Saturday, August 14, 2010


For people who actually give a damn about movies beyond some kind of statistical horse-race (really, guys - when did moviegoing become fucking Fantasy Football?) watching boxoffice numbers is usually one of the most depressing things you can do. Which is why I rarely engage with it, save for circumstances like this weekend where the sociological implications carry a measure of interest. In any case, The Numbers are in...

Worthless, artless pandering to the lowest common-denominator "guy movie" (and the worst action film not featuring a badly-designed transforming robot)? #1.

Worthless, artless pandering to the lowest common-denominator "chick flick?" #2.

Something brilliant, genuinely-inspired and one of MAYBE three movies from Summer 2010 that will actually MATTER a year (or even three months) from now? #4. Behind fucking "The Other Guys."


Yeah, yeah, I know. Already assured cult status, huge on DVD, remember-what-happened-for-Fight-Club-and-Fear&Loathing, etc. And take solace in the "big picture" that this wouldn't have even gotten MADE five years ago. All true.

But, still... "The Expendables?" Really? Humanity, sometimes you really just disgust me ;)


Doc said...

Saw SPvTW last night and loved it. Truly an awesome film that will need to be watched again to catch some of the references I didn't get the first time around.

More people should see this movie. I caught a 7:40 pm showing, and the theater was at least a third full, maybe half full. Pity.

Nojh said...

I went and caught the last showing of the day yesterday which was around 10:30. Loved the film. But it was only showing in two theaters out of the 20 theater complex, and had very limited times. My area is known for having a significantly large 17-23 age group, so I was surprised it wasn't showing in more theaters. Perhaps that is part of the problems. Not enough theaters willing to bet. My theater was packed.

sniffits said...

I LOVE how studios only take the opening weekend into account, considering my friends and I are waiting a week so we can all go see it as a group because (GASP) we work for a living.

I never watch movies on opening weekend, yet I see quite a few of them every year. Shame that my money counts for nothing.

Clayton said...

-hands Bob a fifth of scotch- Here, we'll both need it. Stuff like this is depressing.

Ramzeltron said...

It's a shame movies like these don't get the recognition they deserve.

At my local theater complex, there was just a few showings, it's sad.

Andrew said...

I'm not sure this is the forum for this discussion but here it is anyway:

Geeks (not movie geeks, but geeks) are (in my experience) the people most likely to get films they want on torrent or similar and not go the the cinema.

I don't have any numbers but it seems that it could be a factor.

Obviously the kind of people who would go and see the expendables couldn't make a computer work.

Ah well, I'll try to get to the cinema to see it, the mrs wants to see Sharlto so we'll have to go and see A-Team.

drumstick00m said...

I have seen SP twice already and I intend to see it (and Inception) again (or more). No matinee viewings.

Dave said...

So it is safe to say that scott pilgrim is the Snakes on a plane of 2010.

I really wish I had put money on that. Why do I never ever put money on things I am sure will happen?

TheDVDGrouch said...

Scott Pilgrim actually isn't playing in my small town yet but The Expendables is. I was invited to go see the Expendables on Friday with some friends but actually manged to talk them all into waiting until Pilgrim comes to a theater near us. I have Bob's review to thank for giving me such a good argument to use.

Christopher said...

Come on man, are you really surprised? Okay, maybe Inception gave people hope that American audiences aren't retarded. But the fact remains, that no one even knows about Scott Pilgrim outside the nerd community. The advertisement for this has been close to plain horrible

rorschach348 said...

Not liking The Expendables is fine, Bob, but your worship for Scott Pilgrim has made you awfully bitter towards it, and has affected your views of The Expendables in turn.

Silent Jay said...

