It is quite interesting how many great movies were released in the late 1990s. I do not think that this has much to do with my age as people as well as critics of various generations have praised movies like American Beauty, The Matrix, Fight Club, or The Truman Show. Perhaps one could add Eyes Wide Shut to the list, but Scorsese has produced great movies all throughout their career whereas the aforementioned movies were arguably the high points in the career of their respective directors. Yet, as you age and become more educated, you tend to view products you enjoyed or thought were valuable for your personal development in a much different light.
As I rewatched Fight Club, the main message of the movie was just as powerful to me as it had been two decades prior. As a youngling, though, I found the soundtrack more riveting and somehow considered the Jewish actress Helena Bonham Carter in this movie very attractive. This is what VHS video quality does to you because in HD she looks like a total crack whore, similar to how porn starts of yore look better in SD. What also surprised me was the amount of subversive elements I noticed in this movie, none of which made it better. Arguably, the inclusion of these elements made it worse, and they also limited the commercial appeal. Similar to how interracial and bisexual porn gets produced even though it is not commercially viable, because some people in the background want this garbage to be produced, so did the men behind the curtain add elements to Fight Club that did not make it a better movie and limited its reach.
There are several elements in Fight Club that add absolutely nothing to the movie:
– Excessive violence at a shock factor hitherto not seen in a mainstream release. This includes a gruesome detailed shot of an attempted suicide with a gun.
– Full frontal female nudity that adds nothing to the story
– Full frontal male nudity, with a penis in the center, as some kind of “joke”
– The movie making fun of Catholicism
The first three points are pretty self-explanatory. On the other hand, the movie’s very negative depiction of Catholicism as a joke is something that may completely fly by you if you to not want to look behind the surface. The context is that the main protagonist gives his acolytes the homework task to start a fight with a random person. As the narrator, he tells you that this is a lot harder than it sounds. For some strange reason, a priest, recognizable by his attire, is depicted as having pent up aggression. The guy is scrawny, yet, upon having been sprayed on with water, quickly loses his composure and hits first. He drops the Bible, just so that it ends up in a spot where it gets hosed.
It surely is a complete coincidence that the aforementioned scene made it into the movie. After all, it added nothing to the story. Probably it slipped past quality control. It is absolutely inconceivable that it was included upon the insistence of some shadowy figures, after all. The same is true for the absolutely disgusting levels of violence in this movie. People were just asleep. It had nothing to do with wanting to push any boundaries. Surely, instead of a priest, we could just as well have seen a rabbi with a torah in that scene, right?
Who am I kidding? Movies are used for pushing an agenda, and this happens across all genres and budget levels. Fight Club was used by social engineers to push excessive violence, trying to normalize it, and the supposedly humorous inclusion of a cock smack in the center of the screen for a second or two serves the same purpose. I cannot even remember having been exposed to naked male genitalia in any mainstream movie release before, but there is a first time for everything, right? This is clearly progress for the progressive agenda.
Fast forward two decades, and gratuitous violence does not cut it anymore. The current frontier is the sexualization of children. You can probably write a history of Hollywood as a vehicle for destroying a society’s morals. From this angle, Fight Club appears in a much different light. Sure, you can say that it is a movie pandering to the sensibilities of men. Hollywood gave you that, but they served this message with a side of rather shocking cultural subversion.