Raanan vs the CLASSICS (pt. 4 of 6) – FIGHT CLUB
FIGHT CLUB is #3 in the countdown of popular movies with positive messages that my irascible cousin can’t stand.
A lot of people love this visceral David Fincher feature, which speaks its cultural criticisms directly to the disenfranchised thug that dwells in each of us. But is Fight Club, based on the Chuck Palahniuk novel, truly revolutionary, with it’s porn-spliced frames and third-act narrative shifts, or is it just another gimmick-laden big budget corporate McThriller? Who’s to say? Raanan’s to say, that’s who.
“Overrated Movie #3- FIGHT CLUB
“When Fight Club came out in 1999, it became an instant classic among adolescent males, which is always a safe sign that a movie isn’t very good. While Fincher has matured a lot since then, at the time he was suffering from Oliver Stone Syndrome, which is defined in the American Journal of Psychiatry as: “The delusion that your thoughts are so lofty and urgent they must be hammered repetitively into the audience’s head, subtlety being the kind of risk only shallower artists can afford to take, like Beckett or Shakespeare.” In Fight Club, this Chinese-water-torture type of didacticism is achieved by Edward Norton’s narration, which is constantly telling you what to think with the same kind of brainwashing numbness found in the Consumer culture which the film constantly urges you to consider critically. This hypocrisy could be excused if the ideas in Fight Club were as exciting as the film presupposes. But try as I might, I don’t see how our reliance on material possessions- which is annoying at best- somehow justifies terrorism. The anarchism in the movie is juvenile and reactionary, an easy-way out that ignores a far greater challenge: trying to figure out how to live within this hopelessly flawed society, while still keeping your soul intact.”
What do you think? Fair or foul?