Moviepro (www.moviepro.net)

We have taken some photos of "Choke". They represent actual movie quality.

• Not perfect, but Rockwell shines in this fairly well adapted raunchy tale posted on 22 Aug 2009

  Choke tells the story of Victor Mancini (Sam Rockwell), a sex addict working in a colonial times reproduction. His mother, Ida (Anjelica Huston), suffers from dementia, and spends most of her time thinking Victor is someone else (mainly long dead lawyers) during his frequent visits to the hospital. To pay the bills, Mancini has a bit of a unique talent: he chokes on food in swanky restaurants, and practically forces innocent bystanders into saving him from death.I read the book Choke a few years ago, thinking it would be same in vain to writer Chuck Palahniuk's near flawless Fight Club (and of course, David Fincher's incredible film). But Choke was nothing like it, and anyone going to see the film thinking it will be is in for a disappointment.But like Fight Club before it, Choke is adapted quite well from its raunchy source material. The story is quite liberally changed in some instances, but in others, it is an almost literal recreation. Mancini is a well-rounded character, with bizarrely comic traits that are pure Palahniuk. I found myself almost crying from laughing so hard at the comic mishappenings he got himself into, frequently calling back to the events in the book. It was strange however that so little an amount of time is spent on the choking that Mancini has down practically to an art form, but then its off-the-rails, frank portrayal of sex was always much stronger. First-time director Clark Gregg does an excellent job making this character so true to Palahniuk's work that you can forgive him for glossing off something so integral to the plot (but at least it makes for a whole lot less convoluted, confusing and downright silly third act). Gregg's addition of the little idiosyncrasies of Mancini's lifestyle (small cuts to previous sexual encounters, frequent breast-filled day dreams) only further strengthens how close the film cuts to its source material.But despite being 92 minutes long, I think Gregg could have done with a touch more editing. The film is not lengthy at all (many sequences practically zip by in the hyper-kinetic sense of Fight Club before it), but the film feels quite long in some instances. Despite their importance to the story, the flashback sequences involving a much younger looking Huston and young Victor (playing by Jonah Bobo) drag on endlessly, nearly losing their train of thought mid-scene. Some of the scenes between Mancini and Ida's doctor, Paige Marshall (Kelly Macdonald), also have a habit of dragging their heels. Some cuts here and there in these scenes could have only benefited the film. As well, Gregg's doing away with the third act leaves some subplots hanging in the balance, never to fully integrate themselves with the film as a whole. Non-readers may not even notice some of them (including one glaring omission), but it may strike those who have read it as quite odd.The supporting cast is pretty well rounded. Macdonald does a great job in her scenes, as do Bijou Phillips in a small role as one of Mancini's co-workers, and Gregg himself as the lead character in the colonial times reproduction. I had failed to realize it was him when watching the film, but he brings a special greatness to every one of his character's lines.I was a little disappointed however in Brad William Henke's portrayal of Mancini's friend Denny however. Not because Henke does a bad job in the role, but because he does not get nearly enough time on screen. He steals many of his scenes, and seems to know just how to frame Denny, frequently shifting from the downtrodden weakling of a sidekick, to the strong willed individual Mancini wishes he could be. Henke is having fun in the goofy role, and it is obvious that he is very comfortable doing it. He does not have a whole lot of credits on his filmography, but I can only help this role makes him a lot more accessible in Hollywood. More scenes could have only reinforced the notion.Huston, looking much older than usual for the majority of the film, is excellent in her portrayal of Ida. She does not look to be doing much, but the emotions she conveys simply through her facial movements and expressions is enough to suggest that she is doing more than simply phoning in her performance. The role may not seem too tough, but she pulls it off without breaking a sweat. Despite disliking the flashback scenes, they only further developed her character into the closet psycho she is so great at playing.But the movie rests on Rockwell's shoulders, and he is clearly up to the task. The breath of life he gives Victor Mancini is almost poetic in how personal it looks and sounds. No, he does not give the same energy that Brad Pitt does as Tyler Durdan, but this does not seem to bother Rockwell in the least. He plays Mancini just the way he needs to in order to make him a believable regular guy, suffering from addiction problems and his need to please his overbearing mother even as she is slowly withering away. You can see the pain in his face right from minute one, and never once does he let us take this idealism for granted. He uses it and characterizes Mancini with a great breadth of thought not regularly seen in contemporary American cinema.While it is not perfect at all, Choke is a wonderfully valiant attempt at recapturing the nearly demented nature of a Palahniuk book. His unique voice is captured quite fluidly within the film, and writer/director Gregg can be quite proud of his work here. With the help of a great supporting cast, Rockwell practically lights up the screen in a way that only further proves his greatness as an actor.7/10.

