"Fight Club" given a new ending in China where authorities win

[Jonathan101]

The ending of David Fincher’s 1999 film Fight Club has been changed in China.

The film featuring Helena Bonham Carter, Brad Pitt, and Edward Norton was recently made available on the Chinese streaming platform Tencent Video.

Fight Club follows the story of a depressed man (Norton) suffering from insomnia, who meets a strange soap salesman named Tyler Durden (Pitt) and soon finds himself living in his squalid house after his perfect apartment is destroyed.

The two bored men form an underground club with strict rules and fight other men who are fed up with their mundane lives. Their perfect partnership frays when Marla (Carter), a fellow support group crasher, attracts Tyler’s attention.

Viewers noticed that the closing scene of the film was changed due to restrictive censorship rules in the country.

In the original, The Narrator (Norton), kills off his imaginary alter ego Tyler, and then watches multiple buildings explode, suggesting his character’s plan to bring down modern civilisation is afoot.

However, in the Chinese version of the hit film, The Narrator kills Tyler, and the exploding scene is replaced with a black screen with the caption: “The police rapidly figured out the whole plan and arrested all criminals, successfully preventing the bomb from exploding”.

It also says that Tyler was sent to a “lunatic system” for treatment.

This change has sparked outrage among fans.

“This s*** sucks,” wrote one fan. “Companies shouldn’t completely change the intent and purpose of films just to sell out in Chinese markets.”

Another person wrote: “The first rule of Fight Club in China? Don’t mention the original ending. The second rule of Fight Club in China? Change it so the police win.”

Peony Hirwani
Tue, 25 January 2022, 9:53 am
The ending of David Fincher’s 1999 film Fight Club has been changed in China.

The film featuring Helena Bonham Carter, Brad Pitt, and Edward Norton was recently made available on the Chinese streaming platform Tencent Video.

Fight Club follows the story of a depressed man (Norton) suffering from insomnia, who meets a strange soap salesman named Tyler Durden (Pitt) and soon finds himself living in his squalid house after his perfect apartment is destroyed.

The two bored men form an underground club with strict rules and fight other men who are fed up with their mundane lives. Their perfect partnership frays when Marla (Carter), a fellow support group crasher, attracts Tyler’s attention.

- ADVERTISEMENT -

Viewers noticed that the closing scene of the film was changed due to restrictive censorship rules in the country.

In the original, The Narrator (Norton), kills off his imaginary alter ego Tyler, and then watches multiple buildings explode, suggesting his character’s plan to bring down modern civilisation is afoot.

However, in the Chinese version of the hit film, The Narrator kills Tyler, and the exploding scene is replaced with a black screen with the caption: “The police rapidly figured out the whole plan and arrested all criminals, successfully preventing the bomb from exploding”.

It also says that Tyler was sent to a “lunatic system” for treatment.

This change has sparked outrage among fans.

“This s*** sucks,” wrote one fan. “Companies shouldn’t completely change the intent and purpose of films just to sell out in Chinese markets.”

Another person wrote: “The first rule of Fight Club in China? Don’t mention the original ending. The second rule of Fight Club in China? Change it so the police win.”

To view this content, you'll need to update your privacy settings.
Please click here to do so.
To view this content, you'll need to update your privacy settings.
Please click here to do so.
It’s not clear who exactly is responsible for the change. The Independent has contacted Tencent Video for comment.

This is not the first time a film’s scenes have been changed in China.

In 2019, many scenes in the film Bohemian Rhapsody referencing Freddie Mercury’s sexuality were removed in its China release.

And in 2020, the China Independent Film Festival (CIFF) was “halted indefinitely” following the crackdown on freedom of expression under Chinese president Xi Jinping.

Many of the films at the festival, which was founded in 2003, tackled issues such as homosexuality and political history deemed sensitive or inappropriate by the Communist Party.

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/fight-club-br ... 44141.html

[clearspira]

Just remember: Corporations like Disney who claim to be all about LGBT issues, diversity, inclusion, equality - they are the one's who work side-by-side with China to remove the ''offending'' scenes.

Remember that every time you cheer a new ''diverse'' character in a Disney or Marvel film.

[Jonathan101]

Just remember: Corporations like Disney who claim to be all about LGBT issues, diversity, inclusion, equality - they are the one's who work side-by-side with China to remove the ''offending'' scenes.

Remember that every time you cheer a new ''diverse'' character in a Disney or Marvel film.

In this case though I don't think China needed help to cut to black and have text that said "They were all arrested before they blew up anything and Tyler Durden is now in a lunatic asylum".

I find that cartoonishly lazy censorship, up there with "Poochie died on his way to his home planet".

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

This is indubitably silly, but isn't a political fiasco or anything.

