The (Not So) Hidden Fascism of FIGHT CLUB | A Deeeeeeep Dive
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 11. 2018
- If you want to directly support me and see this video without ads, check it out at nebula.tv/videos/maggie-mae-f...
A Fight Club deep dive film analysis.
More FILM ANALYSIS vids in handy playlist form: • Maggie Does Media Anal...
BIG TIME SPOILERS for Fight Club, and Avengers: Infinity War. Content warning: fascism, discussion of violence, suicide, adult films and adult situations
/ maggiemaefish
/ maggiemaefish
/ maggiemaefish
Thanks to these fine friends for lending their voices!
- Mikey Neumann reading from Film Theory: An Introduction, Second Edition
mikeyface and / filmjoy
- Shannon Strucci as Christian Metz and reading from Cinema Studies: The Key Concepts, Second Edition
plentyofalcoves and / struccimovies
- Dan Olson as David Fincher
FoldableHuman and / foldingideas
- Jen as I. A. R. Wylie
deaths_cool and twitch.tv/shaunandjen
- Robert Evans as Eric Hoffer
iwriteok and behindthebastards.com
- H.Bomberguy as Andrew Hewitt
hbomberguy and / hbomberguy
- May Letiz as Bertolt Brecht
nyxfears and / nyxfears
Movies Referenced:
Fight Club (1999) dir David Fincher
The Sixth Sense (1999) dir M Night Shyamalan
Avengers: Infinity War (2018) dir Anothony & Joe Russo
The Universal Clock: The Resistance of Peter Watkins (2001) dir Geoff Bowie
Behind the Green Door (1972) dir Artie & Jim Mitchell
For more on Peter Watkins, check out his website where he's got some essays, etc: pwatkins.mnsi.net/ and I definitely suggest his movie Punishment Park.
Other References:
"Behind the Scenes of Fight Club - The Narrator shoots himself in the mouth" via Rosemary P on CZcams
"BUSTED: Right-Winger Mike Cernovich Pretending To Be Assaulted" via The Majority Report w/ Sam Seder on CZcams [Cernovich footage]
"'Let's party like it's 1933': Inside the alt-right world of Richard Spencer" by John Woodrowcox from The Washington Post, November 22, 2016
Fincher's Average Shot Length data from vashivisuals.com/category/davi...
Image of Dave Rubin via The Rubin Rebort on CZcams
Fight Club: Original Motion Picture Score by The Dust Brothers (1999) Restless Records
"How David Fincher Hijacks Your Eyes" by Nerdwriter1 • How David Fincher Hija...
"David Fincher - Invisible Details" by kaptiankristian • David Fincher - Invisi...
"Netflix Series 'Mindhunter' Brings Filmmaking Savvy to Episodic TV | Adobe Creative Cloud" by Adobe Creative Cloud • Netflix Series "Mindhu...
"The Hidden Meaning In Fight Club - Earthling Cinema" by Wisecrack • The Hidden Meaning in ...
"Der Sieg des Glaubens" poster from 1933, Propagandaministerium
Photo of Fincher: "Director David Fincher at the french premiere of his movie The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo in Paris" by Elen Nivrae from Paris, France
Fight Club by Chuck Palahniuk 1996 W.W. Norton
"Fight club draws techies for underground beatdowns" by Associated Press in East Bay Times, May 30, 2006
Video of "Forbes reporter finds tape of Trump 'spokesman' John Barron" via CNN.com
Video of "Trump to PBS reporter: Such a racist question" via CNN.com
"GAVIN McINNES QUITS THE PROUD BOYS" via Gavin McInnes on CZcams
"Proud boys initiation second degree" via BattleBrothersTrading on CZcams
"Police Seek 9 Proud Boys Supporters on Riot Charges After Brawls With Antifa" by Ashley Southall in New York Times, October 15, 2018
"Inejiro Asanuma" entry on wikipedia.org
Music:
"The Descent," "Echoes of Time v2," "Industrial Cinematic," "Phantom from Space," "Chillin Hard" by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/b... - Krátké a kreslené filmy
"This internalisation of loss..."
HBOMBERGUY STILL TALKING ABOUT LOSS :D
Also this is fantastically good, thank you so much.
| ||
|| |_
@Furore2323
Damn, even male disciples aren't good enough for you people. This HBomerguy didn't flagellate enough?
Hbomberguy is still alive?
@@citycrusher9308 Are you high?
This movie is the Schrodinger's Cat of Gendered perspective. It is both a male power fantasy propaganda _AND_ a pro feminist parody of toxic masculinity.
I've come to give bland MRA sympathisers in my life one chance to listen when I tell them that "snowflake" is from a satire about toxic masculinity written by a gay man, after which I let them keep using the word and embarrassing themselves.
@@e.s.r5809 I did not know that. 'Snowflake' came from this movie?
I don't think it _is_ male power fantasy propaganda. The film has that portrayed by a cult leader, but the film itself isn't promoting it, despite the swaths of insecure men that entirely missed the fact that their cries of reclaiming masculinity are being mocked by Palahniuk. Calling it a propaganda film would be suggesting that both Palahniuk and Fincher intended for that to be the message audiences take away from it on some level, and they didn't.
It's like Neo Nazis watching American History X and actually coming to the conclusion after the fact that the film is promoting their Nazi beliefs. Stupid people will view a film that explores a destructive, toxic mindset, and be convinced that simply having it shown in the film is some kind of reassurance of their beliefs, regardless of how obvious the scathing criticism of the beliefs are, as the actual point of said film. It seems to be an unfortunate consequence of irrational people choosing to take a film that looks at any given viewpoint as automatically being in favor of it.
@@allendrake6960 that's why I said both! Because it matters not what was intended, but what is interpreted. The makes may have intended feminist parody, but it has been interpreted as either or!
@@dragonmaster613 Ah, I see what you mean. Unfortunately true. I wonder how shocked Palahniuk was to see how much of his story's popularity was from the population of men he was satirizing. I can't imagine Chuck making the message any clearer without being completely on-the-nose about it. You'd think the frequent homoeroticism (that's so blatant that calling it undertones is a bit of a stretch) would make insecure men think more about Tyler's bullshit ramblings, but apparently not. xD
I never hated Marla and you’re not supposed to. The twist of the film was that he ignored his instinct to call Marla first when he needed a place to stay.
Also. Jack/Cornelius says "How could Tyler, of all people, think it was a bad thing that Marla Singer was about to die?" Which means there's something there. Jack has a conflict brewing inside him and cannot confront his feelings towards Marla without admitting to himself the truth about Tyler. It's convoluted and brilliant.
Something I think is lost on Maggie.
Marla is such a tragic character in such a gut-punch of a way. I don't think you're supposed to HATE her, but I think the movie initially presents her through the eyes of the narrator, as being out of her mind. But as we learn more about her, we learn she's just a pretty depressed person with some kinda bizarre coping mechanisms... coping mechanisms that the narrator himself is also using, though, so who is he to judge her for it? And once we know the twist of what Tyler really is, tons of previous scenes between her and the narrator become re-contextualized, and it's revealed that not only is she the sane one, she's basically been putting up with this abusive asshole (granted, in some ways he didn't really consciously understand how abusive he was being) who flips back and forth between hooking up with her, then suddenly acting like they've never even touched each other and he's repulsed by her.
@@leeporwoll2380 the comics finally pin his name down as Cornelius?
@@blackraptor1154 far as I've read from Palahniuk. Sorta tongue-in-cheek. He was trying to take some power back from everyone who put "jack"/tyler on a pedestal...
@@leeporwoll2380 yeah I was just wondering since I belive I finished the first run (when Jack is Sebastian) never finished the second (when God comes or whatever)
Just a little side note, schizophrenia is not when someone creates an alternate personality... the disorder is called dissociative identity disorder
The Narrator/Tyler's condition is complicated, he has DID while ALSO able to talk, interact and think OUTSIDE either his own body and/or brain, hallucinating either the Narrator or Tyler, meaning he hallucinates a part of himself outside of himself, complete with two whole different personalities, knowledge, memories, dreams, wants, interpersonal connections and familiarities that, for all it can be seen, are split parts of a single brain. So, in a way, he also suffers from schizophrenia mixed with DID.
what do you think DID is? @@xwexarexbulletsx
@@xwexarexbulletsx I'll just leave this here from the DSM: "Individuals with dissociative identity disorders may experience symptoms that can superficially appear similar to those of psychotic disorders; these symptoms can seemingly resemble some of the Schneiderian first-rank symptoms formerly considered indicative of schizophrenia...Individuals with dissociative identity disorder may also report a range of visual, tactile, olfactory, gustatory, and somatic hallucinations...Dissociative identity disorder and psychotic disorders are therefore distinguished by symptoms characteristic of one of these conditions and not the other (e.g. dissociative amnesia in dissociative identity disorder and not in psychotic disorders)."
Being outside of your own body and/or brain is literally what dissociative disorders are all about.
Diagnosing Tyler with anything, especially when the video debates that the Narrator is artificially created to serve a narrative purpose, is not the nicest thing to do...
Even being able to assume that schizophrenia or DID/OSDD is what could be the cause of Tyler's presentation of himself shows a misunderstanding of what these disorders are.
I can only speak for dissociative disorders, but in them you definitely don't imagine physical people next to you. You imagine other people in your head that you talk to and that talk back. They may, or may not, consider themselves a part of you but they will still mostly at least admit they share the same body with you. Some personalities might be unaware they have DID and be confused. Personalities might have trouble accepting responsibility for others doing things because they don't feel related to that decision. Or, if there's an amnesiac barrier between them, might not remember doing something at all.
DID/OSDD (which is its watered down version essentially) can function wildly differently person to person. But they don't make you think there's more people physically around you, acting things out.
@@LuckaKaresova "Not the nicest thing to do", isn't Tyler a fictional character? What's wrong about diagnosing someone that doesn't exist and, like you say, serves as a character for a story? Absolute respect to real life people being affected by mental disorders, but he's fictional after all.
The real fight club was the friends we made along the way
which was just us... because we have no friend, we made them up
@Arthur Frayn And how do you know this?
Friend Club 🤗
The real club was the fights we had along da wae
we don't talk about the friends we made along the way
I can’t believe I never thought of Tyler editing the narrative of the film given that he spends his time editing films when he’s working in the cinema
The book is based on a short story (same author) designed to describe an idea for a "book club" for masculinity, attempting to describe an environment where people can engage with each other in masculine ways. The narrator is literally a theoretical stand-in for the actor in a toothpaste commercial
Edit: I know the book isn't the movie. I just think it's interesting
Ikr it's so obvious in retrospect
@@andrewjohnstone7943 I was always sure the book was indirectly describing a man coming to terms with his homosexuality. The struggle with masculinity and his relationship with Marla indicate it's causing him to have an existential crisis. Tyler is some warped view of what he thinks society expects him to be, even if that means having sex with a really gross woman to pretend to be a masculine man who is into women. And what do men do around each other if they're not supposed to be gay together? Fight. Or at least that's something he might rationalize to himself.
