There is a line about “fathers setting up franchises with other families,” and I never thought about connecting that with the fact that Fight Club was being franchised and the movie made that connection. Now that I see the movie, especially when I sat down with Jim Uhls and record a commentary track for the DVD, I was sort of embarrassed of the book, because the movie had streamlined the plot and made it so much more effective and made connections that I had never thought to make. This is par for the course when a great director is making a film adaptation. Kubrick never even consulted Stephen King on most of what he changed, he had free reign. The book is vastly different from the film, entire situations and scenarios were added and removed deliberately by Stanley Kubrick to convey his own artistic intentions. The Shining is a perfect example of this. Film adaptations rarely stay true to the book, and are instead used as a foundation for a completely independent piece of art. It is important to remember that the book has virtually nothing to do with the film. Ah yes, the popular book vs film differences: these do not matter.

Jack durdan rule 8