Directed by:
David FincherScreenplay:
Jim UhlsCinematography:
Jeff CronenwethComposer:
The Dust BrothersCast:
Edward Norton, Brad Pitt, Helena Bonham Carter, Meat Loaf, Jared Leto, Zach Grenier, Holt McCallany, Eion Bailey, Richmond Arquette, David Andrews (more)VOD (3)
Plots(1)
In this adaptation of Chuck Palahniuk's 1998 novel, Brad Pitt stars as Tyler Durden, a sociopath filled with anarchic rage, who organizes an underground organization of "fight clubs". These clubs, in which young men with white collar jobs engage in no-holds-barred bouts, spread across the city. But Tyler has far more insidious plans - he enlists the aid of his unassertive friend, Jack (Edward Norton), to destroy conventional "society" through a deadly series of bombings. When Jack realizes the nightmarish and shocking truth, he fights to bring Tyler down. (Criterion)
(more)Videos (3)
Reviews (11)
At the age of eighteen, when I was angry at the system and I liked the Doors (the band) and Pulp Fiction, Fight Club would have been the movie of my life. But today, I don’t think I could be a movie star even if I really wanted to and did everything necessary to achieve that. And I've learned to get by in the system. Which is sufficient reason for me to think of this movie as just very spectacularly filmed bullshit.
()
The genius directing by David Fincher plays the main role in Fight Club, being able to keep up with the anarchically crazy literary manifestation by Palahniuk against the current lifestyle of western society. Someone else who contributed a lot toward the excellent result was Jim Uhls, who adapted the book into a screenplay that could be used to make a movie. Unarguably, the book is a stronger experience, but the movie also has much to offer, thanks to the actors, the technical side and, primarily, Fincher’s playfulness. On the other hand, the original book isn’t one of the best things ever to have trickled out of Palahniuk’s sick mind.
()
David Fincher demonstrates an incredible mastery not only in how well-crafted the entire story is, but especially in how it is filmed. The fact that the acting performances are stunning is expected, but what stands out is how film techniques are utilized: various camera swoops, the insertion of seemingly nonsensical flashes, and a mosaic of dreams and reality. David Fincher is the king of dark psychological thrillers, and he proves it with essentially every one of his films.
()
The most indigestible, but intellectually and thematically the most charged and, perhaps for some, the most compelling David Fincher film. And after mature consideration, also my favorite. Anarchy, fights, and at times hopeless situations, depression, and despair. But above all, the life in it! The living energy of all the characters at any time of the day, night, or person.
()
This is the richest interpretive film I know. Is it a critique of consumerism, a satire on the far-right and anarchist associations at the same time, or just a provocative thriller about the need for violence? Maybe all of it. In any case, it takes a good bit of genius to make it not look, through its shiny facade, like an angry young generation that wants to save the world with rocks in their hands, but rather like a serious ancient philosopher who has it all figured out to the last detail. It was a breakthrough life film for when I was in my 20s, and a decade later it’s (only) a fantastic cinematic ride without compromises, reflecting the end of the 1990s like few other things.
()
Ads