Fight all men’s club. The club has a

is a thrilling and captivating film, with some very interesting plot twists,
which will keep you hooked until the very end. Edward Norton stars as the
un-named protagonist, whom suffers from multiple mental health issues and Brad
Pitt stars as his unlikely best friend, after the two meet on a plane. After
their unlikely bond is formed, the pair soon become ambassadors of men, when
they create a secret all men’s club. The club has a set of strict and defined
rules, where men go to release anger by beating each other almost to death in
some cases, soon known as Fight Club.

The polysemic messages
encoded within the dialogue, story and cinematography help to make Fight Club all the more compelling, as
it leaves the text open to your personal interpretation, therefore allowing you
to gain your preferred gratifications from the text.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

When watching Fight Club, the idea of the crisis of
masculinity is a very potent theme throughout the film. This therefore made the
film more interesting to watch, as it provided a thought provoking topic to
think about whilst watching and thus making the film more engaging. One scene
which strongly portrayed some of the ideologies of this theory, was when
Norton’s character was attending a help group for males with testicular cancer.
The mise-en-scene that David Fincher(the director) has used within this scene, has
been carefully thought out and used extremely well, in order to convey the idea
that the male characters featured in the film, are in a crisis of masculinity.
For example the scene is shot in a school gym, typically you would see this as the
type of place, where very stereotypically masculine sports take place, such as
basketball. However, the men in this scene are using the area for activities
such as, sharing their feelings and offering support to one another and even in
this day and age, a lot of us still see this as a very typically feminine thing
to do because, of course, it is absolutely against the rules for men to show
any kind of emotion that may portray signs of weakness. Moreover, if you are in
to the topic of feminism and the ongoing battle that it faces, you will be sure
to enjoy Fight Club, as it explores
some of these issues, especially surrounding the feisty female character, Marla
singer, wonderfully played by Helena Bonham Carter. Throughout the film, there
is an underlying feeling of misogyny, as we a wrongly and annoyingly forced to
identify with The Narrator because it is his voice who takes us through the
film. Therefore, the more potent response from the majority of us is to
empathise with him and not Marla. Although sometimes annoying, it enables a
narrative that is able to explore the inequality between men and women in our
society, which is a very important issue that needs to be heard about, in order
to be resolved, therefore including it in films as big as Fight Club, with big stars is a really good way of beginning to
supress the ignorance within society and making people listen.

In addition to this, the
theory of the crisis of masculinity, is also expressed through the well thought
out cinematography by Jeff Cornenweth within the scene. For example, there is
the reoccurring use of a shallow depth of field within the scene, thus making
it clear, possibly to more so, to the members of the audience whom have a good
understanding of film,  how the men do
not fit into their masculine surroundings and therefore illustrating how they
do not fit in with their surroundings.


Moreover, there are other
strong themes that also run throughout the film, which may help you to create
an understanding of the film, making it easier to follow and therefore more
interesting. These themes are postmodernism and consumerism. Postmodernism is
the idea that nothing is no longer original, but instead a combination or copy
of the originals. Why would this make the film more interesting? Well, by
having a basic understanding of the postmodernism theory, it will allow you to
pick up on the subtle hints that point towards postmodernism and this will help
you to form an opinion on the topic and debate the issues that the film is
exploring. The idea of consumerism is possibly one of the most successfully
illustrated themes through the mise-en-scene and dialogue throughout the film.
For example, the Narrator and other characters have a very obvious obsession
with branded products, such as IKEA and Starbucks.

 Fincher knew that the film was only going to
have a niche audience due to the highbrow content, but he still put a lot of
time, effort and thought into carefully portraying all of the complex themes
that I have mentioned. For this, he deserves a lot of credit because, although
the film was made in 1999, these issues are still very present and ongoing in
today’s society and they need talking about in order to begin to resolve them
and Fincher does this in a really effectively as he puts forward the ideas in a
very thought provoking way. On the other hand, although I think that that these
themes are really well illustrated, interesting and important, because there
are so many complex things to think about and try to pick out, at once the film
does start to become difficult to follow. At some points it even became
painfully frustrating to watch and unenjoyable, as I was constantly actively
trying to decode the film and it all got a bit too much to take in, in just a
single sitting.