I just got back from Soctt Pilgrim a few hours ago. The theater was full but not completely full. It was a good movie and much deeper than the trailers would have you believe and I think that is the problem. SPVSTW has been marketed niche movie for a niche audience which is probably why the though I admit a premature judgement won't do was well as some thought.
The fact of the matter is this nerd cool or whatever you want to call has it's limits especially with the mainstream audience who may not be into comics and video games as much this trend would have you believe. The fact that nerd culture is still has that box around it and aging tough guys are still more attractive tells me we're still the outsiders not being invited to the party. I guess the point I'm making is if you want help out Scott go see the movie but don't just talk about the visuals or the music around people who are ambivalent to see the movie, talk about the deep story arcs (minus spoilers)and how trailers don't do justice to just how good the story is.

Q said...

Why the fuck do you even bother looking at the numbers anyway? I'm serious the more you bother acknowledging them (seeing as only movie buff and movie geeks care anyway) the lot longer they will stay.

Note: I say this as a huge hypocrite as I cheered the moment it was announced last year that Ice Age 2 beat Transformers 2 in the box office.

akkuma420 said...

i dunno.... everyone's complete worship of this movie kinda makes me not wanna see it anymore.
The Expendables on the other hand..... i grew up with Sly and Arnold flicks, still really excited to see it regardless of what I've heard.
I really respect Bob's opinions on movies and for the most part he's usually right, but there are other movie reviewers out there that i frequent and respect just as much as Bob and they really liked it.
And my pops wants to see it with me, kinda have to see it.
But i dunno, SPvs.TW is getting the Avatar treatment in the gaming community and I never saw Avatar just for that reason, it was way over hyped and i just was hearing so much about it that it was making me sick.
so i dunno, may just pass on both.

LördFarkwad said...

nyeh, nothing you say will ever convince me that fight club is not the greatest film ever made (or at if your a guy...women don't get it in my experience, though that was probably intentional)

That and anything with nick cera instantly gets my scorn, he's like every annoying irritant I have gone to school with...except on a screen and given a script....and I can't punch him in the face.

CrunchyEmpanada said...

I'm going to have to make sure to go see The Expendables now, instead of SPvTW again. Ever. I'm really starting to hope I never have to see it again.

I really hate constant praise for movies, even if I like the movie. But especially when I think it's only mediocre, which is the case of SPvTW.

akkuma420 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike Ralls said...

My favorite rant on Eat, Pray, Love was by the author S.M. Stirling. Rant below;


Subject: Eat, Pray, Love, Puke: or, Romancing the "I" joatsimeon2000

I've read the book (in chunks as large as I could stand, at the bookstore -- no way I'm going to give this person money) and the movie seems to be faithful to it, albeit not quite as gratingly self-regarding.

News Flashes to Our Heroine, or at least the "Heroine In Her Own Mind":

1) If you can't "find yourself" in Peoria or San Diego or Newark, you ain't going to find yourself in Amalfi or India or Bali EITHER.

You're not a spiritual pilgrim, you're a fucking whitebread tourist with delusions of grandeur. None of these third-worlders think you're a goddess as you meditate in front of the rice paddy; they're just laughing at you behind your back, jerking you around, and ripping you off -- including the gurus supposedly teaching you to smile with your liver. Good for them, incidentally; it's poetic justice.

2) Finding a perfect slice of pizza in Naples does not mean you're a better person. It just means you've got money and free time.

3) Don't tell 15-year-old Indian girls about to be forced into an arranged marriage that you "foresee a happy future" for them. You wouldn't tolerate any such thing for yourself for an instant, but it's OK for the little brown wog-girl furnishing part of the exotic background for Your Story, eh?

4) You're not nearly as important or interesting as you think you are, you narcissistic, self-referential twit. You just have far too much free time and disposable income for your own (or anyone else's) good (see, above, ref. Neapolitan pizza).

And your feelings and subjective emotional states are EVEN LESS important than you are; certainly to everyone else, and if you weren't a spoiled baby and moral imbecile, they wouldn't mean that much to you, either.

In fact, that's one of the marks of an actual worthwhile human being, as opposed to a 75-year plus waste of perfectly good oxygen: they learn, as they grow up (it's an essential part of the process) that they're not very important and their feelings are less so.