• Wry, dry and riled. A slap-up meal for Fight Club cronies… posted on 16 Aug 2009

  Given the dark dynamism of Chuck Fight Club Palahniuk's writing, it was only a matter of time before a second of his books made that proverbial leap from page to screen. I mean, it's been nearly a decade since David Fincher cast the pages of Palahniuk's robust debut into a combustible black satire- reducing commercialism and consumerism to mere ashes as viewers looked on in shock and awe. The result? A stone cold classic. But of all the books to follow Fight Club, few could've expected Chucky P's reluctantly praised, riotously quaint yarn, Choke. A seedy, semi-psychotic headscrew about sex, sons, sex, mothers, sex, love and scams that's now, thanks to bit-part actor-cum-director Clark Gregg, strutting ominously into cinemas across the UK: horny as hell, looking for some action.Echoing Fight Club's depressing sense of modern life, Choke draws us into the oddball life of ill at ease sex addict Victor Mancini (Sam Rockwell), a Colonial times reenactor who's spun a wretched swindle to pay for his mother's fancy hospital care: pick a restaurant at random, wine there, dine there, then pretend you're choking on a hunk of food so that the person who "rescues you" will feel emotionally and, more importantly, financially responsible for you for the rest of their life. Hideously shrewd, right? Well Choke's that kind of film. So if sexually explicit dialogue, morally wrong narration, randy conmen and chronic masturbators fail to float your boat then, oh what the hell, Choke is a must see as far as this month's movies are concerned. After all, it's not all dicing with death and decree and sexual compulsion: elements of intimacy and romance do surface in this cloudy con/sex pool.Like Fight Club, although not quite as profound, Choke - at heart - is a gross and exaggerated journey through one of the various dark veins lining the underbelly of urban America. It isn't pretty, nor is it what you would call akin to the norm. It's a raw, dirty-minded character driven comedy peppered with outrageous moments that rarely cease to entertain or amuse, touch or transgress.As Victor Mancini, Sam Rockwell defines the archetypal comedy anti-hero: droll, charming, cynical, but a man of odd principle. Imagine Austin Powers on Prozac. Hurled onto the streets of a society-sanctioned, institution-shrugging America: unruly, dense and sneering. The character fits Rockwell like a glove. Giving the ever impressing thesp' his best role since Chuck Barris in Clooney's Confessions of a Dangerous Mind. He acts up a sardonic storm in a turn to trump the character's kudos. Add to Rockwell's, the performances of veteran Angelica Huston and top Scot Kelly Macdonald and you've got yourself a very well acted film.And the direction? Neat. Clark Gregg's coughed up a wryly amusing, ably structured spin on one of modern literature's most repugnant and hilarious books. There's no disguising that. His droll cameo tops off a good all-round job. Sure, the first time helmer's no David Fincher and Sam Rockwell's no Edward Norton but, then again, what right does any aspect of any movie really have to compare itself to Fight Club!? Okay, Choke may feature a forlorn anti-hero who takes some odd pleasure in attending group therapy sessions, but to compare the two in terms of celluloid worth and innovation would be off beam and unjust.Choke is a stand alone, illicitly moral and blissfully satirical film that just about lives up to the quality of Palahniuk's novel, even if Gregg's attention to detail and depth he was willing to dive into the psychology of Victor was somewhat shallow. As a fan of the book, this came as the only real letdown. But you have to expect this when 300 page novellas are streamlined into 90 minute movies. Cutbacks get made. Details get shaved. Episodes: altered. Pages: lost. Thus, it's not a film that exactly lodges hard in the jugular, or the memory, but one that's chock full of wit, grit and revolt. Just not enough kick to crack the kudos.

• Pain posted on 02 Aug 2009

  "Sex is as important as eating or drinking and we ought to allow the one appetite to be satisfied with as little restraint or false modesty as the other." Marquis de Sade I am told indiscriminate sex can lead to impotence when a true love surfaces, as if in retaliation or punishment for the anonymous, meaningless actions. Such seems to be the case in Choke, where young Victor (Sam Rockwell) has become a sex addict, for which his payment due is apparently his inability to become aroused by a woman, his mother's doctor at a nursing home, whom he may love.Having recently been made aware of actor David Duchovny's alleged addiction, the audience should better able to grasp that such an affliction actually exists, and like others, is difficult to expunge. For Victor, a guide at a colonial tourist-trap town, the pain of finding out from his mother (Anjelica Houston) who his father is may just be the metaphor for Victor's loneliness. At the least the pain of failing to get an erection is just as grave.The film doesn't so much resolve Victor's plight as it does make fun of a little anonymous sex and a whole lot of identity issues. So this occasionally funny film tries to tackle a big issue, over-indulgence, and succeeds in outlining the behavior that may lead to the addiction but never fully deconstructing it. The casual way the obsession is treated militates against a deeper understanding of its core and the ramifications (such as disease or psychic trauma). "Sex. In America an obsession. In other parts of the world a fact." Marlene Dietrich