He's got issues with women, men, but mostly with how he thinks he's supposed to act around men or women. And he struggles with what being gay does or doesn't say about his masculinity, about him as person.
I was surprised to learn the author is gay in real life. I don't know if that was his intent or not. Either way, I think it adds a lot.
You could even make the claim that Tyler has edited the film itself given that the movie ends with an image of porn sliced into it.
He is editing it because he is the subconscious of the narrator ... neurosis and projections which lead to his insomnia.
A minor thing I want to point out about the chemical burn scene: Tyler is wrong. While sodium hydroxide powder does soak up water from your skin and the air around it, the idea that running large amounts of water over his hand would make the problem worse is completely wrong. The proper response to sodium hydroxide skin contact is "wash station, wash station, wash station!" You still want to do it in a way that doesn't spread the chemical around on your skin (i.e. tilting your hand so that the water pushes it off, not around on your skin), but you most certainly want to wash as much of that junk off as you can as soon as you can, and running water is the best option in the case presented in the film. The recommended wash time is over fifteen minutes, with the goal being to rinse the powder off and also dilute what doesn't come off as much as possible. Stopping yourself to go look for the vinegar to try and neutralize it would accomplish little more than to prolong pain and increase the damage to your flesh (which is likely Tyler's intent, since the lye ritual seems to be a combination baptism and branding ceremony for his followers.) What's more is that simple vinegar isn't as acidic as the lye is alkali, so you would need a hell of a lot of vinegar to neutralize that much lye powder. One calculation I read is almost 2 liters being poured directly on the area at a continuous rate. Dilution with water is still the best option, even if you have vinegar on hand, since your sink will automatically have a larger supply of water than any jug of vinegar.
In short, that scene is like the airplane oxygen mask scene at the beginning of the movie: harmful pseudoscientific misinformation meant to dazzle idiots into thinking Tyler is so much smarter than all the normies. Something that right-wing conspiracy theorists have gotten pretty good at.
that was one thing I remembered for years about chemical burns and never questioned it
thank you
It's also being communicated to and by a sleep deprived, disillusioned mentally ill man. It's not meant to be a film version of the anarchists cookbook.
Well Tyler is a propagandist. It makes sense that he would lie like that to manipulate people, or that Jack would imagine a scenario like that playing out.
I can't remember the interview but Chuck Palahniuk said that before publishing the novel he decided to change certain information in the book to be slightly different from what would work in reality (napalm, soap based explosives) because he didn't want it to be used as an instruction manual.
Thank you for leaving the one of the only normal comments on this thread.
I view fight club as a horror. An existential horror. Also Marla is the most sympathetic character in the entire film. Even Bob goes along with Tyler's crimes and brainwashing. Marla just tried to relate to Jack/Tyler in her dysfunctional way.
Crazy cuz banking is the definition of hell
Marla is also imagined
Aren't both bob and Marla figments of his imagination?
@@mrwassef She isn't. Why are people saying this matter-of-factually? She's obviously written with interractivity with the real world and, if that's not enough, she is real in fight club 2 (written by the same author), and in the book she's real as well. I think people have watched too much "fan-theory" bullshit.
@@blurgle9185 marla is the skeptical one, real or not she really questions tyler/jack and for that tyler paint her as disfunctional and sick
I knew when “urine is sterile, you can drink it.” Entered the common vernacular that people were seriously not getting the movie.
Fight club fan made soundtrack czcams.com/video/zZbTT7EypM8/video.html
Reminded me of a saying from my country “if you boil shit it’s not edible”
Reminded of Nathan For You.... apparently children’s pee has heeling properties in some cultures to this day. Some Ancient Romans believed that pee was good for sterilization. I heard it was on themselves or each other at bath houses, but just read on the most trustworthy search engine on the world-wide web (*wink, wink*) that Portuguese urine was imported to *use as mouthwash*. Yummy.
@@lookbovine as a Portuguese child, I can confirm I have capitalized my own body for the acquisition of funds via selling my Caprisun-ladened urine
"in some cultures" lol
@@lookbovine
me internally: "why does david finchers voice sound so familiar"
*looks at cast below*
OH SHIT DAN OLSEN
HBomb was in it too. They both have such recognizable voices.
shannon strucci as well
I dunno, I always got the feeling that throughout the movie that Marla was being this very honest person and the Jack persona attacks her for being this person that can be comfortable as she is where Jack is having an existential crisis that he feels is solved by the Tyler persona being this anarcho primitivist that is geared to attack all the things that Jack won't admit he's disgusted with and Marla is the impetus for this split because he both despises her and loves her dearly for being this sort of confirmation that there is a light at the end of the existential dread he is feeling.
me every time I click on yet another fight club video essay: "is this finally gonna be the one who talks about how it's gay"
it's pretty irrelevent.
@@ragingnoob3603The writer of the book is gay, but from what I understand, the book itself was more specifically about toxic masculinity and its consequences taken ad-absurdam, yeah? The gay thing is worth a mention since it lends a little context, but I think you're right that it's not the conversation that needs to be had.
Of all the many conversations that needed to be had, the aesthetic fixation on purity and dissolution of ego being likened to fascist propaganda was one I was not expecting, and a very fair and good point.
Kinda reminds me of Starship Troopers where it (the movie, at least) was an intentional allegory for fascism and everyone, as with this movie, completely missed the point where it was a critique.
@@ragingnoob3603 I actually don’t care if it’s relevant or not it’s important. To me. Also in general. I don’t understand how you can deem any such reading as irrelevant when contextually it’s undoubtedly inspired by the experiences of a gay man, the gay upholds man
@@laylao3483 I never asked or cared about how *you* view it. just because the story is written by a gay man doesn't make a gay story by proxy unless blatantly stated, then it's just you projecting.
What Tyler does to Raymond is basically what Jigsaw does to his victims in the Saw series: "I hurt you, because you need to learn for your own good."
I feel like that scene is the only part of the movie that sends a clear, and concise message that's incredibly difficult to misinterpret. It's also true as hell. Was thinking about this earlier. Humanities best achievements were made in the face of impending doom. We live such meek, and sedentary lives now. It's no wonder society is degenerating. Our fear of death is what calls forth the best from us. It's the master key to evolution, and we do everything we can to tranquilize it. Without a cause, we can't produce new innovations. So anyway that's my guess as to why Nilla Wafers are $6 a box.
christ way to lower the bar into nothingness. you're going to bring up that tripe here? who gives a fuck about that garbage.
@@justinqualls4964 Men did greater things when it was harder to -see boobs- buy Nilla Wafers
@@justinqualls4964 Dealy beloved. Other time, other space, people live a damn boring routine life, although the world is so peaceful. Off course, some of them thinks they gotto get out of the life, and dreaming about getting a big fortune. To realize that dream, there's only one way left in that world, needless to say, its, some how, to find out the mysterious fortune, hidden by the ancient people. "Busters", it's the name who we call the fortune hunters. Now they're about to start a historic journey, that no one could come back alive from. That is to get the "FISA"'s, called legend by people.... But, except the one person, no one in the world can make it real who has got to be billionet and radical, physically and mentally..... Yes, you are the one! Now the whole world is watching you and looking for your success. NOW LET'S GO FOR IT !!!
@justinqualls4964 Ya man, that's cool and all, but all evidence says that this is an old, arbitrary thought that's existed as long as civilization itself. The rate that we're advancing technologically is accelerating and has been for as long as we can tell. Max Planck was told that physics was almost reaching a point of finality by his professor, and we know how that turned out. People have complained about this same thing since before Jesus, so tell me, have we been steadily declining since we put the last block on the pyramids, or are you just complaining about something we seem to like to complain about
I feel like this reading of the film assumes that the 'intended viewer' doesnt engage with the film and instead just accepts it face value. My interpretation is that you are not supposed to like any of the characters.
I mean maybe not the intended audience as much as most of the people who have seen it. Literally every person I know irl that has seen Fight Club has mostly just talked about how cool and badass it is, how cool Brad Pitt is in it, etc.
@@darko1295 Shoot man, get smarter friends lol
I mean liking Tyler is kind of the general consensus of the movie too. Tyler is distinctly framed to be this hip charismatic badass. Even me as a former sixteen year old shit head idealized Tyler Durden. Although as a disclaimer, my admiration was less rooted in his fascist dick wagging and more in his bohemian, pseudo-nonconformist, pseudo-Marxist lifestyle. I knew the dude was a radical nutcase you weren't supposed to want to win, but the fact that he didn't feel the need to live up to anyones expectations or cling to arbitrary means of status or social value was just too enticing for my insecure, adolescent brain at the time. Also, I was still working through my sexual identity so seeing an ultra macho Brad Pitt in skin tight outfits, him and Edward Norton barking at each other like bitter ex-boyfriends and then both of them banging 90s Helena Bonham Carter (another iteration of sexy, pseudo-bohemian trash fire) was cathartic to say the least.
@God Not really, just not really digging into the underlining themes of the movie. Most people watch movies solely for entertainment and only perceive the surface-level meaning of the media they consume. And that's okay
You are meant to like Marla, from my perspective, because she is the most authentic and human. She is flawed, of course, but she does not give a single F how you would feel about her flaws, and will forgive you (or never notice) your own flaws til you consistently abuse her.
If anyone saw Fight Club as an endorsement of violence and submission to ideology, they've missed cautionary tale entirely.
Fight club is a cautionary tale, not an ideal to aspire to.
Finally, a sane interpretation of Fight Club!
wishful thinking
I don't think it's entirely cautionary, the Narrator leaves the film not a completely weakened person, clearly injured but in many ways a strengthened and matured character.
It goes to every extreme of a journey that in the real world is taken as safely as strapping on some boxing gloves and getting a group of mates looking to do some illicit drugs.
It's not healthy but it ticks all the boxes, or you can use the movie to show you the end point of that journey and save everyone the pain.
And yet I unfortunately so many people do aspire to it. Not even in a distant sort of metaphorical way. Fight club along with the Matrix are regularly referenced in pseudo-ironic fashion amongst members of the alt-right. I agree that it may have been intended as a cautionary tale, but it was ambiguous enough that people can see whatever they want to see in it. And unfortunately a significant number of people picked up on the toxic masculinity and fascism and saw it as sincere rather than cautionary and ran with it.
