There's no way you read fight club if you think the movie is somehow better.
What even is the "coincidence?" I wasn't able to glean enough info from the posters to make one out.
Dostoevsky wrote a book titled "Demons" and another titled "House of the Dead". Long after his death, both of those titles were later used for unrelated horror movies. I pretended to think that they were, in fact, adaptations of his novels, as a jape.
I love the book being entirely meta. The random fictitious references to the made up author and stuff breaking the fourth wall. It is fun. I wonder if there are any other books similar with that kind of framing device.
The book is far, far better than the movie. None of Ellis's novels have been filmed well; Less Than Zero is one of the worst adaptations in film history.
Agreed. The book is excellent and superior to the movie. However, the adaption is still great, and it would've been better if it included many small details from the book that were, I'm sure, removed in the final cut.
For me this one is really hard to call. The movie works, but I like the book's discussion of philosophical concepts. Even though Michael Crichton is one of those authors whose novels are basically an excuse to espouse his views to you, it helps that his views are actually kind of interesting.
It's been forever since I read the book but what I do kind of dimly recall is that the message was more like 'don't let some academic put together military operations without extreme oversight,' because some big-brained feminist historian makes the genius move of deliberately sending off their best scouts to be murdered and raped en masse for the nebulous possibility of getting some double agents.