5) you want to be a good person, instead of the aforesaid waste of oxygen? Get a -life-. Be outer-directed. Finish school, get married, work at your job, raise the kids, pay the mortgage, pay your taxes, fight if you have to, vote conscientiously, do the right thing by your relatives and friends. Fulfill your duties and obligations.

If happiness happens in the process, good. If it doesn't, do it anyway. Then you die. Asi es la vida."

Mike Ralls said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Partisan said...

Dude. It's only Saturday. Still got Sunday left to go. Like Yogi Berra said: "It ain't over till it's over."

But hey, whutcha' gunna' do? It's not like we didn't see this coming. No use losing hair over this.

I learned a long time ago that it's not worth getting upset over stuff like this (unless "absolutely necessary"). Just do whatever YOU want. Enjoy whatever YOU like. Live and let live for yourself and let the world go to hell on it's own. None of it matters in the grand scheme of themes. So why should I care? Why should YOU care? Enjoy the good, dismiss the bad, and live free and happy. (...legally)

Now if you'll excuse me. The Dude and I are off to knock back some White Russians and see Scott Pilgrim again.

Silent Jay said...

Is it just me or does Knives Chao sound like the name of a Tarantino character that didn't make it into "Kill Bill". The actress who played her performance was a sweet surprise.

gavstern said...

Bob, you should debate AngryJoe on this one. As far as he was concerned you're out of touch with what moviegoers want.

Chris Cesarano said...

You know what? I was really hoping Scott Pilgrim would top it considering the advertising I've been seeing for it. Meanwhile The Expendables has apparently only been airing on TV stations I don't watch (Spike TV, for example). I also haven't seen much of Eat Pray Love advertised and only really know of it because some friends of mine were anticipating it and the Expendables Call to Arms trailer.

However, even if Scott Pilgrim is still at #4, I think it can rise pretty well through word of mouth. This thread is the first time I've seen anyone say the film wasn't at least good. Sure not everyone adores it, and as I saw the midnight showing I could point out a lot of things that could go wrong with certain audiences. However, I am completely floored by the 80% it has gotten on RottenTomatoes.

In addition, my father listens to Michael Medved on the radio (I've never been too partial on the political talk, but I don't mind the guy's movie reviews) and my Dad was impressed that the guy was all about Scott Pilgrim. Apparently he was a bit meh on The Expendables and absolutely hated Eat, Pray, Love. So if someone that spends most of their time discussing right-wing politics can praise a film like Scott Pilgrim, then I imagine word of mouth will eventually spread.

Plus, while part of me knows the film isn't the best thing ever, discussing it with my friend the day after the midnight showing brought us to the conclusion that we MUST see it again soon. I've known a lot of other people to come to the same conclusion.

So I'd imagine Scott Pilgrim will be up towards the top long after The Expendables (generic guy movie) and Eat, Pray, Love (generic chick movie) have had their time.

It's just a disappointing immediate because the masses go for what they would generically like. But such is life.

Hyrabethian said...

Yeahhh, I wasn't that impressed with the expendables either.

I mean I loved Sly's last movie Rambo because it encapsulated everything that was right with big 80s action flicks.

This movie seems to encapsulate everything that was wrong and eventually killed the genre by the mid 90s...-_-

Filmduck said...

The biggest problem is that everything from advertisements to reviews (especially reviews, even yours, bob) have built this movie up as the ultimate geek service and have all pointed to, or insinuated in some way, the idea that anyone that is not a complete video game nerd will neither like nor understand this movie.

Then everyone that said these things is disappointing when said film does not do well. Usually I am thrilled to jump on board with the insulting of the average movie goers and there awful taste in films. However, in this weekend's case the nerd community, as well as the advertisers and other critics only have themselves to blame.

Lets face it everyone likes on occasion being elitist, and everyone likes having something they feel is really made specifically for them. That is why we nerds have jumped at the chance to proclaim this OUR movie (and to a certain extent it obviously is). But we failed to ever mention that someone else might be able to enjoy it as well. I unfortunately have a bunch of tasteless jock types for high school friends, yet after desperate pleading managed to convince them to see SP instead of the expendables, and guess what? They all loved this movie... a lot. Most of the nerd references aren't too difficult to understand as long as you are under 30 and the few that are do not make it impossible to enjoy the film.