• Choke is easy to swallow posted on 25 Jul 2009

  Let's get this straight right off the bat: Choke is a sick, nihilistic, sacrilegious, depraved hunk of cinema. That means, to me, it rocks out loud. Although this biting, dirty minded look at sex addiction, lust, bondage, and masturbation isn't suitable kiddie fare, or teen fare, its refusal to treat its lead character as, pardon the pun, a hunk of meat vapidly acting out his own fantasies actually forces you care about him far more than he'd ever care about you.Victor Mancini (Sam Rockwell) is, plain and simple, a sex addict; he even attends meetings, where they have a multistep program designed to cure people of their addiction, same as for other addictions. Meanwhile, his mom (Anjelica Huston) lays in a nursing home, showing progressive signs of dementia (she rarely recognizes him), and to finance his mother's hospital stay, Victor runs cons. One of his cons is that he causes himself to choke in restaurants, allowing Good Samaritans to save his life; they're so concerned for him that they often give him money later to help him, or something. Then he gives the money to the not-benevolent nuns who run the hospital where his mother is incarcerated.Along the way, of course, Victor humps everything in sight, because he's not just an addict, he's an unrepentant addict. His best friend Denny (Brad William Henke), is also an addict - he's a chronic masturbator - and is often complicit in Victor's dealings.Victor meets his match, physically, in a doctor (Kelly Macdonald) caring for his mother; unlike with the scores of other women, Victor somehow can't, uh, finish the job with Dr. Marshall. Maybe he - gulp - loves her? Nah, can't be.But lest you think this is just about some pervert's odyssey to self-actualization and empowerment, a real learning experience for all, it's just plain not. Victor doesn't learn diddly, no pun intended. (And if you recognize where a pun might have appeared there, you're the intended audience of this movie.) His journey isn't to find himself, or to better himself, it's to find out a little about his past, particularly the identity of his real father, as Mom schlepped the young Victor around for years, on the run from the police for crimes unspecified (although it's alluded that she was involved in violent protests). Now she's completely vulnerable, but her memory's not entirely reliable, either. But again, this ain't no touchy-feely heartwarming tale of a mother-son bond, not at all; Victor just wants information before his ailing mom joins the choir invisible.Rockwell is fantastic, perfect with his adorable-to-women, lost-puppy face; he's not strapping, he's not hot-with-two-Ts, he's just some schmoe with apparently irresistible, endless charm. Huston is solid as his mother - both in the present and in flashbacks, where she recalls another of her famous characters, Morticia Addams - and Henke is a real hoot as Victor's handy (another pun) pal. Adding equal parts sexiness and mystery is Macdonald as the leggy doctor who comes to love Victor, however inexplicably.Choke is raucous and profane, but there's oddly no gratuitous nudity or sex. Well, not gratuitous from where I'm sitting, if you know what I mean. But seriously, what's in there is relevant to the plot. How could it not be, though, when your protagonist is addicted to coitus?

• It's tough when you read the book posted on 01 Jul 2009

  I have never seen a movie based on a book that I had read and enjoyed. I was excited that this was made into a film. And my expectations where even higher when I read that Sam would play Victor. Problem is I wasn't able to separate from the book while watching the film or forget what was suppose to happen next. The whole Dr. Marshall being a patient really tripped me out when I read the book. It was like seeing Kim Novak in the bell-tower in Vertigo. Not the same effect when your watching the film as a member of the New England Patriots and you know what Clark Gregg is calling next. So as I ramble and whine about reading the book and it ruining my movie experience. I only have one thing to declare. As cousin Avi (SNATCH reference) would say "Don't Read the Book"

• Think Gilligan meets Groundhog's Day—in hell…Choke posted on 26 May 2009

  It took almost a decade for a second movie to come out from the literary source that is Chuck Palahniuk. David Fincher owned Fight Club, making it a cinematic wonder, enhancing the novel and becoming a wonderful companion to it. Rumors swirled afterwards about all his other stories being optioned for film translation, but after 9-11 halted Survivor's chances and Invisible Monsters' progress ended, it didn't seem good. But here comes 2008, with an unlikely savior in Clark Gregg, and all of a sudden we have Choke in cinematic glory to bring the author back into the spotlight. I love his books and all of them have a pop culture, post-modern feel showing sensibilities that can succeed on the big screen. Is Gregg the optimum choice to help the cause? Possibly not, but this is a very narrative driven story without the flash and flair of other novels, so his inexperience helming a film isn't overtly noticeable. While it is not as good as the book—how many actually are—this film keeps the tone and essence intact, bringing to life the words on the page. It's subtle and subversive and kept me entertained throughout.Gregg has been in Hollywood for a while now, a familiar face to David Mamet fans, and for all you kiddies, an actor in Ironman. The role he gives himself here is a good one, the stickler boss of the colonial theme park that our leads are employed at. It's a thankless role and definitely the straightman of the ensemble; however, it is his directing that is really put on display. He doesn't try to go beyond his limits and I commend him for it. Single-handedly saving the world from possibly going Palahniuk adaptation-less forever, I have nothing but praise for the man. There are some camera tricks utilized, most obviously the quick cuts between our lead Victor Mancini's sex-addicted visions of every woman being naked to their fully clothed reality, but it's more or less a strict, linear narrative. I do have to mention the final shot, which carries on as the credits play, a long take of two leads making out. In extreme close-up, the highly personal nature of what is displayed leaves you somewhat uncomfortable due to the length, but also happy at the idea of these two partaking in the action. It's the boldest stroke Gregg makes and, being the last thing we see, the strongest most memorable moment for me.It's all a comedy from start to finish, but one laced in good writing and subtlety. There are no real laugh-out-loud moments, except perhaps the revelation of a man being blind, just a consistent journey of sarcasm, heartfelt humor, and genuine witty banter. Victor, played perfectly by Sam Rockwell, really breathing life into the character as I envisioned him when reading the book, is a man that goes to restaurants and deliberately chokes so that some unsuspecting Good Samaritan can save him. These people now have a bond with him, feeling responsible for his life and in effect send him gifts and money whenever asked or on the anniversary of their fateful encounter. As one eyewitness's account says, her son was about to be divorced until his sense of bravery at saving Victor made his wife fall in love all over again. This kind of thing is a common trend with our lead; his uncanny ability to be devious and evil yet always have the outcome end up being generous and profound to those he is wronging. No wonder the guy becomes glued to the possibility he may be the second coming of Christ—believe me, it's actually a plot thread, and one that holds the film together.Rockwell's manic overabundance of life becomes a whirlwind, sleeping with random women at every turn, hanging out with his masturbation-obsessed best friend (Brad William Henke who hopefully will start getting more work after this), angering his boss by using 20th century objects in a colonial environment, and visiting his mother, who is suffering from dementia, that believes he is her old deceased lawyers. Only Palahniuk's warped mind could come up with this stuff, let alone tie it all together into a coherent plot that is interesting to follow through to its conclusion. A burgeoning relationship with a young nurse at the home, (Kelly Macdonald trying to hide her Scottish accent for who knows what reason), adds some conflict and space for Victor to finally seek help for himself and begin step four of the sex-addict program. Having a lifetime of pain brought on by the one person he loved, Anjelica Huston as his mother, keeps him closed off to the world, making it strange for him when he finally finds someone he can open himself to.There is so much going on, it'd be tough to talk about without either ruining the story or ruining the joke's setup. Choke is definitely not for everyone, the humor is probably too risqué for some and the subject matter too eccentric and modern for others. Palahniuk, who has a nice background cameo at the end, uses thinly veiled satire to bring us into his surreal interpretations of reality and be able to find ourselves living there. It is definitely one of his smallest scale novels, as far as craziness goes, but also one of his most accessible. For that reason, and because Gregg deftly adapted it with a respect to the source material, we have a resounding success. Hopefully allowing us to be brought back into his world of miscreants and fiends with a piece such as this will mean the more out-there stories will finally find their way to Hollywood. Scratch that. How about to a nice indie company that will do it right?

