Disapointed by choke?

I'm absolutely addicted to the movie. About to watch it for the third time in two days. I love love loved it.

Also disappointed...for much of the same reasons as most of you guys are.

I keep imagining Zach Galifianakis playing the role of Denny now that I've seen him in "The Hangover."

I dig the movie. The book's ending would have been too quixotic and Sisyphean for Hollywood. You need an ending that pumps you up, like banging a hot chick in a public restroom. Who needs to be cured from a sex addiction by god??

One thing the book and movie really made me think about is this sex club, which I think Neil Strauss gets into in The Game. You really think that hanging out in a commercial airliner's restroom with the door open will get you sex with a decent-looking chick? I see an arrest or ass rape by a recent prison release as far more likely.

hi. i'm new. get over it. i don't know anything about forum etiquette, let alone cult etiquette. get over it.

fight club was a pretty good adaptation. i really stick by my opinion that reading is so much better, because the film, is one persons idea of how it looks. when i read fight club, it looked so different to me.

choke's adaptation was even more ordinary.

to end, hollywood fucked up two fucking fantastic endings. fuck.

In all respect, Chuck preferred they stray from the book's plot.The story should evolve he says, a new generation of fight club, rather than just a picture version of it.When a movie panders to the book too much, the book loses all authority. There are things that are still only possible in books and conversely, things that only a film could do. When movies are down-to-the-line faithful with the book, it kind of erases, or eclipses the book, and people forget that there even was one. By being unfaithful to it, the book and the movie can co-exist peacefully. He said as long as they call it choke or fight club, beyond that he wants to be as surprised as anybody else. So in that sense i'm very happy with the result.
So this time hollywood just got the green light to make a great movie, rather than simply transcribe a great book.
I saw it from your perspective at first, but i agree with Chuck on this one after listening to his explanation. I don't wanna see just a picture version of the book. I wanna see something different. I only want the story that Chuck created,told in his book. The movie can have the same characters, and same ideas, but i want to see a unique telling of it. Not to the " Idea of how it looks to one person" effect, considering that is the same story, just how the director saw it, but rather a whole'nother story. Like Chuck said, the next generation of it. The book should not ever be compared to it. The movie not an incarnation of the book, but rather a new conception, laced with an intrinsic suggestion.

And to meagerly offset my digression, I liked Choke. Didn't the first time i watched it, but after seeing it a third and fourth time i began to love it. Awesome movie.

P.S
The interview i surmised was one with WYSP or something like that. Interviewer was a marble-mouth, but Chuck, needless to say, was entertaining.

I do agree with you there on all counts mate, but I'm just saying the ending for both books alot more entertaining to me and what's a story without a brilliant ending? I too have seen choke a few times, I own it. I think maybe the thing with choke is the directorial decisions makes it lack. Fight club was fantatically done. Not how I imagene it bit still fantatically and it does hold it's own. Choke just kinda slumped for me, I was disapointed and I still am
kinda. Still watch it though. So go figure

I finally saw this movie one night when my old room mate was sick. We watched it on her mac. I was incredibly disappointed. The book is awesome. The movie is not.

Well I liked it. I about pissed myself with the lawnmower comment.

hi. i'm not exactly new, i was a member for a brief period of time and i guess my account got deleted. i didn't post much anyway.

as for the movie. i didn't HATE it, but disapointed is a good word. i guess fight club as this big brad-pitted, over the top, special effects, business centers collapsing generation defining film and everything else is going to feel weak in comparison.

i guess they should have followed the book a little bit more. and some of the casting could've been better chosen also. it could be better.

yea the movie choke wasn't all that great. the book is so much better. it was like it didn't really have the right feel to it or something. not very insightful but yea the book is so much better.

Choke is probably in my top ten all time favorite books I've read, ever. Definitely my favorite of the books I have read by Chuck Palahniuk (I haven't read them all yet)

At first I was disappointed, (in the movie) expecting something as grand as Fight Club, but once I got over that idea, which was pretty quickly, I was really able to appreciate it as a good piece of comedy. I fell in love with Fight Club (the movie) back when it first came out, and it is truly one of the best movies ever imho, (and who cares about Brad Pitt in it... Edward Norton!!! YUM!) I watched it over and over and over long before I ever knew it was an adaption from a novel. I only wish I had know way sooner then I would have been turned on to this great author so much sooner.

Anyway, Choke... one reason I liked it was because I was able to share it with my husband, who appreciates film much more than literature, much sooner than if there wasn't a movie. If there hadn't been a movie I'd still be nagging him to read it now likely, or reading my favorite parts out loud to try to entice him (yet only annoying him "listen, listen to this part!" instead)

And he, having never read the book, really enjoyed the movie. Though there were parts I had to explain in more detail for him, like the drinking of the beer out of the saucers in the garden. Actually, I just wanted to explain it, I probably didn't have to.

