This movie has lingered in the back of my mind in the week or so that has passed since I watched it. It may be one of the most thought-provoking movies I’ve ever seen. Here’s what I thought:
What type of movie even is it?
All throughout the movie I was stumped. Is this a dark comedy? Is this a horror film? A thriller? A drama? A romance? Even now I cannot place my finger on exactly what it is. Scenes such as Bob’s grotesquely maimed head resurface in my mind, and make me think, ‘Yes, this is a horror film disguised as a dramatic dark comedy’. Then, I remember the almost heart-warming romance that the movie begins and ends upon. If you take the fact that Tyler Durden and the Narrator are the same person, the entire movie is about Marla and the Narrator. I guess what I am trying to say, in a very convoluted way, is that Fight Club fits into none of these boxes perfectly, which one of the reasons it is so great. I had never seen a movie before that didn’t perfectly fit into an already predefined space. I think I was on the edge of my seat the entire time this movie played because it had elements of all of my favorite genres, which allowed it to never have a boring moment.
When was the climax?
This was another question I couldn’t get out of my mind. If we think of the typical view of dramatic structure, as outlined by Freytag’s Pyramid, one could argue that the film ends on its own climax. This being, because mere minutes after the Narrator rids himself of Tyler, the 10 financial buildings around him explode; nothing is resolved, the audience is left in the chaos he was trying to escape. This view also would say that most of the movie is exposition. Alternatively, we could say that the inciting incident, instead of being something like realizing Tyler is him, is something like his apartment being blown out. Then, the rising action is the creation of Fight Club, and the terrorist group. The complication then would be realizing he is Tyler, with the climax being their standoff. In this case, the reversal would be the Narrator shooting himself, with the falling action being Marla and all of the henchmen coming up to the viewpoint he is stationed at. Finally, the resolution(or perhaps lack thereof) would be the Narrator and Marla watching the financial towers fall, as he bleeds from his shot-out cheek.
If I’m being honest, the latter makes more sense and is more well defined. However, I prefer the first version, in which the film ends at the climax, because that is how it felt to the audience. Nothing feels resolved, nothing feels like it is tied up with a nice bow. The audience is left feeling the chaos of the world they are looking into, which is why I prefer to see the end of the movie as the climax of the entire story.
The details make all the difference.
The small touches throughout the entire movie make it so much better. Let me explain.
The first thing I noticed was a manipulated FBI warning that played at the beginning of my DVD. It looks just like a normal one you might see on a DVD from that time, but it lingers just long enough for you to read it and realize that it is off. As soon as you catch on to the fact that it is not normal, it disappears, leaving you wondering if you read that wrong. Just like the Narrator, you begin to question your surroundings.
Second, are the tiny blips of Tyler we see flash upon the screen during the initial expository information given about the Narrator. For those who don’t know about the final twist, they are puzzled. They can clearly recognize Brad Pitt, if only for a split second, so why is he there? They then however forget about his appearance for the rest of the movie, until the twist is revealed, at which point their memory serves them and these images come flooding back to them. Brilliant.
Third, are all the hints we get that tip us off to the fact that Tyler and the Narrator are the same person. My favorite is from a scene in which Tyler is sleeping with Marla, and the Narrator comes to the door. Tyler opens it, and they have a brief exchange, at the end of which Marla says ‘Who are you talking to?’. Even though Marla should be able to clearly see who Tyler is talking to, she doesn’t, because she can’t. This is another moment that subtly tips off the audience.
Lastly, the spliced in pornographic image that runs at the very end of the film. It’s a nice touch, that references Tyler’s rebellious acts from when he worked at movie theaters. Like the initial FBI gag, its a great detail to include that shows the effort that was put into the film.
The style and actors are perfect.
When I initially watched the trailer, like most people, I was drawn in by Brad Pitt. He seems like a likable tough-guy, who is the center of the story. However, after reading the book, I became aware of the fact that Edward Norton’s character is actually the focal point. And he does it wonderfully. I think I fell in love with his portrayal of the Narrator because it was so relatable. Even though Edward Norton is this amazing actor, he is able to encapsulate the lengths ones mind goes to to circumvent the boredom and depression of everyday life.
In addition to Norton, as I mentioned, Brad Pitt is a big-hitter. I was surprised by how much I liked Tyler Durden; this is most likely due to Pitt’s excellent delivery of Durden’s highly quotable lines. Despite this though, I found myself not missing his absence or feeling bad once the Narrator had disposed of him. This is amazing work on Pitt’s and the screenwriters’ parts, since Durden is such a likable character. It’s amazing that they were able to make him so likable but that I didn’t miss him once he was gone.
Finally, Helena Bonham Carter as Marla was fantastic. She was the perfect actress for this role, and the way she fluctuates between moods within the film perfectly matches what I had envisioned while reading the book.
It does stray from the book.
But it does this for the better. While there are minor details missing, such as how in the book, the soap is made specifically from Marla’s mother’s liposuctioned fat, I found myself not missing them. I think the stream-lining they did for the film serves the overall purpose of the story well, and that it was a good cut-down. I also prefer the ending to the movie, since it emphasizes the chaos of the entire story, and leaves it more open-ended. In turn, the ending of the book, which leaves the Narrator in a mental hospital that he thinks is Heaven, left me with more questions than I wanted to answer. Thinking about the ending of the movie is enthralling; thinking about the ending of the book is saddening and puzzling.
This is one of the best movies I’ve ever seen.
I envision myself watching this film many more times in the years to come. It was that good. My only regret is that I wasn’t born in time to see it in a movie theater, since I imagine it would have been a fantastic experience; to be on the cusp of a new century in 1999, wondering if the world was going to end, and watching this movie that embraced the chaos and reaction to monotony that everyone was suffering from.
If you watch one movie today, watch Fight Club.