Fight Club (1999) **1/2

(I’m pretty sure there are spoilers in this post.)

The first rule about Fight Club (1999) is that you do not talk about Fight Club. The end…

Since that wouldn’t be a very constructive blog post, I suppose I must talk about director David Fincher’s highly creative and unusual movie, which was adapted from the 1996 Chuck Palahniuk novel of the same name.  Edward Norton plays an unhappy white-collar worker who suffers from insomnia and consumerism. His entire life is focused on having a condo completely decorated in IKEA and covering up safety defects for the automobile company for whom he works.  He can only feel anything when he goes to disease support groups—even though he doesn’t suffer from any physical affliction.  When the disaffected Marla Singer (Helena Bonham Carter) starts attending the same meetings (even one for testicular cancer), Norton’s character relapses and returns to his insomniac ways.  Marla and Norton’s characters are emotional wastelands, who both despise and commiserate with one another. 

And, then there’s Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt).  Tyler is a sociopath who is one part philosopher and three parts madman.  Tyler and Norton’s characters meet on a plane and begin living with one another after Norton’s apartment explodes.  They live in a cesspool of a dilapidated house and start an underground fight club.  Tyler uses the club to recruit men to his Project Mayhem, which consists of making bombs with chemicals used in soap and then planting them in credit card buildings.  Eventually, Norton’s character realizes how insane Tyler is and tries to stop him, and this is when the film really gets interesting.

Make no mistake, Fight Club is a graphically violent film. Watching people have their faces beaten to pulps is not a pleasant experience.  There is lots and lots of blood and the occasional skull blown out by a bullet hole.  If you have a weak stomach, this is not the movie for you, because the fight scenes are quite realistic and the blood looks like blood. 

Fincher and cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth used Super 35 to film Fight Club. It gave the movie and unusual look, which played well against the fact that most of the scenes were filmed at night.  It is a gritty looking movie, which on a second viewing has so much to offer.  Why on a second viewing, you ask? Well, I’ll tell you, but this is where the spoiler comes into play—and it’s a BIG one.

Tyler Durden and Norton’s character are the same person.  Yeah, it was sort of like The Sixth Sense (1999) when you realize that Norton’s character has created an imaginary persona to release him from his unhappy life and to launch him into a world of chaos.  As such, when you watch Fight Club for a second time you pick up on all of Fincher’s inserted visual clues. Those odd flashing splices that you couldn’t totally make out before Tyler enters the film—that was Norton’s subconscious beginning to insert Tyler into the frame.  Why does the screen sort of shimmer when Pitt is in a scene (yes, he’s hot, but so is Helena Bonham Carter in a dark, weird way)?  It’s Norton’s mind.  Why are all the un-Tyler scenes flat and somewhat bland—this is Norton’s reality.  It is a highly inventive way to present two different cognitive states. 

The acting is good, but not great.  Bonham Carter is a particular favorite of mine, so just about anything she does is fine by me.  Her Marla is flippant and morose at the same time.  Norton and Pitt play extremely well off one another—as they know they are playing two different sides to one man.  There is a psychotic twinkle in Pitt’s eye throughout. And, it is a delight to watch Norton transform his character from a boring pencil pusher to an all-out badass.  My favorite scene comes when he blackmails his boss into paying him to work from home. In it, you see the complete disintegration of Norton’s character.

Overall, I liked Fight Club. Still, the story is a bit far-fetched and the film is way too gratuitously violent for my liking. 

Read More

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011) **1/2

While Sweden generally does not suffer from extreme heat temperatures,  I can find no other explanation as to why so many characters in director David Fincher’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011) are so diabolically demented than this: Satan sleeps in Sweden.  While the film is cloaked in a rather riveting plot about a serial killer, there is no getting around the fact that that the story is filled with graphically disturbing scenes and amoral characters. 

Based on the international best-selling Swedish novel of the same name by Stieg Larsson, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo asks the question: what happened to Harriet Vanger (Joely Richardson) 40 years ago? Disgraced journalist Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) is asked by Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer) to investigate his niece, Harriet’s, disappearance and assumed murder.  Whilst combing through boxes of documents, Mikael discovers a notebook containing a list of undecipherable names and numbers, which he thinks is connected to Harriet’s disappearance. Part of his investigation requires his questioning Vanger family members about what they remember about the day Harriet disappeared. Let me tell you, the entire Vanger family is a study in emotional instability and Type A-personalities—almost all of them live on the same massive island compound in separate homes and refuse to speak to one another.  When Mikael’s investigation hits a snag he enlists the help of Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara), a gifted computer hacker.

