of a car with highschool friends. We snuck in the theater. I didn't know that was the plan and pointed out that I needed to pay and got shushed.
When I first saw the movie in the theater I felt that the idea that violence was a solution to the ennui of modern life was a weak message, but over the years it has resonated more with me as society has become more watered down and soulless - not so much the violence as the idea of conflict and pain as a means to understand oneself and one's relationship with the world, a reconnecting with the primal nature.
This is a movie you have to watch at least twice. I'd recommend watching it three times. And be extremely observant of everything seen, said, and done in each scene. There's dozens of clues hidden throughout the film that Ed Norton's character and Brad Pitt (Tyler) are the same person. The first clue is in the opening scene when Ed Norton is talking about the explosives and he says "I know this, because Tyler knows this." And the first time we see Tyler (other than the quick single frame flashes) is when he's on the moving walk way at the airport, and when we see him Ed says "if you wake at another time and in another place, could you wake up as a different person." And right when he says "a different person" that's when the camera reveals Brad. Something else to notice, when the flashes of Brad appear early on, pay attention to what is said. For instance when we see the quick flash of Brad behind the doctor, it appears exactly at the moment the doctors says "that's pain". So there's all sorts of clues in the film, which makes it really fun to watch a few times and see if you can find all of them.
I don't know why everyone is suddenly doing Fight Club reactions, but I don't mind. As a movie that preaches to emasculated and domesticated males, it's always interesting to get a female perspective. I've seen some women be like "Oh that looks nice" when he's describing all the furniture that is making him a slave, completely missing the point.
@@erikawilliams9558 Emasculated is not really contextually dependent. The primal instinct of the alpha male nature has been deemed inappropriate in the current culture. So men live lives of quiet desperation, pretending to care about throw pillows and decorative towels, grateful for their allotted man caves -- small areas of perceived independence, only allowed by their wives to keep them from pulling too hard on the leash. Men are effectively neutered, shamed into submission. Fight Club was a violent primal scream against that. And yes it ended poorly, because it was one extreme to counter another extreme, the way someone raised in a strict household might go on binge of sex and drugs to feel alive.
Tyler was right about one thing: the breakfast you have the morning after a midnight gun was in your face, death being a finger motion away...is the *best* meal you'll ever have. I had eggs and toast and cheap coffee; them eggs were ethereally sublime. The crunch of the buttery toast. I just don't have the words.
Such a great film! A great read, also, if you’re interested. I hope that someday you will continue the View Askewniverse by watching ; Mallrats Chasing Amy Dogma Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back Clerks 2 Jay & Silent Bob Reboot
The BIGGEST mind blown theory of this film; is that it's a sequel too Ferris Bueller's Day Off. The narrator is Cameron ( notice they never mention his name) and again... he has another mental breakdown. Ferris NEVER existed. Notice how the narrator is in auto insurance. Much like how Cameron destroyed his father's car and I'm sure they made a fraudulent claim. So, having a hard time in life... Cameron makes up another imaginary friend.
it's a deeply existential examination of male masculinity and mental health in a modern world. Our modern roles in society vs our deep ancient ancestors.
I am Jack's embarrassment at idolising Tyler so much as a teen. Fincher's flair and Palahniuk's nihilism were a match made in murky post-modern heaven.
The story is about the inner battle Norton is the part of everyone that wants to follow the rules, fit in, be accepted. Pitt is the part of everyone that is chaos, independent, doesn't want to fit in. The narrator is the person this battle is taking place. Everyone decides how much of their life is controlled by Norton and by Pitt.
What I love most about this movie is that they never tell the audience the other huge twist. There are plenty of clues, even more than the "Durden is the narrator" twist, yet almost nobody gets it. Took me 3 viewings to figure it out. For those who don't know what I'm talking about, I'd love to tell ya... But... you know the rules.
@@patrickflanagan3762 This theory isn't fan fiction. There are way to many coincidences for that not to be a plot point. I can list them if you want. Fincher lied to the audience, showed you scenes, concerning Tyler, that simply didn't happen. Later in the film, he tells you the truth about those scenes. And it is a bit of a jump to accept it. If the director were to insert a few revionist scenes with Marla and Narrator it would be so easy and much more believable to the point where it wouldn't have been that big of a twist. But he didn't and that's why I love this movie!
@@patrickflanagan3762 - Marla walks into traffic multiple times without a care - Marla shows up at at a cancer meeting smoking and nobody cares - Marla shows up at testicular cancer meeting and later claims that she has a right to go there, again nobody cares - Marla and Narrator argue over meetings in the laundromat, Marla only wants brain conditions - Marla only steals men's clothes in the laundromat -Tyler and Marla both smoke even though the Narrator doesn't. But not just that, they both smoke in very flamboyant, unnatural, "cool", ways - Narrator is jerking off when he hears Tyler and Marla fucking. - Tyler's and Marla's sex scene is shot very artistically as if it's a dream - the only time Marla and Narrator interact with another human is the diner. The server is probably used to this kind of eradic behavior from Tylet/Narrator - Narrator sees Marla as his spirit animal. (That's an obvious, blatant clue) -The final shot their silhouettes match almost perfectly. - etc... This movie is ultimately about a man and his internal struggle between his own masculinity and his own feminism.
Little late to the party having just found this channel, and burning through the videos. Fight Club is my favorite film, just such a joy and mindbinder. I find something new every viewing. She said "He's having a near death experience" or something similar, and I had to respond (to no one), "no, he's having a near LIFE experience". Enjoy your content more than some others, as you bring a new perspective being connected to the business, and really like the trivia bits!
I have no idea how many times I've watch this movie. Saw it the theater and it was amazing. It's just one of those movies! "Pulp Fiction", "Donnie Darko", "V for Vendetta", "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" and "Fight Club" are those types of movies that seem to change you in a way after you watch em. LoL I was told by my instructor at my aircraft school that three times you see him, it's one splice, two and then three. So each time you see him you see him a tiny bit more. I'm guessing it represents him growing in his mind. IDK. I can watch this movie all the dang time. With everything that has happened to me this past year this movie rings true even more so. It's so strange how stuff in movies seem to keep comin around being so familiar lately. Love this movie! Love your reaction! You're too cool. So glad you liked it.
Fun fact they released a blue ray/ DVD version that had a false menu on it that made the watcher think the disc was somehow a copy of never been kissed with Drew Barrymore. The menu plays briefly before tearing away to the actual fight club menu. This totally got me and I tried reloading the disc several times before letting it play long enough to figure out the joke
Actually, that was a good point she made. Edward Norton's character is a product of the consumerism, materialistic world, being focused on lifestyle and possessions. He works to save the company money over human lives, which explains his alter ego despising consumerism and materialism and is the focus of most of his speeches.
There's a fan theory that the movie Ferris Bueller's Day Off is like Fight Club, where Ferris is just a figment of Cameron's imagination, the person he WANTS to be. We never see Cameron's family after all.
You missed the point of the film. Tyler says it best: "Man, I see in Fight Club the strongest and smartest men who’ve ever lived. I see all this potential, and I see it squandered. God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables - slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don’t need. We’re the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our great war is a spiritual war. Our great depression is our lives. We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars, but we won’t. We’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very, very pissed off." Unfortunately most people don't think like this anymore. The internet/social media/government has made sure of that. The film (and book) attack the ideas of humans living in this capitalistic and alienated world as justifiable. For good reason too. Look at where we are at now...