ABSOLUTELY - AVOID GROUP THINK LINE COMMUNISM, SO-CALLED POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND THE LIBERAL LEFT.. THINK AND RESEARCH FOR YOURSELF..SHE USED IT AS A PRETEXT TO MISSINFORM AND PUSH THE LIBERAL LEFT PROPAGANDA.. NOW REMIND ME WHO IS IT THAT WANTS PEOPLE FIRED, FINED OR JAILED FOR NOT USING THE RIGHT WORDS?? OH YES THE LEFT!.. WHO IS IT THAT IS CONTINUALLY PUSHING THE LIE OF WHITE/MALE PRIVELEDGE WHEN IN FACT BLACK/FEMALE PRIVELEDGE IS THE ORDER OF THE DAY? WHO IS CONSTANTLY CALLING THINGS RACIST, SEXIST AND PHOBIC WHEN THEY ARE NOT.. OH YES THE LEFTIST IDIOLOGY OF SO-CALLED POLITICAL CORRECTNESS (WHOSE VERY NAME IS A LIE).. AND WHO SUPPORTS MASS IMMIGRATION INTO THE WEST TO BRING ABOUT WHITE GENOCIDE (EVEN IF THAT FOOLISH WOMEN DOESNT THINK IT EXISTS).. OH YEH GLOBALISTS...IF YOU WANT FACTS RATHER THAN COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA GO TO RED ICE TV, UNDOOMED, MARK DICE, PAUL JOSEPH WATSON, LAUREN SOUTHERN AND MILO..
haven't watched this movie but i don't think i'll ever forget a little story about this: Fincher's 9-year-old daughter told him that her classmate, a boy, said that he loved Fight Club. He forbade her from talking to him ever again.
Lmfao
Probably more a judgement on the boys parents.
@happinesstan if the boy likes it from a purely surface level, like he sees himself as Tyler, then yeah, massive red flag. But if he liked Fight Club from what the whole movie is presenting then that's an overreach.
@@thepassingstatic6268 I don't think it's that deep. If I know parents are allowing their 9 year old son to watch 'Fight Club' that's a red flag.
😂😂 That's awesome and hilarious!
Fincher said: "I love this idea that you can have fascism without offering any direction or solution. Isn't the point of fascism to say, 'This is the way we should be going'? But this movie couldn't be further from offering any kind of solution."
One of the early fascist mottos was: movement for movement's sake
The who losing a fight tactic was for the purposes of recruiting new members. You let someone win a fight against you and they feel empowered, and then you recruit them. You actually see the priest from the sequence, later in the film, in Fight Club.
True, I was totally baffled at how this woman completely missed something so obvious. She's talking about how iniates are feeling like losers, where it's the exact opposite. They feel empowered and masculine for winning a fight against a tough guy who was bullying them. The recruits themselves feel empowered for getting someone to join their cause. The very idea of someone "feeling like a loser" for letting someone win is absurd. If anything, it makes the person feel magnanimous, not inferior.
@@noxteryn damn, I rly forgot what that word meant
@@noxteryn your comment is very refreshing to read, and thanks for the time and effort 👌🏽
@@noxteryn Hey, smart ass, it’s both possible, and incredibly common, to do both.
A common cult recruitment strategy is switching between showering the victim with affection/empowerment/gratification, and then conditioning them to seek it out more through obedience.
Not to mention, those guys ARE told to be losers. They’re told that life sucks and that their only means of empowerment is through impotent violence. They’re TOLD what they should think feels good to them. They’re TOLD that what they’re doing is beautiful and meaningful. But they’re not given a choice. Nobody goes to Fight Club to talk about their feelings.
Definitely more brainwashed not being able to look around at what is going on around you and observe that it is clearly malicious evil. All these big stupid buildings were built by demon retards who believe unironically they will escape to some magic cloud dimension after leeching from this world everything it had.
So... I have a lot of thoughts about Fight Club. I live and breathe subtext, and Fight Club is complex as all get-out, the kind of work that's revealed itself to me in more detail over time. It's also entertaining, relevant... I'm a woman and a Feminist, and it's one of my favorite novels of all time.
Fight Club is absolutely a cautionary tale. In fact, I'd call it a Feminist text, in that it ultimately rejects Tyler's toxic masculinity in favor of an ideal that balances masculinity and femininity. Sure, a lot of people miss the point, but that's not necessarily the text's fault. A lot of people take Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet as being primarily about true love, but that's not a message embedded in the text. Of course, Fight Club DOES make Tyler's narrative incredibly appealing at first. But the point is to show the audience how easy it is to be seduced by someone like Tyler by doing the same to us; offering that illusion of choice while guiding our every thought is absolutely intentional. Is the subtext contradicting the text too obscure? I've never thought so. I mean, maybe it's just because I'm a trained English major, but I thought it was obvious at least by the time of Bob's death. There are other disturbing things about Tyler before that point, but I think that's when it's clear that following him is a bad idea. I think what's happened is that Tyler's ideas are already appealing to the audience, and then they a form a strong bond of wishful identification with him. That, then, colors their interpretation of the text; they see what they want to see. ...And yeah, I have to admit, I do think the text probably did too good a job of making him appealing. I mean, even though I hate everything he stands for, even I have to admit that I admire his cunning, charisma, and drive. Anyway, though, if you want more evidence that the author of the novel intended to subvert Tyler's point of view, the comic book sequel (not drawn but still authored by Palahniuk) is an extremely meta narrative. This frustrates a lot of fans, but Palahniuk is making a Death of the Author type point about how Tyler took on a life of his own.
Anyway! The idea of fetishism you bring to the text is very interesting! I actually do think that Palahniuk was working with psychoanalytic themes -- the relationship between eros and thanatos was VERY present in the novel, at least. I think the idea that Jack is Tyler's creation is worth exploring. However, I also don't see anything in the text to support it. I mean, you could go meta, and treat Tyler as the personification of toxic masculine ideals in the author of Fight Club itself. That's actually pretty interesting... And actually, the sequel gets into similar territory. But I think reading it that way makes the actual text of Fight Club less interesting. I think the point is this: Tyler is no less a fetish object than the furniture. I mean, Jack is literally trying to fill the void inside him with another man (homoerotic implications totally intended -- the novel says early that Tyler wants Marla, Marla wants Jack, and Jack wants Tyler) (also let's not forget the phallic imagery of Tyler's gun in Jack's mouth in the very first scene). Tyler is an identity constructed to give him a sense of self that Capitalist society has been unable to provide. One thing that makes me think that Palahniuk was definitely working from psychoanalytic themes here is that this gets into ideas about the separation from the self, the real and the symbolic, with Tyler representing the symbolic, constructed identity (this makes it make more sense, thematically, that Jack is able to see and interact with Tyler, while also actually being him). This shows how dangerous it is to accept doctrines like Tyler's -- it can take you over from within without you even realizing it, stripping you of your identity and autonomy.
I used to think that Fight Club was more a critique of toxic masculinity than it is a critique of Captitalism. I thought Tyler's critiques of Capitalism were... if not invalid, then not the point -- they're just what Tyler's about, right? But now I feel like that was kind of dismissive. I'm certainly not saying men have it the worst, but it's like Contrapoints said in her video about men: our culture has failed to provide a healthy model of masculinity. It spends a lot of time telling men what not to be, but doesn't give them much of an alternative. The alienation Jack experiences is a result of tying manhood to Capitalist ideals of success, mainly material gain. The hollowness he experiences as a result is absolutely a real mental health issue, one that's not limited to men. No, what I was missing is that the text doesn't criticize toxic masculinity over Capitalism, it criticizes toxic masculinity as a product of Capitalism, and that Capitalism itself is based on toxic masculine values. I think the character of Bob is a good point to focus on here. He was a competetive body-builder, and lost his testicles by taking supplements meant to help him bulk up. In other words, he tried to buy a version of ideal masculinity because that would make him able to compete, and he was emasculated in the process. I think it's worth noting that he's symbollically castrated a second time by following Tyler -- he ends up losing his head, which, "head" can also refer to the penis (and no, I don't think this was a mistake; he doesn't die that way in the novel, and I think this is one place where the movie made a better choice). He's lost power, agency, and identity, even more than he did when he lost his testicles. This is why, although it's not explicitly stated in the text, I think it's fair to say that Jack got the ideas Tyler embodies from Capitalist culture.
I also think the parallels between the Capitalist system Tyler criticizes and Tyler's versions of things are pretty obvious.
1. The both provide pre-packaged identities that can be bought (whether through money or personal sacrifice)
2. They focus on domination of others and do not accept compassion
3. Both make promises that you can become powerful by following them (notice how Tyler promises his followers positions of power, after having previously criticized how Capitalist society told them they would be movie stars and millionaires)
4. Both treat people as expendable things to be profited from (Tyler does this quite literally with the soap [which Palahniuk drew from actual Nazi practice] and when he sends them off to die for his own benefit)
And I mean, Tyler's pretty much a textbook proto-fascist leader; I don't see how that could have been a mistake. But I wouldn't call Tyler a hypocrite. No, he knew exactly what he was trying to do from the very beginning. I would also argue that Fight Club was always a recruitment ground for Project Mayhem. Men who join it are already looking for a sense of identity and purpose. They have to be willing to follow at least some of Tyler's rules (if it's your first time, you have to fight). They have to be willing to both inflict and suffer pain. You're right, that latter point does break them down, in a manner similar to how basic training breaks down US military recruits. And then when they join Project Mayhem (which, he only takes the most dedicated volunteers), he strips them of their identities and so they follow orders blindly.
As for sex! I actually really like how the film invites comparison between the Fight Club scenes and the sex scenes. Because Tyler views both as being about domination. The reason he's disgusted by Marla is because he views her as weak because she's a woman. The novel explicitly states that Jack meeting her was Tyler's genesis. Her presence calls him out as a fraud, and also, she seems tougher than him. This is unacceptable, he has to dominate her, or he's less of a man than she is. Also! There's the fact that yeah, he is actually attracted to her. I can't remember if the movie really gets into this, but in the novel, it's explicit that Jack has a fear of intimacy because of his parents' dysfunctional relationship. So Tyler allows him to have Marla without getting close to her (I'm pretty sure these things are embedded in the text, because I read the novel first, and I called this way before the text explicated it). If Jack embraces Marla, he's also accepting compassion and softness within himself, and that's incompatible with his ideals of masculinity. In this way, you can do a really interesting Jungian interpretation: Marla, in addition to being Jack's love interest, is also his anima. When he takes her hand at the end, he's also accepting his own more feminine qualities.. I think the buildings falling also drives this home -- they're phallic symbols that represent Tyler's ideals of toxic masculinity. This, then, is the healthy alternative of masculine identity the text offers: someone who doesn't conform to a cultural standard of masculinity, but who is true to his own emotions; someone who values others and shows compassion toward them.
just stumbled on this comment now and holy shit, thank you. this was everything I wanted to say. Tyler Durdan is the wrong solution, but the men feeling affected are experiencing very real and very valid pains that are more than just, "we want to feel powerful but we aren't."
@@DonLasagna Hey, thanks for reading all that; glad you got something out of it!
@@Hakajin no problem. I also didn't want to come off like I hated the video, i still thought it was phenomenal as well
Yeah, you brought it together for me here with this comment. As a young CMW , I FELT the validity of the capitalist masculinity critique, but my own critical analysis took much longer to develop.
