Fight Club --> survivor
 

everyones seen fight club but has anyone read survivor? In my opinion it's superior! Same author too. They are actually planning a film for it. The script was approved by fox (I believe it got an 8 out of 10).

Survivor has strong messages throughout and the surprise end is brilliant; but only a few people will realize it! (I didn't realize it until I read about the book) Point is, go read the book and when the film comes out watch that too!

I'm confused. What's the connection between the two?

Survivor was written by Chuck Palahniuk, who also wrote Fight Club.

Ah, I see. I figured it was either that, or the title of the book (which didn't seem likely...I recall reading that they had the same title). Interesting stuff.

So can u give us a brief idea of what the storyline is?

Have they confirmed any actors or directors yet?


Peace,

directors who had interest but were dropped - sam mendes, fincher, the american psycho director, darren a., jerry brockheimer

also madonna or nicole kidman want to play the leading actress,

for leading man, kevin spacey wanted it if mendes directed but that didn't work out. marylon manson and maynard from tool actually have interest

here's the summary (back of book) --

Tender Branson -- last surviving member of the so-called Creedish Death Cult -- is dictating his life story into the flight recorder of flight 2039, cruising on autopilot at 39,000 feet somewhere over the Pacific Ocean. He is all alone in the airplane, which will crash shortly into the vast Austrailian Outback. But before he does, he will unfold the tale of his journey from an obedient Creedish child and humble domestic servant to an ultra-buffed, steroid-and collagen-packed media superstar. He'll reveal the truth about his tortured romance with the alusive psychic Fertility Hollis, share his insight that "the only difference between suicide and martyrdom is press coverage" and deny responsiblity for the Tender Branson Sensitive Materials Sanitary Landfill, a 20-000-acre repository for the nation's outdated pornography -- amoung other matters bizzarre and trenchant.

Unpredictable and unforgettable, Survivor is Chuck P at his deadpan peak and it cements his place as one of the most original writers in fiction.

It actually starts on page 289 and moves backwards down to page 1 (being the last page). Good stuff, it'll make a great film if it's done right! It's also pretty sadistically funny

It's meant to be read backwards? We talking "Memento" here?

not really, the first chapter he's in the plane and he's telling the story from his childhood years up to how he got on the plane. It starts at 289 and goes down because that's how long his story is and how long the planes' fuel lasts apparantly

Sounds pretty cool.


Peace,

i never finished it, i found it a bit boring. there were some great ideas in it but it just seemed to grind on forever.
Not at all like fight club.

Auhhhhhhhh. No, please, please, if we have to twist another of Palahniuk's great works of fiction into the movie format, PLEASE let them NOT pick Survivor. That book was, in my opinion, his worst.

Okay, like all Palahniuk books, it's interesting, right? But it wasn't gripping in the manner of Fight Club, and it wasn't compelling in the manner of Choke, and it wasn't grotesquely fascinating in the manner of Invisible Monsters.

Fight Club was and still is, IMHO, the best of Palahniuk's works to translate into movie format. It's quick, it's to the point, it's revolutionary, it's a movie that men need to see. Survivor doesn't seem to know what sort of book it wants to be-- a commentary on celibacy? A satire of religiosity? A critique of celebrity? A diatribe on drug use? Who knows.

Now, Invisible Monsters.....that could be gripping on screen. In a very visual sense. It'd end up being rated NC-17, but it'd be gripping.

Personally, i like everything Palahniuk this far, some i love some i like...
Survivor may have more potential for a movie than Choke, but i'm not sure... anyway it doesn't mean the book was better (which it was NOT), but more adaptable to cinema?? just a diffuse feeling...
and... i thought Edward Norton would be in it. although i really like Kevin Spacey, Edward is so perfect for a Palahniuk movie...
Diary? if any book can be made into a movie, i won't live long enough to see all of Palahniuk's books on the screen...

I really enjoyed Survivor, but the end kinda puzzled me in that I thought it could be taken two ways and I wasn't sure exactly what happened. Maybe that makes it better, but I am not sure. Also, I have to agree with a earlier post in that even though I liked the book, I have my doubts that it would translate well to the screen. Or at least, as well as Fight Club which in my opinion is one of the greatest movies to have been released in the last several years.

