We’re following the rules of Fight Club - by not talking about it!
“Oh, I’m afraid this pornographic cinema will be quite op-er-a-tional when Travis Bickle arrives…”
At the time, the audience reaction was somewhat the same. Few people idolized or identified with Bickle and instead considered him a frightening and believable character that the urban landscape of the day could and did produce.
Only when Rambo transformed from a dangerous, immoral killer (in the novel) to a sympathetic drifter (in the movie First Blood) and finally into an 80’s action hero (in the ridiculously titled RAMBO: FIRST BLOOD 2), did the more adolescent male attraction to the character of Bickle really enter the culture.
Right. It should have been RAMBO: SECOND BLOOD.
Love Always Sunny’s Rambo parody.
Responsible for the idiots who believe his act? No, they were clearly idiots before he came along and will presumably still be idiots after he is gone and forgotten.
The thing that has always bothered me about Fight Club is… why did you go and see it?
Ok, let’s accept that it’s a clever film with a clever twist and subversive message (and possibly multiple layers of subversion, depending on your view) and says meaningful things about society and/or masculinity and/or mental illness and yadda yadda yadda.
But did you know any of that when you paid your $10 to see it for the first time?
Because as far as I recall, the trailers didn’t show any of that. The trailers showed a lot of cool guys bare-knuckle fighting.
So if you went to see Fight Club, you went with the sole intention of seeing some guys beat each other to pulp. Right?
Unless maybe you read a review first.
The studio never knew how to sell Fight Club. That was pretty obvious from the trailers. I don’t remember wanting to see it at the time. I was in film school then and went to a lot of films though. Plus David Fincher had directed Seven also starring Brad Pitt just a few years before and Edward Norton had just done American History X. Like I said, I enjoyed it and still think it has some interestings twists. I just don’t think it’s as edgy or message driven as I once did.
Back in 1999, mainly it just had to be on somewhere. I didn’t have a TV and would see pretty much everything being released.
And it was a film by the guy who made Seven and The Game, both of which I liked.
That’s why I originally didn’t go and see it in the theatre. The trailers sold the movie really badly; that was a massive cockup.
I did see it in a theatre, thank God, a few months after it came out in a theatre that shows movies that are out of the other ones cheaply. But even that was a spontaneous decision, and I didn’t expect what I would be getting.
I don’t disagree with them being idiots before but I also don’t think that excuses his responsibility. Let me ask a similar question. Do you think Charles Manson should be in prison? Why/why not?
Great trailers! It was clearly a film with comedy and commentary on life and violence, presented in a quirky/weird way and starring some really good actors.
What’s wrong with people wanting to see it based on your premise?
Because I knew the twist and thought it would be fun to see how it was executed.
Little did I know I’d find the book much more sound.
The trailers were so odd and different. I was curious to see what it was all about.
I can see what you’re getting at, and it’s a interesting point, though I think it isn’t quite equivalent. Manson is in prison for conspiracy to murder. Do you think that if somebody shoots a Mexican at a Trump rally then Trump, regardless of what he has just said, is guilty of conspiracy to that murder? How about if they shoot a Mexican the day after the rally?
Actually, nothing I’ve wanted to see plenty of films where that was the premise.
But it’s interesting to see people justifying what was so great about the film after they (presumably) only wanted to see two guys beat each other to a pulp.
I think it was always fairly widely known that there was more to the story than just that, though. Not least because it was based on an existing novel.
To be fair, there was a lot of media outrage when it came out of the “Ban this sick filth” sort. When someone tells you that you shouldn’t see something, you’re going to want to see it.
As I said above, I was less than discerning back then. I was seeing at least 2 movies a week and usually more at the weekend.
It depends on exactly what Trump said to incite the incident. If he said, “We should kill all Mexicans.” in front of a crowd at a rally, I believe he should be held for conspiracy to murder. That wouldn’t dismiss the guilt of the person who physically committed the crime but I believe he would also be complicit just as much as Manson is of the murders his followers committed.