My biggest complaint would have been the Denny character, he just didn't fit my idea of him at all. I imagined this skinny sickly OCD guy appearing to be off in his own world. And I do often get hung up on little nuances of characters, that aren't right in my head or could have been improved... the way he held his pencil when he was sketching was just all wrong.

the only problem with the movie is that they left out all of the philosophical stuff from the book. that weakened the movie a lot, it was more a movie for fans of the book who already knew why he was doing a lot of that stuff.

The acting was great, the book is great, and the script was great minus the ending. But the movie was very disappointing. I think it had to do with the directing. The movie needed a director with some style or a vision, like Fincher had for Fight Club. The low production quality for Choke gave it a made-for-tv fee and that's why it felt flat.

I think a director like Darren Aronofsky would have done it justice.

I still say, for a movie going up against Fight Club (which in some lists is at the 4th greatest movie of all time) that Choke holds it's own. I mean, even if they had managed to make the 10th greatest movie ever with this, there'd still be overwhelming people disappointed in it.
The only thing I can see that hurt it was having so much of Denny's story cut out and with the castle ending and whatnot. But I thought the ending with him back on the airplane again but with someone he actually cared about now was just as good an ending. Maybe even better since so much of Denny and his rocks were cut, the original ending would have felt weird.
Hopefully, this will get some more fans when it comes on cable next month. But I'm willing to bet, if that I Am Legend guy does do Survivor, that people will think Choke is better than that one.

i read the book when it first came out, and to be honest, thanks to a small case of brain tumor (im not making this up) i hardly rememer the book, or much of anything before 2005.... that said, i was able to watch the movie on its own, without the book as a reference.

it felt as if the actual 'choke'/shroud of turin element were almost unnecessary plot points, and just the sex addiction/colonial life sequences could have carried the movie on its own. as a comedy, i laughed, my partner laughed, and it was a pleasant 90 min time waster, and worth the 5.99 i paid to buy it...

i should be done reading haunted this week and want to go back and re-read choke and survivor though

i do rememer the mutant baby chicks running around everywhere though...

As it should! When your going in to see an adaptation of a book you should always be willing to go in with an open mind. The 'Big Screen' will never live up to your minds eye. Distortions and omissions are pretty much the name of the game. Art is subjective, especially when you take something from one medium and transfer it to another. I personally enjoyed the movie for what it was, and I welcome more Palahnuik adaptations.

(pleasebelullabypleasebelullabylullaby lullaby LULLABY!)

Thanks to you guys, I just read the book. I didn't even know that the movie was out. Is it on dvd yet? On satelite yet? After reading all the above reviews, I am anxious to see it.

Yeah it's definately out on DVD, not sure about TV. So you liked the book then?

I loved it, I have Haunted now

I liked the rape-scene.

And you can't compare someone like Fincher to whatever this bad sitcom tv-dude's name is.

I couldn't find the movie anywhere in this one horse town, so I bought it off of e-bay. It should be in soon. I'm anxiously waiting....

i can't say im disappointed too much by the movie. I thought they could have put a little more effort into it, but I am no director so I can't tell anyone how to make a film....but I would not watch it agian.

I 100% agree with SpiritReaver's first statement. Chuck writes books that are pretty much already movies. Choke had an amazing ending, and then Hollywood came and effed it, dude. They followed it reasonably close to the book, but they disregarded the importance of collecting rocks and building, and obviously the ended was completely destroyed.

I really liked the movie. Probably because I read the book when it first came out. So it's been a while. Which I'm thankful for.

After I read Dune, I watched the David Lynch film a few days after and I HATED it!

I think most of us can agree that 99% of the time the book is better than the movie. Especially if you've recently read the book and the greatness of the book is still fresh in your mind.

And on a side note, I was glad to see they had the love pearls part in there...I was wondering if that was going to be kept in.

I thought the movie felt like some stupid american pie kinda movie.
Not like the gritty dark comedy feel of the book.

I finally watched this. Clay Davis from The Wire is in it! Sheeeeeeeiiiit!

Yeah, I'd cut loose a ten for that.

I was disappointed the first time I saw Choke. Since buying the DVD, I've watched it twice more and it has grown on me each time. Sam Rockwell plays a brilliant Victor. I wish Clark Gregg would have adapted the screenplay in more of a David Fincher/Fight Club sort of way.

But in the Special Features, Clark Gregg does talk about deliberately "creating" a different version of Choke. From his perspective.

Disappointed.

i live by Choke (read as: Choke is a great book). and the film was dull. it wasnt even that tiniest portion left off a fraction of what you can see when you read the book.

I was very disappointed in the movie. It was not nearly as well put together as Fight Club, and I was pretty upset about the end. I was looking forward to seeing it, but they completely tossed it.

I liked this movie.

I thought it was ok. Not awful, not fantastic, but definitely watchable.

To my mind it captured the spirit of the book fairly well, and I think the film was almost better if you were a fan of the book. I found myself laughing in expectation at things that were about to happen (having not read the book for several years). Yes, it was no Fight Club, but anyone expecting a big budget movie considering the director, studio, etc is just setting themselves up for disappointment.

The casting was pretty spot-on - I thought the interplay between Sam Rockwell and Anjelica Huston was excellent, I have to admit I got a little teary at times. Kelly MacDonald was good too, she captured that sense of cold confidence with underlying fragility/insanity that was exactly how I had pictured Paige Marshall. Denny was not how I had pictured him, but I think he did a good job, too.