I actually thought Mr Palahniuk (spelling?) kind of sucked as an author. I had the feeling it was writen to boost his own ego, almost like he was trying to impress a crowd he imagines to be around himself at all times. That's just me though. And if you thought the movie Fight Club was good and you want to read the book because of it, think twice. Chuck P. has said it himself that the director and scriptwriters took the movie version to an entirely new level he didn't think was in the book.

To be more exact, I think his style is weak, BUT, I think his content is very interesting. In lullaby some girl is possesed and eats all her diamonds causing her teeth to break and mouth to bleed... See what I mean?

Either way reading is good for you, so you should ignore what I say and read anyways.

They originally scrapped the idea of the movie for Survivor because of 9/11, they had everything ready to go and then lost all of their pre-production efforts. It seems like all of Palahniuk's books-to-movies were hindered because of terrible worldly events. Fight Club's release was pushed back almost a year because of Columbine. Survivor has the best opening, suicide hotline's wrong number. Man that is hilarious.

Sounds pretty darn interesting, thanks for getting the word out on Survivor, I always love to hear about a good book!

Salon.com posted a really incredibly scathing and well written review of Palahniuk's newest book a while ago, and in doing so wound up with a kind of painful indictment of the man's writing career and writing style.
Definitely worth tracking down if you're interested.

Anyways, I mention it because I've found it mostly impossible to respect Palahniuk or his writing at all since I read the review. It really does just bring up several logical critiques that should be embarassing to him as an author.
I'll try and find it and post it.

Double post:
----It's apparently not very clear, but a link to the whole article is directly below this.---- [edit]

You may need to watch an ad to read the whole thing:
http://www.salon.com/books/review/2003/08/20/palahniuk/

And to be fair, here's a bunch of people telling her she's wrong:
http://archive.salon.com/books/lette...3/08/21/chuck/

I think the Salon.com review said what I tried to say much better than I did in my previous post. If you haven't read anything by him, the review is dead on. The leafing through a magazine part reminded me of this one character Palahniuk had in Lullaby that was a hippy and new all these cheesy out of context facts.

GO SALON!

well, litterature like any other form of art is a matter of taste, isn't it. and some critics really suck, and have such a high opinion of themselves and their "sacred" opinion on every single thing, they remind me of Holden. what else would an *honest* critic say than "i didn't like it because (1)...2)...3)... ...) but read it and build yr own opinion".

i would not say Palahniuk's ideas are the most original in his books. Heller already told the same things in many different ways. it's the style that's different.
it's in fact rather easy to answer to such ready-made criticism, all based on taste:

"written in the same phony, repetitive, bombastic style"

repetition for instance is one of the characteristics of Palahniuk's style. you don't like it, well OK, but it's like criticizing a strawberry for being red!

"all hopped-up imperatives and posturing one-liners"

same thing here. one-liners, another characteristic. to me, it adds to the impact of each page, and the graphic design of the whole book.

(...) nuff said, all a matter of opinion(S).

by the way, this article uses "imagine that" quite a lot for someone who doesn't like repetitions!

"Imagine that these books traffic in the half-baked nihilism of a stoned high school student who has just discovered Nietzsche and Nine-Inch Nails."

well, "half-baked" here is totally gratuitous and bases on nothing.
i don't see one would (or worse, *should*) "get over" Nietzsche and Nine-Inch Nails so quickly, or even in THIS lifetime. Palahniuk sees all the ***** surrendering us, doesn't accept it, and why the heck should he? to be "wiser"?, give up his nihilism and become a businessman?, and so many in modern USA, dedicate his life to a career, purchasing a better car?
OK, he earns money thru his writing, but isn't that fair?

"Imagine that he affects to attack the shallow, simplistic, dehumanizing culture of commodity capitalism by writing shallow, simplistic, dehumanized fiction."

so, would you prefer NOT even to try to attack this shallow (etc.) commodity capitalism? and yep, one can put bombs in supermarkets, OR one can write books, but then instead of calling him a terrorist, people'll say "see, he criticizes the system but lives in and from it". blah blah. solution?
when i'm not out there bombing cars and buildings, i write in this MoFo.

(and i'll be writing here tomorrow if secret agents don't come to arrest me now for writing this, and after tomorrow despite of some Sionist racist elder member)(do you sometimes READ posts here, Pike? or pass them thru a Windows spellingchecker software?)