<color=darkred>Previous Review: <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/326.274285.10610811>Blood Diamond
$2.50 Reviews:
Fight Club
<img height=400>http://i69.servimg.com/u/f69/16/09/70/40/poster41.png
I am at a loss for words. I cannot comprehend what I have just watched. Mostly because what I just watched was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. There is absolutely nothing about this film that is redeeming in any way, and if anyone ever forces me to watch it again, I might just have to murder them in their sleep.
[Img_Inline width="275" height="170" Caption="This movie PROMOTES smoking. So terrible." Align="left"]http://i51.tinypic.com/1ypnjd.jpg[/Img_Inline]
Or maybe in a club where people fight? Like in this film? Get it? Good!
The film stars some good actors: Edward Norton is an unnamed narrator, Brad Pitt is a soap salesman, and Helena Bonham Carter is the woman. The three do things that would make watching paint dry seem exciting. There are fights, people get beaten up, but nothing ever seems to matter. I was yawning fairly early on, and in a "thriller", this usually isn't a good thing.
Unless of course, it picks up mid-way through like Transsiberian did. In that case, I would likely applaud it. But it didn't. Nothing ever happens. EVER! People talk, people fight, and that's about it. There's a twist ending, that people won't see coming not because it's an amazing twist, but because people have already fallen asleep, and only awaken when the film's soundtrack goes, "DUN DUN DUN". Then you will open your eyes, unaware of how the carnage currently on the screen got there. You will then have a choice to make: Turn off the TV and go to bed, hoping that it was all a bad dream when you awaken in the morning, or set the DVD on fire and then smash it with a sledgehammer.
[Img_Inline width="275" height="170" Caption="Do you like yourself? You won't after watching this film." Align="right"]http://i69.servimg.com/u/f69/16/09/70/40/fight-10.jpg[/Img_Inline]
What I don't really understand is how so many talented people could waste their time creating such a terrible film. The director is David Fincher, someone who has made one really bad film in the past (Zodiac), but also made some good ones, like Se7en and The Social Network. The leading actors are all usually quite good, but in this film, they fall flat. There is almost zero emotion coming from them, and their performances could only have been more flat if I watched the film on a flat-screen TV. Oh wait, I did. Should have watched it on an older TV, at least then there would be some depth.
(See people, this is why I don't try to incorporate "jokes" into these reviews -- I'm not funny!)
To those people who are going to claim that I didn't like the film just because I didn't understand it: Get off your high horse! That is the ultimate cop-out when defending a film. Saying that someone didn't understand it is like saying you are better than they are. Maybe they didn't, but not understanding something doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't enjoy it. I didn't really understand Mulholland Drive. Anyone claiming to understand Mulholland Drive is likely lying to you anyway. Does that make it bad or not enjoyable? No! I'm sorry guys, I just can't accept that excuse.
[Img_Inline width="275" Caption="AND WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH THE SOAP?" Align="left"]http://i69.servimg.com/u/f69/16/09/70/40/fight-11.jpg[/Img_Inline]
You know, when studio executives don't like a film, there's usually good reason for it. In this case, that reason is simple: The movie sucks. It has nothing to say about people, their relationships, their thoughts, feelings, emotions or culture. While this may have been one of the most talked about films back in 1999, I don't really see why. Maybe because it had content in it that should have led to it getting an X rating? That's possible. But in terms of what its message is? I sincerely doubt that.
Something else I'd like to say: Cult films are often times not good. Sometimes they can be, like in the case of, um, I don't know, Cube maybe? But let's take something else into consideration here: Troll 2 is a cult film. The Room is a cult film. People go to watch these films to laugh at them, or at least, I sincerely hope that's why people go to watch them. I would guess that to be the case here as well, just because of how terrible this film was. Its script was lackluster, its direction sloppy and its acting flat.
This is one of those movies where I normally would have assumed the over-eager fanboys would have hyped it up too much for me, leading to me hating it. I would have assumed that, except nobody would talk about it! Is there some sort of rule against talking about Fight Club? Did I miss some--
Moderator edit: Obey rules number 1 and 2 next time.
<spoiler=Other Reviews>HAPPY APRIL FOOLS!
If you are a fan of my reviews, and you want to boost my ego receive notifications when new reviews are posted, please join this <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/2-50-Reviews>user group.