Club, is one of those films that you can watch an infinite
amount of times and notice something new and view changing every time,
therefore making it almost impossible to properly understand by only watching
it once. You will probably end up getting sick of watching it, but the constant
curiosity of what you might find out the next time you watch it is compelling
and you will not be able to help yourself. Finally, the major plot twist at the
end just makes the film. The twist reveals a case of serious mental illness and
an unlucky connection between The Narrator and Tyler Durden. Although, at first
the concept can be rather discombobulating, however, once you gain a full
understanding of the film, the themes and the physiological genre, you will
soon realise that it is one of the best plot twists in film history.



Happy Death Day:

Death Day is a spectacular example of a hybrid genre film.
Although it is labelled as a horror movie, the film depicts conventions of a
horror, rom-com, action and even a psychological thriller. At some points it will
make you want to cry with laughter and other points it will make you want to
quiver behind the seat, whilst trying to gather the popcorn that you sent
flying across the cinema, as you jumped out of your seat in a mad fit…

Thus making the film very
interesting and entertaining to watch, as it has successfully tackled the so
very difficult task of attempting to attract a wide variety of audiences. The
movie has been classified as a 15, which I feel is fitting, as the use of a
hybrid genre means that there is something for people of a younger age, as well
as adults because it is not all just blood, guts and gore like other horror
movies, such as, the Insidious franchise(2010-18).

death Day starts off very slow and almost begins to become
predictable, as it reaches an obvious climax very early on in the film.
Therefore, making it a bit boring to watch before the plot begins to develop.
This was a poor attempt at the initial process of engaging the audience, from
the director (Christopher B. Landon). However, it is redeemed as the plot
begins to thicken and more enigmas are introduced into the narrative. From the
archetypal blonde, female victim protagonist (Jessica Rothe), to the typical
slasher killer hiding behind a scary mask, Happy
Death Day follows very typical narrative and structure of a horror film.
The film is centred round the female protagonist’s (Tree) birthday from hell.
After a long day of battling a hangover and disappointment after disappointment,
Tree ends her day by getting herself brutally murdered, when a masked killer
follows her under a creepy bridge and stabs her to death, as she is making her
way to a party, late at night…and all alone…Stupid, right? Yet another film
where we are all sat on the sofa screaming, “No, do not do it! Turn around you
Bl**dy idiot!” Not very exciting, but still, we watch because it is just what
were used to. During the first birthday of Tree’s, she is conveyed as a very
self-centred and arrogant character. Being rude to, or even ignoring almost
every other character that she encounters on her way home from her one night
stand, Carter’s (Israel Broussard) college dorm. She starts her day in Carter’s
room, as she wakes angrily, he kindly and timidly reintroduces himself and
makes sure that she is okay. Tree responds to this by treating him like a piece
of sh*t on her shoe, as she totally dismisses his kindness and swears him to
secrecy.  The next character that Tree
comes across is Carter’s roommate, whom she rudely storms past, during her
swift exit. In the court yard a friendly student approaches her and asks her to
sign a petition, in this case Tree totally ignore her and even goes so far as
to scoff at her. This attitude just gets increasingly worse when Tree gets home
and rejects the mini birthday cake that her roommate had so kind-heartedly made
for her, Tree gets dressed and rushes off to her class, demonstrating 0
gratitude for the gesture and even throws the cake in the bin.   

 It soon becomes clear when Tree wakes up the
next morning, after her brutal murder, only to find herself in Carter’s dorm
room again as she begins to relive her birthday from hell again, that the
hidden message behind this film is going to be something about bettering
ourselves. It is also very obvious that as soon as Tree improves her attitude
and realises her mistakes that she will stop reliving her death/birth day and
that she will be able to live a full peaceful life. The romance between her and
Carter is also inevitable, however, although this is sounds very typical of a
horror movie and all round a bit rubbish, it is all made up for with, the
enigma of who the killer is and the KILLER plot twist at the end.  Every birthday that Tree relives she is able
to come up with strategies to try and overcome her killer, obviously failing
multiple times, this is where elements of slap stick comedy come in and it
becomes funny that she keeps getting killed and you almost find yourself
laughing at repeated failure. Every morning that she wakes up and finds herself
on the same day she starts to care less and less, as well as this being funny,
you are able to start identifying with her as a character because you love the
fact that she just does not give a sh*t and almost start to envy her. Rothe
acted her role exceptionally well, as well as this Landon and the writer(Scott
Lobdell) have done really well with this, as it is not often that people can
produce a character, which the audience can go from hating to loving, in such a
short amount of time.

 From this point onwards the enigmas continue
to build and become utterly gripping and it also helps that you are now
dreadfully in love with the protagonist, but the whole thing is finally topped
off with one of the best plot twists since Fight Club (1999), but in order to
find out more, you will have to go and watch the film, which is out on DVD in
January 2018.