@@DonLasagna I disagree with the idea that capitalism is an outgrowth of toxic masculinity or treating either one as the impetus for the other. Or even rigid concepts. Too structuralist for my tastes. Sorry if I misread your argument, and do correct me if I did. over all i loved your comment and you demystified a lot of things for me! I also love the novel. Although based on what I've seen and read of him, palunik seems to kind of celebrate the nihilism of fight club. I think the other fascinating read of it is to just view it as nihilistic. Palunik himself definitely doesnt come across to me as a feminist, even though his book depicts toxic masculinity better and more deeply than american psycho imo. But I dont know everything in his head, I'm sure he wanted the book to be open to interpretation. The other aspect of the book I love is that its soooooooo amazingly satirical. Something the movie didnt capture for me at all really... the dynamic and bombastic ways palunik has his characters rebel against things that we all deep down resent, but must accept as functioning members of society. The way they [project mayhem/space monkeys] escape all absurd, capitalistic, superficial, socialized society is so appealing. And so hilariously interspersed with wit and funny moments. These moments are in and of themselves worth celebrating if you take a more absurdist postmodern approach towards looking at them.
Really though, the proof that the novel is amazing, is that people who read it are just as charmed by Tyler as jack and the space monkeys. Just as intrigued by their subversion of society. The fact that everyone, no matter what their ideology is, is struck by this story - in some way attracted to the antics and the imagery, is indicative of how poignant they are. It gets to the root of a lot of people in a way almost no other story that I know does. The fact it has such a wide appeal and instances of people iminating the actions of the characters, I.e. the real fight clubs, adds to the charm of the movie in a fucked up way. Because palunihk is definitely trying to be provocative with this novel imo. He wants to show us our worst selves. But what's even more incredible is that people have always done these things. The parallels between project mayhem and fascist dictatorships is definitely very interesting, but I'd even put it into a larger context than that. Project mayhem represents the suppressed frustration and dissatisfaction within all of us. It just so happens that doing the things that Tyler does is often the most efficient way for people to let those pent up feelings of inadequacy and despair out from under the surface.
As far as the reading that jack is schizophrenic... I do think that's interesting. People go crazy because they are not having a neurological need fulfilled, and the brain tries to compensate. I dont know enough about schizophrenia to say if its accurate to suggest jack may be suffering from it, but that boy is clearly fucked in the head. This is the main thing I disagreed with this movie analysis on. I too, see no reason to make a meta reading of it like that. This book isnt meta, its visceral, and brutally honest about the human condition. But it's also a cautionary tale, without a doubt. I mean clearly. To me, it's both. And it's also not trying to prescribe an answer. Human connection is of course the thing that people are truly deprived of, but even human connection will never be adequate. Or at least not powerful enough to ever have a fully altruistic society. In my personal life, I reject all Tyler stands for. But on a collective level, I cant discredit the appeal of his seduction to and fetishization of complete rebellion. What's worse is I can see the appeal to those things within myself. And I dont feel that's escapable... sorry to be a downer.
So this is probably really long and Ik it's very stream of conciousness, i just typed it up on my phone. But I'd be happy is someone actually read all this :) or even responded! Because theres loooooots of stuff I haven't touched on
I love Fight Club and will defend it unabashedly, purely because the whole point of the movie is these characters aren't supposed to be the good guys. You're not supposed to be on their side. David Fincher and Chuck Palahniuk in both the movie and book, respectively, were exploring the psychology of disenchanted young men in a society of rampant consumerism and lack of meaning. A society run by "last men". It specifically is about the young men that turn to Nietzschean philosophy and interpret in a way that justifies a Fascist ideology. Except unlike other Fascist movements, this one has no goals, just pure destruction based on nihilism - which to anyone who knows the actual philosophy of Nietzsche, is a common, gross misinterpretation of his philosophy*. David Fincher in interviews says that's exactly what he was attempting to do, directly naming Fascism as an overarching part of the plot. So not hidden at all, except to the intellectual lightweights who take the movie at immediate face value. If you walk away from the movie praising Tyler Durden or the Narrator, you've missed the point, and we should all reserve the right to relentlessly mock the edgy dudes who do.
The movie you get is a fascinating psychological thriller where no one is the good guy, people are just people pushed to their extremes by the world they inhabit and the people around them. It serves as a warning to the dark directions people can and probably will head in the soulless society of postindustrial, neoliberal, hyperconsumerist life. That's why I love it. Way more interesting than your standard hero's journey movie pumped out year after year.
*Nietzsche was actually trying to fight against nihilism, and his talk of destruction of existing moral systems and institutions was only to replace them with new and improved ones, as to be determined by the great men of the future. He idolized Napoleon for destroying the old legal codes of Europe and replacing them with his own. A prime example of his ubermensch idea. Obviously not a perfect philosophy, but I appreciate the value gained of taking a good hard look at the system you've been born into, assuming none of it is inherently right, and working out for yourself what you actually believe, and then seeking to constructively create new things in this world, like a child using their imagination for pure creation. And of trying to improve yourself and your power in order to accomplish something, not dominate others like how many other people end up interpreting it. Sure, power can destroy, and we, especially left-wing minded people, focus on that, but it also creates, and that gives it value. It is up to us to create power for ourselves and then use that power for "good", whatever we determine "good" to be. We should not fall into destructive nihilism like the main characters of Fight Club. The movie is a warning.
Words of common sense in the comment section. I interpret the Revaluation of all Values as a call to bring balance between the feminine and masculine in an otherwise toxic society. Nietzche was misunderstood and his philosophy was co-opted by evil entities as they always do.
Tyler is explicitly the villain of the film. There's a lot of interesting commentary here but the central thesis completely flips the message of the film around to pretend that Tyler is being celebrated, when the whole film is a repudiation of Jack's imagined ubermensch.
"a straw man whose mortal enemy is a fancy word for blanket."
Made me laugh too
It is funny, but I think it's interesting that Maggie's criticism here is, itself, a straw man. The word "duvet" is not Tyler's mortal enemy - it's just a thing he uses as an example of the society that is his mortal enemy. And a duvet is not a blanket - it's closer to a comforter, but it's not that either. It's a duvet.
@@Beery1962 that's not what strawman means.
@@yuvalsela4482 That is an example of a straw man. The definition of "straw man" is "an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument." In what way do you think that's not what she was doing when she suggested that Tyler's mortal enemy was a duvet? She was intentionally misrepresenting Tyler's motivations in order to convince us that his argument is flawed. I mean, I agree with her that his argument is flawed, but her way of combating it here is fallacious.
Or are you perhaps suggesting that Tyler Durden's mortal enemy actually IS the word "duvet"?
@@Beery1962 in the way that it isnt his argument and the fictional character of Tyler and the person Maggie Mae Fish aren't in an argument.
When I first watched the movie, I was in a state of virtually complete emotional numbness tinged only by a very distant pain and agitation. This was due to bipolar depression. Jack's inability to feel meaningful emotion, especially pleasure, powerfully resonated with me. His violent struggle for purpose, alongside Tyler's anti-consumerist, anti-status quo sentiments, sparked a bit of life in me that I hadn't felt for some time.
For Jack and the people around him, Tyler was the villain, a hypocrite and an extremist, violence-loving authoritarian. But he was also the light. His extremism, despite it's blatant immorality, enabled Jack to feel alive again. And it made me feel alive again too, if only for a brief time.
That's the power of anger. It awakens the dead. But when left unchecked it can beget violent cruelty and wanton destruction.
I have always loved the book because it helped me realise how obvious truths can be used to muddy the water so you cannot see where you're heading in that moment.
the main character in Fight Club (Played by Edward Norton) is nameless.
yes we all know. everyone that wants to has seen the commentary... you are far from the only one
tyler to the narrator, "I didn't create some loser alter-ego to make myself feel better. Take some responsibility!"
In light of this interpretation, I also think it's interesting how Fincher changes the ending. In the book, the bombs don't go off, and when the narrator/Jack/Tyler shoots himself he wakes up in a mental hospital, with the hospital employees revealing themselves to be Project Mayhem members eagerly awaiting the return of their leader. So in the book he's confined in a place that explicitly labels him as a crazy person (where he seems to want to be), but his power is revealed to be the true nightmare, one that he cannot escape. In Fincher's Fight Club, it ends with the narrator triumphantly basking in the victory of a successful plan and newfound ownership/control of this power.
I don't think he's basking in power at the end of the movie. I think he's looking at Tyler's doings as something he doesn't want part of and he's holding Marla's hand because he's choosing the possibility of exploring life through her eyes and abandoning the cult he created.
You're obviously very intelligent. But having studied the book for years it is NOT about PM at all. Chuck has stated this many times. The book is about the narrator facing God and in the conclusion he does. Its also a romance. It has a political message but the main focus is on religion and romance. Chuck even inserted an afterward laying this out EXPLICITLY
Palahniuk has said Fincher had the better ending.
@@leeporwoll2380 Need to look that up. I know he approved of what Fincher did but not concerning the ending
@@darkthorpocomicknight7891 it's in the dvd commentary. They talk about all the changes Fincher made to the movie. Another one Palahniuk liked was the "haven't been f*cked that hard since gradeschool."
As Wisecrack said, Fight Club is the end of meaning, as it is a text that can be read so many different ways that it truly could mean anything. However Fincher's, Pitt & Norton's as well as the author's interviews have made it clear - to me at least - that the movie is parodying how lost men ditch society's rule for Tyler's. What I think the video misses is that the so called cinema fetishists are a group that, at large, do not interpret the movie as "yeah Tyler's making a lot of sense" and are actually appalled by him and sympathetic to Marla, especially after repeat viewings. Me and most of my cinefile friends agree that it's wrong to worship Tyler and from online discourse I've seen in film talking spaces that seems to be commonplace. The fault of the video is that it assumes that because there's people who worship Fincher's style and because there's people who worship Tyler, that means people who worship Fincher's style worship Tyler, something that is not that accurate
Yaaaaaas. I totally agree. When I was younger and dumber, Tyler seemed cool and edgy, but as I matured and became less ignorant of other perspectives, revisiting the film felt totally different. The ending feels like a catastrophic tragedy, a complete loss of self, with it's triumphant music feeling intentionally ironic. Fincher is a master filmmaker, every choice is intentional.
@@paulrobertson2453you could also view it as a depiction of someone arriving at wrong actions through means of having no limits in what they can do, even though they have layed out all the information needed to arrive to a more.. beneficial conclusion in the pursuit of helping others, and themself, as result of such pursuit.
Fight Club is the perfect mirror: whether you like it or not, you get out of the movie is exactly what you want want to see
Exactly, there isn't one true message to the movie, it all depends on the mind that translates it.
Many movies are like that, in fact, you could even say that about our society - if you are happy where you are in your life, society is good; on the other hand, if you hate your life, then society bad.
Tyler: Oh, a GARAGE? Well lah-dee-dah mister french man!
Jack: Well what do you call it?
Tyler: A Car Hole!
His name isnt Jack. Infact no name is giving in the movie or the novel. He is simply "the narrator".
@@DankBuddhaStank ~ His name is MOE
@@DankBuddhaStank yes but everyone calls him jack because of the recurring motif of "I am Jack's xyz" the narrator uses throughout the book & film and it sounds better than "the narrator"
@@DankBuddhaStank I Am Jack's False Name.
@@laikapupkino1767 His name was MOE
Next time: an analysis of why recognizing the voices of other CZcamsrs makes me happy while watching this one.