Yeah. But in the end, in order to really live you have to outgrow your alienation, get past rebelling as blindly as you once followed, and learn how to engage with the world as a whole individual again. A lot of people who got the first part down missed *that* half of the lesson; and that mindset is part of where we are now, too.
Besides the not-quite-subliminal (liminal?) pics of Tyler Durden inserted into the movie at several moments in the beginning, there is also a brief video on the hotel channel which the Narrator is watching during one of his work trips, with a shot of a roomful of white jacketed waitstaff welcoming the hotel guest. The waiter on the right side of the screen is Tyler. (Or Brad Pitt, maybe, since Tyler is supposed to actually look like Edward Norton.) I worked as a projectionist using 35mm films at the time this came out and your trivia section was correct, no one called the reel change dots "cigarette burns" until after this movie came out and we wanted to sound cool. Reel change dots were already obsolete at the time this came out anyway, since they were used for reel-to-reel projection systems. They signalled to the projectionist to get ready to switch from projector A to projector B. But by '99, most theaters (in my experience) used platter systems and timers. All the individual 2000-foot reels (about 20 minutes of screen time) making up a film print would be taped together into one massive reel of film, tightly wound and several miles long, laying on its side on a big spinning platter. It would unravel from the inside out through the projector head and collect onto a second platter. There are also scenes where the film itself - representing the "universe" contained within the movie's story I guess - is vibrating on screen, creating a blurry background behind Tyler and showing visible sprocket holes at the left and right sides of the screen. This is to replicate a common mishap in film projection. Film would be threaded over 4 or 5 smooth plastic rollers into the projector, threading again over metal rollers with sprockets and being locked in place with the film gate. Each frame of film (showing 1/24 of 1 second of screen time) had 4 sprocket holes on either side, and an intermittent roller would pull the film through in increments of 4 sprockets, moving so fast that the frame lines could not be seen by the audience due to the "persistence of vision" optical illusion. It just appeared as smooth, uninterrupted motion. But there were times that an extra-thick tape splice or a mangled sprocket hole would pass through and kick the film gate open, causing the film to flap around as it ran through the projector and often making the screen image flutter or blur. So the film is saying that Tyler is such a disruptive element that he has literally thrown the universe off its track.
A little trivia: The scene where Edward Norton's character punches Tyler Durden in the ear. That wasn't scripted. Prior to shooting the scene, David Fincher took Edward Norton aside and told him to do it for effect. Edward did and the reaction from Brad Pitt was real, doing so while in character. Edward Norton's character apologizing, saying "I' fucked it up." felt like a real reaction, too, while in character.
I’ll give it to Marla here. She’s the sassy Anti-damsel that we started getting in the 90s. For instance, she winds up sleeping with Tyler but she’s not swooning over him.
You went to film school and are just now seeing these movies... I saw these movies and they are the reason I went to film school lol. Love watching the first time reactions from someone who knows how the sausage is made.
When I saw it in theaters, it did have that single frame at the end. It always had it in the theatrical release. It made a lot of people in the theater laugh. (I saw it the first week it came out.) Be wary of what you read. There's tons of false information out there these days. I see it all the time.
I also saw it when it came out. It was definitely there and I never forgot it. lol Def a lot of bad info out there. I read stuff about movies, music, TV shows and other stuff that's completely wrong all the time.
Shanelle, you cannot run toward something without being chased. The trauma keeps you moving, do not doubt the beauty and strength cultivated from vulnerability.
They darkened the colors in this movie so much in post that you can't tell that Tyler's "burnt orange" leather jacket is actually bright red in real life.
This is one of those movies that's great to rewatch again and again, there's TONS of subtle hints about Tyler not being real right from the very start. If you ever feel like giving it another watch, DO IT. You'll pick up on so many tiny details that you totally missed the first time (hell, we all did)
Marla Singer is not real too.
@@alexdelpiero4974 yes she is. Unlike Tyler/the narrator, which are only acknowledged one or the other, her presence is acknowledged by third parties throughout the film, also when Tyler/the narrator is present
@@alexdelpiero4974 she absolutely is.
@@trulybtd5396 How then is she in a testicular cancer support group? And also she sits smoking in a support group for people who want to quit smoking? Nobody notices her. Norton says that her lie is an extension of his lie. The film is much more complex than it seems.
@@camannwordsmith She is not. She crosses the road and the cars do not even slow down so as not to knock her down. And there are many more hints that she exists only in his head.
My favourite final shot in all of cinema. The Pixie's 'Where is My Mind?' fits like a hand in a glove.
Perfect synthesis of song and scene. If it isn't No. 1, it's in the Top 3 at least.
a yellow rubber glove?
You should watch it again now knowing what you know. It is a totally different experience and gets better with each watch.
This.
Fight Club is one of the rare movies that gets better when you already know what happens. You gain a whole new perspective.
Absolutely, it's like two different movies.
yes. this.
Or read the book, it’ll make you love the movie more.
One of my favorite lines is when Marla says he’s the worst thing that ever happened to her. Knowing what we know about her, that’s really saying something
She’s worse in the book
Is Marla even real or is she another of the narrator’s alternate personalities?
Fight Club, American Beauty, The Matrix, and Office Space all came out in 1999 and they all share similar themes of cubicle workers growing bored of their existences and rebelling against the work force/the man/the establishment/societal standards etc. As Tyler said, that generation of men grew up without a great war, without a great depression, without great causes to fight for. Their paths had just been go to school, go to college, get a job in the corporate machine etc. Just existing on autopilot with no purpose. That's why these films were basically a religion to people back in the day.
Perfectly stated.
Well said
,, you've forgotten, Shooting Fish (1997) starring Kate Beckinsale ,,that also features the Y2K plot device 📠📟💾
Men are no longer aloud to be men, because men are no longer needed... That's the way i always saw it, instead we're just trying to fit in to this "new" society where there is no need for us anymore...
Also Being John Malkovich
The marketing campaign for this film really didn’t give anything away, and it’s part of why it wasn’t hugely successful on release. I know I didn’t see it until about a year later based on word-of-mouth recommendations. It was WAY more interesting than I expected.
1999 was a cool year for movies….Being John Malkovich, Fight Club, The Matrix
This film is about toxic masculinity many dudes miss this
@SHH the idea to be a “Real man” you must get in touch with your violence side. Brad Pitts is meant to be the anti hero says the books author.
Same. Saw it once it was released at Blockbuster
@SHH the whole movie is a comment on toxic masculinity. In how his alter ego presents
Cinema therapy did a whole part about it..
th-cam.com/video/MWDeRcXevic/w-d-xo.html
@SHH Did you miss Tyler's speech about No great war... No Great depression etc.?
We really can’t talk about the time Bruno from Encanto joined Fight Club.
“I’d rather just half ass it my entire life.”
That’s when you got my thumbs up.👍🏿
Thanks for the reaction, Shanelle.
Can i be in the half-assing club as well pls?!
can relate. hahaha!