• Choke on this posted on 20 May 2009

  What a strange little film 'Choke' was. I saw it wanting to be more than it was, and I guess it just boiled down to a "find yourself" tale, overshadowing its slapstick, addiction message and numerous sex scenes (and before you jump to rent this instead of porn, take note: very little nudity is shown during the scenes – though there are a few other "comedic breast" shots elsewhere.) 'Choke' has its absolute fill of messed up characters, in fact, not one that appears on screen doesn't have numerous and obvious problems. Unfortunately, the movie gives us very little characters to root for or care about. One, for instance, does change his/her ways, and even then, it was ho hum. I will say this about the movie: they did get addiction down fairly well, though I can only relate to the "addicted" personality, not necessarily the sexual addiction. Throughout the film, we follow Victor to his mother's side in a mental hospital, to numerous sexual encounters (past and present), his fight (or comfort) with the sexual "problem," his need to fund his mother's medical bills by, well, choking it out of strangers and make sure his best friend and anyone else around him continues on the downward spiral his life has become. Normally I love Anjelica Huston, but unfortunately, here she was completely unconvincing as the mother with Alzheimer's as if just reading and not acting out her lines. And what was with all the women dying to sleep with Sam Rockwell? I guess it goes along with the "women love jerks or guys that treat them like dirt" theory (although doesn't that usually apply to handsome men?) Similarly, it also puzzled me how Adam Sandler became a calendar model/playboy in 'I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry.'

• At last another Chuck makes it to the big screen! posted on 02 May 2009

  Choke is the second Chuck Palahnuik book to get the big screen treatment after 'Fight Club' and hopefully not the last. As anyone who has read any of his books will testify they seem almost impossible to film yet any could become a script so much more imaginative than the usual Hollywood fodder. So to this then adapted and directed by Clark Gregg and starring Sam Rockwell as the main character Victor Mancini and Anjelica Huston as his mother. Based on such a rich text the films main charm as you can imagine is in the voice-over and the sharpness of the script, Victor, moving from one scam to the next, is a sex addict who fakes choking in restaurants so people save his life and become attached to him sending him cash which he uses to pay for his mothers hospital care. With flashbacks we are given opportunity to see Victor's upbringing before jumping back to the present in hospital visiting his mother who is losing her mind which is where we meet Dr. Paige Marshall the woman assigned to her case and also the woman fast becoming Victors object of desire. Through a series of funny set pieces in the hospital or in the medieval re-enactment town where Victor works and goofs away the hours with his pal Denny the story is well paced. Victor, desperate to get his mother to tell him who his father is while she can still remember, is fast beginning to spiral out of control. Then comes the twist and although well done it will be no surprise to people who had read the book, which is a shame, because it loses some impact. Don't though let this put you off what is a funny, filthy and deviously clever film. Great performances, well adapted and even a cameo by Chuck himself. For fans like myself it's just nice to see the work on the big screen and done well, for none fans it should, if nothing else, serve as an introduction to one of the greatest writers around today.

