Why did this film's message not last? The new generation of millennials seem to be wannabe yuppies...

Why did this film's message not last? The new generation of millennials seem to be wannabe yuppies, and pissed/infuriated that they can't be yuppies. All they ever do is cry about baby boomers not allowing them to have that pathetic middle class life that Fight Club mocked. Didn't they take the lesson of this movie how all that is a dead end and that society sucks?

t. assblasted baby boomer

Yes goy, don't desire a better life for yourself. Be content with less.

Found yer problem

Not to mention that this message of yours is delivered by a schizophrenic that ends up shooting himself

because millennials are all too chickenshit to drop everything and join isis a cult to destroy credit card companies.

i thought the message is to live life the way you want and ignore the poseurs

You'd think modern millennials would relate with Tyler more.
Or did I watch the wrong movie?

Something about not joining the Manson Family 2.0?? Maybe a little something about the brutality of having an office job?

wow…….rly makes u think

You don't need computers and self-help seminars. You don't need prescription pills and kelp smoothies.
Be a man. Learn to use your fists. Turn off the tv and read. Learn to grow your own food, make your own clothes.
Oh, and self-improvement is masturbation.
BRAVO PALAHNIUK


lol fight club is shit unless you're 13 or zoe quinn

no

There are like three distinctly different things wrong with your post

so go live the rest of my days in the middle of the woods like a manly man?

i don't know i'm just saying fight club didn't know what it was saying

Palahniuk is a stupid cuck

Fight Club has no message

Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

I enjoy having money and the drugs, pussy, entertainment, and nice home it buys me. Fight Club does not speak to me.

Joe Rogan is the closest we have to a modern day Tyler Durden. Joe Rogan guides millions of men into his cult of thinking.

Joe Rogan is a faggot cuckold hypocrite with no spine, no accountability, and redefines the meaning of all bark and no bite.

There is also the little matter of 9\11 happening between the release of the movie/book and now.

A whole generation has gone and fought in at least two wars, blown shit up and fucked with people on a grand scale. When this came out Vietnam was the last big war the country had been in.

Our manhood was tested, and it passed. Fuck Palahniuk and his literal faggotry, he should well and truly have ridden the AIDS train by now.

People are dumb, short-sighted scum & 24/7 media propaganda simply works.

Fuck off nihilist.

Well they didn't even watch it for starters. The "You don't talk about fightclub" is more known it seems then the rest of the movie.

so the members of the fight club are losers?

Sucking the dick of globalist jewish bankers is now a test of manhood?

Yes, all losers.

...

Timothy McVeigh ruined it for everyone.

did he read the book? Was it that popular before the movie came out?

but capitalism is great, goy, dont you want to be a billionaire one day like everyone else? just work a little harder, it will trickle down!


if fight club is too deep for you, you may have a problem.

You arent yer fucking Kahakis, and you arent yer fuckin Jala-ha-peeno zesty mordant and yer definitely not your pepperonis


fuck off nigger, youre a faggot, pray the oligarchs that rule over you never make you fight a real foe you fucking rascal riding burger boy

Bet you didnt even serve or youre a pog ass remf, only a fucking civvie sounds off like this

I wouldn't even say 1% of the generation actually fought in either Iraq or Afghanistan. They were vastly different to WW1 & 2 where practically the entire stock of young men were sent to fight in those wars.

Today we're all faggot millennials that cry about how war is bad yet never experience it beyond our television. I like to think the reason people are pushing for increases in violent refugees, immigration and opposing violent retribution against terrorist sympathisers is the unconscious of our generation wants to suffer.

Tumblr learned the lesson too well.

It hasn't aged well because Palahniuk is absolutely incapable of tact or subtlety; if you want any kind of a moral or message from him, it needs to be incredibly exaggerated and slammed into your head repeatedly. That, and it isn't helped by the fact he wrote it when he was struggling with being gay and being a total edgelord cause the last book he tried to get published was considered too graphic to sell.

He's a decent author who writes some weird shit that can be pretty entertaining. But his books and films don't age well cause it's just mainstream bizarro fiction by another name, and bizarro is not a place to look for high quality writing or morals.

Nihilism is easy to start but hard to finish

I don't think you were supposed to look at any of it as an instruction manual.

just imagine modern millenials trying to carry out any physical activity. that's why.