The psychic tension in the audience while watching this movie at the theater built and built ( and BUILT! ) until the epic reveal, at which point I felt the whole theater relax, as if a bubble had been popped, and take deep breaths because they could now say to themselves: "Ohhh, he's just crazy."
Up until then, they were having their whole lives, and reality itself, put on trial for being too materialistic and for being sheep.
For me, until the reveal, I kept thinking: this movie is SO subversive, how the hell did they get the funding to make it? When the reveal came, I almost jumped out of my seat because of the genius move of letting everyone off the hook with the excuse that he was just crazy. Yet, the subversion was in, set deep like a layer cake under the crazy excuse.
But... the film also shows that people are sheep no matter what. The fight club members go from being mundane cogs in a capitalist system to being literally nameless cogs in a terrorist organisation. It's not like it's an improvement, you know?
@@nordiskkatt ...correct! Absolutely NOT an improvement. Arguably, worse. A cog is a cog, regardless of where they are. I would hope that lesson is as clear as the primary one...though considering how many people will reject that first layer, few get to the next layer.
Most people refuse to accept the responsibility of thinking for themselves, forming their own opinions and examining their own assumptions.
Remember when he was beating himself up in the office? He said "I'm reminded of my first fight with Tyler". Because it was the same thing then.
The flash images you see at the start of the movie are images of Brad Pitt, they represent Ed Norton slowly building the alternate ego that is Tyler/Pitt, that is why after Pitt appears you don't see them anymore because he has manifested. A superb movie, fun, thought provoking, keeps you thinking all the way to the end.
I went to see this movie when it came to theaters in Finland. There were like 6 guys in a wan as we drove home. It was silent. The one of us said: "I just wanna fight so much!". We all laughed and said the same thing. And we didn't fight. We're not stupid. This movie is a masterpiece! It raises feelings!
Was the film in English or dubbed in Finnish?
@@bigbake132 In Finland we read subtitles. Even many of the cartoons are in English on TV. We've never dubbed other than cartoons. The thing was, in -99 we still had video & movie censorship laws, so I think this was cut for the first couple of years here.
@@janskia Interesting. Were you able to understand the movie pretty well with translation and subtitles?
@@bigbake132 English. We don't dub films in Finland except kids movies etc. Always original soundtrack and subs.
@@bigbake132 Finnish people understand and speak English very well, to the extent that we keep hearing that Finnish is so hard to learn because nobody speaks it with those that are learning, instead we just switch to English for comfort. We may have pronounciation difficulties, so called "rally English" at times, but because we've kept hearing non-dubbed audio since childhood everyone has a solid base.
Three points I’d like to make -
In the background in the scene where the Narrator has Marla get on a bus, there is a theater advertising the movie SEVEN DAYS IN TIBET, which stars Brad Pitt. A lot of people like to think that the reason Tyler looks like Brad Pitt is that the Narrator is unconsciously imagining himself as one of the most popular and handsome actors alive.
Also, Marla says in the film, “I haven’t been fucked like that since grade school.” That was a retake for another line, “I want to have your abortion.” Because HBC is from England and the way school is organized is different than in the States, she didn’t realize what grade school actually meant!
HBC comes down the stairs at one point and says, “The condom is the glass slipper of our generation,” naturally bringing to mind “Cinderella”. HBC would later go on to be the Fairy Godmother in Disney’s remake of CINDERELLA, who gives the title character her glass slippers. Also, because they bought Fox, FIGHT CLUB and CINDERELLA are owned by Disney.
Actually, behind-the-scenes for number two, it's the other way around. Originally, Marla was supposed to say "I want to have your abortion." One of the producers came by and objected to the line, saying it was way too strong and wanted it changed. David Fincher, the director, gave her an ultimatum that he had final say on what to replace it with, and he'd only do it once, to which she agreed. Hence, "I haven't been fucked like that since Grade School". The producer objected more harshly, demanding the original line back and David replied "Nope, sorry. Only once. Part of the deal."
I saw this 3 times in theaters, then read the book, then bought the movie and have watched it over 100 times since. At the time, the movie was criminally under-rated, but has since built a HUGE cult following.
Might be the biggest cult movie ever.
@@rustincohle2135 As big as Rocky Horror? Oddly, Meatloaf is in both films.
@@Madbandit77 Bigger. Rocky Horror is a very specific cult-- it doesn't appeal to most people. Whereas Fight Club was basically a religion to an entire generation(s) of young men (and some women).
Tyler’s wardrobe was straight out of the late 90’s early 2000’s thrift store/goodwill style. It phased out about as fast as it appeared.
I'm bringing it back
The movie is meant to be set in Wilmington, DE where almost every major bank has a headquarters (I live here and work in banking). The banks fought against it being set here and there had been talk of filming it here because of the implication of the last scene. There are still some hints left in with the mentions of fight clubs being setup in Delaware City & New Castle, both Delaware towns.
Question: How do you feel about movies based around bank robberies? Like: The Town, A Place Beyond the Pines, and lets say Point Break? I worked in banking for 10 years and I LOVE all three of these plus many more robbery movies. I was utterly miserable the whole time so maybe that's why...
@@HaveL0veWillTravel Well I work back office instead of customer facing with data analysis and more or less db admin on credit card portfolios which is also more in line with Fight Club. What they did wouldn't really accomplish what they tried in the movie of cleaning the slate anyway since most banks don't have the data warehouse servers on site and/or have multiple backup locations. Haven't seen the first two but have seen Point Break a ton of times and plenty of other bank robbery movies and never really thought about it much. I worked out of extra office space at a branch for a year while our offices were being renovated, and what to do if there was ever a robbery was an occasional topic of conversation amongst my group. Fortunately we never had to find out but there were some weird or unruly customers we'd hear about from the tellers during lunch.
@@HaveL0veWillTravel I think the last exciting bank robbery movie I saw was Set It Off and Dead Presidents. Lol. I can’t remember if there were any after those.
Most credit card companies and banks are incorporated in Delaware, but not many are actually headquartered there. Bank of America, for example, is headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina, though the bulk of its credit card division was in acquiring a high-end credit card company called MBNA which was Delaware-based. JP Morgan Chase is headquartered in New York. The credit card bureaus are mostly out west. I always thought Delaware was the implied setting just due to the corporate benefits that have so many large corporations incorporate there and the generic, bland quality to the setting and lack of landmarks and so forth in the city shots. Taking away from it being set in Delaware is the airport. To get to the Bank of American facility in Delaware requires flying into Maryland and then driving.
LOL! All you east coast people think the world revolves around you. Well, the author of the novel is from Portland, Oregon. So, maybe you should ask Chuck?
His name was Robert Paulson
What about your "Galaxy Quest" reaction? Still waiting for it....
Like pretty much everyone, I went into this movie not expecting what it turned out to be and I LOVED it. Fincher is one of my favorite directors for a reason. The man is next level. That being said, while I'm with the ideas of seeing through the mass hypnosis of consumer culture, dealing with the fact that life is often struggle and pushing to live your best, most authentic life, I'm sad that so many people have misinterpreted the message of the movie and believe that it's holding up Tyler's philosophy of chaos, egocentrism, and forcefully "waking up" the people around you by destroying their lives as the truth and the right thing to do. They miss all the "be awake" part and instead interpret it as "Life is pain so go out and seek pain, embrace pain, and cause pain to others to wake them up to (what you personally believe to be) reality. They miss the part about self-awareness and responsibility and instead interpret it as a license to be an a-hole and act like an animal.