Adds depth to your parasocial relationships
HOW ABOUT A REAL ANALYSIS INSTEAD OF USEING FIGHTCLUB AS A PRETESXT TO PUSH LIBERAL LEFT GLOBALIST BULLSHIT??
@@shaunclark425 what if the movie Fight Club was liberal left globalist bullshit all along?
Any analysis with an interesting title is gonna be a pretext for pushing something. The title is "Cultural Fascism and the Colonization of Victimhood". I mean, what did you expect? Lana Lokteff?
Dylan C Thanks! I Hate It!
Did we watch the same film?
Fight Club is a lot of things and can reasonably be interpreted in a lot of ways, but this is none of them.
fun facts- marilyn chambers from "behind the green door" was also famous for being on the front of packets of "ivory snow" soap powder, she was also the star of crononbergs "rabid"
awesome next level video, impressive work.
"also thats not how schizophrenia works"
god thank you?? im really tired of that read on this movie
Schizophrenia isn't split personality.
I don't recall the word schizophrenia coming up
It's called Disassociative Identity Disorder
Or short DID, Schizophrenia in moies is usually seeing or hearing, ... stuff that isnt here. But that are usually ghost or horror movies. It would make a good real life horror movie.
@viciousspew I meant in the book or film Fight Club. It never comes up, whether you want to call it schizo or dissociative. The story doesn't attempt to diagnose it at all. It's just two characters who share one body
While her idea that Tyler telling the story colors every part of the story and limits what the story can say about Tyler is very interesting, I disagree with her take on the film's position with respect to this point. I don't think David Fincher likes Tyler's macho bullshit any more than Maggie does. Fight Club ends with Tyler dead, Jack emotionally and physically crushed, and Project Mayhem vacant and ultimately pointless. The film's take on Tyler is that while his rhetoric is alluring, it is ultimately vapid, so much so that he ceases to exist. The film's take on Jack is that despite his best attempts to believe something and move past the paralyzing futility of life he fails and ends up pretty much where he started. The film's take on Project Mayhem is that while they did something, they are ultimately so confused and inauthentic that we don't even need to see if their plan worked.
Tyler's POV colors the film, and it dresses him up, but by the end both the audience and the camera see right through it. The only thing the movie gives Tyler credit for is identifying the problem. He is the one that puts words to angst every person in the movie is trying to escape. But his solution fails just as badly as everyone else's.
Fight Club does two things.
1) It describes the existential angst that modern consumer culture creates.
(which is why the movie still has appeal today)
2) It points out a number of plans to escape it that don't work.
That is it.
And just like the camera sees through Tyler Durden the everyman sees through Donald Trump and Gavin McInnes.
@Analyzing Male Slavery I think you are supposed to say "Imagine My SHOCK!" like PJW
This one for Top Comment 2018
YOU HAVE BEEN MANIPULATED BY THIS CLEVER BUT WOEFULLY IGNORANT WOMAN..SHE USED IT AS A PRETEXT TO MISSINFORM AND PUSH THE LIBERAL LEFT PROPAGANDA.. NOW REMIND ME WHO IS IT THAT WANTS PEOPLE FIRED, FINED OR JAILED FOR NOT USING THE RIGHT WORDS?? OH YES THE LEFT!.. WHO IS IT THAT IS CONTINUALLY PUSHING THE LIE OF WHITE/MALE PRIVELEDGE WHEN IN FACT BLACK/FEMALE PRIVELEDGE IS THE ORDER OF THE DAY? WHO IS CONSTANTLY CALLING THINGS RACIST, SEXIST AND PHOBIC WHEN THEY ARE NOT.. OH YES THE LEFTIST IDIOLOGY OF SO-CALLED POLITICAL CORRECTNESS (WHOSE VERY NAME IS A LIE).. AND WHO SUPPORTS MASS IMMIGRATION INTO THE WEST TO BRING ABOUT WHITE GENOCIDE (EVEN IF THAT FOOLISH WOMEN DOESNT THINK IT EXISTS).. OH YEH GLOBALISTS...IF YOU WANT FACTS RATHER THAN COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA GO TO RED ICE TV, UNDOOMED, MARK DICE, PAUL JOSEPH WATSON, LAUREN SOUTHERN AND MILO..
@@shaunclark425 Worst copy pasta ever.
I suspect a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Everone's Nazi! Drumpf did it! Fascist USA!!!
When I shaved my head, I didn't think it was to steal a female cancer victim's pain; I thought it was because I was going bald and didn't want a comb-over.
I think this analysis says a lot more about the critic than the movie. I'm pretty sure she would recommend multiple viewings of sense and sensibility
I love this film but have always taken it from the first viewing on as an admonishment of materialism, nihilism, cruelty, terrorism, and misogyny. As you say, Tyler manipulates you. You're bopping along, hey this is cool, what a cool guy Tyler is, suddenly he's leading an organization blowing up buildings, and Jack is forced to divorce this ridiculous worldview from his mind after seeing its logical conclusion. Tyler is seductive the way that terrorist recruiters or cult leaders are, but their ways always lead to either their enrichment or death and destruction. And Jack finds out just how dangerous this is. Once he realizes what is happening he is not ok with any of this, he's just unable to stop Tyler's plan in time. I'm almost convinced that after shooting himself and seeing Marla, he briefly forgets the destruction that's about to happen until the buildings fall. But I as a viewer am not ok with the buildings falling. This was Tyler's plan, and the narrative reveals him to be cruel, petty, destructive, the "bad guy". No matter how cool he seemed at first.
I also felt very sympathetic with Marla after the first viewing and still am with each watch of the movie. That poor, poor woman. She needs to run far, far away from this situation, pronto.
Fight club fan made soundtrack czcams.com/video/zZbTT7EypM8/video.html
Yeah same. In the end the jack guy sees Tyler as the bad guy and fights and kills him to stop Tylers plans.
I think the buildings fall at the end just because it was a cooler ending than the books ending. Also the Books ending on screen would look like a pinned on post credit scene fishing for a sequel. Anybody who hadn't read the book would have groaned about what an obvious play for a sequel the ending was. But the films ending had explosions and that cool as hell.
Buildings that were built by capitalist demon retards Kenny.
Marla is unattractive, unsympathetic? Tyles is a cool guy? I guess people can view things differently, but the view presented in the video essay seems stretched beyond reason. I agree with your take, I mean that's what I get from the movie too. IDK, maybe we're just to simple to grasp the big picture, or maybe someone is hell bent on presenting a certain narrative. I would have said, yeah sure, that's a cool opinion to hold about the movie even if I see it differently, had it not been for the political comments at the very end. It gives away the whole "analysis" as an exercise in confirmation bias. How can one use some movie from over 15 years ago to support one's views about a modern politician or generally "the cruelty" of this world? Well, I guess this was a demonstration. It's obviously manipulative, I don't buy it. I think your takeaway from the movie is sober and on point.
Creating an environment where you are free to do what you want so long as it's punching people and pointing guns at them... I mean... that's Grand Theft Auto, isn't it?
That tracks
Well you could also get a cab and work as a taxi driver in GTA, though I'm not sure you can obtain one without hijacking it.
That moment when you realize that Grand Theft Auto is a British critique of American society, seen through the lens of various genre pieces. Only stupid people think it is a game promoting violence.
Whether it promotes violence or not, it is certainly an environment where the variety of actions you can take are weighted toward violence.
@shteevuk:
Which does a service to society, as violence in video games is harmless, largely cathartic, and has been shown by studies to lead to fewer violent impulses in life.
Also? The environment in Fight Club is nothing like how you describe.
Thank you for your deep analysis of your own head canon for Fight Club.
Thank you for saying the thing.
that's basically what media analysis is. you come up with a thesis and find evidence to support it. is this meant to be a dig at the video, because it's a pretty weak one if it is.
@@largoniusEh I disagree. She's not imposing her view on you, it's common in essays/reviews/analysis to refer to a 'we' instead of an 'I'.
I just discovered Maggie's channel and this is her third video I've watched. I'm extremely impressed. Her intelligence, insight and familiarity with her field is undeniable. Her analyses say just as much about our minds and society as they do about the film itself, if not more. Her videos are both entertaining and highly educational. I've found a lot of great CZcamsrs, but for almost none of them would I sit through an hour-long video. Maggie is an exception.
She's not going to j you o
This could just be me, but Fight Club, for a long time was my FAVOURITE movie, not because of Jack or Tyler but because of Marla. I have a history of having someone in my life whom, whenever I talk to them, I don't know WHICH version of reality they'll remember. That was my dad, who, throughout my early life, had an issue with alcohol. When i came to the realization that Jack and Tyler were the same dude, I instantly wanted to re-examine every scene that Marla shared with both of them. I remember the "Tyler isn't here" scene really ringing in my ears. i think those were almost exact words my dad said to me while drunk at one point. Marla kinda became my focal point for the movie because she's the only main character grounded in something close to reality. When I realized that Marla was like me, and Tyler/Jack was like my dad, then I immediately started seeing Tyler/Jack as "the bad guys". I still have a very "fuck society" kinda mindset, and for awhile still identified with the ... goals??? i guess, of project mayhem, but as I've grown older, I've been able to poke more and more holes in their methodology. Terrorizing random people, wrecking random coffee shops... it's hard to see what that really accomplishes. Yeah it creates chaos, woo hoo, I guess? But what is it replacing it with? Our lives, even under the strict guidance of capitalism, oligarchy, hierarchy, etc. are not short on chaos. We lack harmony, and I guess wrecking a coffee shop is, in a way, a fetish object for that lack.
#TEAMMARLA !!!!! I pray that it was obvious my makeup in this video was a nod to Marla.
@@MaggieMaeFish Oh yes, the visual metaphor was not wasted ^__^
@mickor i'm a wholesome christian mom who is AGAINST premarital sex!!! >:O >:O >:O
+
THESE DAYS WE ARE ALL BULLIED BY THE LIBERAL LEFT GLOBALISTS AND THE MENTALLY ILL SO-CALLED POLITICLLY CORRECT BRIGADE
After watching this, I started to read different influences claimed by this movie. I was astounded that many dudes took this as a tome to validate violent norms of supposed masculinity. The idea that this movie glorifies violence, as in shows how it is useful and good and modern men are "pussy whipped" just blows my mind.
Everyone in the movie is a creep, a reject, or troubled in some kind of way. When "good guy Narrator" is just a normal, not sexy, crazy person beating people half to death and blowing up buildings...that...to me, was the message. "No no you crazy fucks, you fucks are actually crazy" is the message. That taking advantage of the disaffected, the weak, the downtrodden is the realm of violence. That taking command of the power over people while not actually liking people is a recipe for all kinds of evil.
This speaks to your narrative here of Tyler creating a nice guy for us that was never really there to trick us. That the evil in his heart is the true person, and a veil of niceguyism created to justify his actions. I don't know if that was the intent of Fight Club, but I think is a useful narrative in this modern day of evil men doing evil things under the ruse of "nice guy" rejectionism.