• An amazing piece of cinema. Could I love Sam Rockwell and Angelica any more than I do now posted on 22 Apr 2009

  What a tremendous piece of cinema.What wonderfully written and acted film, tender and moving it varying degrees of discomfort.In a world where people are doing head stands over warmed over America like "Revolutionary Road" this, truly, is a beautifully wrough examination of what it, truly, means to be an American.Rockwell - always my favorite of the contemporary actors is, absolutely, astonishing. Huston is exceptional Beautiful and tender and I just can't bring, myself, to think that there is any actress who could bring tears to my eyes, just by opening hers.Kelly Macdonald is wondrous, too, and so great to see her having something to do without being killed, off camera.What a terrific film. I love "Fight Club: but this movie rocks. It is a terrific piece of cinema, and one that lasts so amazingly in the mind.

• Chewed The Book, Swallow The Movie? posted on 22 Apr 2009

  The only Chuck P. book I own. It's a very funny book, about lust and salvation, and here it is on screen in...pretty good form. That is to say I was a little disappointed, with the ending in particular, which strikes a very different tone (not terrible, just different)....but that's neither here nor there.Choke is the story of Victor, med-school dropout who takes care of his 70's radical mom now suffering from dementia and dying after years of drug use and mental instability. In order to pay for her upkeep, Victor pulls double duty at his two jobs, one as an employee at a Colonial American theme park, and two, choking on food in restaurant, so that those who save his life, will feel obligated to help him out with cash from time to time. Who would save someone's life, only to let them die, once you know their sad penniless (over exaggerated) story? Victor targets the wealthy and affluent, "You don't wanna get saved by some waiter", he says in one of many direct addresses to the audience. The broken 4th wall, reminiscent of Fight Club, is taken directly from the book, and one of the films stronger techniques.In the hospital he meets, a young doctor, who assists him in translating his mother's diary, which leads to shocking questions about Victor's origins, and his father or lack there of.Victor goes to sex addict meetings usually just to have sex in the bathroom with fellow addicts. While his best friend Denny, a chronic masturbator, begins taking his first shaky steps to recover, which involves romancing a Stripper and collecting rocks for each day his sobriety, "idle hands are the devils playground". The sex addiction and the need to save his mom, are the twin turbines that propel this film, and by the end they are both so clearly intertwined it escapes being exploitative.I enjoyed this version of Choke, which was kinda of like Choke-Light, but still very funny, if only slightly missing the aim of the novel; the heady and vulgar mix of the sacred and the profane. That is to say, important sub-plots, and main-plot points get muted; we know why Victor chokes, there are more reasons than I stated above, but we don't get to see the people who fund his faints here, as we do in the book, and so that aspect of the story, seems a little disconnected. As do Denny and the rocks, another vital story element for me, got put on the back-burner here. Denny replaces one fetish with another, and most of the rooms of his house are filled with rocks.(Actually they shot this ending, you can see pictures online, but decided against it, before release.) Okay, but everyone always says the book is better than the movie, I know, I know, I just had to get that out.What's left of Choke though is commanded by Sam Rockwell, who is only improving as an actor, and Angelica Houston who needs no intro. While it's not as conceptually taught as I would have liked, its still really, really funny, and at a few moments, a bit moving (Ive got a personal soft spot for movies with visits to the demented in hospitals; The Savages is especially hard to watch), at least for me.It's an allegorical sex comedy, but it's also a very accessible one, considering the weirdness of the material. It's a more personal story than "Fight Club", and almost an opposite ideology, "building anything", versus "tearing down everything", but told in the same sardonic writerly tone, weave come to expect from Palahniuk.In the end, I just wanted more, but it was fun, and the story was brought to life, mostly just as I had imagined it when reading.Also it's got the funniest and perhaps the only funny, "rape" scene, ever filmed (it is and it's not what it sounds like).

• Very rude but very good posted on 14 Apr 2009

  Just saw this film at the Warsaw Film Festival and I was very impressed. This characters are very wacky, but always interesting and the script keeps coming up with surprises. Usually quite obscene ones in fact. The premise could have been quite depressing - a sex-addict has a mum with Alzheimer's who can't remember his name... and all he can think about is the awful way she brought him up... but there are lots of hilarious moments to lighten this scenario. The jokes are good, and the acting is great too - especially Kelly Mcdonald and Angelica Houston. Sometimes, however, the logic of the film is a bit stretched (yes, most of it's meant to be absurd, but the ending gets a bit too far-fetched). Also, the director Gregg is APPALLING as an actor - he reads all his lines wrong (stick to directing, you're actually pretty good!). But all in all, very funny and well worth watching.

