User Score
7.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 55 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 42 out of 55
  2. Negative: 9 out of 55
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. SpaceC.
    Feb 27, 2009
    3
    This movie is about a sex addict whose mom is dying from dementia. Its about as funny as it sounds. In the hands of a competent cast (with the possible exception of the lead), director and scriptwriter perhaps we would have been able to at least invest in the characters. However as is we are forced to sit through 89 minutes of drama surrounding characters we don't care about and a This movie is about a sex addict whose mom is dying from dementia. Its about as funny as it sounds. In the hands of a competent cast (with the possible exception of the lead), director and scriptwriter perhaps we would have been able to at least invest in the characters. However as is we are forced to sit through 89 minutes of drama surrounding characters we don't care about and a story too poorly told and blandly presented to follow. Collapse
  2. JayH.
    Feb 17, 2009
    3
    Preposterous and stupid, none of the characters have any depth. It's pretentious, uninteresting and poorly directed. I found very little of interest.
  3. BillH.
    Jan 10, 2009
    8
    A really great film. Haven't read the book or seen Fight Club, so I'm making no comparisons. It is an originally funny (which, given the context/plot is impressive), and poignant journey of someone who feels damaged beyond repair - and who even has identified with that image of himself - and the twisted path he's able to forge to some kind of sanity. Really, really enjoyed A really great film. Haven't read the book or seen Fight Club, so I'm making no comparisons. It is an originally funny (which, given the context/plot is impressive), and poignant journey of someone who feels damaged beyond repair - and who even has identified with that image of himself - and the twisted path he's able to forge to some kind of sanity. Really, really enjoyed all aspects of it... Expand
  4. Zorro
    Oct 5, 2008
    9
    i enjoyed it. i was in awe. how can i put this more specifically? i went to watch this movie without having read any reviews on it, and, like yourselves, i go to watch a movie on whether the good reviews outweigh the bad. higher chance of enjoying the movie, but then again lot's of ourselves see each other outside of the census. neither here or there. SO....it was great. From who he i enjoyed it. i was in awe. how can i put this more specifically? i went to watch this movie without having read any reviews on it, and, like yourselves, i go to watch a movie on whether the good reviews outweigh the bad. higher chance of enjoying the movie, but then again lot's of ourselves see each other outside of the census. neither here or there. SO....it was great. From who he was, to why he was, to who he'll be, and i drove off trying to get to the shiny diamond island... Expand
  5. JohnS.
    Sep 30, 2008
    3
    Went in expecting satirical and edgy. Left feeling like I'd witnessed a long and painful bowel movement, from every conceivable angle.
  6. ChadS.
    Sep 29, 2008
    7
    In M. Night Shyamalan's "The Village", the period detail of the rustic homestead was perfect except for one tiny detail; the tombstones in the villagers' graveyard looked too new. Vincent's boss at a colonial theme park is constantly on the prowl for such anachorisms: a wigless pate, a newspaper, a handjob. Vincent(Sam Rockwell) is a sex addict. He doesn't have to In M. Night Shyamalan's "The Village", the period detail of the rustic homestead was perfect except for one tiny detail; the tombstones in the villagers' graveyard looked too new. Vincent's boss at a colonial theme park is constantly on the prowl for such anachorisms: a wigless pate, a newspaper, a handjob. Vincent(Sam Rockwell) is a sex addict. He doesn't have to choke the chicken(fifteen times a day!!!) like his best friend Denny(Brad William Henke). Ladies love Vincent: Ursula(Bijou Phillips) risks having her check docked by their Colloquial Old English-speaking boss, who probably knows that manual stimulation of the johnson was rare in the 19th century. Even doctors can't resist the tour guide. "Choke" also recalls "The Sixth Sense" in the way the filmmaker skillfully guards its secret from the audience through careful staging. Vincent isn't dead, but his heart is. The doctor(Kelly MacDonald) sees this. She sees crazy people. Vincent supplements his income by choking on food in public eateries. It's hard to believe that total strangers would feel responsible for