The twist at the end isn't half bad.

Film deludente, mi ha dato l' impressione di tante scenette buttate lì una dopo l'altra. Si perdono molte introspezioni e stati d' animo ben raccontati nel libro (che crea tutt'altre sensazioni). Il regista non ha saputo riprodurre il malessere e le difficoltà del protagonista. Per me bocciatissimo.

Choke definitely missed it's necessary sharp character, it's not half as amusing or dark as it should be in the first place

The main thing that drew me to Choke was the fact that the book its based on was written by Chuck Palahniuk. The man also penned Fight Club, the basis for one of my all-time favourite films, and a book I really enjoyed when I finally got round to reading it. Choke wasn't as good as Fight Club, but I still enjoyed watching it, if indeed it's a film that you can truly enjoy. Sam Rockwell does great work in bringing his despicable character to life, and allowing us to go from detesting him to pitying him to even feeling sympathy for him. The film's greatest strength is its humanisation of addicts, and its demonstration that they have lives and proclivities outside of just whatever they consume to get their fix. Society tends to define these people by their vices, and put them all in a box together, despite the fact that're their all individuals, with their own stories and personalities. The title is somewhat misleading, as it's the facet of our leads life that's given the least attention, but I guess calling it ‘Bang' would have been too obvious. It's oddly funny and touching when it need to be, but there's a sense that it could have dived a lot deeper and explored much more uncovered ground. It's occasional flippancy doesn't lend itself to psychological intrigue, which would have made the film much more engrossing. It's not surprising that it's held in lesser esteem than the likes of Fight Club, but if you're a Palahniuk fan, or you're just looking for some messed up fun, I'd say give Choke a watch.

Despite a great cast (Sam Rockwell, Kelly MacDonald, Anjelica Huston, etc.) and some pretty wild source material (Chuck Palahniuk's novel), Choke falls flat as a film. Victor (Rockwell) is a sex addict who supplements his tour guide income by choking in restaurants and accepting money from those who are kind enough to save him. A busy boy, what with the non-stop quest for sex and all, he is also trying to establish a relationship with his dementia-ridden mother, the resident of a nursing home filled with elderly women who can't resist hitting on poor Victor. You'd figure that a film filled with addiction, sex, con games, salvation and, believe it or not, the Second Coming would be perfect fodder for some edgy black comedy, but you'd be very wrong if that's what you figured. The primary problem is the script, filled with juvenile dialogue that tries too hard to be funny and far too many scenes that serve no purpose whatsoever. To be fair, there are a couple of funny lines, but they are few and far between.

If anything, this movie makes you appreciate even more David Fincher‘s talent, in turning the "Fight Club" novel into the cult movie we all know and love so much. This is in fact a perfect example of how NOT to make a movie, and how to waste a great opportunity. Because that's what this was: a great opportunity. Choke is in fact an incredible book: it has interesting characters, who develop through the story in unpredictable ways; it is smart, very well written, and the narration and editing of the book already feels like a movie ready to be filmed. When I first knew about the movie and the choice of having Sam Rockwell as the main character, I was super excited, I love the guy. But what Clark Gregg delivers with this film is terrible, and it saddens me; because by directing it, he deprived us all from the opportunity of having another great cult masterpiece of a movie, like fight club was. And the novel really deserved a capable director. The book, as I mentioned before, has layers .. it was just too much to chew for Clark Gregg, who at least years later seems to have finally acknowledged that his skills are best suited to direct pop-corn blockbusters - with basic storylines and lots of "BANGS" and "BOOOMS" and "SLAMS" CGI generated, for an audience content to have basic entertainment.

Under-appreciated funny movie w talented Sam Rockwell doing what he does best - flawed, off kilter characters.

This was a gem of a find . I was so sure I got thru everything Sam Rockwell but I guess not 4.2

You can't go into a film like this hoping to like the protagonist, he's flawed beyond repair but represents a true character, that struggles for good despite his mental handicaps. Sam Rockwell was amazing.

Darkly humorous and unique love story, that understandably will not be for everyone, but hit the right notes for me. Loved Kelly Macdonald, per usual.

Sam Rockwell did am amazing job of bringing Chuck Palahniuk's book to life! I think ithis is scored low because others didn't read the book. Read it and re-watch it. It'll help!.

Based on Palahniuk's novel of the same name, Choke definitely has its moments, but at other times, it feels piecemeal. Sam Rockwell delivers a solid performance. I'm a fan of Kelly Macdonald, but I'm not sure if we're supposed to hear her accent or not.

What many critics say is Palahniuk's failure to draw a thread through the plot and subplots, Clark Gregg quite eloquently emphasizes and subsequently makes convenient to follow for non-readers

I read the book many years prior and even before Fight Club struck it big on home video, one of those books you laugh at or cringe about. This film felt like a dream come true, Rockwell was a choice that seemed great, what could go wrong? The biggest issue I have with the film is the deviation from the source material, Palahniuk wrote a great book but the essence is nowhere to be found. I feel Gregg wasn't the right choice for the writer and director, the film has no core, the plot elements are there from the book but Gregg leaves everything super vague. The film plays it very safe, it needed the biting satire that made the book so funny, this has moments but never clicks together. The wall building, the actual choking and the book are quickly tossed to the side for what ends up a mixed film. There a few more books I want to see as films but this fell to yhe area of way too safe, you can't make a safe Palahniuk adaptation. 07-11-2017.

Having a hard time judging it separately from the novel. If I did, it would get 2 stars.

For all its lurid subject matter, Choke gets wrapped up in a package that's perhaps a little too neat and tidy. That is, Choke at times plays almost like a bizarre romantic comedy didactic about the roots of addiction. But there's also quite a few very funny, clever, and moving scenes. And it's always good to see Sam Rockwell. I think there is also some effective insight given into what essentially causes addiction too.

Doesn't reach the heights of the novel, but still captures enough to be good in its own right.

An interesting comedy about sex and love and the problems when one is mistaken four the other. Chuck Palahnuik`s story provides many great ideas and plenty of witty and funny lines. The acting and direction are good and the overall feel is surprisingly positive, well worth watching.

Choke the movie didn't have the quirkiness of direction that I'd have hoped for after reading Choke the book. To me when I was reading the book I had felt off kilter and the odd situation with Dr Marshall and the diary was slightly an out of body experience. I think we don't get into Victor 's head like we should. The monologue is missing and that's really how the humour is explored in the book. The humour really is missing.

Love Sam Rockwell in this