Night of the Living Dead:

of the Living Dead (1968) directed by George A. Romero, is
possibly one of the best Zombie horrors ever made, going on to influence almost
every modern zombie movie there is. The film is the first film of a three part trilogy,
the second two being Dawn of the Dead (1978)
and Day of the Dead (1985). Night of the Living Dead, holds up as a
stark, eerie and unrelenting parable of dread.

 The film was shot on an extremely low budget
of just $114,000. It was shot with grainy film stock and the majority of the
cast and crew were considered to be amateurs, giving it a no-frills approach to
the material. Throughout the film, the handheld camera techniques is used
frequently and in just the right places which creates an over baring build-up
of apprehension and tension.

The film starts when a
brother, Johhny Blair (Russell Streiner) and sister, Barbra Blair (Judith O’Dea)
drive to Pennsylvania on a trip to their father’s grave and Johnny
teases Barbra by chanting, “They’re coming to get you, Barbara!” Soon after his
gag comes true, when a roving, flesh-eating zombie promptly dispatches him and
chases her to an abandoned farmhouse. The tension only increases as our
helpless heroine, Barbara, slips into catatonia, wandering around the house and
blankly staring at music boxes and avoiding the mutilated corpse rotting at the
top of the stairs. To anyone watching the film today, this would seem to be yet
another typical horror plot, however, back in 1968 when the film was made, the
audience had never really seen anything quite like this before, thus being part
of the reason why it has been branded one of the best zombie movies of all

The hero of the film is a
resourceful, intense black man named Ben (Duane Jones). After he boards up the
house and delivers a searing monologue about his narrow escape from the
creatures outside, he has to deal with Barbara’s increasing hysteria. Even
though the movie never directly makes a statement on racial or sexual tension,
it is unavoidable when you have a scene where he has to slap Barbara into
unconsciousness (as an act of atonement, finds her a pair of slippers for her
bare feet). While our survivors deal with the nightmarish situation at their
doorstep, they also have to deal with each other, and that subtle discomfiture
between Ben and Barbara lends an eerie frisson to their scenes together and
therefore makes the film all the more engaging and exciting to watch.

The troubled partnership
between Ben and Barbara is as much a sign of the times as the zombie invasion.
There is much more going on here, and much more reason for this horror
classic’s, timelessness, than a straightforward Vietnam allegory. That said, as
impassive creatures lay siege upon the rickety house, the characters find
themselves in a situation as hopeless, devoid of reason and criminally unfair
as the political climate of their era.


There’s a brute force in Night of the Living Dead that catches
one in the throat. As other survivors gather in the farmhouse, they come up
with plans of escape, of which continually go awry. No matter how many times
they shoot the zombies, throw homemade fire bombs at them, wave torches in the
air and board up the windows, the monsters keep coming. Once you tally up the
carnage, however, only two of the six principal characters die in zombie
attacks; the others are wiped out by their own kind through short sightedness,
stupidity or blind rage. Human error remains a chilling X-factor here, and the
notable sequence where survivors attempt to flee in a truck, is a series of
blunders that is painful to watch.

Romero shot the sequences
plainly, without operatic fanfare, and the effect of this is downright numbing.

As for the ending, it’s
notoriously downbeat. The farmhouse survivors end up in a calamitous mess, with
almost all of them killed in the onslaught. When help comes in the form of
police helicopters, attack dogs, and a posse of good old boys with shotguns,
Romero subverts the notion that authority figures know best. When they arrive
at the farmhouse killing off zombies in the fields and searching for human
survivors, the outcome is hardly what you would expect. Audiences of the time
felt emotionally scared and vindicated at the same time, remembering the
assassinations of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. as the hick
sheriff, instead of lending a helping hand, orders his men to fire at will and
hit all moving targets “Right between the eyes.” This being thought provoking
and causing people to question their trust of authority figures.

The final images are
still black-and-white frames of bodies (of people we have come to know) being
carried to a raging funeral pyre on meat hooks, dehumanizing the dead among us.
The ending has a staying power, inducing rage and nausea in equal measure. That
Romero’s classic still conjures up such intense feelings so many years after
its making is a testament to its power. This film has been made so well that it
is able to provoke so many different emotions for us as an audience, but above
everything the verisimilitude created throughout (disregarding the concept of
zombie invasions of course) through the setting and situation, makes the film
all the more terrifying because you find yourself placing yourself in the film,
in the characters shoes. I think this is why the film works so well as a horror
because it is lasting and almost scaring.