• Worth digesting slowly posted on 10 Apr 2009

  Few authors have as instantly distinctive a style as Chuck Palahniuk: simply look for the most convoluted, scathingly hilarious, disturbingly filthy and twisted narratives which somehow prove revelatory of strikingly genuine nuggets of human nature, usually the ones we would rather keep hidden. Perhaps for this reason, with the exception of his enormous cult hit Fight Club, Palahniuk's work has seldom been adapted for the big screen, with movie executives likely preferring to work with plots which they can be sure their viewers will understand, and not result in heart attacks from either repulsion or outrage. As such, writer/director Clark Gregg's adaptation of Palahniuk's Choke is a daring move - after all, how often does one see the tale of a sardonic sex-addict playing on the sympathies of those who save him from choking to death in restaurants to pay for his mother's hospital bills gracing the marquees? And yet, as surprising as it may seem, for all of the caustically humorous overtones, at the heart of Choke lies a surprisingly tender and fascinatingly complex character study, brimming with humanity and pathos... and yes, loads of gratuitous sex on the side. Those expecting more along the lines of Fight Club's nihilistic social commentary and brutal violence may find themselves disappointed, as Choke's sordid portrait of a man so used to mindlessly numbing his pain coming to terms with his flaws and potential for good almost by accident proves a far more sympathetic look, albeit one with graphic and perverse sexual content. That being said, writer/director Gregg's screenplay is a razor sharp medley of slashing Palahniuk wit and biting one-liners as well as surprisingly poignant character revelations, blending an increasingly eclectic myriad of events into an impressively concise (the film runs only 89 minutes) yet still cohesive storyline. If a flaw is to be found, it lies in the film's ending, which flirts which but mercifully avoids succumbing to convention and provides what may be one plot twist too many, making the finale somewhat unnecessarily cluttered (and yet strangely fitting) but in such an impressively unique work, such minute concerns are easily forgiven. One of the film's many blessings is the casting of the supremely talented Sam Rockwell as Victor Mancini, the sort of lead role he is far too often deprived of. It is a testament to Rockwell's immense skill and charisma that he manages not only to sympathize a character who ultimately sets out to make himself dislikeable but also evokes both hilarity and pathos in the least likely places, delivering one of the most remarkable performances in recent memory. Similarly, Angelica Huston is incendiary as Mancini's mother (in flashbacks shown to be an even less stable parent before her dementia) and her interactions with her son prove surprisingly poignant and emotionally wrenching. The tremendously likable Brad William Henke raises many a laugh as Mancini's similarly sex-addicted best friend, and Kelly Macdonald gives a quirky but charming performance as the doctor who may, despite Mancini's best efforts, end up being a love interest. Director Gregg has a hilarious supporting role as the earnest head of Victor's collonial historical interpreter site, and Jonah Bobo proves a rising talent to watch as Victor's childhood self.Darkly hilarious, sublimely subversive and yet hiding surprising pathos and heart, Choke proves one of the most offbeat films of the year, and is all the more entertaining for it. While the film is without question not for everyone, those willing to stomach the acerbic and often disturbing humour and hefty sexual content may discover one of the most darkly enjoyable movie experiences of quite some time. -9/10

• A difficult film to review posted on 04 Apr 2009

  I try not to read too much about a film before I see it, so I can make up my own mind. I had enjoyed 'Fight club' as a novel and even more as a film. 'Fight club' was one of those mainstream deeper films from the 90s like 'The Matrix', where you can choose to watch it on many different levels.Again author Chuck Palahniuk wants to shock and provoke with 'Choke', but it doesn't quite have the same impact this time around for me. Maybe because it is labelled a comedy/drama and I therefore can't take it that seriously. It could also be that 'Fight club' came at a time when I was more impressionable to this kind of film, who knows.Seems like Chuck Palahniuk more or less joined Bret Easton Ellis' genre of storytelling, who you imagine he grew up reading. But I think if you are going to provoke with e.g. violence, it is important that you provoke people's thoughts as well. Otherwise the thing becomes just meaningless violence. I think both 'Fight club' and 'Choke' succeed in questioning the world we live in.According to the movies official homepage it is a dirty minded, psychotic comedy. You feel sorry for main character in 'Choke', who is a sex addict. "Choke" like the author's previous piece 'Fight club' examines twenty something attention seeking, numbness through materialism and desire to feel. Could it be a similar story rehashed with a different premise and characters? It seems that way to me. I got the feeling Chuck Palahniuk might be an attention seeking "choker" himself, writing shocking books to make people notice him.Who is to blame for protagonist's numbness and why he is so numb is difficult to say. His childhood, himself, parents, or our culture. Or a combination. Probably there are no simple answers to complex situations. I liked the message at the end, which I won't give away here.Soundtrack is pretty good, which you can stream for free on Choke's official site: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/choke/ I am not a fan of Radiohead, but I liked their song 'Reckoner'.This film is quite good and definitely not as bad as many reviews indicate. I think the trouble is people have high expectations and compare it to 'Fight club', and it's very difficult to follow up that movie without disappointing.

• Superv. posted on 27 Mar 2009

  Yes, there were some things in this movie that were unsavory. And Yes, this is not a first date movie or a movie for the faint of heart. But this was the first complete film I have seen in a very long time. Every element (comedy, love, sadness) was robust and fulfilling. The acting was phenomenal, the passion of the artists behind this film glowed. I went with my girlfriend who knows a thing or two about anonymous programs, she has said on many occasions that films depicting these organizations are devoid of any truth or dignity for that matter. Walking out she looked at me and simply said "Imperfectly perfect." The movie is as the book is. A paradox, in so many ways. If you want something not funny but hilarious, go buy a ticket. If your not looking for a love story but some realistic interpretation of loves manifestation in everyday messed up life, then by all means see this movie. If you want to see a hero in a villain or a the good in bad then you would be more than satisfied with this film. Choke is, in my eyes, complete.