Those people seem to have missed that Tyler is the villain in the movie, his philosophy goes off the rails, and he's defeated in the end by the protagonist. The movie isn't saying that Tyler is right and a bunch of toxic people IRL should be following his example... it's saying he had some points at the beginning about consumer culture but then the madness takes it WAY too far and he has to be stopped. And he is.
Meanwhile, people who don't get it watch the movie and think, "I want to go punch somebody now!" and "Yeah, domestic terrorism is what we need to wake people up!" These are the same sad people who watch "The Joker" and take it as a prescription for life.
Even Chuck started out with a less toxic philosophy when talking about his book but, since the movie blew up and he became a celebrated writer (and hasn't had as big a hit since), he's really embraced the angry, toxic masculinity that people misinterpreted from his work. Now he's running with it because, let's be real, that crowd is who has made him the most popular. Which, when you think about it, is the exact opposite of the philosophy in both the book and the movie. Chuck talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk, as they say.
Nor would I expect him to. He's a writer who wrote a story, not a cult leader starting a new religion. Unfortunately, a lot of people base their selfish, self-centered, survival-of-the-fittest philosophy on this book and/or movie and make the world worse for it.
Still, I love David Fincher, I love the cast, I love the filmmaking, and I'm definitely a supporter of people seeing through the consumer game.
E.g. Why do people feel the need to buy new clothes every season (or year) to replace their still perfectly good clothes just because the people selling the clothes tell you that styles have changed? If you bought a pair of blue jeans, they'll last you for years but the people who make jeans can't have you only buying jeans every 5 years or so. They NEED you to buy more jeans so, every season or two, they tell you your old, still perfectly good jeans are 'out of fashion' and you'll look like an idiot if you wear them, so you better go buy some new style jeans for lots of money if you want to keep up and fit in with the people around you.
It's a scam to sell you things you don't need because that's how they stay in business. In those cases it's good to remember that the people selling you the clothes and the people telling you which clothes are in fashion are all working in the same biz and getting paid from the same pile and they'd all be out of jobs if fashion trends didn't change much and you only bought new clothes when your old clothes fell apart. That doesn't mean you should go out and blow up the buildings where they make jeans or that you should buy a gun and shoot a fashion designer. It means you should realize that everything they tell you is to sell you something rather than believing that it's a fundamental truth of life. At that point, it's up to you whether you want to participate in consumer culture but, even if you do, at least you're doing it consciously instead of being tricked into thinking you're "less than" if you don't have the latest and greatest thing they're trying to sell you.
And, if you choose to participate in consumer culture for whatever reason, it's not up to your anti-social, shut-in neighbor who hates his life to set your house on fire and "wake you up." They should be making their own choices for their life and leaving yours up to you.
I so agree with you. The violence isn't the answer it's just another escape, and tyler is definitely the villain. The fact that so many guys see the violence as a good thing is scary to me as a female. They totally missed the point of the movie
100%, the satire and irony is completely missed on a lot of people who watch this film and actually buy into Tyler's ideology. They are no better than Project Mayhem's mindless followers in the film lol. Fight club & Project Mayhem are clearly depicted as an increasingly nihilistic and chaotic descent into violent madness. It is quite obviously not being offered as a reasonable solution to people's feelings of emptiness and purposelessness in a dehumanizing corporate system. Tyler's ideas, and Tyler as a character in general are the grand delusions of a desperate and clearly mentally unstable man creating a personality that is his opposite extreme to pull him out of his comfort zone of tedium and emptiness. This is a dark comedy not a rule book to follow and anybody taking Tyler's impassioned monologues at face value needs to consider their own psychological issues lol. With that said, I also don't think the film is condemning rebellion, uprising or violence, but simply painting a satirical and darkly funny portrait of what can happen when people (in this case, particularly men) lack direction, purpose and fulfilment in their lives and society at large
I love Fight Club. Another Fun Fact: in every scene there is a Starbucks cup hidden somewhere.
Also, lots of Pepsi vending machines.
One of my favorite movies. I pull my DVD of it out about once a year. Every time I watch it I catch something new. One of my favorite scenes is where Tyler is looking into the camera talking and the frame shakes. There seems to be such rage in that scene.
Happy you finally got to this. Certified classic. I saw this when it came out, was OBSESSED, and I'm STILL learning new things about it. You don't even know the rabbit hole you've stumbled into. You probably have a lot on your plate, but you need to rewatch at least once at some point. The WHOLE movie is a completely different experience the second time.
For a long time I thought that my GRANDMOTHER was part of Fight Club because she never spoke to me about Fight Club... :/
Tyler "we just had a near LIFE experience" what a fantastic line. I love it 😆
1999 was one of the best years in movie history. All expressing discontentment with the American dream and deconstructing materialism. Fight Club. American Beauty. Office Space
The 90s as a decade were just an amazing time for movies.
,, I think you'll find that was 1939 ,, wanna fight about it 🤔🥊
This is one of the prime examples of a film where its most vocal fanbase unfortunately took the wrong lesson from the one it's obviously teaching.
the main message of the film is that insomnia is a serious medical condition, and a condemnation of the dismissive medical system! 🤔😆🤫
Yeah, they see these guys as heroes and not how totally self destructive they become. Kind of scary...
@@erikawilliams9558 No, they see them as relatable. Not heroes.
"We don't talk about Fight Club." Lol!
Also the scene where Edward Norton hits Brad Pitt in the ear was real and Pitts reaction was genuine.
Fincher, I heard, cracked up laughing at the scene.
This movie's themes are centrally: how rebelling against conformity can lead to similar conformities, and toxic masculinity and how masculinity is perceived by ourselves and others. The youtube channel (folding ideas) has a great video on this movie and how many people miss its meanings.
I think the fact that so many, particularly Tyler types, do miss the meaning of this movie is one of its greatest ongoing gifts.
It’s also about how empty a sterile homogenous lifestyle can be for the average male. Being neutered by your boss and society into becoming a docile drone worker bee without any control of your life.
Being docile doesn't make you "neutered". You can be civilized and still be a man. Don't be so hard on yourself
@@erikawilliams9558 that depends if you’re Docile by choice or just weak. “ it’s better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener in a war”.
Are you seriously citing the guy who disables dislikes and comments on his videos because everyone is telling him how he's analyses are fallacious? Ironically, some of the people who have missed Fight Club's point the most are precisely those who bloviate about "toxic masculinity". That is quite literally the most superficial approach one can take, besides thinking it's about boxing.
Another movie with similar out of control weirdness based on a Palahniuk novel is 'Choke' starring Sam Rockwell. Well worth a watch, with fantastic performances, but at the same time shocking and hilarious.
I def recommend his novel Survivor as well. He is such a fantastic writer and one of the modern godfathers of transgressive fiction.
@@dontbstingy3587 I've read most of his books and Survivor is by far my favorite.
I like chuck and his novels but choke sucked and I don't know why
I've seen this film more times than I can count yet I've never considered Shanelle's reading of it being about death before, I've always just taken it's message of anti-consumerism and anti-materialism as the main point of it all.
