User talk:Erik/Fight Club (film)

DVD Commentary
I hope this helps. It may not be the best stuff, but I tried to get you something. Some of the things are probably spelled wrong, especially the Nietzsche stuff. I'm not that familiar with him, so I'll try to spell things the best I can, but I'll probably miss some silent letters I'm sure. Each section basically represents what each person specifically says, so long as it was just them and not a group discussion. There is still about 30 mins left on the commentary, I'll watch that and add anything that might be relevant.  BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  04:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Edward Norton

 * Meat had to wear shoes with 8 inch lifts, because Norton was taller than him.
 * Felt that the support group scenes, and the film as a whole, were emblematic of Black Comedy with heavy satire.
 * Credits the multiple name usage as a mélange of Robert Deniro's roles in the 1970s and the Planet of the Apes
 * Norton talks about the Narrator/film, in that it's like the Buddhist approach in "killing" your God, your parents, your teachers, and that Tyler helps "Jack" (as Norton refers to him, and others since he often says things like "this is Jack's pancreas") reject these people, but ultimately, for Jack to define himself he must reject Tyler (the teacher).
 * Tyler's seduction is the liberation of yourself from material possessions
 * Tyler represents a Nietzschen impulse toward Neolism (sp) as a practical approach. Nietzsche Ziarathutche (don't even ask, it just sounded like that..lol..if you are familiar with Nietzsche then maybe you can make it out) Neolism is a "sexy idea", but maturity reveals the hypocracy behind it.
 * Underlying theme that the narrator should have called "the woman" (Marla) from the beginning, but she's too much like him. He sees himself in her, and he basically hates his own lies. (the last part was added by Brad Pitt).
 * Believes the film resolves on an ambiguous note and that you are actually supposed to "figure it out yourself"; "find what you agree with and what you don't".
 * The whole point of the first fight scene wasn't about releasing anger, but about "having the experience for yourself".
 * Likens the film to The Graduate, where it's about trying to figure out how to be happy, being out of sync with what's expected; the youthful dislocation, with an ambiguous ending. About a path to maturity.
 * Tyler is like the "Id", all impulsive.
 * Says that most of the criticism actually came from the Left wing. t
 * Norton expands on the relationship between the narrator, Tyler, and Marla. - When Tyler says "we have to do something about Marla" that is the point where the narrator finally separates himself from Tyler. All he ever wanted was some form of intimacy, which was the source of the conflict in the car ride, but when Tyler begins to step away and Marla is explicitely threatened, he transfers his desires back to where it should have been in the first place, which is to Marla.

David Fincher

 * Fincher acknowledges that the opening title sequence was on a separate budget. The studio agreed that if he did a good enough job with the film that they would pay for the title sequence he wanted. His words were, "we'll think about doing a title sequence if you're good."
 * In response to Pitt and Norton talking about how dark the film looked, Fincher said that you see too much of the actors' eyes in films, so he made it dark for that purpose. Someone made the comment that it was the Gordon Willis approach, I think it was Fincher that said it.

Brad Pitt

 * Brad is in the Hotel infomercial video, this was his idea.
 * Talks about the scene where Tyler is bathing next to the narrator, and that it earned the "gay support" (agreement from Norton and Fincher). It had to do with the scene coupled with the line about "do we need another woman?" To which Pitt replies that it means "we're a mess, let's work on ourselves first".
 * The scene with Tyler using a megaphone to order the members of project Mayhem around was meant to be like the Chinese propaganda of "re-education camps" ("re-edu camps" from Norton).

Helena Bonham Carter

 * Made the comment that she believed that David Fincher though he was Marla (I assume she means through mannerisms and personality), and that she modeled Marla after Fincher.
 * Felt that the Narrators gendering of Tyler was based on Marla. He created Tyler as a male to fulfill a relationship that he felt he couldn't.
 * Had to wear platform shoes because she is so small, and all the men were 6 foot.
 * According to Carter, who doesn't like violence, the film was not gratuitous. The violence, as how it means to men, is about taking the violence, creating a sensation of feeling alive. Because people have become so numb spiratually and emotionally, they have to hit themselves to feel truly in the moment. Like any kind of addiction or self destructiveness.