Long rant aside, this weekend we have done this to ourselves. By lavishing this film with SO much of our love and building it up as a nerd idol that only a nerd can truly understand we have made the movie unaccessible to those same average movie goers we are now insulting for not seeing it, when if we hadn't all been so pretentious about it (myself included) maybe more people would have gone to it on Friday.

mirage said...

Well Bob you got me to see this movie, it was just as good as the source material and at the same time different enough due to movie compression. The down side, holy crap for an 8pm showing on Saturday I would say 10% of the theater was filled. I also waited around to see how many people went into the 10:30, and I would say about the same amount of people. This movie is going to tank, and it pisses me off.

Q said...

Ugh... What's the point of even seeking out criticism at all if just turns you off. I mean it. If other people simply "liking" the film turns you off STOP READING FILM CRITICISM. You obviously have antisocial tendencies. Try to enjoy life.

Give this one chance. His performance is basically a parody of the stuff he usually does.

There's no real point in debating AngryJoe. He and people who think like him really have a prejudice of film critics that they really need to get over if they even want to consider seriously discussing film.

Ezenwa said...

I actually want to see the Expendables. I'm still interested. I just don't like when people use something like box-office sales to decide which is a better movie on a Friday night, especially since they are two completely different genres.

I could go on and on about how mediocrity is something that has become a part of our lives when it comes to movies, t.v., and most of pop culture, but it's been done to death. You can have an awesome film that doesn't get any viewers (like most oscar nods) and a horrible film that gets lots of money (transformers 2). Sadly, that's how it's getting or how it's always been. It's a sad sight. But, can anything be done?

Oh and one more thing: nowadays, it's all about how well you do lifetime in theaters, worldwide. That said, it explains why there will be a Dragon Ball sequel (making budget due to world sales). That said, I wouldn't worry about Scott Pilgrim, too much. I would worry about a PoP sequel, though...

akkuma420 said...

I find it funny that because I don't agree with the mob mentality, I must have "Anti-social tendencies".
I respect Bob's opinion and like I said before, for the most part he's usually right.
I mean I went and saw Inception because Bob recommended it, and I loved it.
It's just this movie I cant bring myself to go and see something that people would fuck if it had a hole.
Too much praise turns me off to things, cause I usually end up leaving disappointed because I was expecting more.
Like I said, it's getting the Avatar treatment in my eyes, I couldn't go anywhere or do anything without seeing or hearing something about Avatar, and after a while, that shit gets really old really quick.
Just my opinion though. 1 movie ticket isn't gonna make or break this movie either.
I will most likely end up seeing it.
Please don't try and insult me because I think and feel differently about movies and film than you do, it's incredibly immature.

akkuma420 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
akkuma420 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Christopher said...

BTW Bob, finally saw Scott Pilgrim with some buddies and you were 100% fucking correct. This film kicked seven different kinds of ass and I savored all of it. My only complaint is that the beginning is a little slow for my tastes. And while I understand it was necessary for character development, this is a problem I also had with Hot Fuzz and Shaun of the Dead. Regardless, when the fun started, it didn't let up for a damn second. All in all, great movie, sadly under appreciated this weekend, but nonetheless it has won its way into my top 5 of the year.

Vincent said...

Nerds and geeks have only themselves to blame. They torrent the fuck out of good movies and TV shows. Every single nerd I know is the biggest pirate, and every single pirate I know is a nerd. They download all the coolest, geekiest TV shows and movies, and rarely pay for DVDs or cinema tickets. And they use all kinds of nerdy, lame excuses for their piracy, e.g. "I've been burnt before by bad movies, so I'm entitled to pirate this extremely good movie."

Chris Cesarano said...

