Crash 1996

So Fightclub before Fightclub.
Just with sex and women.

Attached: 5.jpg (600x888, 88.97K)

I think it's a fair assessment fight me.

bump

Aside from the depressing 90s aesthetic I dont think they're that similar m8

>crash
>not CRASH ACADEMY AWRADS 2004

Explain your thesis, OP.

group of skizo's go around committing acts of violence against the public
Violence is meant to awaken something inside of you.
In fight club it's your manhood. In crash it's your sex drive.
Big final operation near the end
Normal person becomes a quasi-terrorist by the end.
I could go on.

holly hunter a babe

>CRASH ACADEMY AWRADS 2004
Not the shit one no.
See this post

the group quickly consumes the life of the protagonist.
group members are martyred serving the cause.
Covert homosexuality in fight club is replaced by overt homosexuality in crash.
So, both share homosexual themes.

>cronenberg

Attached: download.gif (480x270, 3.24M)

I'd crash into her mommy milkers, if you know what I mean and I think you do.

Attached: deborah-kara-unger_3.jpg (677x1000, 87.17K)

Is my argument sound?

sage

Fun Fact: In the early 2000s when I was like 12 I was going through my parents DVD collection and found this movie, thought it was a racing movie kek....but I jerked off for the first time to the scene where he fucked the short brown haired chick in the back of the car. Good times

Crash is about the psychological connection between sex and the death drive whereas Fight Club is about nihilism and identity. Other than superficial connections regarding pseud-tier commentary on capitalism and a vague idea of violence being cathartic (which I'll add they go about differently) the films have nothing in common. Bad take.

>which I'll add they go about differently
It's the same. Acts of violence mostly. Sometimes against themselves and sometimes against others.
The plots are quite similar even subject matters delt with are different.

This movies was the favorite to win the palm d'or but Francis Ford Coppola actively compaigned against it winning

>even subject
even if the subject

>Anarchy for the sake of anarchy
>People having sex with cars

Apples and oranges, buddy

No, it's not the same. In Crash, it's about the psycho-sexual attraction of destruction. The sexual element of it is what's emphasized (Ballard was a Freudian and explored those themes in his writing). In Fight Club violence is an ironic act--the characters reclaim themselves by subjecting their bodies to physical violence (but the destruction is for its own sake--hence why it's ironic).

The only connection between them is what I mentioned regarding pseud-tier takes on capitalism. Both of them are from the same era of /lit and both of them are intentionally subversive takes on the superficial nature of society. However, Ballard argues that man is a primal animal and the modern environment is a false veneer whereas Palainuk emphasizes alienation and the collapse of systems of belief.

They're different and the connections you make between them are superficial.

>ironic
how is it ironic?
I don't see anything counterintuitive about it.