It wasn't supposed to say that Tyler's lifestyle and message was right. It looks appealing at first (especially to it's original audience who could probably relate a lot more with the protag than people nowadays) but as the film goes on it's shown that it's basically just the extreme opposite of the Narrator's lifestyle and just as bad. The message isn't to be like Tyler or the Narrator, it's to be like a blend of the two. That either extremes are unhealthy and are going to fuck you up.

Wasn't that part of the point?

this aint kino its for commie goons

...

That wasn't the message. The message was that everything falls apart and we're all trying to keep together a society that is fucking corrupted by commercial feminist Jew materialism.

"You just had a near life experience"

"What do you wish you would of done before you die"

Debt = Jew World Order's power

The entire description of Tyler's dream, drying the deer meat on the former super highways that men caught themselves. It was a return to society before the invention of the UNDERMAN


I don't know if Chuck new what he was writing being a gay (somewhat anarchist) guy. But he essentially created a story about Nietzsche's Overman.


That's why Rupert Murdock fired the head of FOX movies for greenlighting it. Because it was a dangerous film. Not some punk rock anti-society Leftist bullshit


It's literally a story about "facing the Abyss" and seeing yourself

Back to 4chan kid. You've learned nothing

See:

American culture is western culture

...

That is a whole lot of gay shit you just wrote

Whose music, movies and pop icons do your kids consume again?

I'm not European.

The ones created and peddled by Jewish executives.

...

There is a problem with this, but not the problem you have perceived. The problem with the current young adult generation is that if they have a problem or lack something that they want, they bitch and whine about it and blame that people that already have it, rather than actually doing something about it themselves.

What's that? The people that are doing something with their lives and achieving their goals actually managed to obtain what you wanted? Clearly this is the fault of the government/patriarchy/discrimination.

I bet people haven't felt this kind of disdain for their own generation's degeneracy since the 60s.

but there's nothing better about it, you're just another boring yuppie wannabe

I grew up dirt poor and now I am moderately successful. I enjoy upward mobility and the lifestyle I can now afford very much in comparison to what I had. I politely disagree with your statement.

No, he read the Turner Diaries. Previous user's message was a sly joke.

Is that you in the picture? You look cute.

loser detected

nonwhite can't read either it seems

oh okay then.

weed dude bro is a colossal faggot

Because being poor sucks ass?

Says the neet drone living off autismbucks who without society would be killed/raped

that's a high level of projection right there bud

...

Joe Rogan, not Seth Rogen

lolmad

DUDE DEPRIVATION TANKS LMAO

I remember an episode of Dirty Jobs where he was making soap out of goats milk with a qt3.14 woman.
Project Mayhem is impossible when you have that many goats.

Shills on 4/tv/ convinced everyone to not take it seriously. The trend continues here.

But the point is he leaves emptiness for extremism. Embracing commercialism and material goods is flawed life, and so is embracing nihilism like our charter does. In the end he never manages to live a healthy balanced life and thats the entire point.

Edward Norton mentioned back when it came out that he was actually really surprised at how much negative reaction towards the film and accusations of it being "fascist" or "misogynistic" or "too violent" came mostly from the Left, calling their attitude very "regressive". And the film is probably more relevant now that kids growing up in the 90's era of Captain Planet style political correctness and being told by their teachers they can be anything they put their minds to are getting older and now that feminism is waging a more explicit war against masculinity


The message of the movie is one of extremes. The main character is a yuppie loser who spends more money on useless shit for his apartment than he does even on fucking food, the most basic thing for human survival, because his life is so empty and pathetic that he can do nothing but masturbate to some awesome new hipster rainforest protection agency certified certified coffee table made out of 100% recycled wood.

The narrator creates a figment of his imagination and an alternate identity named "Tyler Durden", who appears to him as a projection of what he wishes he was like. For the narrator, who looks like the kinda guy who probably had a Huey Lewis album in his condo before he blew it up, Tyler is basically the punk rocker or greaser flip-side of his personality.