Anyway, not even done watching this, I just felt like a rant! Ok, back to watching...weeeee. (can you tell I am really enjoying it if I am googling things and I am not even close to finished :D )
Thank you for making this. I needed to see this.
I glad you landed on your feet after the cracked incident. I'm a big fan of your new work! Incitful video! As a Fincher fan, it gave me a lot to examine
@@akshaynatu1084 Cool guy to meet a a bar or event, but you never invite him to your home, or go anywhere else with him.
I regularly return to this analysis, thank you very much for putting so much thought and detail into it.
The way I got it when he says “do not talk about fight club” when it turns out that he’s the only that constantly told people and invited them.
Which is why Robert Paulson was so comical repeating the rule back to him.
That whole segment about quick cuts and being overwhelmed by information that the audience can't insert themselves into was screaming Ben Shapiro for me.
Ben Shapiro, human Gish gallop.
he does try the tactic. his whole thing is a group of failed rhetorical devices that he thinks no one is deft enough to see through. it's like he's still that 8 year old who was yet to become a failed scriptwriter, hearing his parents tell him how smart and well spoken he is. yet he's the only one who ever really believed it. 'if i talk really fast, and state a number of rapif fire suppositions, and just make up stats on the spot no one has ever seen before - they'll never be able to see through it and call me on it' what's infuriating about shapiro is to see how far you can get with rich parents if you're so goddamned mediocre yet do the bidding of billionaires.
Jack's not schizophrenic. He suffers from a dissociative identity disorder. Tyler was an alternate personality, not a hallucination.
“my ferrari is an alternate automobile, not a hallucination”
glad we cleared that up
@@FixedFace my hallucination is an alternate Fixed Face, not a ferrari.
clear as mud.
Dissociative PD is weird. It is often wrongly called schizophrenia. It is way more popular in fiction than actual schizophrenia. It is also a thing that itself is a fiction.
@@lovasip Nope it's real and it's not a personality disorder. It's dissociative identity disorder. I know someone with it. It's dismissed as fiction by people who want to avoid the complexity of identity. There are literally youtube videos of people with it explaining it. Sure the film directors, writer of the book etc probably didn't research well enough, but that doesn't mean dismissing it entirely helps matters.
DID and Schizophrenia have NO, I repeat, NO association! DID is ALWAYS caused by trauma. Schizophrenia is typically a genetic disorder. Jack is NOT schizophrenic. He has DID, probably trauma from being a male in a society that in the time, the 90s, was under attack. And DID is in NO WAY a fiction. It is usually not as dramatic as it's portrayed in movies, but this movie actually represents it very well. Unfortunately, in the 90s, the APA decided that MPD (multiple personality disorder) was a fiction of Hollywood. Years later, the APA realized how wrong they were (unfortunate for people like me who were trying to help someone who, as it turns out, had DID and were told that it didn't exist at the time so spent 20 years trying to figure out what was going on), and came up with the diagnosis of DID, basically a way to say "MPD" without admitting a terrible mistake in understanding. Still, many psychologists don't even know or accept the difference. DID is not often as dramatic as portrayed in Hollywood, but this representation is actually spot on ... remember, we have no idea what other personalities Jack has or expresses. One personality not having any clue what another is doing is common.
I don't really see your arguments as grounds for critiquing Fincher in a way that implies something so sinister of him. Specifically the points that suggested that his shooting and editing style prevented viewers from forming their own opinions. In all, the script was written as a book, then adapted, then passed to Fincher. The film has never been regarded as anything other than satirical commentary by it's creators. You could argue that presenting Tyler as a sexy omniscient badass is bad for younger viewers but, isn't that kind of the point?
After the release of Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange", a group of young men dressed up as Alex & friends and committed heinous crimes. The film was blamed for this among other copycat crimes. Kubrick commented: "To try and fasten any responsibility on art as the cause of life seems to me to put the case the wrong way around. Art consists of reshaping life, but it does not create life, nor cause life. Furthermore, to attribute powerful suggestive qualities to a film is at odds with the scientifically accepted view that, even after deep hypnosis in a posthypnotic state, people cannot be made to do things which are at odds with their natures."
If toxic young men are idolizing Tyler Durden, is that proof that "Fight Club" is damaging on a sociopolitical level? I first saw this film when I was 18. As a straight cis male I was infatuated with the ideals that Tyler presented. Looking back now, I can see that I was wrong, but I can see that I learned, and that I grew as a person. It's like a satirical Trojan Horse. The Nazis that want to relate to this movie will continue being who they are regardless of how sexy or witty Brad Pitt is or isn't, but at least we can laugh knowing they emphasize with a lunatic terrorist man-child. Some may even grow up a little and see how ridiculous it all is.
You seem to draw a lot of outlandish conclusions from your analysis of Fincher's editing. Hilariously, I see parallels to alt-right theory. Yes, Fincher had Project Mayhem shave their heads to fetishize a woman with terminal cancer, definitely not because of the trope "men shave their heads before impending conflict", or the already stated reason in the film -- to dehumanize them, and make them think not as individuals. Time and time again Tyler acts contradictory to his own beliefs, further proving his grandiose, anarchist philosophy is greatly flawed and redundant. By the nearing end of ACT III he is a teleporting psychopath literally trying to force the PERSPECTIVE protagonist to commit a terrorist act.
The reason Tyler seems like a compelling fascists, is because he was designed to be one. To say that he was designed poorly as an antagonist is to imply that the audience is stupid. The narrator who up until the second half of ACT II was infatuated with him, decides to shot himself rather than adopt Tyler's ideals.
It seems to me that you saw a bunch of impressionable young men vocalize their questionable beliefs with Tyler Durden as their catalyst and you came to the conclusion that "Tyler Durden is the gateway drug to becoming a neo-nazi". I think I heard CZcamsr "Sargon of Akkad" once say something similar but it involved "the left" and something about pronouns.
Daaayaaaaamn!
thank you thank you thank you
I think it's because the critic looks at the movie from the angle of slave morality, which views master morality as contemptuous. However, master morality is highly compatible with masculine traits which today people who subscribe to slave morality necessarily find toxic.
Your critique is way too kind. The outlandishness of her reasoning is nonsensical to the point of absurdity. Like you said, this is precisely the insane logic many people of the alt-right use to justify their crazy conspiracy theories. This video is no different in any way.
I'm aware that I'm responding a almost year old comment but I think you misjudged the intent of the analisys of Fincher's editing and the conclusions Maggie made. On the course of the video it was always pointed the necessity of multiple watches of the movie specially because the movie, even as a seemingly open text, is made to imply some ideas more than others.
The point about Fincher's realism is a problem that is discussed over the course of film criticism, that can be ping pointed since the debates on the first documentary. The question here is not the director's intent but the way tecniques and operations within the film language produce meaning. Maybe you shouldn't account only for your experience when this images still have power, specially when distorted to conflate to others ideologies.
Fight Club is Starship Troopers, sans cheese. Just like cinematic masterpiece Starship Troopers, Fight Club deceives the audience in attempt to show how easy it is to be deceived by fascist-esque ideologies. Fight Club has heavy emphasizes on how Tyler's ideology can become popular in response to modern societies socioeconomic conditions.
When Team America is interpreted as pro American by Americans it's unwise to judge art by the way the American public interprets it :/
I love Maggie's reading, but I think it just reaffirms how we're not supposed to trust Tyler's perspective and ideologies. Even though Fight Club ultimately failed to convey its intended message to a lot of people, I'm wary of the impact that can be caused in both art and by harshly condemning the director and attempt.
The underlying question is whether there's a fundamental difference between satire that's subtle enough to be confused for the genuine article, vs a genuine article that's extreme enough to be confused for satire.
@@Pablo360able That's the truly amazing discussion to have about thos movie and others
@@Pablo360ablethe message to all filmmakers should be: be less subtle, otherwise you might as well just be making Nazi propaganda. 😂
@@wantanamera You could make the least subtle satire of all time and Poe's Law would still come into effect. People are still mad and confused about Oscar Wilde's A Modest Proposal in classrooms around the English-speaking world. Maybe it's better to be true to the artistic vision even at the risk of being misinterpreted; maybe it's not clear what "better" even means. I don't claim to know the answer to the "underlying question" I posed, and if I'm being honest my thoughts have probably shifted since posting it.
I'm glad I first watched this movie in my mid twenties. Teenage me would have idolized Tyler like Jesus.
Yeah, not too proud of that myself lol
I was 19. 100% sucked in.
16... and I read the novel... I still feel and almost self-flagellating shame about how much I went down that rabbit hole before realising I was turning into a fucking horrible human and attempted to pull put harder than I've ever even clung to life.
Fellow victim
I watched it When i was 17 and hated one part where he says that we are all dancing all singing crap of the world.
I never bought into it. I actually in some sense like Tyler (take away the terrorism part)
The whole video I couldn't help but feel a strong parallel between Tyler Durden and the author/narrator of this video. She's accusing Tyler Durden of manipulating me with a contrived narrative to come to his foregone conclusion, while simultaneously doing the exact same thing (albeit this video has a clear progressive ideology as opposed to the fascist one alleged of Tyler). Absolutely fantastic! Very stimulating! Bravo!
That's the crux of storytelling. I can tell people to try and come to their own conclusion as much as i like, but the way i tell my story will always be influenced by my own opinion, unless i do it in a disorganised, jaunting way that ultimately alienates my audience.
And not that that's necessarily a bad thing. Watching a well structured video essay keeps me way more engaged than an expressionistic one (if my goal is to gain a conclusion).
I see Marla's story as tragic and when I watched it the second viewing is when I found her position to be so incredibly sad. I personally don't see this movie making Tyler as a good guy in anyway, I saw him as the toxic persona that society has made jack desire to be though that turns out to be destructive to him, leading him to literally shoot himself in the face in an attempt to escape him.
I completely agree. Marla is the most sane of the characters. The dark humor included. Even framed under Tyler’s vision the second viewing shows Marla’s legitimate reactions to being snubbed by Tyler. She definitely has issues. There aren’t any of us who don’t though.
Also on second viewing seeing him hit Brad Pitt was seen by most I know as funny because of the actors but seeing it with the comprehension that this man is insane, and should have been institutionalized for self harm.
I completely agree too. Also, as @philovermyer6166 pointed out in a comment, Marla was the person that undermined Jack's existential dread. Which IMO matters a whole lot - do note that Jack starts seeing Tyler just after meeting Marla, while by the wall of drivers' licenses we can see that Tyler had existed for quite some time before. To me it seems like Tyler felt threatened and decided to try to corrupt his other self too in order not to disappear. Another possible clue for this interpretaion is that it is doing stuff as Tyler that causes Jack's sleeping problems.
Fight Club is a lot like Starship Troopers in that they are mocking fascism but they also show how and why the ideology can be so appealing in the first place. Like a Martin Scorcese picture, the main characters are horrible people but they're so relatable you forget what horrible people they are.
Almost thumbs up, but for your last sentence. So close.
@@leeporwoll2380 Tyler Durden is appealing and attractive as hell! Fascism wouldn't work, cults wouldn't work if people didn't find them initially attractive!