$2.50 Reviews:
Fight Club
<img height=400>http://i69.servimg.com/u/f69/16/09/70/40/poster41.png
I am at a loss for words. I cannot comprehend what I have just watched. Mostly because what I just watched was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. There is absolutely nothing about this film that is redeeming in any way, and if anyone ever forces me to watch it again, I might just have to murder them in their sleep.
[Img_Inline width="275" height="170" Caption="This movie PROMOTES smoking. So terrible." Align="left"]http://i51.tinypic.com/1ypnjd.jpg[/Img_Inline]
Or maybe in a club where people fight? Like in this film? Get it? Good!
The film stars some good actors: Edward Norton is an unnamed narrator, Brad Pitt is a soap salesman, and Helena Bonham Carter is the woman. The three do things that would make watching paint dry seem exciting. There are fights, people get beaten up, but nothing ever seems to matter. I was yawning fairly early on, and in a "thriller", this usually isn't a good thing.
Unless of course, it picks up mid-way through like Transsiberian did. In that case, I would likely applaud it. But it didn't. Nothing ever happens. EVER! People talk, people fight, and that's about it. There's a twist ending, that people won't see coming not because it's an amazing twist, but because people have already fallen asleep, and only awaken when the film's soundtrack goes, "DUN DUN DUN". Then you will open your eyes, unaware of how the carnage currently on the screen got there. You will then have a choice to make: Turn off the TV and go to bed, hoping that it was all a bad dream when you awaken in the morning, or set the DVD on fire and then smash it with a sledgehammer.
[Img_Inline width="275" height="170" Caption="Do you like yourself? You won't after watching this film." Align="right"]http://i69.servimg.com/u/f69/16/09/70/40/fight-10.jpg[/Img_Inline]
What I don't really understand is how so many talented people could waste their time creating such a terrible film. The director is David Fincher, someone who has made one really bad film in the past (Zodiac), but also made some good ones, like Se7en and The Social Network. The leading actors are all usually quite good, but in this film, they fall flat. There is almost zero emotion coming from them, and their performances could only have been more flat if I watched the film on a flat-screen TV. Oh wait, I did. Should have watched it on an older TV, at least then there would be some depth.
(See people, this is why I don't try to incorporate "jokes" into these reviews -- I'm not funny!)
To those people who are going to claim that I didn't like the film just because I didn't understand it: Get off your high horse! That is the ultimate cop-out when defending a film. Saying that someone didn't understand it is like saying you are better than they are. Maybe they didn't, but not understanding something doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't enjoy it. I didn't really understand Mulholland Drive. Anyone claiming to understand Mulholland Drive is likely lying to you anyway. Does that make it bad or not enjoyable? No! I'm sorry guys, I just can't accept that excuse.
[Img_Inline width="275" Caption="AND WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH THE SOAP?" Align="left"]http://i69.servimg.com/u/f69/16/09/70/40/fight-11.jpg[/Img_Inline]
You know, when studio executives don't like a film, there's usually good reason for it. In this case, that reason is simple: The movie sucks. It has nothing to say about people, their relationships, their thoughts, feelings, emotions or culture. While this may have been one of the most talked about films back in 1999, I don't really see why. Maybe because it had content in it that should have led to it getting an X rating? That's possible. But in terms of what its message is? I sincerely doubt that.
Something else I'd like to say: Cult films are often times not good. Sometimes they can be, like in the case of, um, I don't know, Cube maybe? But let's take something else into consideration here: Troll 2 is a cult film. The Room is a cult film. People go to watch these films to laugh at them, or at least, I sincerely hope that's why people go to watch them. I would guess that to be the case here as well, just because of how terrible this film was. Its script was lackluster, its direction sloppy and its acting flat.
This is one of those movies where I normally would have assumed the over-eager fanboys would have hyped it up too much for me, leading to me hating it. I would have assumed that, except nobody would talk about it! Is there some sort of rule against talking about Fight Club? Did I miss some--
Moderator edit: Obey rules number 1 and 2 next time.
<spoiler=Other Reviews>HAPPY APRIL FOOLS!
If you are a fan of my reviews, and you want to boost my ego receive notifications when new reviews are posted, please join this <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/2-50-Reviews>user group.
