One of the rules of Fight Club is that shirts are not worn during the fights. Yet, Bob keeps his shirt on.

Wouldn't you bend that rule for him?

Well, *I* wasn't wild about seeing him with his shirt off. But the impression I got throughout the movie is that the Fight Club members don't bend the rules for anyone.

It's not just an aesthetic matter. If Bob wasn't wearing a shirt, he'd be at a considerable disadvantage in the fight.

But they weren't fighting to win fights. They were fighting *to* fight. And, again, the club members gave me the impression that the rules were absolutely sacred and never broken. (Although they did bend the first two rules about not talking about Fight Club.)

I have yet to watch another movie since this one in which I failed to notice the "cigarette burns" in the corner of the screen.

AUGH!

What is even worse than noticing the cigarette burns is being able to hear the projectors switch.

You would think theaters would get with technology, DVD's can easily be projected on a theater screen. The images are sharper, the sound cleaner, and the disks are much more manageable. Since new theaters seem to be built about every week (at least in our area) hardware costs would not be too prohibitive either.
The only reason they do not that I can see, is the possibility that a DVD format would be too easy to steal and replicate. Still, I have to wonder why the industry still uses huge, clunky film reels.
. . .Not that this really has anything to do with "Fight Club" . . .

The reason is that celluloid is simply BETTER on a large screen. It's unparalleled for the blackness of its blacks and whiteness of its whites. So far, anyway.

I myself still love the sound and look or actual projected films. It doesn't compare to a digital projectors and DVDs. It loses something.

But I'm sure some people say that about record players as well.

What a film.Such great performances, great music, and some of the funniest lines ever put to paper.I realise that people don't automatically view this as a comedy, but it is ,in parts, one of the funniest films I've seen in a while.My main nit is this; I'm fairly sure that Angel Face (the blondie guy whom Ed Norton pulps) is played by a completely different actor post-attack.Can anyone else confirm or deny this?

What a film.Such great performances, great music, and some of the funniest lines ever put to paper.I realise that people don't automatically view this as a comedy, but it is ,in parts, one of the funniest films I've seen in a while.My main nit is this; I'm fairly sure that Angel Face (the blondie guy whom Ed Norton pulps) is played by a completely different actor post-attack.Can anyone else confirm or deny this?
And I would just like to add that the twist completely caught me by surprise.Which is the way I like it.

I'm pretty sure it is the guy playing angelface post-attack under all that makeup.

btw, the DVD set for this movie is spectacular!

I was surprised at how funny the first half of this film was...then I spent the second half going, "HUH?!" and then loving the (very) end.
I think Jared Leto played "Angel face" through the whole thing, with a real nasty makeup job after Norton scrambled his eggs.

Yeah, angelface's makeup was great. Made me cringe every time they showed it.

According to the commentary they originally invisioned a topless Bob appliance, ala The Santa Clause or something similar but, it would have been to complex, costly, and revolting.

please translate...
(what is a "topless Bob appliance")?

Bob had breasts because he had his testicles removed and he got too much testosterone (sp?) in injections and his body uped the estrogen. So he has breasts.

I'm glad he kept his shirt on.

a "topless Bob appliance" would be a huge set of rubber breasts glued to Meatloaf's chest so he would look very busty. And I guess it is best left to the imagination what that would look like.

no kidding. thanks for the mental picture, though....(choke)

Does anyone know the name of the piece of music that plays when the guys are carrying out their first homework assignment to start a fight with a stranger and lose?It's a weird quirky little piece.....

What is even worse than noticing the cigarette burns is being able to hear the projectors switch.

Actualy you can't hear the switch because modern projectors don't switch. Ever since the 1960s people have used a plater system where after the reels are delivered to the theater the projectionist splices them all together ontop of a round plater that is about the size of a kitchen table, so once the movie is started it will run all the way through with no problems, hopefully. The cigarette burns are still their because it is a standard; but the only theater I have ever heard of still using having reel to reel projectors is the high Museam of art here in Atlanta because they use donated 50 year old equiptment.

The sound you sometimes hear after the burn is a disruption in the soundtrack that the splicing tape can cause.

BTW no movie that features a projection booth has ever showed modern plater projection systems, which makes it quite hard to explain to a coustomer why we can't back the movie up a few minutes (platers must be run all the way through) they figure we have reel to reels like in Last Action Hero.

You would think theaters would get with technology, DVD's can easily be projected on a theater screen. The images are sharper, the sound cleaner, and the disks are much more manageable. Since new theaters seem to be built about every week (at least in our area) hardware costs would not be too prohibitive either.
The only reason they do not that I can see, is the possibility that a DVD format would be too easy to steal and replicate. Still, I have to wonder why the industry still uses huge, clunky film reels.

When I worked at a theater me any my buddies hauled the video projector that we used to show tailers in the lobbie over to an audotorium and watched some of my DVDs on the big screen and the picture quality was notacable less than a good 35mm print. Movies like Terminator 2 transfered their digital effects to film at about 2000x4000 pixles DVD standard is 960x540 HDTV is shot at 1920x1080. The biggest hurtle for digital projection is color rendition. Digital projectors don't have the same color richness as 35mm when projected at real time (24 frames per second). Movies with digital effects are scaned and outputed at a slower rate than 24fps to capture more detail. George Lucas is using the most advanced digital cameras in the world for EPII and claims that you can't tell it from film, I for one can't wait to see if this is true.

Why is this movie categorized under Action? It's more of Drama/Comedy/Suspense. Comedy because of the elements that have dark hues of subtle humor. For example, despite having watched this movie over thirty times and owning the DVD, I still chuckle over Jack's (Edward Norton) reply to Marla when she contacts him by telephone and lets slip how she took Xanox. She's confessing this suicide attempt to him and Jack retorts deadpan-style, "So you're staying in tonight."

The book's not entirely paramount, but it is better. I recommend to anyone interested to scope out the website chuckpalahniuk.net and namely its forum.

I agree. It's more of psychological thriller.

It's been mentioned above, but just to reiterate:

Just like with still film/digital applications, there's a big difference in the look of DVD and the look of film. There are some new DVD formats still being worked out, but for big screen projection, I don't think a digital disc will be better any time soon.

One nit that occurs when the Narrator (Jack) and Bob fight. At one point, Bob has pinned the Narrator down. We see this from above and behind Bob. Look carefully at Bob's T-shirt. The printing is backwards. And when Jack raises his hand, we see it's the right hand that's bandaged. However, elsewhere in the film, it's the left one that's bandaged. Obviously, for whatever reason, this shot was put in backwards.

"I like to watch." - Chauncey Gardiner