Information where I can't remember who said it, or it was a group discussion

 * Subliminal Brad Pitt images (3) were used to introduce the character. Fincher acknowledges that the cutting crew tried to inform him that the film had "dirt" on it, referring to the 1 frame insert of Brad Pitt on three of the frames.
 * Norton had to walk at a steady pace during the virtual catalog scene.
 * Everyone had to time their line delivery because of the constant narration for the film. Sometimes the script supervisor would read the narration to provide help.
 * Director place clues to the truth about Tyler's identity during the first group scene, where the group leader recites dialogue that Tyler would recite later in the film.
 * Chose not to have anyone do the music who had previously done film music before, because they felt they'd become scared when trying to tie all the themes together.
 * Pushed for Radiohead
 * Shot a scene of Norton masturbating (after meeting Marla) to the fact that he hates Marla, but can't continue because she even manages to deny him that self love (I assume like she's denying him the self love of the support groups).
 * Though about visiting real support groups, but decided not to because of the satire involved in the film.
 * They had to loop dialogue (back at the studio) because of all the handicam shots that limited the quality of sound pick-up.
 * When Marla walks out into the street, there are real cars passing by Helena. According to Fincher you can hear the buttons clacking on her jacket from where the cars where grazing her.
 * Versace marketed "Fight Club" clothing according to Fincher and Norton
 * Tyler is often in the background, out of focus, like a "little devil on the shoulder".
 * Believe the criticism for the film is because it attacks the way of life, the status quo.
 * When Tyler and the narrator are hitting the cars with bats, it was Norton and Pitt's idea to hit the VW Bug. They had been hitting all the luxury cars (Land Rover, BMW) and leaving the chevys, fords, etc., but Norton and Pitt saw the VW as the ultimate symbol of youth culture from the 60s, that that generation repackaged and sold their values to our generation who wouldn't listen to their "good music". It was an attack on that.
 * Smiley Face on the burning building was CGI, so was the sex between Marla and Tyler. Fincher wanted to be able to move a camera underneath different parts of the body.

Dr. Durden
That's an interesting question. The Themes section is pretty big, so you could probably trim it back some. Remember, you can add external links at the bottom to the interviews you found so people can expand on what they read. Otherwise, if you don't trim some back I think the article will become extremely long. I think you'll need a couple subsections, but not 8 of them. I think you'll need some because you can tie in certain themes together easier than trying to tie all of them together. I think "violence as a metaphor","nihilism" and "Opposition to materialism" can be tied together; "relationships" and "self-identity", "film comment" could be tied together; with "homoerotic" and "satire" in the lead of the themes section. Unless you have more information to expand those two sections, what I've found on other FA articles is that you include the topics with less information as part of a section lead before you get into the subsections.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 20:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, there's a lot of redundancy; I guess I'm trying to figure out the structure that would take it in. I'll see what I can do. Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 20:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I have an idea to construct Themes in a fairly simple way. I would start off (no subsections) with violence, anti-materialism and similar themes, then I would get specific with a "Characters" subsection to explain the three major characters and how they all interrelate.  What do you think? —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 14:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that's a really good idea.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 14:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I've put in a Characters subsection at the film article. Can you take a look and provide any feedback?  I'll try to implement the overall themes in time, too. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 15:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Since you don't have the main themes part up yet, it's hard to give good suggestions, or find things that could be tweaked. From the first paragraph, I was wondering if you were going to explain, in the "Themes" section that killing your parents, god, teach isn't a literal thing. Right now the "characters" subsection reads like it is literal. Other than that, I think it reads exceptionally well. You managed to turn all the quotes into a great prose. I can't wait for the main themes section.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 17:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll see if I can re-word the path of enlightenment to reflect its metaphorical nature. I've tried to find a Wikipedia article that covers this sort of path, but I haven't been able to come across anything.  I have class in a little bit, so I'll see if I can finally bring in the rest of the themes.  After that, I'll probably rewrite the awards into prose, expand on the critical reaction to address both the violence and the actors' performances, and possibly find citations about the DVD being a big hit, since it seems implied that it was pretty popular at the time. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 17:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC)