probably the most misunderstood film of 1999

Rating: 10/10 (3 March 2004)

probably the most misunderstood film of 1999. those who misunderstood it said it was violence for violence's sake or that it was animalistic and brutal without purpose...stuff like that. those people p*** me off. the film is actually very philosophical (though flawed) and lends itself to much more interpretation and analysis than any other contemporary action film (with the matrix being the one exception). stylistically it's a modern noir tale - shot almost entirely indoors or at night, an underdeveloped look that deepens all the dark areas, the voice-over narration, the beginning shows the end, and there's the femme fatale. at the same time it doesn't work solely within the mores of film noir. from the very beginning it differentiates itself with a very active camera, visual effects and the like. what results is a fresh looking film that may one day have a name like "neo noir." a great soundtrack. pitt and norton are really good and well cast for their parts. i loved this film the first couple times i saw it, but i don't think it stands the test of time as well as i originally thought. seven and the game (also from fincher) are more likely to hold up to repeated viewings. seven is filmed just as well, if not better, and the game is a bit more solidly grounded philosophically...but that's primarily because its philosophy is vastly more simple. fight club is more ambitious and, i suppose, should get points for that. at any rate, fight club will stand up against the "american beauty"s and "matrix"s of its time. all those films, at their core, fundamentally question our lives and contemporary society, much as douglas sirk and rainer fassbinder did in their time. A--.