Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://chuckpalahniuk.net/books/fight-club-2


That's right. Chuck Palahniuk is working on a sequel to his arguably greatest work, Fight Club

Unlike most other authors who announce sequels, this one I'm looking forward to (now that we know he's working on one) because, as his past work has indicated, he doesn't take no crap from any publishers, writes what he wants, as he wants it and lets us, the reader decide whether its good or not....

Also, can't wait for the "critics" to get hold of it... The feminist butthurt will be especially funny.

Was the first book any good? I didn't really care for the movie version.

 jasper76 wrote:
Was the first book any good? I didn't really care for the movie version.

Heresy!

Watch that movie again!

Preferably with copious amount of alcohol too!

 whembly wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
Was the first book any good? I didn't really care for the movie version.

Heresy!

Watch that movie again!

Preferably with copious amount of alcohol too!

The movie gets worse the more times you watch it, not better.

Yeah, I watched it and thought it was boring the first time in the theatre. Since it was so highly acclaimed I tried watching it again not long ago, but my impression did not improve. I think the biggest problems with the movie are Ed Norton and Brad Pitt...with better casting choices I think it could have been a good movie.

But regardless of that I can see how it might be a good book.

Both of you need to report to the nearest bar and turn in your Man Cards... theyre both revoked


And yeah... the book is, in many ways, better than the film.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Both of you need to report to the nearest bar and turn in your Man Cards... theyre both revoked

Just an FYI, they take that away from you when you get married anyways, so no harm no foul.

Should go without saying, but the book is much better.

As to the movie, it's why I recommended copious amount of alcohol. Did you miss that?

Drinking copious amounts of alcohol makes me want to do alot of things, but sitting down and watching a movie is not among them.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
Was the first book any good? I didn't really care for the movie version.

Heresy!

Watch that movie again!

Preferably with copious amount of alcohol too!

The movie gets worse the more times you watch it, not better.

It's a good movie to watch once or twice. The problem comes when you're stuck with people who've just hit college age and swear it's the greatest film ever made and you see it on everywhere all the time because these people haven't actually seen a good movie in their lives up until then. Of course, this is the deepest film they've ever seen, which means of course it's the deepest film ever made. These young cinophiles are also the same kind of people who get uncomfortable watching a movie made before 1990.

For the last film in my film studies class, our proff let us vote on which film we'd watch/discuss. It had to be fething Fight Club.

 Fafnir wrote:


It's a good movie to watch once or twice. The problem comes when you're stuck with people who've just hit college age and swear it's the greatest film ever made and you see it on everywhere all the time because these people haven't actually seen a good movie in their lives up until then. Of course, this is the deepest film they've ever seen, which means of course it's the deepest film ever made. These young cinophiles are also the same kind of people who get uncomfortable watching a movie made before 1990.

For the last film in my film studies class, our proff let us vote on which film we'd watch/discuss. It had to be fething Fight Club.

Lol, if this is really the case, then why are there guys who've "been around the block" a bit who still enjoy it? As with most movies, I'd say this one is as deep or as shallow as the viewer wishes to make it. And this is evidenced by the hundreds or thousands of blogs on this one movie alone... Some people have called it a mere satire film, some have called it an attack on feminism, an attack on consumerism, etc.

Deepest film ever?? Nah.. but most films that I've seen that have gotten that particular moniker are boring as feth. (see here, The Seventh Seal, and City of Lost Children)

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Deepest film ever?? Nah.. but most films that I've seen that have gotten that particular moniker are boring as feth. (see here, The Seventh Seal, and City of Lost Children)

And you have the gall to criticize us for not liking freaking Fight Club?

Those are both amazing films, IMO. They actually make you feel and think. I've yet to meet anyone not utterly affected by City of Lost Children.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Deepest film ever?? Nah.. but most films that I've seen that have gotten that particular moniker are boring as feth. (see here, The Seventh Seal, and City of Lost Children)

And you have the gall to criticize us for not liking freaking Fight Club?

Those are both amazing films, IMO. They actually make you feel and think. I've yet to meet anyone not utterly affected by City of Lost Children.

I didn't like City of Lost Children... So there's that. And while I enjoyed watching the Seventh Seal the first time, it left me with no real desire to watch it again. As in, I felt there was no further meaning that could be gleaned from further viewings. As a cinema guy, I do enjoy a ton of movies. I don't often going into older films saying, "ya know, I really want to watch a deep, philosphical story today", which isn't to say that watching something like Ben-Hur doesn't have some deeper meaning that could be gathered, just that it wasn't the primary intent of that film.

Dude... as sequels goes... most sux.

But, fething The Raid 2 rocked my world.

 whembly wrote:
Dude... as sequels goes... most sux.

But, fething The Raid 2 rocked my world.

Well consider the first film there wasn't really any way it could be worse

 LordofHats wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Dude... as sequels goes... most sux.