I don't think it's necessarily fair to blame nerds due to Internet piracy. I know a few that are like me and refuse to pirate. The only downloading I do is off of Amazon MP3. At the same time, I have a few friends that are HUGE pirates but they went to the midnight showing for Scott Pilgrim anyway. It's going to depend on the person and their own personal ethics rather than stereotypes.

I just got back from the theater after seeing The Expendables with my Dad and friend, and honestly, while it's no work of art, I wouldn't call it shit either. It was fun, though it was also shallow. It was literally a film you went to see for the fight scenes, though tragically they went for shakey-cam instead of allowing fights to be clear. I'm getting sick of not being able to tell what's going on.

Otherwise, the film did a lot of what I was expecting it to deliver. Funny lines with good action. Unfortunately it didn't deliver as promised, which is the greatest action film to ever exist. But hey, there's a difference between a movie that disappoints because it's not great and a movie that disappoints because it is bad.

However, nonetheless, Scott Pilgrim is still a better film for much the same reasons it beats out Eat Pray Love. It's at least trying to say something and has heart, even if the 2 hour time slot can't manage it. Plus, Edgar Wright did a fantastic job directing the combat and also blended the world of games and comics into the world so naturally that it just fits the very idea of Scott Pilgrim (which is that these aspects of media and culture are so ingrained in us that the concept of leveling up in real life is natural and not at all strange).

It's not PERFECT, and it's not the greatest piece of geek cinema either, but the only movie to top it this summer is Inception. It's just that good. No, it won't be the best thing ever, just as Avatar wasn't, but it's certainly more entertaining than Avatar was.

Axle said...

Well Bob, thank you for convincing me to see this. I was planning to at some point or another, but you convinced me to see it this weekend. It was pretty fantastic.

Q said...

I'm not insulting you for having an opinion about the movie. I'm insulting you for what that opinion is. I find your "Avatar treatment" argument laughable because of its childish assertion that somehow something is being shoved down your throat. What I suggest is that you stop reading internet commentators where I'm guessing is where a lot of this hype is coming from.

Now you claim that's this film is being over-hyped and that you don't want to follow the crowd that doing so turns you off. That's fine but that's still anti-social behavior because you're allowing just the presence of other people block your enjoyment.

...Right anyway, been reading Kevin Smith's twitters from yesterday. Gotta say it got me looking on the bright side.

akkuma420 said...

Most of the hype I'm talking about is coming from TV, Radio, Friends as well as the Internet. It just seemed to me it was being hyped up for all the wrong reasons.
Yes I saw the Pee meter, yes I saw the 1up, yes I saw the coins and yes I heard the soundtrack, but was the movie itself any good?
So I took Bob's word for it and went and saw the movie.
I stick by my words, it wasn't for me.
I didn't find the cliche video game references funny in the least.
Micheal Cera was doing what he does best, playing Micheal Cera.
Scott Pilgrim was probably one of the most uninteresting characters in the movie.
I just didn't care for it.
I have a pretty good idea why I didn't care for it either, I had heard too much and was expecting too much.
It's just my opinion though.
This movie is not for everyone.
Me being one of those people.
The one thing I do give it though, the action was fun.
Other than that, I feel it fell short.
Don't get me wrong, I wanted to like this movie, I just didn't.
I just think it's kinda messed up that when people don't agree with Bob 110%, humanity disgusts him.... people have different movie preferences and tastes.
Really shouldn't insult your readers like that, because I guarantee not everyone is gonna agree with everything you have to say.
Just sayin.
And yes I take it as an insult, you calling me "Anti-social". You know nothing about me other than the fact that I didn't care for the idea of have the name Scott Pilgrim shoved down my throat every time I turned the TV on, got in the car, went on the Internet or went outside.

Q said...

I laugh at your 'shove it down my throat' argument because I too watch TV, listen to the radio, and have friends and I seemed to avoid much of the hype that you were unable to manage.

Take control of your media outlets, don't always watch the same tv channels and avoid talking about it with your friends. If you know that something being over-hyped effects your enjoy then do a media blackout until you see it, it's not that hard.I have diagnosed you disease, you have to manage your own treatment.