Eventually, the narrator and his new best "friend" Tyler start Fight Club using many of the same tactics as the therapy groups the narrator had been crashing for over a year to lure in groups of men who are products of the post-Vietnam War era of consumerism, feminism, political correctness and, at least in the narrator's case, paternal abandonment and single mother households who feel as if their manhood is being repressed or even forcibly removed by the corporatist society around them. Fight Club becomes a way for these men to bond in a much more explicitly masculine manner and to experience a cathartic sense of release as they indulge in a mutual act of self-destruction that stems from their nihilistic frustrations. As Tyler puts it at the film's midway point "we have no great war, no great depression" and "we've all been raised by tv telling us we're all gonna be movie gods, millionaires and rockstars, but we won't." Tyler turns Fight Club into Project Mayhem, a terrorist operation for the purpose of turning the members of Fight Club who've come to idolize him for the "gift" he's given them into "space monkeys" who will force his radical anarcho-primitivist vision on the world in the name of "freedom" regardless of whether they ask for it or what the ultimate price is.

The film doesn't really tell you what to think, but puts the material there for you to figure out for yourself, while offering a bit of a cautionary warning about going too far in any one direction. The narrator at the beginning of the film represents one extreme and Tyler represents another you should avoid. But what is the proper middle ground? That's for you the viewer to really figure out.

Fight club is just masturbatory nihilism, claiming men are just niggers who want to hit things.

Men are not beings of violence, but heritage. A true man appreciates the identity of his culture, the traditions of his people, the religion of his fathers, the foods of his mother.

This movie doesn't give a man a past to be proud of, or ancestors to strive for. It's just an empty life, saying that a man is just a pit bull.

People rejected it because it doesn't provide anything but a vague, foolish idea that violence is some cornerstone of humanity.

spoken like a true cuck

I chuckled.

Because it didn't predict the demographic and racial/cultural/ethnic lines that would split this society and would eclipse the materialism argument that Boomers through Gen X were lucky enough to be the primary concern in their lives

I wish there more filmic, novelistic, and comedian equivalents of MDE

There is plenty enough to go around, but the rich hoard & waste it all, and trying to attack the rich means attacking the state & getting slaughtered. Something like Project Mayhem IRL would just get infiltrated & busted by the feds like OWS or the WU or DeepArcher.
Capitalism is a bully that doesn't relent when you stand up to him, he just hires someone to fucking kill you b/c he knows he owns the world.

artificial distinctions spread by the MSM to divide & conquer you. one of the messages in the movie in fact.

lol

did you forget to post your ebin porky maymay? : ^ )

sigh.

yeah the massive rapes, language barriers, religious suspicion among your neighbors, social balkanization and isolation. all fake

talk to me when you've actually worked and lived in the real world and lived on your own for a while.

If you come from a multi culti city or town I feel sorry for you son, cause that's not how things are everywhere, and it's ot how it's supposed to be. I know a whtie guy who grew up poor and i think he was normalized to it, perhaps broken for life.

#killallmen


that's not really how money works


State capitalism, sure. Which is pretty much what the left these days seems to want. Proper free market capitalist principles in action would result in multiple currencies and a greater ratio of small local businesses to big global ones. This is not conducive to the progressive social ideas of the left as if you had a bonafide free market, then people could still refuse service to people of color without getting sued if they wanted to. Nor is it conducive to the goals of those who are interested in creating a kind of utopian Star Trek Federation of every nation on the planet as you can't have globalism if there is too much competition of interests. Corporate entities fund globalist projects because it offers a potential way out of free market competition. That's why nations that had freer markets at home were usually the ones who colonized the most foreign countries as governments in these countries had more resources to pull from (as a result of the prosperity brought by capitalism) and corporate entities would make deals with said government to monopolize the local industries in foreign companies they otherwise couldn't monopolize as easily at home. This usually is done at the expense of local cottage industries which aren't as developed as those industries in the homeland which can more effectively fight attempts at monopolization by appeal to the values of private property or free enterprise and by simply flexing their muscles.

most of the great civilizations of the world have been "multicultural" in some sense. Even England once had many more dialects or accents of English in the middle ages than it does today with greater urbanization and greater centralization of power. Catholicism was the uniting power of Europe for centuries, bringing together all kinds of different tribes and races and giving them a common religious doctrine, a common goal and a common tongue. Islam more or less did that for the Near East. Orthodoxy bound the different factions of Russia and Confucianism was the cultural zeitgeist of the far east, permeating Taoism, Buddhism & Chinese folk religion equally.