I don't watch many TV shows or movies but I did seek out the movie online. I saw the preview and it disappointed me like most adaptations do. I'm not saying it's not a good movie because I've never seen it. I'm just saying that when I read a book I get a set image of what the characters look like and how they speak and act.

I imagined Victor as a taller black haired Italian guy who's sort of tan. While his best friend was shorter with a buzzed hair cut, glasses, and sort of a dumpy yet thin body frame.
I had to watch my mother degenerate before my eyes while she was dying of cancer so seeing someone with a healthy body weight and pallor playing the mother (Who was supposedly anorexic, sick, and dying of starvation in the book) was a very hard stretch for me to accept.

The only character that I'm happy with the casting is Dr Marshall.

Then again I remind you that I have not actually seen the movie and may or may not regret my doubts I'm placing upon it in this post.

I try not to watch the movie of books I really like because it always changes my perception on the characters.
I still may see it though out of curiosity.

Is it graphic like the book when it comes to the sex scenes?
Does it show flashbacks about his mother in it?

the sex scenes aren't overly graphic, and there is certainly a lot less sex in the film than there is in the book. but if they put all of that stuff in, it probably would have gotten an x rating. the little sex flashbacks when he's walking through the hospital were pretty entertaining.

and yes, there are flashbacks with victor as a child with his mother - the department store scene, the bus, tracing his shadow, etc.

having also witnessed someone degenerating from cancer, i agree with you that they did glamourise her state a little, but she does look quite old and sick by the end.

i actually laughed during the movie when (if i remember correctly) i did not laugh one single time in the book. in fact, i think i spent most of my reading time crying. so i appreciated that the movie made me laugh. i didn't care for the movie's ending though. the book ending's exploding feces in front of love interest scene made me tolerate what i probably could not have enjoyed otherwise: an almost happy ending.

PS:
i did not like the way they handled the Nikki (sp?) character, the lady he "mentored" at the sex group. i think that's what her name was. there seemed to be something so awful about the way she was treated... all i could see was that she was brown (seemed to be to me) and the lady in the hospital was glowing white.

I just think the movie left out some important details. Like you see that a bead goes missing on the anal beads but if you haven't read the book you may not even get it when she just says "Oops... Man over board." Then at the end he shits himself out of no where when the guys Heimlichs the guy. My friend was watching it with me on DVD and he was like "Why did he shit himself?"

Plus I just had a set image on how everyone looked and it usually disappoints me when I see a different looking person play the part I already had visualized in my head. Although Twilight was exactly how I imagined the characters, but that's just because the author helped choose the cast.

I like the movie if I look at it as a separate entity. You'll always be disappointed if you compare the movie to the source material.
That is unless you compare The Godfather, Pet Semetary, or Silence Of The Lambs to the books. The movies of said titles were much better than the books were. Silence of the Lambs and The Godfather books were sort of like the old dime store pulp novels you get from the used book store. And Pet Semetary the movie is just all the main points of the book without Stephen's over detailing of everything. Although I do say this in full knowledge that he wrote the screen play.

What were we talking about again?
I'm getting a soda...

The film left me feeling restless and unsatisfied. The actual viewing of the film was like getting turned on and bracing myself for an intense sexual encounter and then........ nothing worth remembering. I hated the flash backs of his mom. This is sad because Angelica Huston is a wonderful actress. Who ever directed this film did a terrible job.

That really pissed me off. :)

He is? I don't even remember.

I was utterly disappointed with the movie!!..

Very disappointing! It's almost like nobody, including the director, read this book. They all missed the point. They could have done so much more with the material provided.
It was fun to see Chuck!

I felt like the movie was more comical than I pictured it when I was reading the book. The ending was changed and that was very upsetting...

But other than that I was pretty happy with the overall outcome of the movie.

As usual, the book is better than the film. That's not the say that the film isn't sitting on my DVD rack though... next to Fight Club. A lot of the grit of the book was missing in the film, it just felt like something was missing. The book set a certain feel, a certain scene, and it just wasn't there in the flick.

However, I still enjoyed it nevertheless. Mainly because I know that whenever I need my true fill of Choke, all I have to do is go to my bookshelf.

I thoroughly enjoyed the movie Choke, and I can't say I was entirely displeased with the movie, the only thing I saw wrong with it, was the main character, Sam Rockwell, was wrong for the part. in the book, the main character(Victor), he plays almost this sad leading life, with a depressive type behavior while in the movie, he plays off this 'I don't care as to what you have to say' kind of attitude, and it threw me off the whole movie because it wasn't how I portrayed him in the book.

Overall - I thought the movie sucked. I hate to say that. But the acting was poor, it didn't have that dark edge, it seemed more to have a "trying too hard" edge to it. I was severely let down. You've got to wonder if chuck was too.

this thread is funny, the movie is kinda old but it is really fun. The main guy looks had a heartburn when he laughs.

Quite possibly the best spam yet.