Vincent's life, so much so that they'd actually send him money, but then again, Fred Flintstone felt obliged to look after a con-man(J. Montague Gypsum in an episode of "The Flintstones" called "This is Your Lifesaver") after luring him off a bridge. The near-death experience scam is for a good cause, though. Vincent wants his mother(Anjelica Huston) to have the best medical care possible. She plays a big part in her son's life, and unfortunately, the story suffers for it. If "Choke" performed the Heimlich Maneuver on itself, expelling some, if not all, of Vincent's childhood flashback scenes with Ida on the lam, it would alleviate some of the overstatement that the narrative makes about Vincent's inability to love Paige, since the son's arrested development already has an explanation through his frequent visits at the institution with his mother. Getting to know the people in Vincen't encounter group would've made better use of the film's running time. But the film is smart about reigning in the fantastical impressions that people have about Vincent at the hospital. The doctor is a hilariously fallible storyteller. Expand
  7. Mark
    Sep 28, 2008
    0
    Have yet to see the film. For anyone who thinks Chuck is a talented writer, try this exercise: please read, or re-read the first couple of sentences to Choke, then please open the first books of Lemony Snickets "A Series of Unfortunate Events: A Bad Beginning." Not only does it appear as if Chucky lifted the idea, he did a shitty job of executing it. Snickets book is obviously geared for Have yet to see the film. For anyone who thinks Chuck is a talented writer, try this exercise: please read, or re-read the first couple of sentences to Choke, then please open the first books of Lemony Snickets "A Series of Unfortunate Events: A Bad Beginning." Not only does it appear as if Chucky lifted the idea, he did a shitty job of executing it. Snickets book is obviously geared for children and has afar superior prose style. How anyone above the age of sixteen could have opened the book "Choke" and read beyond the first two sentences is beyond me. Expand
  8. MichaelS.
    Sep 28, 2008
    2
    Definitely disagree with Tom. Choke was a great book and one of the first I would translate to the screen because of all the visual comedy in the book. But the execution of making this movie was awful. Plays more like a Seinfeld episode, complete with ridiculous over-acting and idiotic musical blips. Every actor in the movie was horrible, and the choices of what to include from the book Definitely disagree with Tom. Choke was a great book and one of the first I would translate to the screen because of all the visual comedy in the book. But the execution of making this movie was awful. Plays more like a Seinfeld episode, complete with ridiculous over-acting and idiotic musical blips. Every actor in the movie was horrible, and the choices of what to include from the book and what to leave out were even worse. Expand
  9. joey
    Sep 27, 2008
    2
    Lame hipster movie for people more concerned with being cool than enjoying a good movie. Recommended only to fans on the writer. You know those cult members who like to pretend they enjoy good fiction, but instead only like shock with no substance.
  10. DarrellS.
    Sep 26, 2008
    9
    it truly was a wonderful adaptation. In all honesty I enjoyed it much more than 'Fight Club,' but then again I enjoyed the book 'Choke' more than the book 'Fight Club.' All the actors portrayed the actors wonderfully, especially Sam Rockwell as Victor, and the chap that played Denny did a wonderful support role. The score lacked a lot, sure their was a it truly was a wonderful adaptation. In all honesty I enjoyed it much more than 'Fight Club,' but then again I enjoyed the book 'Choke' more than the book 'Fight Club.' All the actors portrayed the actors wonderfully, especially Sam Rockwell as Victor, and the chap that played Denny did a wonderful support role. The score lacked a lot, sure their was a Radiohead song at the end, and a few songs here and there, but it feels that the songs were later added by Fox rather than being an original part of the film. The score for 'Fight Club' was amazing and I anticipated 'Choke' to have the same treatment. The cameo by Mr. Palahniuk was awesome. A quick trivia about 'Fight Club:' In every single scene, no matter what, there is a cup of Starbucks coffee (even if it is not visible). If I were to give it a score, easily a 9.5 out of 10. Go see it, pay for those that actually acknowledge Chuck as a great American author, and actually made a decent book to film transition. Expand