I wouldn't say that's the main theme at all. The main theme seems to be weak people seeking a leader or father figure, and blindly following them
@@ashscott6068 And you're both right. It's about not being alive. Living a dead life as a slave.
Anti consumerism.. But I thought the narrator was dead already.. fighting made him feel alive. But I always thought it was funny. If only he had called Marla in the beginning the whole movie would have been very different.
It’s more about how modern society has lost LIFE most people are sheeple and just follow the course of doing nothing except CONSUME
look at your life now how many huge corporate conglomerates you support with your small wages and for what
I’m happier in a field without any technology or money
This film is showing that we have all turned in to purchasing zombies who live to just spend money
@@dubbleplusgood and in 2022 it’s even worse
I never thought about metaphors for organized religion, but then again, I was a teen when I saw this for the first time and just enjoyed the mayham 🤪😉
May I recommend to react to '12 monkeys'?
another psychodelic movie with a crazy Brad Pit performamce, and Bruce Willis is pretty always great to see
Yes, definitely 12 Monkeys.
I also left a comment when she asked about Brad Pitt suggestions. A pretty good Character by Brad Pitt, and perhaps the finest performance of Bruce Willis' career.
12 Monkeys is pure gold.
A cult or an army... not that far removed from each other... right ?
12 Monkeys is like a puzzle I've been putting together ever since the year I saw it in the theater. I think I understand it better than most, but I'm not quite there yet. And if I watch people react their guesses and theories are going to make me crazy, and even worse, the comments lol
I also found that the dvd commentary (both norton and pitt) was amazing. It was like having them over and just hanging out while talking about the different themes, consumerism, etc. They both had an extremely interesting and fascinating conversation during this film and its the best dvd commentary I’ve ever heard. It almost feels like you’re getting to know both of these actors as people.
You only get that ending blind one time, and it's beautiful. Just that reaction says it all, that mouth-covered "this shouldn't delight me but it does" feeling.
The Chinese censorship board changes the end of the film to cut off the explosions and announce that Tyler and Marla went to the police who defused all the bombs safely. Tells you everything about why the ending is so powerful and satisfying.
I was a projectionist and I got to show this. Those "cigarette burns" haven't been used in years as movies lay out on giant flat discs.There are 3 levels of discs. It's basically a HUGE film reel on its side. You thread the film from the disc to the projector at the top, then down through the project, then back to the discs and thread it to the middle of an empty disc. As the movie plays, the film slowly fills the empty disc and will be ready to be threaded again. Back in the OLD days, film was extremely flamable and the projectionist had to be there to watch over it. The reels were 20 mins long and had to be hand threaded at the end of the 20 mins, hence the change over dot. The reels still came to the theater in 20 min reels, but you could easily attach the end of one to the beginning of the next reel eventually laying the whole movie on its side as one giant reel. The discs would hold about 4 hours worth of film. Oh and BTW if you ever did splice in a still like that, you would go to jail. That is like the golden do-not-break rule. Plus people would notice and the would complain immediately. Hell, people complained about just normal movies. They would yell at us for not warning them about certain scenes, they would yell at us when we did warn them (usually if they had kids with them).
It seems that this is not on IMBD, but if you watch the director's commentary, he says that Marla's post-coital remark was originally, "I want to have your abortion." Naturally, the studio didn't like this, and after some back and forth, they told the director to put in anything else. I suspect they didn't like the final version either.
Jared Leto also has a brief cameo as Angel Face, the blonde haired pretty boy who gets viciously pummeled by Edward Norton. So satisfying.
Now that you’ve seen it you really should watch it again. You will be amazed at all the clues you missed and the scenes that play out different now that you know the surprise!
the flashes in the film: Each time (other than the ending one) are times that Narrator (Jack) almost switched into Tyler but didn't
After Tyler & Marla have sex; it was originally in the script
" I want to have your abortion "
but was changed to
"I have not been ****** like that since grade school "
Which doesn't exactly made things better. BTW, Helena didn't get the grade school reference at first because she's British.
YES!! CANT WAIT ! This movie is a religion for some of us! “His name is Robert Paulson”
Masterpiece. Decades ahead of it's time. So many layers to this movie.
Check this Fan Theory....in "Ferris Beuller's Day Off" Ferris is actually Cameron's Tyler Durden.
Watch that with this theory in mind, it works!
I was a projectionist at a theater during this time in films. The 90's - early 2000's were some of the best of cinematic history, back when there were original and unique ideas still. I miss those days. The newest movie that blew me away was JoJo Rabbit. If you haven't seen it, I HIGHLY suggest a viewing.
Now it’s all cgi woke nothingness zero substance
You spelled your job wrong.
@@JasonZakrajsek Dumb autocorrect.
tyler pops in, in single frames, in the early movie. sorta foreshadowing that the narrator is starting to imagine him.
leaning against edward, standing or laying down in the back grounds
Where is the GALAXY QUEST reaction???
When Norton is beating himself up in front of his boss, he says, "for some reason I thought about my first fight with Tyler" ... since he was also beating himself up then. Love that little line.
All of Fincher's films in the 90s are dark, gritty classics with beautiful cinematography, and yes, that definitely does include Alien 3 (Assembly Cut)! A shame his output since has been to a much lesser standard and frequency.
I think he just likes pulp material. My problem with his latest stuff is that the shoots it all with the same color palette. Everybody raves about GONE GIRL but it was very pedestrian when compared to say, ZODIAC or PANIC ROOM. Hell, even GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO was on par with most of his '00s output.
@@Theomite Yeah I thought Gone Girl was actually quite poor and the Swedish GWTDT film starring Noomi Rapace and Michael Nyqvist was perfectly good and it had the authenticity of actually being a Swedish film. I've seen both and I would always go back to watch the original if I had a choice.
@@inmate1614 I like watching the American version and then watching the Swedish sequels. Every now and then I'll switch it up and watch the Swedish original (director's cut, naturally) and follow through. But I like both versions, actually, which I'm grateful for.
Fell in love with HBC when I first watched "Room With A View" waaaay back when.
Despite this movie being a masterpiece, it sadly got barely any Oscar or other awards attention (just nominations for special effects and sound editing - NONE for acting, directing, cinematography, etc). At the time it was released, many critics and mainstream film buffs simply didn't understand the philosophy it was conveying, or recognize the top-tier filmmaking that went into it. A lot of them didn't even realize that the film was ultimately *criticizing* toxic masculinity (by showing how easily it leads to cruelty, violence, and destruction). So they ended up writing it off as just a weird film about some crazy dudes fighting and making chaos. Only as years went on did the film gain recognition for all its artistic merits.
It wasn't about "toxic masculinity". That wasn't part of the zeitgeist back then and you won't find any quotes of Chuck Palahniuk talking about it in any of his interviews back then. Lots of people like to say that's what its about now, but that's just modern culture trying to view it through its own ideological lens. You can say that some of the themes of the book overlap with some conversation about "toxic masculinity", but Palahniuk didn't sit down to write a book trying to address it. Nor did Fincher make the film with that intention either.
I second the film is NOT addressing toxic masculinity. It rails against mindless consumerism, being a cog in the corporate machine, following the standards that society expects you to follow etc. Where the hill are people getting this arrr-tahhhhhhrd idea that it's about toxic masculinity? As stated, that was NOT in the public conversation 25 years ago.
