[Thomas Anderson]

Originally Posted by *ºÇåptäîn¤Çrä§hº*

What exactly was predictable? I mean, yes it was, but did you think Mills will shoot or he won't?

Well yes I did think he'd shoot as otherwise it wouldn't complete the 7 sins, but what I meant about it being predictable was how they introduced Mills wife early in the movie, and she served no purpose to the story, meaning she was only there to get killed and make Mills angry at Doe, thus killing him and completing the 7 sins.

[*ºÇåptäîn¤Çrä§hº*]

Originally Posted by Thomas Anderson

Well yes I did think he'd shoot as otherwise it wouldn't complete the 7 sins, but what I meant about it being predictable was how they introduced Mills wife early in the movie, and she served no purpose to the story, meaning she was only there to get killed and make Mills angry at Doe, thus killing him and completing the 7 sins.

Yeah, ok. But she did not serve NO purpose to the story. Her story pulled the depressive atmosphere of the young family in the new town.
And there was a spark of hope Mills won't shoot and the good wins, would destroy the movie though.

[Thomas Anderson]

Originally Posted by *ºÇåptäîn¤Çrä§hº*

And there was a spark of hope Mills won't shoot and the good wins, would destroy the movie though.

In that situation a vast majority of people would have done the same thing, but if you did you'd end up in jail for a long time, with nothing to do but sit and be miserable about everything that happened, but if you didn't shoot you'd win, because even though you've lost a big part of your life, you could see them put away for life, while you can continue with your own.

Decent movie anyway, although I much prefer Fight Club, and can't wait for Palahniuks (sp?) next.

[*ºÇåptäîn¤Çrä§hº*]

Originally Posted by Thomas Anderson

Decent movie anyway, although I much prefer Fight Club, and can't wait for Palahniuks (sp?) next.

There you said something, Fight Club is my favorite movie of all time and has been for almost 5 years now. Can't wait for Fincher's next!!

[Thomas Anderson]

I was contradicting my own rules by going off topic, so I've split the thread.

Anyway, I must say Fight Club is a great movie, but the book is even better, and probably my favourite book of all time. I've read it many times more than any other, and whereas the movie is really good theres just a little something missing. That said it's one of the best book -> movie transfers I've seen, losing little and changing little either. Very good, and I can't wait for the next one.

[*ºÇåptäîn¤Çrä§hº*]

Originally Posted by Thomas Anderson

I was contradicting my own rules by going off topic, so I've split the thread.

Yes, I almost wanted to say that to you.

Maybe I'm a bit prejudiced here cause I saw the film first, but the book didn't gave me that much. Always thought there was too much in the book that the film thankfully left out. My credit goes to Jim Uhls who did a great job with his adaptation. I'm a big Fincher fan as he is such a technically experienced director. Every shot is so well planned and the Fight Club story and atmosphere just fits his style more than perfectly. The detail sequences, the subliminal images (that he first tried out in Se7en), the ironic film-to-reality descent because of these subliminal images and because Tyler does the same in his job in the cinema, and, and, and...

Just f***in' great! Never seen something that perfect again, referring to its complexity.

[Rosscoe]

Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

[ponrauil]

Ok, here I am Crash

One of the messages of the film, and the most important to my eyes was the critic of our consumption society. It is brilliantly addressed in this film and I expected an great ending about it. All along the movie I was thinking "At last a movie that says something about this and is incredibly cool saying it".
Actually, the ending with the buildings being blown off is a good one (especially with the "Where is my mind" song), but it's completely shadowed by the double personnality twist that, because of it's unpredictability, takes all the attention off the film's message, and some of it's weight too, as it put's an original revolution idea on the shoulders of a crazy mind.
In the end, most of the people I've talked to about this film say it's a great one because of the coherent directing and of how it's impossible to predict the final personnality twist, not because of what it says and how it says it.
That's just how I felt after seeing it for the first time, impressed but frustrated.

Ponrauil

[Thomas Anderson]

I read the book first, which I must say is my favourite book.

[*ºÇåptäîn¤Çrä§hº*]

Originally Posted by ponrauil

One of the messages of the film, and the most important to my eyes was the critic of our consumption society.

Yes, one of the major messages for me, too.

All along the movie I was thinking "At last a movie that says something about this and is incredibly cool saying it".

I love this sentence.

Actually, the ending with the buildings being blown off is a good one (especially with the "Where is my mind" song),

I always see this as the weakest thing in the film. It appears a little shallow to me that equaling all debts is the solution to our society's problems. Being only one "homework" within project chaos I can look over it though.

but it's completely shadowed by the double personnality twist that, because of it's unpredictability, takes all the attention off the film's message, and some of it's weight too,

In my eyes it doesn't shadow the message - it's a part or consequence of it. I mean in our often crazy society it's quite easy to become crazy, it's just the next logical step and part of the criticism.

as it put's an original revolution idea on the shoulders of a crazy mind.

Well, basically, the revolution idea in the film bases on anarchy with fascistic traits. Aren't all such ideas born in the brains of crazy minds?
It would really be wrong when this idea had won in the end.

I particularly love it because it is so precise in the observation of our society but it appears like this happens by the way, and the main focus is to be smart, cool, rebellious for the sake of it - when it is not, of course.
I think it doesn't want to give answers because the creators don't have them either. They just wanted to get that off their chest. They are fed up with lots of things in our world an writing this book/making this film was sort of a valve - to not get crazy like the main character.
Humour is when you laugh nevertheless - having an ok mind (I mean knowing what's right and wrong...) I found this film also incredibly hilarious. Sometimes it's macabre or sarcastic humour but well I love it.
When Fincher talked to Norton after he'd read the screenplay for the first time his first question was: "Did you also find it very funny?" Norton concured. You know, the film is not that much a comedy and you feel a bit uncomfortable when you say you rolled on the floor laughing during such a violent film... When I read that about Fincher and Norton, I thought, man, that's exactly what you felt.

I didn't use "consumption" together with "society" because I think it critizises more than just consumption behaviour. The Raymond K. Hessle scene being just one example.

Oh, man, I could write books...

That's all great already but credit goes to the book here for the most part as we were talking mostly about content. What makes it my favourite movie is indeed Fincher's directing.
Techniques and content are so connected and well digested. I have never seen any film this close to perfect. I don't know how often I watched it but I still find new things or at least new ways to interpret sentences or scenes.
This project really benefitted from Finchers vein to perfectionism.
The visual conversion is just as complex and brilliant as the content.