Lisbeth is the girl with the dragon tattoo—as well as many other tattoos and piercings.  Let’s just say it—she’s a crazy bi-sexual with anti-social tendencies who dresses like a punk obsessed with the color black.  You’d think that the most disturbing images about the hunt for a serial killer would be connected to the murders, but not here. No, we are treated to two graphic rape scenes. In one, Lisbeth is sodomized by her reprehensible state guardian Nils Bjurman (Yorick van Wageningen)—it’s the price she has to pay to get him to allow her to have her own money.  In the second, Lisbeth tasers Nils, rapes him with a giant dildo and then proceeds to tattoo “I Am a Rapist” on his chest. Mikael, of course, takes her away from this sick world and into the demented Vanger world, where first a father is a serial rapist and killer and then his son. Quite frankly, it’s one “Ick” after another—and in between “icks”, we get to see Lisbeth and Mikael have soft porn sex. 

So, after my description of the film you are probably wondering why I gave it 2-and-a-half stars if I was so repulsed by it?  Well, no matter how deplorable and unlikable most of the characters are and how graphically disturbing some of the images are, you cannot get around the fact that the story is compelling.  When Mikael and Lisbeth discover the truth about what happened to Harriet you are shocked (even though when you reflect on how screwed up the Vanger family is it does make perfectly sick sense). 

Although Mara was nominated for a Best Actress Oscar, overall there were no striking performances.  The film is filled with gifted actors: Plummer, Richardson, and Stellan Skarsgård to name a few, and there is a steadiness to the film because of this.  Yet, other than the character of Lisbeth (and even she is limited), Fincher presents his characters as staid, cool Swedes. Attempting to channel Bergman was a mistake for a former music video director from Colorado. Fincher does much better making films with American sensibilities, and should leave Swedish existentialism to the master (and, on occasion, his American stalker and imitator Woody Allen).

Overall, I found The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo graphically disturbing, but found myself immersed in its overall plot. I didn’t like one single character, yet was still somewhat attached to the outcome of a few of them.  Simply put: I found the entire film disturbing—was that a good thing? Who knows…

Read More

Se7en (1995) ***

 

For some reason, cultured serial killers are always the worst. When they base their heinous acts on biblical and classical literature they seem to creep me out more than their illiterate chainsaw wielding counterparts.  Perhaps it’s because I work and live in a world based on knowing and disseminating knowledge. Of course, it doesn’t help that this type of character usually looks harmless, as does Kevin Spacey’s John Doe in Se7en (1995).  Doe bases his murderous acts on the seven deadly sins (more properly known as the Cardinal Sins) and uses quotations from the likes of Aquinas, Chaucer, Dante, and Milton to leave messages for the detectives pursuing him (Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman).  Atmospheric and edgy, Se7en is an uncomfortable look at the depravity of the times in which we live.

Freeman plays Detective William Somerset, a well-read but world-weary man who finds himself seven days from retirement when he catches a serial killer case that he’d rather not have.  He is joined on the case by his soon-to-be replacement, Detective David Mills (Pitt), a jaded but still naïve cop who has recently transferred to the police department. The lead character’s name was not randomly chosen by screenwriter Andrew Kevin Walker—he named Somerset after his favorite author, W. Somerset Maugham.  This only adds to the literary allusions throughout the film, when several well-known passages are referenced throughout.  I would even venture to guess that the character of Mills is some type of  proxy for John Stuart Mill and his utilitarianistic harm principle, where each individual has the right to act as they want, so long as these actions do not harm others.

That philosophy, of course, is put to the test when Mills and Somerset come up against a serial killer who thinks he’s doing the world a favor by ridding it of the dregs of society. When explaining why he murdered his innocent victims he says, “Only in a world this shitty could you even try to say these were innocent people and keep a straight face.” And, that’s the point—they live in some type of apocalyptic world where everything is gray-toned and it never seems to cease raining unless you go out into the countryside.  Evidently the horrible acts carried out by Doe in this No-name city are nothing too out of the ordinary.  This is the reason Somerset wants out and says as much when he explains to Mills why he’s ready to retire: “I just don't think I can continue to live in a place that embraces and nurtures apathy as if it was virtue.” It sucks in No-name city, and the people who live there are complicit in every awful thing that transpires there.  Those who think they can rise above it, like Mills, find themselves completely enveloped by its sinister ways. 

While we are spared watching the sickening murders take place, we do have the unwelcome experience of seeing the aftermath of Doe’s actions. Gruesome crime scenes abound, and while they are not as stomach-turning as what you would find in a slasher movie, they are still difficult to look at.  His take on the seven deadly sins is rather imaginative, so I suppose if I were grading his psychopathic artistry I’d have to give him an A.  For me, his '”sloth” endeavor is the more memorable of all his “masterpieces”.  That emaciated body sputtering to life sent a jolt throughout my entire body.  Obviously this was the point in Spacey’s career when he embraced his darker side by playing both Doe here and Verbal Kint in The Usual Suspects (1995) in 1995. He must have picked up a few pointers from Anthony Hopkins’ turn in The Silence of the Lambs (1991) about how to play a cool and calculating serial killer, because he does a nice job of not overplaying Doe’s depravity. 