Also in the defense of Bob (because I know he'll surely appreciate help from me)* , whenever consider others opinion about films whether they love it or hate it is regardless the only thing that matters is "Why?". And I have found while searching through the internet is why anyone would enjoy Expendables is that they either want an 80's nostalgia high (to which I say there are better films for that) or they are the kind of mediocrity approving douchebags that made Transformers 2 top box office.

Only one of those two is an actual excuse.

Q said...

Wow, I really am illiterate...still not going to change it.

tyra menendez said...

True story: Chuck Palahniuk went for a tour of a haunted house, which was illegal, because the property was condemned (at least, that's how I remember it). The kid running the tour starts up his spiel with, "The first rule of..."
Chuck looks at the kid, and says, "You know, I wrote that book."
The kid looks back and says, "There was a book?"

In before, cool-story-bro.

Kyle said...

I have been dying to see Scott Pilgrim. I have a friend who has seen it 3 times already. Everyone else I know who has seen it has just loved it.

Next weekend it'll be interesting to see how much other movies numbers drop off compared to SP.

Andrew said...

You know the "rule" that the book is usually better than the film (time constraints etc.)?

After I saw Fight Club I went and got the book since I was going on holiday.
My girlfriend at the time read it first since I was part way through a Jerry Ahern novel (I know).
I started it but is was total dog-shit, just badly written and lumpen.
I was considering giving up on it when another guest in our hotel asked what I though of the book.

I told him it was crap and that I was giving up on it and he said "huh" and wandered off.

Later, my gf asked me for the book, I asked what for and she told me the author was in the hotel and she wanted to get it signed.

Oh shi-

Yup, it was him.

Actually the box blurb on the UK DVD release of Fight Club gets right on my nerves, it refers to Norton's character as "Jack", that's not his name.
Winds me up.

akkuma420 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
akkuma420 said...

I had a long drawn out response above, but I chose to delete it.
I'm done discussing this, not because I feel that you have bested me or have somehow "won" the conversation, it's just that I came to a realization, one cant talk to people like you, its like arguing with a brick wall.
It took a friend to tell me that for me to realize it.
He saw are conversation/argument and said "really dude? your gonna argue over a stupid movie with some internet weenie that thinks he has a PHD in psychology? It's a waste of time, some people just aren't willing to listen, whether it be fact or just a opinion"
I think that is one of the most insightful and intelligent statements I have ever heard him make.
So long story short, I'm done with this.
I didn't care for the movie, it wasn't my cup of tea.

The End.

Q said...


Oh, come on. I'm sure we can keep this going. I was hoping we could make it to at least comment #50.

And just so you know. It's an Associate degree in Psychology from the University of Phoenix. So there. Also your "friend" (or whatever you would like to call him) can go... slip on a weenie. CHECKMATE.

Chris Cesarano said...

You both need to give it up.

Q, you're making too many assumptions about it.

Akkuma420, you had your mind made up to begin with. You didn't go in there with no expectations because all you had said was you expected it to not live up. Well, it didn't, and probably because you nitpicked the whole time.

Now, maybe if you see it again in the future you'll be able to appreciate it for what it is for. In fact, there's a lot of misunderstanding you seem to have about the film. I bet you didn't even get that a lot of the dialog such as "Getting a life" and "I'm a little Bi-Furious" were intended to be atrocious one-liners, just another product of the post-1980 generations.

The video game references were cliche? Please, even webcomics don't pull off gags like this. Sometimes, yeah, it's cliche to see someone "level up", but you miss the point. What makes Scott Pilgrim a product of the generation and its culture isn't that every reference is done with a wink and a nod, it's that it blends into average life. It's like how my friends and I may pull off something awesome and the first instinct is to say "Achievement Unlocked". Our minds are wired that this shit is natural, which is why the game world logic goes unexplained.

That Edgar Wright managed to blend all of these elements, as well as comic book style, into the film without it overpowering the narrative is a further testament to his incredible skills as a director.