But, fething The Raid 2 rocked my world.

Well consider the first film there wasn't really any way it could be worse

Hey! The first one wasn't bad!

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
I didn't like City of Lost Children...

I never said liked. I said affected by. I'm the only person I know who's been willing to sit through it more than once. Parts of it are so depressing, most people can't stand to see it more than once.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:


It's a good movie to watch once or twice. The problem comes when you're stuck with people who've just hit college age and swear it's the greatest film ever made and you see it on everywhere all the time because these people haven't actually seen a good movie in their lives up until then. Of course, this is the deepest film they've ever seen, which means of course it's the deepest film ever made. These young cinophiles are also the same kind of people who get uncomfortable watching a movie made before 1990.

For the last film in my film studies class, our proff let us vote on which film we'd watch/discuss. It had to be fething Fight Club.

Lol, if this is really the case, then why are there guys who've "been around the block" a bit who still enjoy it?

Because even if I hate watching it thanks to excessive overexposure to it, it's still a good movie. Not the kind of film that would belong on any top 10 lists, but still a well made movie with interesting themes and ideas.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
I didn't like City of Lost Children...

I never said liked. I said affected by. I'm the only person I know who's been willing to sit through it more than once. Parts of it are so depressing, most people can't stand to see it more than once.

Sounds kind of like my experience with Salo.

Fight Club is great if you also like to live on the border between anarchist and libertarian.

Gotta say, having read the book and seen the movie, I think I'll pass on this.

Gonna echo the other sentiments here that Fight Club is one of those things that is way cooler when you have not had time to refine and develop your tastes. It's not a BAD movie, far from it, but it is hardly the great work that some make it out to be. The book is better, imo, but mostly because it has more room to develop the characters which actually improves the overall product.

But overall, I give it an "okay". You don't need to tie me down to watch it, but there's lots of other films I'd rather watch that are deeper and more meaningful. Fight Club also suffers from overenthusastic fans who tout it as something it is not. It's kind of a first step into deeper films, it's the shallow end of deep, so to speak. The problem is that most people never go PAST that shallow end.

I've found that is a decent enough movie but that some of its adherents are problematic to say the least. The other problem is that somehow its reputation is much greater than it is, so people go in having been over-hyped and come out disappointed.

 Ahtman wrote:
I've found that is a decent enough movie but that some of its adherents are problematic to say the least. The other problem is that somehow its reputation is much greater than it is, so people go in having been over-hyped and come out disappointed.

I'd agree with this.

Fight Club is not that bad of a movie. It's not that GREAT either. It's a fairly decent work overall, but it has problems in its fanbase overvaluing it.

 curran12 wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
I've found that is a decent enough movie but that some of its adherents are problematic to say the least. The other problem is that somehow its reputation is much greater than it is, so people go in having been over-hyped and come out disappointed.

I'd agree with this.

Fight Club is not that bad of a movie. It's not that GREAT either. It's a fairly decent work overall, but it has problems in its fanbase overvaluing it.

I'd agree with that, too.

 Ahtman wrote:
I've found that is a decent enough movie but that some of its adherents are problematic to say the least. The other problem is that somehow its reputation is much greater than it is, so people go in having been over-hyped and come out disappointed.

Ironically, I feel the same about Firefly.


Speaking of irony, it does seem as though FC, more so than many movies that have gained a cult following has a form of irony that is completely lost on many of those most verbal/ PR driven fans (the ones who over-hype it)

Speaking as one who actually does love the book/movie for what it is (I'll be honest, when I first saw it, I probably was one to over-hype the movie), I think it'll be interesting to see where Chuck takes the story, since it is apparently set to take place about 10-15 years after the first book/movie did.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
I've found that is a decent enough movie but that some of its adherents are problematic to say the least. The other problem is that somehow its reputation is much greater than it is, so people go in having been over-hyped and come out disappointed.

Ironically, I feel the same about Firefly.

Me, too.

Again, it's one of those that I've seen way too many times now to want to see it.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
I've found that is a decent enough movie but that some of its adherents are problematic to say the least. The other problem is that somehow its reputation is much greater than it is, so people go in having been over-hyped and come out disappointed.

Ironically, I feel the same about Firefly.

Me, too.

Again, it's one of those that I've seen way too many times now to want to see it.

Well the difference is that FC is decent enough

Firefly is just a repackaged Buffy with half the charm and none of the substance

So, this will be a graphic novel - spread over 10 issues?

Could be fun.

 Mr. Burning wrote:
So, this will be a graphic novel - spread over 10 issues?

Could be fun.

Yep, IIRC Dark Horse Comics will be publishing... Which means I'm completely unfamiliar with the artists, but from the pictures that have been released to this point, the style seems pretty neat.

But is it the sequel we deserve?

I was hoping to see news of American Psycho 2 or something.

Fight Club? Eh...