[Deledrius]

Amusingly, I (would) actually prefer this. Not the why, or the who, and in context this is pretty awful.

But I'm also sick of the trend in post-9/11 films where the bad guy gets to succeed at blowing things up and killing loads of people and the good guy "wins" not by stopping the terrorist/supervillain/whatever but just apprehending them after the fact.

The irony is that Fight Club predates the trend by a year and change! Still, it's a terrible, hypocritical film, and a narrative where the insane terrorist is stopped by the authorities before he's able to cause death and destruction in a bloody, reckless show of frustration is refreshing.

Unfortunately, in the context of an authoritarian regime censoring a film (one ostensibly about anarchy and resisting unquestioned societal norms) in order to justify total statism and police actions, I can't get behind what is otherwise a narrative improvement. Not that anyone, least of all China, cares about my opinion.

Context matters for happy endings. Just look at the alternate ending of Brazil...

Just remember: Corporations like Disney who claim to be all about LGBT issues, diversity, inclusion, equality - they are the one's who work side-by-side with China to remove the ''offending'' scenes.

It's nearly always opportunistic and performative. Corporations follow the money 99 out of 100 times.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Amusingly, I (would) actually prefer this. Not the why, or the who, and in context this is pretty awful.

But I'm also sick of the trend in post-9/11 films where the bad guy gets to succeed at blowing things up and killing loads of people and the good guy "wins" not by stopping the terrorist/supervillain/whatever but just apprehending them after the fact.

The irony is that Fight Club predates the trend by a year and change! Still, it's a terrible, hypocritical film, and a narrative where the insane terrorist is stopped by the authorities before he's able to cause death and destruction in a bloody, reckless show of frustration is refreshing.

Unfortunately, in the context of an authoritarian regime censoring a film (one ostensibly about anarchy and resisting unquestioned societal norms) in order to justify total statism and police actions, I can't get behind what is otherwise a narrative improvement. Not that anyone, least of all China, cares about my opinion.

Context matters for happy endings. Just look at the alternate ending of Brazil...

Prettty much... Though also in my mind foremost is that it's an American movie just being air dropped to China. If they want to tape it up, then it's like, go ahead whatever the movie is 22 years old by now. I don't think it's going to be that hard for people to be able to find the original one anyway.

[Jonathan101]

Amusingly, I (would) actually prefer this. Not the why, or the who, and in context this is pretty awful.

But I'm also sick of the trend in post-9/11 films where the bad guy gets to succeed at blowing things up and killing loads of people and the good guy "wins" not by stopping the terrorist/supervillain/whatever but just apprehending them after the fact.

The irony is that Fight Club predates the trend by a year and change! Still, it's a terrible, hypocritical film, and a narrative where the insane terrorist is stopped by the authorities before he's able to cause death and destruction in a bloody, reckless show of frustration is refreshing.

Unfortunately, in the context of an authoritarian regime censoring a film (one ostensibly about anarchy and resisting unquestioned societal norms) in order to justify total statism and police actions, I can't get behind what is otherwise a narrative improvement. Not that anyone, least of all China, cares about my opinion.

Context matters for happy endings. Just look at the alternate ending of Brazil...

To be fair, Tyler specifically says that the buildings are empty and they aren't killing anyone. I'm not sure anyone actually dies in the movie at all except in the existential sense.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Amusingly, I (would) actually prefer this. Not the why, or the who, and in context this is pretty awful.

But I'm also sick of the trend in post-9/11 films where the bad guy gets to succeed at blowing things up and killing loads of people and the good guy "wins" not by stopping the terrorist/supervillain/whatever but just apprehending them after the fact.

The irony is that Fight Club predates the trend by a year and change! Still, it's a terrible, hypocritical film, and a narrative where the insane terrorist is stopped by the authorities before he's able to cause death and destruction in a bloody, reckless show of frustration is refreshing.

Unfortunately, in the context of an authoritarian regime censoring a film (one ostensibly about anarchy and resisting unquestioned societal norms) in order to justify total statism and police actions, I can't get behind what is otherwise a narrative improvement. Not that anyone, least of all China, cares about my opinion.

Context matters for happy endings. Just look at the alternate ending of Brazil...

To be fair, Tyler specifically says that the buildings are empty and they aren't killing anyone. I'm not sure anyone actually dies in the movie at all except in the existential sense.

He threatened to cut his own testicles off. He used his position of power to lure his followers into helping him autoerotically castrate himself or something. Also Bob died on his watch.

[Jonathan101]

Oh, yeah, forgot about Bob.

(kind of ironically since Meatloaf just died)

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

And it's in a manner more consistent with how contemporary and controversial issues are circulated in society today, compared to the individualized and modernistic criterium for how we judge a protagonist or antagonist in a film.