Fight Club

Cult. Technically without hesitation (as it’s typical with Fincher), staying always one step ahead of the viewer, and always fun, original and solid. Maybe you’ll guess the twist, but even knowing it doesn’t affect the amazement at the ingenious deconstruction of the film space and the interpretive ambiguity. An excellent Norton and an equally good and inimitably cool Pitt. It’s impossible not to break the first rule – you don’t speak about Fight Club. 95% (05/11/2020)

The most indigestible, but intellectually and thematically the most charged and perhaps the most seductive Fincher's film for someone. And after mature consideration, also my favorite. Anarchy, fights, and at times hopeless situations, depression, and despair. But above all, life in it! Living energy of all characters at any time of the day, night, or person at any time. (08/20/2006)

The genius directing by David Fincher plays the main role in Fight Club, being able to keep up with the anarchically crazy literary manifestation by Palahniuk against the current lifestyle of western society. Someone else who contributed a lot toward the excellent result was Jim Uhls, who adapted the book into a screenplay that could be used to make a movie. Unarguably, the book is a stronger experience, but the movie also has much to offer, thanks to the actors, the technical side and, primarily, Fincher’s playfulness. On the other hand, the original book isn’t one of the best things ever to have trickled out of Palahniuk’s sick mind. (03/16/2022)

At the age of eighteen, when I was angry at the system and I liked the Doors (the band) and Pulp Fiction, Fight Club would have been the movie of my life. But today, I don’t think I could be a movie star even if I really wanted to and did everything necessary to achieve that. And I've learned to get by in the system. Which is sufficient reason for me to think of this movie as just very spectacularly filmed bullshit. (02/23/2003)

This is the richest interpretive film I know. Is it a critique of consumerism, a satire on the far-right and anarchist associations at the same time, or just a provocative thriller about the need for violence? Maybe all of it. In any case, it takes a good bit of genius to make it not look, through its shiny facade, like an angry young generation that wants to save the world with rocks in their hands, but rather like a serious ancient philosopher who has it all figured out to the last detail. It was a breakthrough life film for when I was in my 20s, and a decade later it’s (only) a fantastic cinematic ride without compromises, reflecting the end of the 1990s like few other things. (11/21/2008)