I just watched Fight Club last night. All I have to say is, WTF??? The ending totally baffled me.
Here is my interpretation(s):
Fact: Brad Pitt’s character was a hallucination created by Edward Norton’s character.
Questions: I came to two conclusions… li Brad Pitt’s character was completely all in Ed Norton’s head, and Norton was 110% schizophrenic. Pitt never existed.[/li]li Brad Pitt’s character was initially created all in Norton’s head, but as a result of Norton’s intense schizo condition, Pitt became an actual separate living entity, and was visible only to Norton, but not a hallucination. Pitt was sort of a demon-like being. When Norton was around other people, Pitt would possess Norton and take over his mind and body. When Norton was alone, the two were separate.[/li]
I am leaning more toward the latter scenario, because at the end, when we see the security camera watching Norton fight with Pitt, it almost appears as Pitt, though invisible, is actually there whooping Norton’s ass. Granted, this scenario is all speculation. It would certainly make the film more interesting if scenario (B) is indeed, accurate.
I’d have to go with the first scenario, MSK. Though the book makes this a lot more clear than the movie did. I can see where you might think that from the security camera shots, but I think it’s the same kind of thing as Ed Norton was doing in his bosses office.
I think it was quite obvious that A was the answer. Witness the minions around the country calling Norton’s (otherwise unnamed character) “sir” and Helena Bonham-Carter calling him “Tyler.”
Damn, I was 99% sure it was (A), but I hoped it was (B) Damn damn damn!!
I was hoping it was another bizarre original film similar to “Being John Malkovich” or James Stewart’s “Harvey.” Instead, we have an R rated version of Me Myself and Irene meets the Ultimate Fighting Championship.
I’m 100% sure scenario A is correct, because I read the book, which is infinitely more twisted than the movie.
What you have to keep in mind about the “all in his head” thing, is that Tyler Darden did all things you saw in the movie, but we saw them from The Narrator’s perspective, i.e., Tyler was a completely different person than himself. All the other characters, only ever saw The Narrator, just different aspects of his personality, thus, the total confusion depicted by Marla (see Montfort’s post). Why the hell has Ed Norton been denied the Oscar??? If not for this then for Rounders or American History X
Obviously this is meant as the action where Norton “kills” the Tyler personality inside of him.
But…
Is it just me or does he seem perfectly fine except for some bleeding? The angle it looked like when he shot himself it should be coming out the back of the neck or through his jaw. Yet Norton was able to talk fine afterwards and even able to relax.
Alright, I think, if I understand what you mean, I can help you with the second question. Tyler has a huge hole in the back of his head, whereas the Ed Norton has it in the back of his head, because that represents Tyler’s dying. While Ed Norton’s character was only injured, it meant that he didn’t need Tyler anymore, so Tyler was effectively dead. This was shown by the hole in the back of his head.
My answer to your first question is going to seem like a cop-out. Ed Norton was also fighting Tyler’s fights as well, since they were both the same person, so he was really, really tough. Therefore, the pain from the gunshot didn’t affect him like it would a normal Joe. The book’s ending is completely different, not only the ending but the few chapters right before the ending. They explain everything to a greater degree, and make it clearer. The ending, though I don’t want to give it away, is more surreal, and much more believeable.
There has been a really long thread about Fight Club, that had a lot of great discussions. I recommend a “Search”. And someone bump it (if that’s allowed), because it is a great read for any FC fans.