As for Pitt and Freeman, both do admirable jobs with their respective characters.  Freeman, in particular, does an outstanding job as Somerset.  Everyone knows he can deliver his lines with that god-like voice of his, but it is more his non-verbal work here that resonates.  When you are playing a man who is tired of the world it only makes sense that your character should appear physically and mentally drained—Somerset does. Perhaps it’s the way he carries Somerset or how he keeps his eyes and facial features in an almost constant state of underlying tension that makes me believe he has had enough of No-name city and the human race.  The look on his face when he opens up the box of vengeance (I won’t spoil it for those who haven’t seen the film) is priceless. 

My biggest complaint with Se7en is Gwyneth Paltrow as Mills’ wife Tracy.  While I know the character is necessary for plot reasons, Paltrow’s performance is just beyond boring.  Sure, her character is depressed about living on a subway line in a city where she doesn’t know anyone, but that doesn’t mean she has to be mind-numbingly tiring  to watch.  This role does not suit her at all and would have been better cast with the likes of Juliette Lewis or Marisa Tomei.  Oh, and to make things worse, it was on this film that Pitt and Paltrow became romantically involved, which resulted in more than 2-years of annoying gossip fodder. 

Overall, I think Se7en is a highly enjoyable psychological thriller.  It makes you really examine the world in which you live and contemplate how complicit you are in what is happening around you.  Plus, the ending is just beyond shocking and memorable. 

Read More

The Social Network (2010) ****

Rarely does a megalomaniac get their comeuppance at such an early age as does Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) in The Social Network (2010). Adapted from Ben Mezrich’s book The Accidental Billionaires, the film focuses on how Facebook was created and the lawsuits that followed.  It is a lacerating and ironic examination of the world in which we live today—Zuckerberg just serves as the unlikable whipping boy of an entire generation. 

The Internet has developed into an alternate reality for many people.  It is the place where anyone can seem interesting—especially those people who are socially awkward and personality-deprived.  It is the place where you can write on your blog that your now ex-girlfriend is a bitch and that she has small breasts.  It is the place where you can rate your fellow students and co-workers as “hot” or “not hot”.  It allows you to say whatever you want about someone without having to say it to their face.  It helps you make “friends” that you could never make in person. Quite simply, you could have the social skills of a paper bag and the personality of a megalomaniac and still found a billion dollar website about connecting with people.  Could anything be more ironic than this?

Yet, there is another, often overlooked, theme in this movie that screenwriter Aaron Sorkin focuses on: intellectual property theft. While Sorkin doesn’t delve into this as fully as he might have, it is still there.  While the whole debate about how much Zuckerberg appropriated from the Winklevoss twins (Armie Hammer) and Divya Narendra (Max Minghella) is examined in both Mezrich’s book and Sorkin’s screenplay, I believe there is an underlying critique of what the Internet has done to the integrity of intellectual property.  In cases like that of the Winklevoss twins you might have the original idea for something, but then someone can come along polish it up and then pass it off as their own and have no qualms about doing so because they believe they made it better.  It is sort of like this blog (and countless others) about the 1001 book.  Steven Jay Schneider and his fellow editors came up with the original idea, but other people have piggybacked off of it. Are we a society that lacks originality, or have we become a world comprised of adapters—as Sorkin himself is, by adapting a screenplay (an Oscar winning one by the way) from Mezrich’s book?  I often ponder this question—perhaps you should, too.

The reason I like The Social Network so much is because I think it is a brutal analysis of  what the Internet Age has done to society.  Still, a film like this would be nothing without a superb cast and production team.  While I think Eisenberg does a tremendous job of not turning Zuckerberg into a caricature, I found both Justin Timberlake and Andrew Garfield’s performances to be more compelling.  Timberlake plays Sean Parker with just the right amount of smarminess and manic-ness (the OED hasn’t made this a word yet, but they should).  I hated his character (I think that’s what Sorkin was going for), but loved how Timberlake made be loathe him. 

Garfield’s Eduardo is the most sympathetic character in the entire picture—of course, this could have had something to do with his serving as an adviser on Mezrich’s book.  Still, I thought Garfield played Eduardo as a young man caught in a bad situation quite well. He plays an often confounded grown-up in a quiet, somewhat restricted way, while Eisenberg gets free reign to turn Zuckerberg into one of the biggest asses ever. Garfield is often unjustly overlooked, but without him the film would have lost its moral compass.  I suppose the fact that my favorite scene in the entire movie is when Eduardo tells Zuckerberg and Parker that he won’t be pushed out willingly might make me biased towards him.  When he says to Zuckerberg: “You better lawyer up asshole, because I'm not coming back for 30%, I'm coming back for everything!” I felt that righteous indignation nudge that makes me identify with someone who has been wronged.  Plus, I absolutely loved how he made Sean Parker cower in fear when he pretended like he was going to hit him.  The best line in the entire film is when he says, “I like standing next to you, Sean. It makes me look so tough.” What a way to be thrown out of your own company!

Overall, The Social Network is a film that expertly represents the time period in which it was made.  It says something rather profound about the Internet Age and about the social network that has evolved from it. 

 

Read More