Also, to say that this is Michael Cera being himself is a tad understatement. We can never escape the fact that the actor himself is soft spoken and lanky, but his character IS confident in ways that his others have not been.

But that his character is uninteresting? That's a first. I've heard people call him a douchebag, but not uninteresting. The whole point is that he's a douchebag, though, until he is forced to grow up. The downside of an action-packed film like this is that the character growth is stuffed into two hours, yes. This is the fatal flaw of the film: there's so much it WANTS to say and that it's source material says, but it can't because of time constraints.

If you didn't get any of what was there, then that isn't the film's fault.

That said, I CAN take people saying it isn't there style, but honestly, I think the geeky humor is handled in such a manner that it really takes a back seat. No one says "Chaos Theater? Like in EarthBound?". It's just there for the people that DO get it. But let's face it, if you're between 15 and 30 (possibly older), the idea of someone being able to text message in their sleep CAN be executed in a way that is humorous. It just so happens that Edgar Wright did it in his typical masterful manner.

I'd be blaming yourself for why you didn't enjoy it. Is it the best film this year? No, that goes to Inception. However, it's definitely entertaining and the sort of film that is just GREAT to watch with friends. Plus, my friends and I are already quoting it.

It's great in that it is capable of delivering again and again, and such films are rare.

tyra menendez said...

@ Andrew,

some of the changes in the movie were better than the book, I will agree with that, but I like Palahniuk's stream-of-consciousness style.
The reason it calls Norton's character, "Jack" is because of the running theme of "I am Jack's (blank)" and the character is never actually named and to call him Tyler, would be a spoiler. Even Chuck started referring to the character as Jack.

akkuma420 said...

That was quite a read.
It has nothing to do with me not understanding it.
I got it.
I'm 25 years old, I understand the references.
It has nothing to do with that.
I just didn't care for it.
IT was not for me.
Not everyone is gonna like it, and i think everyone needs to except that without trying to explain how that person is wrong.
It's called an OPINION for a reason.
God it seems like such a mistake to even voice your opinion in here.
how lame.
Phoenix..... lol, online school, what a joke.

Q said...


...Yeah, it kind of is, isn't it?


But then again, what else can I do? I mean I am from the internet after all.

Andrew said...


Thank you, I see your point but Chuck's writing style just gave too much away too early, there was no POW! moment in the book.

Norton's character does refer to the 3rd person magazines in the paper st. house: "I am Jacks colon"
"I get cancer, I kill Jack".

However Norton's character is called "Narrator".

He is credited as "narrator".

Whoever wrote the DVD blurb was probably just a tool.

If Chuck wants to refer to the character as Jack then that's fine, it's his book but in the context of the film and the DVD box then it's wrong.

akkuma420 said...

True that.

tyra menendez said...


The funny thing is, Fight Club was not his first novel. He first wrote a novel called Invisible Monsters, about a model who gets her face blown off by a gun shot.
When he submitted it, the publisher hated it, so he wrote Fight Club as a big "fuck you" to anything corporate, and sent it in. Obviously, they liked it, and Chuck got published. So his second novel was technically his first.
But yeah, all his books are written that way, you like it or you don't. I will give you that it's one of the few cases that the movie was better than the book. Though, that's not the case with the movie version of Choke.
The "boom" moment wasn't as powerful, because I figured it out before it was revealed. Though not by the middle of act two, like with some movies with a "twist".

Anyway, I figure Chuck's writing style is about like Bill Sienkiewicz' art style, it's not for everyone.

And as far as the DVD blurb goes, calling the main character "narrator" on the box could sound lame. So, at least they were aware of the "I am Jack's ..." narrative device, meaning they probably actually watched the thing. What is really terrible, is when the blurb is completely misleading of the plot, which I've encountered, but can't think of any examples. I see your point, but it could have been worse.

Andrew said...

Fair enough, I'll meet you half way on that.

I know what you mean about misleading blurbs but I too am unable to come up with one.

The back of Fight Club is not the end of the world and Chuck's books aren't terrible but I tend towards having a very polarised view of everything.

