Great Critique of Anti-establishment and Masculinity

Rating: 8/10 (16 February 2016)

To me this film is great in the sense that it provokes me enough to see messages perhaps exceeding the original intent of both the author and the film maker. The irony is that the film in really serves as a strong critique against the two main characteristics that Tylor represents: anti-establishment and masculinity.
To begin with, the movie was produced by one of the biggest media corporates in the world, cashing on the corporate hatred and self- hatred generated precisely by those corporates. The crowd who followed Tylor thinking that they are liberated from the capitalist treadmill are in fact merely shifting from one treadmill to another. Same as the fascist followers who felt empowered carrying out the orders, in the process of working for Tylor they are really being exploited and given a tiny share of the power and resources they gathered - exactly the same as working for a company. Will their lives really change after credit records are destroyed? We have seen how communist revolutions rose and fell. What is, then, the whole point of the movement? It is a project of the protagonist set out to find his own value, instead of being defined by others. It is a process that requires internal examination and self-awareness. The crowd he draws is used for his personal project; eventually he becomes aware of his other self, Tylor, examined his own actions and those of Tylor's, and finds peace again with himself.
Another mockery the film makes is towards the concept of masculinity. I quickly noticed the crowd drawn by Tylor consists only males, and the character itself is the projection of perfect masculinity perceived by the society. In a civilised society where powerful positions no longer require physical strength, certain male members feel a great sense of insecurity – exactly the members fight club attracts. Frustrated by their failure to gain influence in the establishment, they go to the gym and boxing clubs to regain confidence, or engage in reckless behaviours to show how daring they are. The film portrayed these people as flat in character and seemingly stupid. The only trait that sets Tylor apart from them is his intelligence. In fact, it was the intelligent part of him that woke him up from the corporate slavery, not the masculine part. Violence and sex are used as a tool to express power, but after the short-lived pleasure derived from the power trip, the ensuing wounds and pain are long-lasting. While Tylor dominated Marla in bed, the protagonist does not even feel the pleasure from sex. In the end, the feminine and powerless Marla saves the protagonist by reconnecting the conflicting parts of him and completes his self- searching journey.
My mood was manipulated by the film the first time I saw it; the motivational speech about self-discovery and pursuit of passion sold me. But when I realised they were blindly targeting companies, I suddenly realised the stupidity of the ideology with which the crowd was bonded, and from that departure, I felt alienated from the protagonist and from the film and was able to see the bigger picture. From the interviews of the author and the director I did not see the same interpretation I had, however, I believe an art piece has its own life after its creation. From cinematographic perspective, this is a very well made film. Once again Fincher did an excellent job. I recommend this film.