If you think this film is primarily about anti-consumerism, you're missing a lot. Please tell me what's the point of the entire third act? Anti-conformity is a closer fit, but that's twofold-against "normal" society but also against counter-cultures, given the portrayal of Fight Club/Project Mayhem's development into a cult. Still, anti-conformity doesn't account for everything either.
Anti-consumerism and anti-conformity apply to everyone equally. Why is Fight Club for men only? Why does Tyler say that thing about being raised by women and if a woman is the answer they need? Why does the Narrator's relationship with Marla both propel him towards Tyler's persona and eventually draw him back from it? What is the function of the Narrator's relationship with Bob? His rivalry with Leto's character?
Masculinity is clearly essential to the theme. Tyler says, "All the ways you wish you could be, that's me." If that's so, why is he so focused on self-destruction, hitting bottom, losing everything? If Tyler is what he wants to be, why does Tyler and Marla's relationship resemble his parents' dysfunctional marriage? Why does Tyler become the antagonist in the film's final third? Why does the Narrator kill him? Clearly, there was something wrong with "all the ways you wish you could be."
It's an enormously complex movie. I think it's reductive to say it is "about" toxic masculinity, but it undeniably explores ideas of masculinity extensively and finds a healthy measure of fault.
@@noodle_fc I think it definitely explores the male experience in modern society and Palahniuk did say he wrote the book to target men. But I think there's a significant difference between the book/film's themes dealing with masculinity in society and it being a story attempting to address toxic masculinity.
And I think its the modern lens that leads people to believe that its a story about finding fault with masculinity. I mean of course a modern culture that basically defines all forms of traditional masculinity as "toxic" is going to determine that a story dealing with masculinity must be a criticism of masculinity. How could it be anything but when coming at it from that perspective.
But I don't think that was the intention of the author or Fincher. There's a subtle, but very distinct difference between saying masculinity is toxic in the modern world and the modern world is toxic to men. And I think modern attitudes have flipped that script and don't even realize they're doing it. The book/film is about the latter, not the former.
I mean it seems like you see Tyler Durden as the representation of masculinity here that "Jack" is striving for and has to kill in the end. But if that is what Tyler is supposed to be, why is Tyler so antihierarchical? Why is he so anti-social? Why does Tyler deal with the owner/mafia guy by letting him beat the shit out of him instead of kicking his ass and dominating him traditionally???
Sure, Tyler is very assertive and sexually aggressive. And while its easy to to see those things as indicators that Tyler is supposed to represent "toxic masculinity", especially if you're coming from the perspective that views those things as toxic, I think there's another explanation that fits ALL of Tyler's traits, and not just some, AND aligns with the other themes in the film like consumerism and corporatism.
It makes far more sense to view Tyler as "Jack"'s uninhibited self and the ideal personality to reject everything he finds wrong with the world than to view him as some kind of representation of "Jack"'s idea of a man.
He doesn't imagine Tyler to be some big CEO, that fucks a lot of women, makes a ton of money, and excels in normal society. He imagines Tyler to a self assured, anti-social (in the true sense of the world, not how people incorrectly use it), radical terrorist. He describes him as a "night person" that works various part time jobs in which he fucks with the status quo by doing anti-social things like splicing porn into family films. He imagines him as a guy posing as a soap salesman so he can make bombs out of the soap.
Tyler isn't supposed to represent traditional manhood. He's the fantasy personality of a guy who hates his job, hates the consumerist corporate culture around him, and hates himself for being so attached to all all of it that he can't even sleep unless he attends a bunch of support groups for diseases he doesn't have just to feel a bit of release.
Tyler isn't ultra assertive and self assured because he's supposed to represent some kind of toxic behavior in men. He's that way because "Jack" hates himself for just passively going along with a job, culture and life that he can't stand.
Tyler doesn't have crazy sex with Marla because he's supposed reprsent "Jack"'s toxic desire to sexually dominate women or anyhthing like that. "Jack" doesn't even show any sexual interest in Marla when they meet. He's unable to even see her in that light because he's too preoccupied with his own self loathing. instead he sees her as the external embodiment of his own problems and hates her as an extension of his own self hatred. Tyler has crazy sex with her because Tyler can just enjoy her for who she is, someone similar to "Jack". Something "Jack" might be able to do if he actually accepted himself.
"Jack" doesn't kill Tyler at the end because he's killing his "toxic masculinity". He kills him, because he comes to terms with himself and doesn't have the need for the anti-social lunatic side of him anymore. He loses the desire to tear down society and everything about himself. That's what he's killing the in end. He's not killing his masculinity.
@@moonlitegram Our perspectives are not as different as you might think. In particular, I agree that the film is not an attempt to address toxic masculinity specifically (same goes for the book). I also agree that it's a mistake to read Tyler as a personified representation or critique of masculinity, toxic or otherwise.†
You wrote, _"It makes far more sense to view Tyler as "Jack"'s uninhibited self and the ideal personality to reject everything he finds wrong with the world"._ I would modify that in a subtle but I think essential way. I think Tyler is the Narrator's _flawed attempt_ to construct an ideal self. As events unfold, the failings of that attempt show themselves. When thinking of who he really wants to be, the Narrator got it neither completely right nor completely wrong.
Regarding the ending, I agree in part with your assessment of the Narrator's motivations for killing Tyler. He has "come to terms with himself," sort of, in that he's ready to make an earnest attempt to change _as himself_ rather than adopting an alter ego. I think that the Narrator will take what he learned from Tyler; I disagree that that he is rejecting or discarding Tyler as a whole and don't think Tyler was primarily an "anti-social lunatic." Addressing Tyler at the end, he says, "I'm grateful to you, but this is too much. I don't want this." (probably not verbatim, but close to that) He still wants to be like Tyler in many respects, but without Tyler's excesses.
Relatedly-not to delve too deeply into what I think you get wrong about the meaning of "toxic masculinity"-, I'll mention that a similar thing applies to critiques of masculinity. Like Tyler, concepts of masculinity contain valuable qualities to retain as well as flaws or excesses that should be left behind. As just one example, traditionally man is seen as the family breadwinner. It's absolutely a good thing to provide for one's loved ones-no one is telling men to stop supporting their families, right? However, if a husband feels threatened by his wife's career, if the desire to have _greater_ professional success interferes with the _partnership,_ that is a problem.
In art as in life, it's a case of not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
†Now, having agreed that Tyler isn't some kind of allegorical stand-in for masculinity, let's acknowledge that he _is_ a male character in an influential piece of pop culture, one that is already in the business of social commentary specifically concerned with and meant for a male audience, and which many men cite as an important formative influence. Therefore, it makes a lot of sense to consider Tyler in the context of modern social attitudes regarding masculinity. As the narrative itself finds flaws in Tyler, it shouldn't be wholly surprising that certain toxic _aspects_ of modern masculinity are represented in Tyler.
And for the record, it's not exclusively a function of hindsight. I absolutely considered themes of desirable/undesirable traits and attitudes in the late '90s when viewing the movie and reading the book, even though the term "toxic masculinity" wasn't yet in vogue.
