Page 1 of 7
Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2008 5:45 am
Any fans here?
Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2008 10:29 pm
What male person isn't?
We don't even need to discuss.
Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 3:10 am
Yeah, i seen fight club like 20 times. So, you know the first rule about fight club.
Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:18 am
I'm sad that this so quickly digressed into "I seen the movie, hyuk!"
What I love even more is when people who are really into UFC and the like say things like "That's my favourite movie!" Also the video game. Also the critics who focus on the violence of the movie like it is a movie about fighting. Those people, well they missed the point. Totally.
Fight Club isn't even close to Palahniuk's best. I've read Lullabye, Choke, Survivor, Rant and Fight Club thus far. And Fight Club probably ranks under all but Choke.
But that might be because I like the movie far better than the book (and it is still a great book). It just took the book, made it more coherent, and made the messages more clear. How often can you say that?
I also understand the comment about "what male isn't?"
On the other hand, how many males do you know that actually read unless dictated to them by their scholarly institution? I'm not saying there are none, I just don't think it was as simple a question as you made it out to be.
And frankly I know several male friends (who do read) who wouldn't have known about (or at least had read anything by) Chuck Palahniuk other than his relation to the movie.
That said, I do like the comment. He does really appeal to the male psyche. Particularly Choke, Fight Club and Rant (not as much, or not as focussed on, in Lullabye and Survivor).
More important is his tapping into the post-modern psyche. But that is a much longer discussion.
My personal favourite thusfar is Rant. Man, so much to love, it is my favourite piece of fiction. Really interesting literary style (particularly for fiction), with some fantastic imagery and plot.
Survivor is fantastic too. I really want them to make a movie of this one. Helena Bonham Carter would be perfect for Fertility, and I would still probably cast her, but to see the same actor in two Palahniuk films would be somewhat disappointing (and rather telling about Palahniuk's view of women, methinks).
Lullabye is great. The most plot-driven (rather than character driven) book of his that I've read. Thus the most easily adapted to film, yet I have no desire to see it made into one.
Choke isn't very good, in my opinion. Some weak writing and hurried points that are not great. It is being released soon, I believe, with Sam Rockwell as the lead, which is a great casting choice.
Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:29 am
I didn't know who Chuck Palahniuk was, but I'm not a man for another 4 days anyways.*
*I'm turning 18, not getting a sex change.
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 3:23 pm
I picked up Rant last week, it better be damn good. Although I've been meaning to read one of his books for a pretty long time, I just never go around to it.
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2008 7:43 am
So I finished Rant quite awhile ago, and I have to say...it was strange. But everytime there is a wreck on the opposite side of the road or a wreck that has been cleared off the road I can't help but mutter "We know why your rubberneck..."
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:04 pm
His other books are a little less strange... kind of. Rant is a little more strange in every way (in literary style to characters, to the fact that is kind of a pseudo-sci-fi). The other ones that I've read are still strange, granted, but a little more based in traditional literary style, and a little more based in the real world
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2008 8:58 pm
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 4:54 am
Thank you. I read that a while back, and was talking to a friend about it, but lost the link.
It is pretty good. He strikes some interesting similarities. I would have appreciated it more if it was less "Tyler=Hobbes" and more pulling out the similarities without equating the two. Because by equating them, he definitely made some pretty big leaps.
I also would've appreciated a more scholarly approach (basically, if it felt less like it was written by an opinionated Grade 9 kid).
Actually, these two complaints are pretty much the same.
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:03 am
Oh I understand and I agree. But I loved the fact that he actually made a comparison. Bill Watterson needs more love.
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:28 am
Lottel wrote:Oh I understand and I agree. But I loved the fact that he actually made a comparison. Bill Watterson needs more love.
And a completely valid comparison. I'll keep my diatribe short*, but Calvin and Hobbes was one of the very few postmodern successful print comics. Most other print comics are trite and repetitive. C&H had wonderful fun at poking fun at "modern" ideas, while remaining accessible (Doonesbury might've been the former, but certainly wasn't the latter).
And Fight Club is pretty much the posterchild for postmodernity for me.
*I did a presentation/paper in a university pop culture class on webcomic/comics and comparisons and the like.
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:39 pm
See, I've been saying that for years and if you have a copy of that paper still, I would like to read it.
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:54 pm
Lottel wrote:See, I've been saying that for years and if you have a copy of that paper still, I would like to read it.
I do have a copy, I think, but only a hard copy. My computer went kablooie about 2 years ago, and I lost all of my files.
And the paper didn't delve into C&H specifically very often (though we did quote Watterson considerably on the topic), but we did spark considerable conversation about the nature of different comics, with much time spent on C&H.
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 9:13 pm
As well it should have been. Mr. Watterson was a smart man, not only with his comic but because of quitting when he did. I applaud him for that decision and I am happy he has not made more. Now if he would make a different comic after all these years...
Ok then. If you ever get a virtual copy up and running, I DEMAND a copy. I mean, humbly request.