It drives my wife mad.

Hey, Reasoned debate on internet leads to man changing mind.

There's a news headline.

Ezenwa said...

Color me a spam artist, Bob, but you have to see this review.

Dude, he captures virtually every reason why the movie works. He even explains the characters very well.

Main Point: this movie is actually deeper than one sees it to be. He does go into why he doesn't like the Expendables, from a film standpoint, but, well, I haven't seen it yet, and I'll probably enjoy it. I just don't want to be comparing two unrelated movies together.

By the way, another reason why this movie hasn't maintained lots of money: it's not everywhere. Should it have been? Absolutely

tyra menendez said...


Also, said debate doesn't lead to invocation of Godwin's Law. That, too, would be a headline.

I think knowing that people can't punch you in the face, when they get pissed, at you, leads people to not back down. Personally, I'd rather save my outrage for something that actually matters, not opinions of entertainment. And I can not like something while recognizing that it's not shit. I recognize Lord of the Rings as a great story, but I'm still bored to tears with the writing style; I never even made it passed Tom Bombadille, on the second try. Same with Frankenstien, I couldn't finish it, because of the bi-polar writing style. I toss that up to the whole teenage-girl thing.

H said...


no one likes dickish remarks back and forth on threads. yes, Q is being a bit of a twat. don't be one back.
that said, i have a couple things to say. while i respect your right to have an opinion, as we are obviously different people with different tastes, i will also say that i disagree with your opinions and felt your approach showed closed-mindedness.
however, Mr. Cesarano said pretty much everything i was going to say in my initial response; he was not listing reasons for why you are wrong, he was supplying food for thought, in the hopes that you may see things from a different angle. your response of simply refusing them and claiming that your rights are in danger of violation showed some irritating immaturity.

also, your original comment sounded like you were saying "uuugghhh i don't like things that are popular." had you worded it more like "things being over-hyped makes me go in with unfairly high expectations", this little mess could have potentially been avoided.

akkuma420 said...

That was the first reasonable response to anything I have had to say here.
I suppose your right, It did come off sounding a little immature.
I think it was partly due to the fact that I had spent the majority of the day trying to explain myself on why I really didn't care for the movie.
I just really don't know what it was about that movie though, It just didn't do anything for me, everything just felt so forced, the humor, the style and the soundtrack.
I personally thought I would love this movie because I was lucky enough to grow up in those awesome video game years.
I cant even really explain why I didn't like it to be honest, it just didn't impress me, and I left the theater disappointed.
Maybe Ill go see it again.

As for all the other comments, I just hate the feeling that I'm being attacked for my personal opinion's, it really pisses me off.
Even more so when the person trying to attack you is an obvious douche bag.

Philbo said...

Bob, would you know where to go to find out the release numbers in the UK? I only ask because the movie is being advertised over here as by the director of Shawn of the Dead and Hot Fuzz: two British movies that are well on their way to becoming contemporary classics (if thats not an oxymoron?).

For this reason I think the movie could do better than expected when released in a week over here.

Andrew said...

True but I might construe your reference to Godwin's Law as an implication that I have been as much of a choad as Hitler.
You have then brought him up and I would be able to refer to Godwin's Law.
Recursive references:


It is of course impossible to prove (I love the interweb) but I am 6'2" 220lbs and both ex-forces and and ex-bouncer, I rarely back down in arguments in real life.
I do however think it is an important facet of the personality of a man to be able to admit when he's wrong.

tyra menendez said...

I'm far too blunt to invoke Godwin's Law by merely referencing it. However, I also hate to invoke it, so if I wanted to compare you to a fascist, I'd probably use a fictional one.

I think being able to make friendly after a disagreement is also an important facet. =D

Andrew said...


Even with Nazis.

Paul said...

I'm going to engage in a helluva lot of schadenfreude on this one. Sure I don't like any of those other films either but Scott Pilgrim going down in flames and Pilgrim boosters nearly jumping out of windows over it just....well, it just brings a smile to my face. Glad to know hipster still = bomb at the box office.