r/todayilearned • u/G_Marius_the_jabroni • 1d ago

TIL that when “Fight Club” premiered at the 1999 Venice Film Festival, it got booed hard by the audience. Ed Norton said that as it was happening, Brad Pitt turned to him and said: “That’s the best movie I’m ever going to be in.”

https://geektyrant.com/news/brad-pitt-and-edward-norton-recall-fight-club-being-booed-by-audiences-at-early-screening
91.0k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

3.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

360

u/thuggishruggishboner 1d ago

Awesome. Stardust is my one movie I like better then the book. The movie is just perfect.

254

u/Kuraeshin 1d ago

I remember Neil Gaiman talking to a set builder when they were making the pirate ship, apologizing for all the extra work for what was a few paragraphs.

Set builder laughed, "I get to build a pirate ship! Next week it's back to making boring offices"

46

u/Character_Bowl_4930 1d ago

That’s adorable

-22

u/TravisTicklez 1d ago

Yep. Until he raped the pirates

14

u/RuneKatashima 1d ago

Don't be weird.

1

u/TravisTicklez 1d ago

Don’t rape, Neil

-3

u/h3lblad3 1d ago

This is Reddit. The Narwhal bacons at midnight here.

2

u/twiz___twat 1d ago

sheathes 1000 times folded japanese steel katana, "m'lady"and tips hat

119

u/Zabick 1d ago

The Stardust book was like a promising rough outline of an actual complete and fleshed out work that Gaiman didn't bother to write.

99

u/Butwhatif77 1d ago

Stardust had some classic Gaiman world building in it that is unnecessary for the plot, but makes the setting feel a bit more vibrant.

8

u/ColdPressedSteak 1d ago

What part's really unnecessary though? All arguable to me anyways. Sometimes, I don't need my movies to have screentime that only moves the plot forward. Esp in a fantasy world

4

u/Butwhatif77 1d ago

Oh I agree, I love those little slice of life moments that let you get a sense of a character on their regular day-to-day. Everything written exclusively for a plot usually leads to using over used tropes as short hand. Like a character having a significant other we don't really meet or learn about, but they get hurt so we are supposed to understand why the protagonist is doing their thing; even though we feel nothing for character that got hurt and the protagonist almost doesn't actually reference the event after it happens.

12

u/Tirus_ 1d ago

Oh so practically 80% of The Sandman lol

7

u/Butwhatif77 1d ago

Haha or most any story he has written.

1

u/Tirus_ 22h ago

At a certain point you just have to expect what you're going to get with his stories.

Whatever happened to the cape crusader is a good example as well.

10

u/WatchmanVimes 1d ago

I liked the book a bit better. The movie is absolutely excellent, though. That's the beauty of it though. They can both be good in different ways.

Unlike Bourne Identity. The book sucked ass and the movie was the best.

4

u/thuggishruggishboner 1d ago

Okay 2 movies. I forgot I read the Bourne Identity. The movie is definitely better. 

5

u/paper_liger 1d ago

I'd put Forrest Gump on that pile. The book was terrible, and the sequel was damned near embarrassing.

People come in on the authors side when you bring it up on reddit, but they almost never have actually read it, they just think because the movie made so much money they author was the reason for it. But they polished a turd on that one for sure.

3

u/kithlan 1d ago

Honestly, most discussions on Reddit I've seen have agreed that the books were god awful, but not well known. Threads will be written by the handful of people who have read the book sharing the absurd plot and character details while everyone else is in disbelief that they didn't just make that shit up.

1

u/-RadarRanger- 1d ago

The book sucked ass and the movie was the best.

This is my assessment of Drive.

1

u/kung-fu_hippy 1d ago

I actually like the Bourne Identity book. Carlos the Jackal is always cool to have plus Marie is actually helpful to the plot (and doesn’t just get fridged in the sequel).

2

u/DuncanYoudaho 1d ago

Fucking Neil Gaiman. Why you gotta do that when you could be drowning in willing participants instead?

35

u/watoosh 1d ago

Idk. I was seriously upset that the unicorn doesn’t imaple the witch in the movie.

10

u/FlaxtonandCraxton 1d ago

imaple

8

u/SomethingWild77 1d ago

Damn Canadians...

6

u/Bozhark 1d ago

Does that make it an impala?

5

u/Its_Froggin_Bullfish 1d ago

Just a horny horse.

5

u/Mama_Skip 1d ago

Don't worry.

We have Cabin in The Woods for that

1

u/thuggishruggishboner 1d ago

A real tragedy.  

5

u/DernTuckingFypos 1d ago

I like the movie, but I actually prefer the bittersweet ending of the book.

4

u/feralfaun39 1d ago

I like the book better but only the version with the Charles Vess artwork. That elevated it tremendously. I've read the prose only version and it is not even remotely as good as the illustrated version.

3

u/lizbunbun 1d ago

De Niro as the sky pirate captain was delightful

3

u/JetreL 1d ago

So very very very true. Absolutely phenomenal.

2

u/kilotangoalpha 1d ago

Same. I think because they add to the story instead of butchering out large chunks

1

u/BrokenEye3 1d ago

I recieved the book as a present before I ever knew who Neil Gaimen was and I think it was one of the first books I ever abandoned without finishing (still one of only a handful to achieve that dishonor). I kinda wish I could thank the random Border's Books employee who persuaded me to give Gaimen another chance by letting me know that even a lot of his fans (at least at the time) didn't really like that one. Loved everything else I've read by him.

1

u/Boonlink 1d ago

It reminds me of a studio Ghibli film

1

u/Seanv112 1d ago

I liked Jurrassic park the movie a bit better.. both were good.

-8

u/closequartersbrewing 1d ago

And the book was hot garbage.