The litmus test for intelligence.

Rating: 10/10 (29 August 2002)

I believe Roger Ebert is a literate man. I also believe he lacks true intelligence. As does anyone else who dismisses this movie on grounds of excessive violence (this from the man who wrote Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, a movie in which a character is killed by forced anal sex involving a 20 inch pointed strap-on dildo, for christ's sake). People here who fail to see the brilliance of this movie, comment that the 'excessive swearing and nudity' sickened them. Since when is nudity a sickening thing? Does the word 'f**k' make you convulse in nausea? It's just the human body, we all have one. It's just a word depicting an activity that the majority of us partake in. Prudishness like that doesn't sicken me, it does infuriate me though.
Excessive violence? First of all, there isn't that much violence in this movie. What little there is seems to have an unpleasant quality, though - it's realistic. When you pound a man's head into a concrete floor, it really does turn into a bloody mess. What's the problem? Is violence not a real concept? Do people actually never fight? This movie deals with violence responsibly, more responsibly than any other movie i can think of. This isn't Arnie throwing faceless bad guys through plaster walls, this is a depiction of what really happens when you beat the living shit out of people, or when someone gets a bullet in the head. It's not excessive in the slightest. It's just real.
'How much can you really know about yourself if you've never been in a fight?' asks Tyler Durden. How much do you know about the reality of being human if you've never left the creature comforts of your safe little worlds, if you've never run for your lives, if you've never felt adrenaline pumping into your body and your instincts taken over as your hand clenches into a fist? Ebert is a prime example of a literati, who by the looks of him has never been in a fight. I doubt he fought in Vietnam, or has ever faced violence. And that's my point - human beings aren't simply their intellect, they are also animals with instincts. What's your point, Ebert, that we must forego our urges? What if the urge is to fight, and the fighting is consensual? I know that you aren't against excess in sexual matters, due to your involvement with Russ Meyer films. Are some urges, in your opinion, more harmful? Sex is better than violence? Ask a rape victim if he or she had preferred a good beating instead.
But Fight Club is not about violence. It's about survival instincts (they fight to feel alive, not to cause pain). It's about men with no great depression, no great war. Throughout human history, men have had to fight for their survival, whether in earning a living or fighting in wars. No longer. What's the point now? That's what the movie asks. I am not personally a consumer-minded individual, i consider myself more of a hedonist. I don't care about things, unless things actually let me enjoy myself more. I don't need Tyler's preaching. But a lot of people do. If a pair of CK underwear makes you feel better about yourself, then there's something seriously wrong.
Someone here said that this movie's message is an insult to the world that our ancestors fought to give us. It does not insult that. It insults and questions the way we live in that world. Did soldiers storm the beaches of Normandy for Britney Spears and valley girls saying 'like, duh'? Did Churchill sacrifice Coventry for Big Brother and cell phone ringtones? Did the people Hiroshima and Nagasaki die for Pokemon?
This movie is about a lot of things, it's brilliantly written, brilliantly shot, brilliantly acted, brilliantly directed. It makes you think, it makes you smile in agreement, it makes you shake your head in disapproval. That is, if you have a brain. If someone asks me what the best movie i've ever seen is, my answer would have to be Fight Club.
P.S. some people have called this movie fascist...
Fascism - A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. ...says the dictionary. The space monkeys worship Tyler Durden in the same way Buddhists worship Buddha - he is to them an enlightened individual to whom they look for instruction. Cult of personality does not a fascist make. Tyler Durden is a clear-cut anarchist.