@@leeporwoll2380 Fight Club wasn’t trying to defend fascism or cult mentality it was showing first hand how people can fall into such things. It was showing how they can be attractive to people.
I don’t think most Martin Scorsese (or Fight Club) characters are relatable (to me), but I find them interesting in a grotesque way.
The most relatable character of his, for me, was Jordan Belmonte, because I’m a drug addict. I never worked on Wall Street, though.
@@trekjudas evil has no face but our own. Tyler is no worse or better than any single one of us. That's the problem. There is nothing to "relate to" ...he's just us. A mirror. Nothing more, nothing less.
And the world needs more anti-capitalists going forward. Regardless of gender, race, creed nor hallucination....
Fight Club was one of my favorite movies/books when I was an angry teenager but I like that you had a take that was actually new (to me, obviously). It's probably one of the most over analyzed contemporary stories so it's super interesting to actually hear someone take it in a way I haven't heard, even if I'd disagree with some points.
But after listening, I agree it's very valid to say that you can't explain so many people loving Tyler as viewers being dumb or "not getting it." On some level, it *IS* a failure of the narrative. Or yeah, the desire of Fincher/Palahniuk to make something that both looked/sounded sexy worked against the main theme of Tyler and his followers being wrong. If the coolness of the bad guy is the main thing the audience remembers... yeah... it's a problem. I think Chuck Palahniuk has said he's always struggled to make likable characters. It's kinda sad Tyler Durden might have been one of the most appealing despite his obvious purpose as the villain. As a fan of his books though, I always read them as stories of gross, unlikable caricatures. Which was very cool to wanna-be-edgy teenage I'm-not-like-other-girls Jessica. At this point, grown-woman Jessica might have to admit, she's a bit less impressed.
Anyway, thank you for the thoughtful video! :)
I'm not sure If I agree about the look/sound good and sexy worked against the theme. I mean look at Rick and Morty. Rick is very much another Tyler Durden. Nihilistic, but always wanting to be in control, hates the only other person who doesn't want him in control, drags everyone into his world and his way of thinking and due to rapid fire overexposure, they just end up going along with it. Rick is the Villian of Rick and Morty and everyone loves him. He looks slovenly, he constantly belches, and speaks mainly of hate. Still the most talked about thing in Rick and Morty.
So I think, it doesn't matter the packaging, people just think that type of character is cool and wants to emulate them.
@McMindflayer That's a really great comparison. But I'd say from what I've seen of that show, Rick is really similar to Tyler. He is also:
1. Very smart, and funny, and a step ahead of everyone else
3. Generally is able to use that to manipulate the situation into getting what he wants (even if it doesn't make him happy)
Tyler says a lot of very catchy, quotable things. So does Rick. I think it makes perfect sense that a lot of people would admire that. People seem to admire Jordan Peterson and want to be like him even though he's a grumpy old man, because they think he's smarter than everyone else. It's not *my* idea of sexy but Rick is certainly "cool" to people who like him. And in a way, his slovenliness is just extra cool points to a lot of people because it's proof he doesn't care what people think of him.
But yeah, I agree people like nihilistic guys and want to be like them, even when they are the story's villain. Especially when the hero is bland in comparison.
But if Rick and Tyler weren't always framed as genius, master manipulators (which I do think is most of Tyler's appeal, although his abs are also pretty fantastic)... I would doubt people would think they're admirable.
Yeah, I do think to an extent it's just an issue that audience members have a long tradition of idolizing strong villains. Just look at Darth Vader, Hannibal Lecter, the Joker, Alex DeLarge, any mob or slasher movie, etc. I think it comes down to the power fantasy of identifying with strong villains. They're strong, intelligent, get shit done, usually charismatic enough to have a following, and are so important that every other character is forced to react to them. People generally like those traits, even when used in negative ways, and then there are of course the people who like them even more specifically because they are used in negative ways as a cathartic kind of release of their own negative impulses and feelings (hell, Superman is all those power fantasy things too and the main criticism about him is he's too good and too powerful). The trouble becomes when people hold on to that fantasy too strongly and without due consideration, the kind of people who have Tony Montana posters on their wall and act like he's some ideal to aspire towards even though you and I know that being a disgrace to your mom, murdering your best friend, and dying in a drug war while high as fuck on cocaine are not exactly reasonable goals.
Unfortunately, I can't think of a proper way to combat this kind of negative trend with audience identification with villainous characters other than to say we need a greater promotion of media literacy in America (and probably the rest of the world but I can only speak to what I see in America). Considering how much we value and are bombarded with visual media through film, television, and the internet, it is crucial we know how to properly contextualize and receive it in an adaptive way.
I've always felt like Palahniuk's ending did a better job getting his message across than the movie. It's been years since I've read but if I recall correctly the bombs fail and narrator ends up in a mental hospital convinced that he died and went to heaven. Tyler also has a bit of a smaller role with some of the best speeches going to the Mechanic instead of Brad Pitt and I think that helped downplay his appeal as well. But I can definitely see where you're coming from, especially with the movie.
@@MikeDiastavrone3 theatre used to be morality plays, and people still liked the villains more.
Fiction is a safe place to explore that side of humanity
I'm obsessed with Fight Club and I really don't like admitting that because then I get grouped in with the people who think Tyler is the hero, lol
While I like the movie, I think it did Marla dirty. I see her as an absolutely CRUCIAL character, specifically in how she contrasts with Tyler, and the movie removes a lot of the scenes with her and her characterization as if they're less important. Tyler is who the narrator wishes he was, Marla is who he actually is. Him and Tyler share a body and are called "the same person", but him and Marla are actually the same person.
Once you realize that, her character does two things: first, it highlights how men and women are viewed under different lights - Marla feels kind of different from the narrator mostly just because of her gender, when they both do the same thing it gets scrutinized in different ways (like when they go to the cancer meetings and he tells her off for not belonging even though he 100% doesn't belong either). And second, the way the narrator views her and interacts with her says a lot about him. It has this vibe of like, men are misogynists because they see themselves in women and that scares the shit out of them. Toxic masculinity isn't an attempt to reach noble heights, it's an attempt to pretend you're less human than women are. Marla's a real person with real flaws, and that's why he hates her AND why he seeks comfort in her.
Marla is a more fucked version of the narrator because she's stuck being viewed under the limiting lens of "woman" while he has an out.
whoa this is actually such a great take...
I think that Marla's character isn't elaborated upon because Tyler/Jack doesn't actually give a damn or has the capacity truly about her, and it would demand vulnerability to show actual interest. But as I watch the film I feel like I relate to her based on my experience with being in proximity to a struggling man who copes with delusion and denial, while being in a place in life where I feel like I'm in too deep to leave
Oh am I in a minority then then found myself completely changing how I saw Marla on second viewing?? She’s right that it’s still through Tyler’s lens but I felt empathy for her being messed around by such a arsehole, in fact in the very scene used in this video.
I found this video so interesting even though I didn’t agree with everything but I see from the comments that the video has a far better understanding of how this video is perceived than I do! Some of the comments here are so angry, arrogant and misguided it’s scary
Totally agree. In every viewing after the first, Marla is most definitely humanized greatly. Having now the knowledge of what was actually going on, you see her with empathy when having confused interactions with the Narrator, who is much harder to empathize with, and his psychological problems very noticeable as he says various lines, which don't make sense and confuse as well as come off as insulting to Marla. I feel with a lot of her analysis, though a large portion I liked, would very often seemingly appear to me as sometimes seemingly purposefully misrepresenting various events' context, as well as some characters' qualities and intentions.
I always knew it was Brad Pitt's fault that Donald Trump was president.
I chuffed, take a like.
Calm down Bill Maher :p
Cats8HerFace Is it a serious or is cocky funny?
I love your profile photo!
kaemon bonet Who?
I never really paid attention to the "Raymond" scene when I watched that movie an eternity ago. Putting myself in his shoes now, that breakfast the next day would not be "the best breakfast of my life" or whatever. I would *probably* be unable to eat for quite a while, and that would only be after the anxiety subsided enough for me to sleep more that 30 minutes at a time.
@@iago9711 Trauma doesn't give you superpowers, unfortunately.
@@iago9711
@wwwaldo333
Both valid points that illustrate that life is not so simplistic and that any given thing has multiple perspectives, pros and cons.
@@user-et3xn2jm1u Becoming a veterinarian requires superpowers? That's not an achievable goal?
@@iago9711 Taylor says Raymond is wasting his life. What does Raymond say? Who knows? Tyler isn't going to bother to ask and find out. He is going to do Raymond's thinking for him and Raymond is expected to execute his orders without a say in anything. Apparently, as long as he becomes a vet, his freedom and desires don't matter?
I was robbed at an overnight shift at a convenience store, around midnight on Christmas. Definitely didn't have breakfast, just cried a lot and quit my job. I'd been through enough at that place already and I felt lucky to be alive at that point. I couldn't even leave my apartment for a little while; I was so scared. If I were him, I would move and hide and probably end up regressing
Great analysis had me hooked all the way
Wow, I must say this analysis is really illuminating and insightful. I'm getting so much outta this
I'm not sure how you watched the protagonist kill Tyler at the end and finally connect with Marla after two hours of watching him feeling disengaged, inauthentic and alienated, and came away with the conclusion that Tyler was being presented as an ideal.
It's because she's dumb and doesn't understand anything about what the film is trying to say
Probably based on the impact it has had on many People, mostly white men on "right side of the political spectrum"
Tyler is a Mary Sue.
@ULGROTHA I think I have had this conversation before. :)
You are probably right.
I fooled you all... I WAS THE MARY SUE ALL ALONG!!!!
I inserted myself into the narrative of this video.
We're taking it back.
@@torinmccabe you haven't watched the video, then?
This analysis is so great! Great job, Maggie and others! (:
Definitely going to enjoy my next rewatch of this film again. Thanks for a new perspective!
That robbery scene always made me so uncomfortable... I was robbed at gun point when i worked at a grocery store as a teen. Its not fun. No one is cool for doing that, no matter how smart they are, no matter if they didnt actually hurt the poor cashier or not.
That is the point of the scene. Some men think they know better what is good for you to the point that their toxicity allows them to feel justified by starting with the threat of violence and promise of actual violence if you do not succumb to their will. All the while viewing himself as a superior being, passing along an altruistic and heroic act through violence and concluding it has a postive impact which non violence would not acheive. All the while never questioning his own methods with compkete confidence.
Wow really? Don't you say... I can't believe it, you just opened the world's eyes. Thank you master.
when that happened to me in a bus i just thought "oh cool, thats a m1911"
I have gotten a gun to my head in at least three times and I couldn't care less about guns in movies, games or whatever...what is even the point of your comment?
@@l30n.marin3r0what was the point of yours other than to be seen as edgy and interesting? Their experience is no less valid than yours because they had some residual trauma. They were a TEENAGER ofc it's gonna leave an impact jfc
It seems to me that the movie is telling us something like this:
"I have something important to say. I'm a cautionary tail about how facism, toxic masculinity and conformity are easy and dangerous answers to our current soulless individualistic and capitalist society. And it's so important, that I'm going to tell you this in an ambiguous, obscure, non-explicit, misleading and ironical way. I really hope you catch it right after multiple lectures and you neither sympathize nor identify with the main character though. Good luck!"
