Choke

I strongly agree with another reviewer who essentially said that this felt more like a work inspired by Chuck's novel, rather than a direct adaptation of the book with a mimicked style and tone. While the novel has Mr. Palanuik's trademark acerbic wit, this film is a tad softer. But the thing that brings it to life are the performances. Sam Rockwell is stellar as usual, with his sweeping mix of humor and intensity, and Kelly MacDonald just shines, bringing her character to delightfully complicated heights. Also, Angelica Huston is perfectly cast as the brashly insensitive mother, who's just just trying her best. Sort of.

This movie could've gone off the rails in many points but the circular symbiosis of the story keeps it grounded. Fantastic character acting from the two leads, Houston & Rockwell. Victor is a fascinating character who you want to root for. The colonial park & related boss tension provides amazing levity in contrast to some of the harder scenes at the hospital. Very good.

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"

Ignoring the annoying first chapter designed to offend the light-hearted, I very much enjoyed reading the book. Clark Gregg(Director/Writer/Actor), you were awesome in "The Adventures of Sebastian Cole". However, one of the interesting facts about "Choke" was that it was filmed in three weeks. When given that short amount of time, you can either play it safe and get as close to a classic storyline as you can...or you can try something unique and possibly get a diamond or a lump of coal. With the main character being a sex addict with a Jesus complex, which one do you the viewers think would have been better to try? Like the movie "Fight Club", "Choke" (the book) was insulting, fresh, and surprising in how it made you believe such impossible situations. Honestly, Clark Gregg made the wrong choice. In my opinion, this movie felt like a very funny joke being told by an awkward guy who didn't really understand it in the first place.

Not nearly as humorous or as dark as the book. It felt like the director was just trying to play it safe and in doing so neglected to give us something worthwhile. I'm a big fan of Chuck Palahniuk's novels, but save for Fight Club, nobody seems to be able to quite capture his tone, or sense of delectably dark humour. The actors do their best and are interesting to watch at least, but overall I found the film decidedly average.

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.

First this movie is not for the faint of heart.I decided to hire this movie because I like the movies that are based on books written by Chuck Palahniuk.Another reason I saw this movie was because I like Sam Rockwell and his movies.I was really impressed with this movie - It was disturbing,funny and also dark.I thought it could have been better if it was over 2 hours long but it was still quite good.This is definitely not a movie to go to for first dates,family viewing or for elderly people.If you are interested in the theme of sex addiction and what goes on behind the scenes of treating it then i would recommend this movie to you. 8/10 is my rating

Follows a sex addict as he comes to terms with himself and as he cares for his mother losing her mind in a care home. It's a weird adult tale of absurdity as he journeys through delusional reality, full of fake facades and people enslaved by their desires. While starting on the starter you might find yourself trying to choke down your chuckles, due to the stark nakedness of the chef. But once your taste buds get used the phycological food being served in the main dish. You realise the chef wasn't trying to kill you but was trying to feed you, the laughter bursts out. When the dessert comes, you grab a taste. The medicine suddenly starts to wear off, waking up you find your family around you smiling, you survived the operation, well done.

It's a dark because of the author of the book. But it's well worth the watch.