Blew my teenage mind when I saw it in the theater. Life changing cinema. One of my favorite things to look for when rewatching are Helena's facial expressions and dialog once she starts having a relationship with the narrator; if you imagine her perspective, every scene she is in blatantly gives away the entire plot twist, but the audience never catches it. It's genius writing, directing, and acting.
Yeah I saw it in the theaters with some college friends when it came out. The general reaction of the theater was like WTF?!? Except my one friend who figured it out 1/3 through the movie who Ed Norton and Brad Pitt were both Tyler. Mind you this is the same friend we’re in the theater watching 6th sense and figured that plot twist out as well.
Fun fact- the first building that explodes is the fox plaza which is the same building they used as the Nakatomi Corporation HQ in Die Hard.
Now watch American History X.
Every guy hopes they can get as ripped as Brad Pitt in this movie
Patrice O'Neal saw Fight Club, he said: "it's self hate, guilt, the burden of white guys who can't be men and the burden of dishonesty".
His description was right on the money.
meh
It's not.
Oh the irony of a youtube ad coming up to cover the squarespace logo right as it appears.
A great movie about males bonding over the making of a hygiene product 😁
It's amazing watching your take on these movies. You're where I was like 20 years ago. I saw this in a theater - riding in the backseat of a car with highschool friends. We snuck in the theater. I didn't know that was the plan and pointed out that I needed to pay and got shushed.
Ooo I love this movie! I'm really gonna enjoy this reaction!!
One of the few 10/10 movies ever made. Its always relatable and relevant. A cultural phenomenon of a movie!
When I first saw the movie in the theater I felt that the idea that violence was a solution to the ennui of modern life was a weak message, but over the years it has resonated more with me as society has become more watered down and soulless - not so much the violence as the idea of conflict and pain as a means to understand oneself and one's relationship with the world, a reconnecting with the primal nature.
I don't think that's the message....i think he's saying violence isn't the answer either
This is a movie you have to watch at least twice. I'd recommend watching it three times. And be extremely observant of everything seen, said, and done in each scene. There's dozens of clues hidden throughout the film that Ed Norton's character and Brad Pitt (Tyler) are the same person. The first clue is in the opening scene when Ed Norton is talking about the explosives and he says "I know this, because Tyler knows this." And the first time we see Tyler (other than the quick single frame flashes) is when he's on the moving walk way at the airport, and when we see him Ed says "if you wake at another time and in another place, could you wake up as a different person." And right when he says "a different person" that's when the camera reveals Brad. Something else to notice, when the flashes of Brad appear early on, pay attention to what is said. For instance when we see the quick flash of Brad behind the doctor, it appears exactly at the moment the doctors says "that's pain". So there's all sorts of clues in the film, which makes it really fun to watch a few times and see if you can find all of them.
I don't know why everyone is suddenly doing Fight Club reactions, but I don't mind. As a movie that preaches to emasculated and domesticated males, it's always interesting to get a female perspective. I've seen some women be like "Oh that looks nice" when he's describing all the furniture that is making him a slave, completely missing the point.
The point is fight club wasn't the answer either. And what exactly does "emasculated" mean in this context?
@@erikawilliams9558 Emasculated is not really contextually dependent. The primal instinct of the alpha male nature has been deemed inappropriate in the current culture. So men live lives of quiet desperation, pretending to care about throw pillows and decorative towels, grateful for their allotted man caves -- small areas of perceived independence, only allowed by their wives to keep them from pulling too hard on the leash. Men are effectively neutered, shamed into submission. Fight Club was a violent primal scream against that. And yes it ended poorly, because it was one extreme to counter another extreme, the way someone raised in a strict household might go on binge of sex and drugs to feel alive.
Tyler was right about one thing: the breakfast you have the morning after a midnight gun was in your face, death being a finger motion away...is the *best* meal you'll ever have. I had eggs and toast and cheap coffee; them eggs were ethereally sublime. The crunch of the buttery toast. I just don't have the words.
Such a great film! A great read, also, if you’re interested.
I hope that someday you will continue the View Askewniverse by watching ;
Mallrats
Chasing Amy
Dogma
Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back
Clerks 2
Jay & Silent Bob Reboot
She will, all that was added to her list in the last live stream.
@@TheJamieRamone Sweet!
The BIGGEST mind blown theory of this film; is that it's a sequel too Ferris Bueller's Day Off.
The narrator is Cameron ( notice they never mention his name) and again... he has another mental breakdown.
Ferris NEVER existed.
Notice how the narrator is in auto insurance. Much like how Cameron destroyed his father's car and I'm sure they made a fraudulent claim.
So, having a hard time in life...
Cameron makes up another imaginary friend.
I would like for you to check out the movie Some Like it Hot, its a comedy.
it's a deeply existential examination of male masculinity and mental health in a modern world. Our modern roles in society vs our deep ancient ancestors.
Can I just point out you are not supposed to talk about this..... 😅🤣
35:16 - That also caught me off guard as well! I also only noticed him there when he passed by the narrator at the airport.
WRT your intro, I've definitely seen at least one article describe Pitt as "a character actor trapped in a leading man's body".
I am Jack's embarrassment at idolising Tyler so much as a teen.
Fincher's flair and Palahniuk's nihilism were a match made in murky post-modern heaven.
Why? He isn't wrong in what he's preaching.
@@rustincohle2135 because Tyler Durden is a fascist
The story is about the inner battle Norton is the part of everyone that wants to follow the rules, fit in, be accepted. Pitt is the part of everyone that is chaos, independent, doesn't want to fit in. The narrator is the person this battle is taking place. Everyone decides how much of their life is controlled by Norton and by Pitt.
What I love most about this movie is that they never tell the audience the other huge twist. There are plenty of clues, even more than the "Durden is the narrator" twist, yet almost nobody gets it. Took me 3 viewings to figure it out.
For those who don't know what I'm talking about, I'd love to tell ya... But... you know the rules.
If this is the "Marla isn't real either" theory, I think that's kind of ridiculous and not at all supported by the film.
@@patrickflanagan3762 This theory isn't fan fiction. There are way to many coincidences for that not to be a plot point. I can list them if you want.
Fincher lied to the audience, showed you scenes, concerning Tyler, that simply didn't happen. Later in the film, he tells you the truth about those scenes. And it is a bit of a jump to accept it.
If the director were to insert a few revionist scenes with Marla and Narrator it would be so easy and much more believable to the point where it wouldn't have been that big of a twist.
But he didn't and that's why I love this movie!
@@patrickflanagan3762
- Marla walks into traffic multiple times without a care
- Marla shows up at at a cancer meeting smoking and nobody cares
- Marla shows up at testicular cancer meeting and later claims that she has a right to go there, again nobody cares
- Marla and Narrator argue over meetings in the laundromat, Marla only wants brain conditions
- Marla only steals men's clothes in the laundromat
-Tyler and Marla both smoke even though the Narrator doesn't. But not just that, they both smoke in very flamboyant, unnatural, "cool", ways
- Narrator is jerking off when he hears Tyler and Marla fucking.
- Tyler's and Marla's sex scene is shot very artistically as if it's a dream
- the only time Marla and Narrator interact with another human is the diner. The server is probably used to this kind of eradic behavior from Tylet/Narrator
- Narrator sees Marla as his spirit animal.
