A brilliant, searing indictment of urban disenchantment

Rating: 8/10 (22 December 2005)

FIGHT CLUB is a brilliant, searing indictment of urban disenchantment, disheartenment and finally, disenfranchisement. Peppered with sarcasm, it culminates in a testosterone driven explosion of cultural anger and resignation against the apathetic emptiness of consumerism.
The book's author, Chuck Palahniuk, has indicated that the Marla character was the catalyst, and that without her, there would be no story. Yet, her significance is not fully recognized. That's his only "complaint" (though he doesn't verbalize it as such) on how his story was adapted to film.
It's apparent from many reviews (such as the usually caustic Kenneth Turan) that, as in Kubrick's EYES WIDE SHUT, the message of this movie is getting lost. Just as EYES was not about sex or eroticism, FIGHT CLUB is not about violence.
The violence is the result of the psychosis that consumes the protagonist. It's the vehicle used to demonstrate the ultimate isolation which causes him to disassociate himself into another identity.
This movie is about social and cultural despair - the kind created by total consumerism and lack of purpose. What results is the solitary emptiness felt after realizing that "things" do not create happiness. Neither does having a "well paying job," unless it also aligns with a sense of purpose. And when one has a "career" such as his, to render catastrophic car accidents to statistics for the sake of mitigating the damages of corporate America, well, what can be realistically expected? Anyone with a conscience would "explode." I know I would.
Many people did not interpret the significance of that. Sadly, so many people are only regularly pabulum-fed typical Hollywood movies that they can't comprehend anything which departs from that overused formula.
It's really sad that the novel's author, Chuck Palahniuk, screenwriter Jim Uhls and Director Fincher's vision, along with the wonderful characterization of Norton, Pitt, Bonham-Carter, MeatLoaf, and all of the other actors, was essentially all for naught on so many levels to the general public.
A word about "violence":
As with the Columbine tragedy, violence portrayed in films does not itself cause it. That particular tragedy was caused by parental neglect and irresponsibility.
The insane and psychologically impaired will find their excuses to perpetrate violence, one way or another. It's still not a reason to jeopardize our first amendment rights. Nor is it a reason to try to attempt to placate people with pat answers to everything with generic films that say absolutely nothing.
Still, some people may be too psychologically fragile to see through this. We all need to take responsibility for our own psyches. And art should not suffer at the hands of those who cannot intelligently perceive it. That's called suppressive Nazi Communism. And it's more dangerous than any person's individual threat - because it will affect us all. If we think people are apathetic and dangerously dis-associative now, just wait and see what happens if the Patriot Act is ratified and we lose our freedom of speech.