• Funny but not really satisfying posted on 23 Mar 2009

  From the writer of Fight Club comes the story of a sex addict who will choke in restaurants to get a free meal and sympathy. He is a med school drop out who works as a historical reenactor and is dealing with his mother who is locked up in a psychological hospital for women. There he meets a doctor who changes his life. Some people I know love the film and some people loath it. I'm taking the middle ground. While I know people's lives are this convoluted, I thought there was just too much going on (face on a milk carton?). I never could fully give myself over to it. I laughed frequently and had a good time but it just never rang any bells for for me. Can you tell that I'm kind of neutral about it? I mean I'm having a hard time saying much about it other than this was a movie where I actually liked Sam Rockwell. Worth a shot if you think you might like it, with the proviso that it is based on a book by the writer of Fight Club and is about a sex addict.

• Those who give "Choke" a chance won't find it hard to swallow, but may be left hungering for more posted on 05 Mar 2009

  ChokeDirected by Clark Gregg.Starring Sam Rockwell, Anjelica Huston and Kelly Macdonald.Coming almost ten years after the mind-blowing "Fight Club", author Chuck Palahniuk's second novel adapted for the big screen is the story of an addict's quest for self-fulfillment. No film has been able to establish the same quirky style of cool that was so palpitating in "Fight Club", and director Clark Gregg's "Choke" is no exception. The movie knows better than to try and recapture the magic of its spiritual predecessor, and is a decidedly different experience in both style and tone.Victor Mancini (Rockwell) has a lot on his plate. His hospitalized mother (Huston), who suffers from Alzheimer's disease, has forgotten who he is. His dead-end job at Colonial Dunsboro has him playing indentured servant to failed drama students in the seventeenth century (Victor refers to himself as "the backbone of Colonial America"). And on top of it all, he may just be the last and most despicable descendant of the one and only Jesus Christ. The guy clearly can't catch a break, so no wonder he uses his group sex addict meetings to pick up chicks and pretends to choke in restaurants, hoping to mooch off of potential saviors."Choke" succeeds in capturing the peculiar and eccentric elements of Palahniuk's text, often to hilarious effect; whenever visiting his mother in the nursing home, Victor must confront a senile old woman pestering him for an apology for the time that he supposedly touched her "woo-woo." Such small comedic bits are where the film really shines, because the overarching story is ultimately handled without much urgency. Everything feels a bit disjointed, more like a series of gags than a succinct motion picture. Victor's motives are often unclear; he simply waits for things to happen to him, and then reacts. The film explains his various character flaws through flashbacks depicting his rough childhood at the hands of his fugitive, drug-addicted mother, but never bothers to give the matter much closure.Despite the story's flaws, everyone in the cast is top-notch. Sam Rockwell thankfully makes for a great sleazebag, but still gives Victor enough humanity to keep the audience rooting for him. Kelly Macdonald ("No Country for Old Men") makes a surprising turn as a hospital nurse reluctant to succumb to Victor's persistent advances. Anjelica Huston has a fun time playing Ida Mancini, lending some credibility to the occasionally exaggerated role. Even the bit parts are of good quality, with the director stepping out from behind the camera long enough to play Victor's stuck-up boss at Colonial Dunsboro, sentencing those who defy him to a day in the stocks.Much like its characters, the film is far from perfect, but it is not without a certain appeal. Those who give "Choke" a chance won't find it hard to swallow, but may be left hungering for more.Final Grade: C+

• Premium one-night-stand material. posted on 11 Feb 2009

  There are moments when watching films that you genuinely feel exalted by what you are experiencing one moment and then you find yourself confused or cursing at the director for tripping over one too many times. Clark Gregg, the director and writer of the screenplay here needs to tie his shoelaces; there's no simpler way to put it: Choke is great fun, but it's also too clumsy with characters and plotting to transcend beyond the realm of silly entertainment. When taking on the style of novelist Chuck Palahniuk, one has to maintain the writer's sardonic and satirical tone, but not at the expense of keeping things relevant and far from absurdity. Gregg nails the comical tangents of the novel's story and yet when trying to develop any sense of interesting character and substance to back it all up, the results are less than satisfying. What results is a feature that is more than likely to strike up more than a few chuckles from audiences but will undoubtedly leave them feeling unfulfilled by anything else.To claim that Choke is without its positive features outside of its funny bone material however would be a slight misjudgement. If there is one thing that Gregg at least seems to capture in engaging light here, it is the main character of Victor Mancini played by Sam Rockwell. Victor is just about the opposite of your average big-screen leading man; self-obsessed, vindictive, perverted, manipulative and womanising, Mancini isn't a nice guy, but the ladies seem to like him regardless. At least, that's what Choke wants you to believe. Taken on a pure premise level, Victor's predicament is absurd in every right; gifted with the rare talent of being able to convince women to have sex with him, this all-around asshole sleeps around… a lot. Throughout the course of the movie however his situation irrevocably changes, due in part to a chance meeting with a new nurse at his elderly and senile mother's nursing home. From here on in Victor can't "function" properly with other women, so to speak, and the results play off his character well. It's here that the movie draws its biggest laughs but there's some compelling character work as a whole too.It should be noted that although the setup sounds somewhat hammy, there are no over the top sitcom Ben Stillerisms present here. Choke instead plays its comedy routine subtly through well timed dialogue and sharp satire.Where Victor really gets a chance to move beyond his comical façade however is through his mother, who often –as a result of her dementia- mistakes him for old friends and lawyers. It is during these sequences that Mancini is layered out more substantially, with the script eventually playing its cards right during the final act which capitalises on all facets of his character; the wit, his somewhat tragic disposition and his naïve outlook on women and love. It's a mix that works wonderfully and brings things to a poignant closing, but as it stands, such moments beforehand are rarely seen. This doesn't necessarily hurt the film too bad; Gregg seems more occupied with keeping things edgy and humorous and that's fine, but there are times that the narrative gets clunky as a result of various all-too-obvious setups for that eventual climax. Particularly out of place are the overt flashbacks of which are far too frequent and far too inconsequential to carry any weight. Such moments stand to detail the back-story of Victor and his mother, but they never seem to take off and Anjelica Huston consistently feels out of touch and looks generally ridiculous trying to look half her age (They recast a younger version of Victor of all things, so why not his mother?).Despite its many problems however, there is no denying that what Choke represents, and how it eventually delivers it is satisfying enough to keep audiences laughing in their seats. For those looking for another Fight Club affair though, this isn't it. Palahniuk's voice is represented well enough, but too often little details in character and plotting get lost in amongst Gregg's ambition to create something as edgy and controversial as it is relentlessly funny. As it stands the movie works well as a satirical comedy, but less as the faux drama that it tries to be throughout the earlier stages of the narrative. However, with a strong set of performances and a refreshing, original voicing of comedy, there's certainly room to have fun with Choke, but just keep in mind that "it doesn't mean anything"; simple, premium one-night-stand material with only a hint of something more beneath the surface.- A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net)