(That's an obvious, blatant clue)
-The final shot their silhouettes match almost perfectly.
- etc...
This movie is ultimately about a man and his internal struggle between his own masculinity and his own feminism.
Little late to the party having just found this channel, and burning through the videos. Fight Club is my favorite film, just such a joy and mindbinder. I find something new every viewing. She said "He's having a near death experience" or something similar, and I had to respond (to no one), "no, he's having a near LIFE experience". Enjoy your content more than some others, as you bring a new perspective being connected to the business, and really like the trivia bits!
The main character's name is Jack... "I am JACK's desire to destroy something beautiful."
This movie caused so many fights at school it’s ridiculous, i was in grade 11 and times were crazy
I have no idea how many times I've watch this movie. Saw it the theater and it was amazing. It's just one of those movies! "Pulp Fiction", "Donnie Darko", "V for Vendetta", "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" and "Fight Club" are those types of movies that seem to change you in a way after you watch em. LoL
I was told by my instructor at my aircraft school that three times you see him, it's one splice, two and then three. So each time you see him you see him a tiny bit more. I'm guessing it represents him growing in his mind. IDK.
I can watch this movie all the dang time. With everything that has happened to me this past year this movie rings true even more so. It's so strange how stuff in movies seem to keep comin around being so familiar lately.
Love this movie!
Love your reaction!
You're too cool. So glad you liked it.
The actors commentary on this movie is chef's kiss, it's all three Brad, HBC and Edward, you should try it on a re-watch. Love your vids cheers
We are all not just friends but true lovers too!
Fun fact they released a blue ray/ DVD version that had a false menu on it that made the watcher think the disc was somehow a copy of never been kissed with Drew Barrymore. The menu plays briefly before tearing away to the actual fight club menu. This totally got me and I tried reloading the disc several times before letting it play long enough to figure out the joke
Actually, that was a good point she made. Edward Norton's character is a product of the consumerism, materialistic world, being focused on lifestyle and possessions. He works to save the company money over human lives, which explains his alter ego despising consumerism and materialism and is the focus of most of his speeches.
There's a fan theory that the movie Ferris Bueller's Day Off is like Fight Club, where Ferris is just a figment of Cameron's imagination, the person he WANTS to be. We never see Cameron's family after all.
You missed the point of the film. Tyler says it best: "Man, I see in Fight Club the strongest and smartest men who’ve ever lived. I see all this potential, and I see it squandered. God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables - slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don’t need. We’re the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our great war is a spiritual war. Our great depression is our lives. We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars, but we won’t. We’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very, very pissed off." Unfortunately most people don't think like this anymore. The internet/social media/government has made sure of that. The film (and book) attack the ideas of humans living in this capitalistic and alienated world as justifiable. For good reason too. Look at where we are at now...
You get that Tyler is the villain in this story, right? His philosophy is not being presented as correct.
Yeah. But in the end, in order to really live you have to outgrow your alienation, get past rebelling as blindly as you once followed, and learn how to engage with the world as a whole individual again. A lot of people who got the first part down missed *that* half of the lesson; and that mindset is part of where we are now, too.
Besides the not-quite-subliminal (liminal?) pics of Tyler Durden inserted into the movie at several moments in the beginning, there is also a brief video on the hotel channel which the Narrator is watching during one of his work trips, with a shot of a roomful of white jacketed waitstaff welcoming the hotel guest. The waiter on the right side of the screen is Tyler. (Or Brad Pitt, maybe, since Tyler is supposed to actually look like Edward Norton.)
I worked as a projectionist using 35mm films at the time this came out and your trivia section was correct, no one called the reel change dots "cigarette burns" until after this movie came out and we wanted to sound cool. Reel change dots were already obsolete at the time this came out anyway, since they were used for reel-to-reel projection systems. They signalled to the projectionist to get ready to switch from projector A to projector B. But by '99, most theaters (in my experience) used platter systems and timers. All the individual 2000-foot reels (about 20 minutes of screen time) making up a film print would be taped together into one massive reel of film, tightly wound and several miles long, laying on its side on a big spinning platter. It would unravel from the inside out through the projector head and collect onto a second platter.
There are also scenes where the film itself - representing the "universe" contained within the movie's story I guess - is vibrating on screen, creating a blurry background behind Tyler and showing visible sprocket holes at the left and right sides of the screen. This is to replicate a common mishap in film projection. Film would be threaded over 4 or 5 smooth plastic rollers into the projector, threading again over metal rollers with sprockets and being locked in place with the film gate. Each frame of film (showing 1/24 of 1 second of screen time) had 4 sprocket holes on either side, and an intermittent roller would pull the film through in increments of 4 sprockets, moving so fast that the frame lines could not be seen by the audience due to the "persistence of vision" optical illusion. It just appeared as smooth, uninterrupted motion. But there were times that an extra-thick tape splice or a mangled sprocket hole would pass through and kick the film gate open, causing the film to flap around as it ran through the projector and often making the screen image flutter or blur. So the film is saying that Tyler is such a disruptive element that he has literally thrown the universe off its track.
There's a lot of evidence suggesting that Marla isn't real either, but another personality.
A little trivia: The scene where Edward Norton's character punches Tyler Durden in the ear. That wasn't scripted. Prior to shooting the scene, David Fincher took Edward Norton aside and told him to do it for effect. Edward did and the reaction from Brad Pitt was real, doing so while in character. Edward Norton's character apologizing, saying "I' fucked it up." felt like a real reaction, too, while in character.
I’ll give it to Marla here. She’s the sassy Anti-damsel that we started getting in the 90s. For instance, she winds up sleeping with Tyler but she’s not swooning over him.
You went to film school and are just now seeing these movies... I saw these movies and they are the reason I went to film school lol. Love watching the first time reactions from someone who knows how the sausage is made.
The look on Shan’s face with the grande latte enema 🤣
12 Monkeys,
The 5th Element,
Romy & Michelle,
Young Guns 1 & 2,
Moonlighting,
Vanishing Son
Using the song "Where Is My Mind" by The Pixies for the last scene was perfect
When I saw it in theaters, it did have that single frame at the end. It always had it in the theatrical release. It made a lot of people in the theater laugh. (I saw it the first week it came out.)
Be wary of what you read. There's tons of false information out there these days. I see it all the time.
I also saw it when it came out. It was definitely there and I never forgot it. lol
Def a lot of bad info out there. I read stuff about movies, music, TV shows and other stuff that's completely wrong all the time.
What a _coincidence,_ I just watched another "Frist Reaction to Fight Club" video today.
Shanelle, you cannot run toward something without being chased. The trauma keeps you moving, do not doubt the beauty and strength cultivated from vulnerability.
An absolutely amazing live action adaptation of Calvin & Hobbes
You're so right, it's fucked up.
I watch this movie as 3 movies in one: a satire, a tale of madness, and a love story.
They darkened the colors in this movie so much in post that you can't tell that Tyler's "burnt orange" leather jacket is actually bright red in real life.
"Mischief, mayhem, soap. OMG! Are they in prison? Maybe." 🤣
If you're at all interested: There are 2 sequels to Fight Club in graphic novel form (Chuck Palahniuk was the writer for both).