The difference between this kind of multiculturalism and the modern kind Holla Forums is bitching about is that this was a multiculturalism that was brought about a common belief in a higher idea that transcended normative divisions, but at the same time did not actively seek the destruction of individual tribal or cultural identities, provided people accepted a very simple set of common moral and theological creeds. Also, while tribes have always mixed with one another as a way of sealing economic or military alliances, tribes were headed by patriarchs who had a greater say over who their children or tribesmen ultimately married and tribes themselves even as they allowed themselves to come under the umbrella of greater empires, worked tirelessly to always maintain a certain level of self-reliance and independence. This allowed tribes to selectively breed with other tribes, while preserving their cultural character or tradition and sense of lineage, even as they began to include other races or wed certain members of their tribe off to notable persons of other tribes. Aristocrats also made sure to breed only with select individuals if not of the same tribe than at least of the same class to keep their wealth in that immediate family. And really a lot of times it was sufficient that aristocrats mixed to maintain peace between otherwise autonomous races & tribes. And even if tribes never mixed in any meaningful capacity, they were generally united by some kind of religion, which was also sufficient. Egypt has been conquered by several nations, adopting languages and religious beliefs of the conquerors, but genetically the country is hardly Arab or Greek or anything other than Egyptian at all and yet the oldest cities of Egypt showcase the architecture of several great civilizations.

This is something more and more absent in the modern world. Our "multiculturalism" isn't really multiculturalism at all, it's a superficial diversity and set of pseudo-religious codes that clothes the fact that the color of the great civilizations of the world is gradually turning into a grey mush.

what is the source of this bout of effortposting?

Stay assmad, edgelord

Go read a book bigger

that's a giant wall of text to basically say modern multicult is multiracialism and sinking to the lowest common denominator

1) Because it's a fucking movie
2) Because, believe it or not, not everyone actually watched the fucking movie
3) Because, believe it or not, not everyone understood the point of the fucking movie. As evidenced by the fact that they actually made a beat 'em up game out of it

I had no idea they did this. Is it any good?

Okay, men are not beings of violence. We just have teeth for tearing flesh, hands for holding weapons and powerful muscles to punch shit.

found the nu-male

who is this fluid druid

The act of fighting/violence is one of the most primal acts of masculinity there is and is one of the most fundamental things that binds all men together regardless of religion, race, or class as men. There's nothing morally good or bad about violence in and of itself. And unlike women, our bodies are more naturally built for it.

Fighting, whether it's against nature or against other men in order to obtain food, resources and women, is something we as men have done for thousands, even millions of years. And it was a primary means that men used as a means of establishing hierarchy among themselves as men struggled for survival in a harsh world.

It has always been in WOMEN'S interest to coax men away from a more wild life of wandering and fighting where his primal urges are most satisfied and to encourage him to "settle down" and make her and her children the center of his attention cause this suits her interests. The difference between the past and now though is that in the past, even as men settled down for the sake of their women, life still had its challenges that tested the primal strengths of men as they were when they were still hunters. Now, men are as big of "nesters" as women and plagued by idleness.


the movie is about a generation of men raised mostly by women as their fathers abandoned or neglected them, you dumbass. Everyone knows that single mother raised children are more aggressive and emotionally troubled on average. And it's also a fact that children raised without fathers often struggle with a belief in God, or at least an all powerful, masculine one, which is why Tyler goes on a rant about how their fathers were "our models for God", and if they can get by without their deadbeat dads, then surely they don't need God and God, like their fathers, probably never wanted them or hates them if he does exist.


That's kinda the point of the movie. These are men who find the superficial demands of modern society and find the "you can be anything you want, even an astronaut" shit they're instilled as kids (which only ever ends in disappointment) to be oppressive and find "freedom" in self-destruction and in the indulgence in primal masculine activity which modern liberal cucks tell them is wrong. There's a reason the narrator said out of all the historical figures he could fight, he'd fight fucking Gandhi. Because Gandhi is the poster boy for "passive resistance" and is often invoked by modern liberals to tell people why violence is NEVER the answer, which for the narrator just seems like bullshit used to deprive men of their most basic masculine function and turn them into slaves to IKEA.

found the feminist

This guy gets it, and I don't understand why so many people don't get it, when it's spelled out very clearly in the movie's dialogue.

People are dumb user

Why live?

No

Overrated tarsh

All these fags ITT shoving their beliefs in the movie just shows that it has no message, but you morons want it so bad to have one.

Yeah, but this dumb?
I mean, god damn.

It's a movie for nerdy white men.