  11. TomK.
    Sep 26, 2008
    6
    Its a bad movie no doubt about it. But i kind of understand since its based on one of palahniuks worst books ( hand by hand with diary). Some of Palahniuks books are movie material (survivor, lullaby and obviously fight club) and some are not. This was a bad call from the studio. Dont see it unless you are fan of Chuck's work or have a preference for dark dark humor.
  12. Philipisawesome
    Sep 26, 2008
    5
    Awesome trolling there Philip. Please don't feed this guy. Personally, I would avoid seeing a movie by an author I hate, but hey.. I'm a different breed of cat.
  13. PrestonJ.
    Sep 26, 2008
    7
    Please excuse Philip, he's just not a fan of the writer this was based from. If one doesn't understand or know damaged people like the one's illustrated in all of his books, or at least understand that these characters aren't created out of thin air but from lots of close up research of this world (please see CHick Palahniuck's "Stranger Than Fiction": a Please excuse Philip, he's just not a fan of the writer this was based from. If one doesn't understand or know damaged people like the one's illustrated in all of his books, or at least understand that these characters aren't created out of thin air but from lots of close up research of this world (please see CHick Palahniuck's "Stranger Than Fiction": a collection of non fiction works) than its alot to take in. The film isn't perfect but the performances are solid and does a decent job staying with the source material. If you are a fan of this author's work you will still enjoy this adaptation. Expand
  14. Philip
    Sep 22, 2008
    3
    This is one of the most tortuously awful movies I have ever had the misfortune to sit through. I would've walked out if I was able to muster the strength but this amateurish patchwork of grotesquely off-key humor left me paralyzed with it's sheer incompetence. I am a fan of black humor and I was not offended by the content of the movie but I WAS offended by the appalling This is one of the most tortuously awful movies I have ever had the misfortune to sit through. I would've walked out if I was able to muster the strength but this amateurish patchwork of grotesquely off-key humor left me paralyzed with it's sheer incompetence. I am a fan of black humor and I was not offended by the content of the movie but I WAS offended by the appalling delivery. This film feels like it was edited by a drunkard who has never watched a movie before in his life. Many shots are out of focus, the boom keeps dropping in front of the camera, the framing is awkward. Man. It's about an hour too long, the performances are feeble, the dialogue is wooden and ludicrous, the plot has zero momentum and almost all of the jokes fall completely flat. The worst thing is the ham-fisted 'reflection' towards the end of the film where the non-plot winds itself into a black hole of stupidity and the main character begins postulating on what he's learned about 'life' in the haphazard sequence of events that constitute this atrocious movie. I actually groaned out loud with disbelief at how awful it was. Man, I'm really depressed after watching this trash. It was agony. I understand that they didn't have much to work with - it is Chuck Palahniuk after all - but they could've at least tried. Did I mention that I think Chuck Palahniuk is overrated and pretty lame in general? That may have colored my review slightly. This is not 'twisted' or 'edgy' or 'dark' or anything like that. It's just trash. Rather go for a bike ride and have a drink with someone you haven't seen for a while. Life is too short for Chuck Palahniuk. Expand
Metascore
47

Mixed or average reviews - based on 27 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 27
  2. Negative: 7 out of 27
  1. Sam Rockwell strips himself down to pure appetite and has a buoyant spirit. But the film sure doesn't. It's bizarrely flat--it has no affect.
  2. Reviewed by: Mark Bell
    60
    The film feels flat. I don't know how to express my criticism much more than to say that things unfold before you, but you never really engage in the world beyond just watching it.
  3. For much of the way, the film just feels like it's pressing too hard to make an impression.