• A movie a mature audience will enjoy posted on 09 Feb 2009

  Chuck Palahniuk appeals to a younger audience? I thought this movie was very well written, very well acted and dark and disturbing. I will add this book to my must read.I guess I'm a Sam Rockwell fan, and the reason I desperately wanted to watch this movie and it was only after watching it did I realize this was based on a book. The movie stands alone very well. I just can't stop thinking about it. I never believed Victor (Sam Rockwell) to be a disgusting human being, I saw him as flawed, horribly flawed, misunderstood, imperfect and what else can you expect when your mother was completely insane.I thought Choke was a phenomenal movie, with amazing depth of character and insight about mental illness. Victor is a sex addict, so there is an awful lot of sex in the movie - if this bothers you, then do not bother. You will need an open mind to enjoy this movie.The comments here on IMDb are extremely disappointing, so please do not bother reading them.

• Why isn't Sam Rockwell a Movie Star? posted on 06 Jan 2009

  I've read a couple of Chuck Palahniuk's books, and they're dark, weird and unsettling. So is this movie, but it's also funny, outrageous, sacrilegious and a little pervy. So I really liked it.Victor is a sex addict who attends sex addict meetings to pick up girls (Joel Grey plays one of the members with a sly twist on his usual impish character). He purposely chokes on food in restaurants in order to be "saved" by wealthy patrons who feel obligated to "help" him further by giving him cash. He needs the money to keep his mother (Anjelica Huston) in a mental hospital where she's being treated for the delusions that scarred his entire life.The movie is a labyrinthine journey toward discovering Victor's origins, then regression back through his tangled history. Sam Rockwell portrays Victor better than he's ever played any role before. He slips between arrogance, annoyance, gullibility, disbelief, desperation and humor seamlessly, and the performance is the pinnacle of his career thus far.Don't take the kids, but don't miss this movie.

• Good for a 90 minute film -- Better and fuller if it was 2 hours posted on 21 Dec 2008

  I had the opportunity to view the film Choke at Columbia College Chicago for a screening which held a Q&A with the main actor of the film, Sam Rockwell; so being that I read the novel before as well, I would like to share my take on the film. No synopsis here; read the one that IMDb's.If you have read the Palahniuk novel Choke, then you should expect that this 90 minute film cannot hold all of the sexual intensity (and comical vulgarity) that the novel had the space to provide for. Do not get me wrong--this film is very funny and Sam Rockwell is, as usual, superb in the anti-hero role that he's played so well in other films.My one (and major) problem with the film is the fact that it was 90 minutes and wasn't pushed to be a 2 hour piece. I felt that there was so much more to delve into psychologically that Choke the novel did with sex addiction and the story and idea (will not spoil here) of who the character Victor Mancini was or thinks he is. Rockwell's great acting did a lot to pick up this slag, I do have to mention.One thing I did like, which was also done with the ending of Fight Club (another Palahniuk novel) is that (again, will not spoil here) the finish to the Choke film was more satisfying then the deus ex machina endings that Palahniuk sometimes (well, many times) does with his stories.Kelly Macdonald, who is wonderful in anything that she is in, as well as the other supporting actors and actresses kept the story alive and in a wonderful way.The pacing of the film as well as the narrative was very much "Palahniuk" and this is a pace and narrative that is one of a kind and most interesting to view; which is aside from the usually predictable flow of the other films of today. I did give this movie a 7/10 but I still believe that it is a movie that should be seen by anyone who likes to laugh, especially at things they don't think they would laugh at. Also, because the overall story is hilarious and is satisfyingly unique and the acting makes the film whole, too.And did I mention Sam Rockwell was great?