• star_wraith [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    So in that case the movie essentially makes the opposite point? The author wrote a satire but the movie goes all "yes but unironically"?

    • axont [she/her, comrade/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      No, I think the movie makes the same point but maybe there's some kind of mistranslation when it went to a visual medium. Because Brad Pitt is cool and handsome, so perhaps it's difficult to see he's presented as a weird fascist. I don't really know honestly. I saw the movie first and read the book later and they're essentially the same thing. The movie just has a particular aesthetic style and makes the characters seem cool. Perhaps the narrator (Norton's character) is portrayed more sympathetically too?

      The only difference in the plot from the book and the film are the narrator explicitly ends up in a psych ward at the end and project mayhem has been foiled. Although it perhaps hasn't been, because it's suggested the orderlies and nurses working at the psych ward are also project mayhem members who believe this is still part of some scheme. The film ends with project mayhem succeeding at blowing up all the corporate headquarters, but Tyler Durden has been exorcised.

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      No, the movie is still a scathing satire. They just cast Brad Pitt and Edward Norton, so everyone thought "Wow cool sexy guys doing cool sexy guy stuff", instead of focusing on how this dude starts a fascist death cult in the basement of a rotting abandoned house.