That's almost the same reason why "American History X" is very well liked by neo-nazis. Making a cautionary tale of something while showing also how cool that same thing is a slippery path.
@@eliamagrinelli517 It's frankly fascinating that two different movies starring Edward Norton shoot right over the heads of so many people. It's almost like they expected a more intelligent audience than they got.
We need ambiguity. That’s what makes stories last long after you’ve heard them and cause you to reflect on yourself.
@@eliamagrinelli517 The problem is, to avoid caricaturing the "evil" side, and thus divorcing it from any real-world relevance, it's necessary to show at least in part how these concepts *are* attractive in the first place, why people turn to them. Mustache-twirling villains are easy to hate, but bear very little relation to the real world. In the real world, evil is often very attractive, very seductive, even very comforting to its adherents. So to be a proper warning against evil, it needs to be portrayed more realistically. Which, unfortunately, has the effect of making more attractive to the sort of people who are already inclined in that direction. "American History X" portrayed the neo-nazis as bad, but -- as Lindsay Ellis's excellent video essay on the problems of satire notes -- also a bit "badass".
The path is only "slippery" because real life is inherently "slippery". There's a phenomenon in psychology known as "motivated perception", that is, what we see in any particular work is highly coloured by our own preconceptions and prejudices; through filters that tend to reinforce our existing worldview instead of challenging it. Which is why so many people get satire wrong, or misunderstand its actual target. It's extremely rare than satire can work to actually challenge a particular worldview without either making its target seem attractive to a certain kind of person, or devolving into caricature.
The problem with that, is that the only alternative to satire and irony is preaching and moralizing, "this is bad, mmkay"; which is even less likely to reach its target audience.
Liked and subscribed, fantastic analysis, which might benefit from a reviewing. Look forward to seeing more of your insightful work!
You are absolutely brilliant.
Thank you for your videos.
17:55 You know, it just occurred to me that Tyler has the *exact* same logic as Jigsaw, just using a somewhat less extreme method.
That said, I have to disagree about a lot of the Marla stuff. I found her to be completely sympathetic on second viewing. In fact, I genuinely can't think of a more radical shift in how I viewed a character, in the first vs second viewings.
Agreed. In the first viewing you see her as playing out her fractured character in the second you can tell that she develops feelings for Jack/Tyler. I will also agree with Maggie that not having an “in” into her character is a way of the narrative being controlled by either Fincher or Tyler.
Love the Dan Olson cameo in this. His analysis of the film through the lens of toxic masculinity is a recommendable companion piece to this one.
That guy eats soy nuggets dipped in mayonaise
Quit being a follower and become your own Dan Olson
@@T61APL89what
@@T61APL89 i hope that one day you can allow yourself a chance to be happy instead of trying to make others as sad as you are. You deserve better.
Jack needed a hero to save himself from his horrible life. Tyler became his hero, but much like the audience, Jack didn't know he was Tyler. I read the book have seen it a few times; I had always been convinced that he had finally pushed himself past his psychospiritual boundaries and he had cracked/splintered.
Also, I agree with everything you said.
David Finisher is an amazing director. His entire filmography is all worth watching.
*Fincher
The fact that tyler is always right and always gets what he wants means he isn't real and is Jack's fantasy.
Except Tyler is an unreliable narrator and is spinning us a yarn
and the ending... kind of a give away that it's Jack who is real when it's Jack holding the gun.
@@themudpit621 & then after that, a single frame of a nice big cock, to give away that while "Jack" may seemingly have survived to the end of the film, it's Tyler who is actually responsible for the film itself. Holding a fictional gun, in a film controlled entirely by Tyler.
@@TheSoulHarvester I think it's more simply that Jack hasn't excised the alter ego of Tyler completely, and has internalised some of his absurdist rebellious streak.
Good video, food for thought.
At least one thing I disagree with: the head shaving. Men having been shaving their heads as an expression of aestheticism, efficiency, aggression or anonymity for a very, very long time. This isn't appropriation or colonization, it's a declaration of war. Also both those terms deny the possibility of either coincidence or sharing which is pretty nihilistic -although not as much so as a phrase like "the creative class."
'Anonymity' being the key word, which was explicitly mentioned in the film. In Project Mayhem, you have no name.
@@iamjurell or Robert Paulsen!
Amazing analysis. Im so glad I found you
I love this movie and the book, but I loved this video; very interesting and well thought out, well delivered!
An hour? Oh helllllllllllllllll yes! I'm genuinely getting popcorn for this.
I love hearing some of my favorite CZcamsrs in this video! Mikey is how I found your channel in the first place, and Dan Olsen and Hbomb are awesome, it makes me happy that all my favorites seem to like each other and work together 😊
This was fantastic! Much more than I was expecting.
You channel is so good Maggie Mae Fish; thanks for these videos! I could not help but make the connection, about 6 mins into this one, that Ikea literally has an entire line of furniture called "LACK" lol
Great video, Maggie! Thank you
An amazing analysis. Historically, it's the same that happened with a lot of Italian anarchists who later join to the fascist movement, instead those who keep his ideology. Tyler is that guy who wants to destroy the system but wants to make his own narcissistic point of view as the only alternative.
this aged well.
Its always a delight when i recognize some of the voices you get to read quotes
This was fantastic. Subscribed!
Its weird, because I see everything your saying and yet I feel that somehow, the very last minute of the movie cuts against all that. Not even Jack trying to stop Tyler, but the scene where he holds Marla's hand as the bomb goes off and talks as though its over, not like he's beginning some grand revolution. Like Tyler's time is gone. He's still giving orders though - but he seems more interested in being with Marla and getting the guys to go away. So he can talk to Marla.
I guess it depends on what he decides to do next, if he's reseduced by the power he still has.
"Get better at questioning narratives... at questioning authority" Yea sure ok, whatever you say TYLER!
Love thanks for this...
As a guy growing up in a third world country f-uped by all these toxic ideas it means a lot. Keeps me sane in a way.
Its nice to see the HRT working out for you, Maggie Mae!
This is the first fresh take on Fight Club that I have heard since 2000. You've made an instant subscriber out of me - love your work already.
Personally I didn't agree with a lot of what she had to say, but I definitely appreciate that it was original and didn't say the exact same things as every other video essay I've seen deconstructing it.
I also like the theory I've seen on CZcams that Marla is also Jack's delusion. Tyler and Marla are competing for space in Jack's brain.
So it's implied as something Freudian? Like Jack is the Ego to Tyler's Id and Marla's Superego?
The whole time I watched the movie the first time I thought that Marla was going to be revealed as a figment like Tyler
@@SayHelloHelli Marla is real. He is even married to her in fight club 2. So any theories about Marla being fake is just reaching
Viking Breh fight club 2 came out way after the original book and tbh I don’t consider it to be part of the discussion
@@SayHelloHelli unless Chuck himself says that Marla is not real then i don't really think it's up for debates. It's reaching pretty far. I don't get how coming out way later has anything to say as long as it's the original writer
I think you've over-analyzed this movie. The main problem of the movies is not a man feeling he wants to be a dictator of an underground club . Neither is it fetishism or fascism. The problem is a man who can't come to terms with his own existence in a capitalist world. He has a boring job doing something he hates, all the while his company refuses to do recalls on unsafe products which could potentially harm people. He wonders why he can't sleep and tells his problems to people on planes and vehicles who have no interest in solving his problems. He seeks counselling and becomes addicted to help groups. Basically he tries all the accepted societal methods of coping, then tells the person he thinks is Tyler Derden on a plane a joke about his single serving life and finds it surprising that Durden actually listens to him. Durden does just flash in and out. There are many clues that Durden is himself throughout the movie. The cop call where the police say the dynamite that blew up his apartment was homemade. He shouts "you think I blew up my own apartment? Why would I do that?' Also, if you had a chemical background, you would have known very early that the chemistry used to make soap and fertilizer also makes bombs and dynamite, so you would have know what they were up to. So the character that you claim is a fascist is also clueless at the same time, except he's doing everything that needs to be done in order to make it happen and choosing not to question. Also, "society's collapse" is not accurate. The bombs targeted Credit Card companies which would have eliminated debt. This is something that actually happened historically when bank robbers of the twenties and thirties often burned mortgages, freeing homeowners of their debt. As far as the whole 'Raymond' thing. I don't think they intended to come back and kill Raymond, and Raymond stated his own goals in life, not Tyler Derden's. In the end, Tyler is a villain, just like the bank robbers of the 20s and 30s. But some people can misunderstand and think Tyler is a hero. I don't think that is the intention of the book or the movie.
I haven't seen this movie in probably 10 years, but I always enjoy your stuff so I decided to watch this video about it. I'll need to watch the film again some time after this.
39:30 I think you're missing the point....otherwise fascinated with everything so far.
Men don't stay single because they're macho. When he says "I'm a 30-year-old boy" it's out of hopelessness. Who would want to marry him?
Holy fucking shit did I post this TWO YEARS AGO and then make a SIMILAR comment just now? Unwittingly, feeling like I've never seen this??? Fuck me
Maybe the real Tyler Durden was in us all along!
Maybe Tyler Durden was the friends we made along the way.
Clever observation/analysis
Wow. What a great analysis
Something I didn't realize until now. While there were black members of the Fight Club (particualy the one that beat Jack), I don't think there were anyone but white guys in Project Mayhem.
The threat against straight white men that is shown in media. I thought I was the only one who jokingly saw that as well.
So what could be the comparison in that?
Fight Club is toxic masculinity, which every man can participate in while Project Mayhem is facism and other such groups which tend to be very white supremacist?
I think one of the cops in the “we gotta get his balls” scene was black.
@@RihannaIsIluminati No, the black cop was the one that came back into the room and said "I think we should check this out" stopping the other cops from cutting off his balls.
@Evyatar Hadar
You are right, I remembered him a couple weeks after making this comment.
the first time I watched fight club, I must've been nine. my older brother was fascinated by that movie, so we rented it and watched it together.
my brother, being a young teen, loved the anti-stabilishment message, the anarchy, the masculinity. and I think it's very interesting that, since he was sort of an authority figure for me, I learned to like the movie for the same reason (me being a younger boy as well).
however, as time went by, my brother's reading of the movie changed, and it became more of a critique of how Tyler needed the terrorism because he wasn't capable of accepting a possibility of love, personified by Marla. my reading of the movie, however, leaned a little more towards whatever anger a closeted gay man (such as Palahniuk) must've felt against strict norms of society.
as an audience member, I like fight club because it's an interesting work to get some insight into other audience members, especially if you can do it with someone you are close with, watching it in different stages of life.
amazing video, I learned a lot of new things. just subbed!
I agree I think it's the only movie that's changed in meaning for me over the years. I don't watch it every year, maybe every two or three years, and It says different things and i read them with different eyes every time. Gonna have to watch it again after this I think.