Rules of Attraction......

[Guest NoCalMike]

Ok first of all, I saw this movie last year in the theaters and enjoyed it somewhat. My girlfriend just rented it and I watched it twice and it is one of those movies that I like a lot more with each viewing. I am guessing that the college it takes place in(am sure it is a fictional college) is supposed to be looked at as more of a liberal arts type of college than just a standard university.

 

I have a one question though.

 

Did, Lauren really date Victor before he went to Europe and he just got so drugged out there that he forgot who she(and himself) really were, or was Lauren just kind of dreaming the whole thing up in her head because she wanted to lose her virginity to him(kind of like the way Paul had the fantasy about Sean Bateman in his dorm room).

 

Also I would like to ask if any of you have attened a liberal arts school that is similar to this. I have read a lot of discussions on this subject since this movie came out, regarding whethere college life is just like that, or if it is merely an exaggeration. Most people in support of the film say that this subculture is definately REAL, but it all depends on the crowd you hang with. I mean, the people in this film supposedly came from the "rich, beutiful, troubled, tortured souls" group, rather than a "normal" group of college kids. I know college kids drink and use some drugs(mainly pot probably), however in this film it wasn't the drug use itself that came off creepy, rather the normality and the fact that it was no big deal for two girlfriends to be talking about the night's party over an 8-ball of cocaine. It was integrated into a normal part of life(along with alcohol) yet it didn't seem to affect the rest of their college routines(well not like classes were a featured part of the film anway).

 

All thoughts and comments on the movie or experience(s) welcome.

 

(oh and had to throw this in here: Why in the hell didn't they release the NC-17 version on DVD, should I hold off on buying the dvd in hopes that it is released eventually? Is there any truth to the rumor that Bale was asked to do a cameo as "Patrick Bateman" ?)

[Guest Downhome]

While we're at it, I'd like others to say what they thought of it. I've been thinking about watching it.

[Guest Youth N Asia]

I just downloaded it and watched it today. I thought it was alright, I wasn't blown away or anything.

 

I think Lauren just told people Victor was her boyfriend. And then just expected him to know who the hell she was. I normally like Shannyn Sossamon (sp)...but she looked pretty bad in the movie.

 

I was looking for Bale in the movie cause I heard he was in it. Didn't see anything though.

 

My favorite part was Victor resiting his whole European trip.

[cawthon777 0]

I thought it was weird and artsy ... and not a pretty artsy. A dark artsy.

 

It's one of those movies where all the young adults (college students in this case) are portrayed as cold, callous, driven, evil people. Even the most innocent characters are pot heads or have something 'wrong' with them emotionally.

 

It's hard to compare this to any other movie. I might say 'Go' but this is much darker.

[Guest HollywoodSpikeJenkins]

I watched the first 15 minutes, and wasn't really interested. Never finished watching it.

[Guest TUS_02]

I thought this was a brilliantly made film. Honestly, it was my favorite film of 2k2 NOT directed by Peter Jackson. I went in thinking it was going to be alright and left with a huge fucking grin on my face due to the fact that it kicked so much ass and there was going to be a small minority who will agree with me. They picked the PERFECT director for this as you can see a LOT of Pulp FIction in this.

 

Most people in support of the film say that this subculture is definately REAL, but it all depends on the crowd you hang with. I mean, the people in this film supposedly came from the "rich, beutiful, troubled, tortured souls" group, rather than a "normal" group of college kids. I know college kids drink and use some drugs(mainly pot probably), however in this film it wasn't the drug use itself that came off creepy, rather the normality and the fact that it was no big deal for two girlfriends to be talking about the night's party over an 8-ball of cocaine. It was integrated into a normal part of life(along with alcohol) yet it didn't seem to affect the rest of their college routines(well not like classes were a featured part of the film anway).

 

It exists, but like typical hollywood... it got overexagerated for the purpose of entertainment. The school that I go to is basically the same way... hell, the high school I graduated from is basically the same way. You just have to know the right people...

 

(oh and had to throw this in here: Why in the hell didn't they release the NC-17 version on DVD, should I hold off on buying the dvd in hopes that it is released eventually? Is there any truth to the rumor that Bale was asked to do a cameo as "Patrick Bateman" ?)

 

I read that yes, they are coming out with a Directors Cut version of the movie. And also a yes, there was a scene filmed with Patrick Bateman, but it was cut out of the theatrical release... HOWEVER, the part was not given to Christian Bale.

[Guest Crazy Dan]

I think it really depends on the school. But I do think that drug use can be a common thing on colleges. Especially in the case of students drinking and smoking pot every day. At my school that I attended, I know coke was getting fairly big. I also know that you could get any drug you wanted if you trully looked hard enough. But it was never to the extremes that you see in the movie. I do think in college it is very easy to indulge in a more hedonistic life style, that is for sure. College is the place that allowed me to grow the most, and was for the most part a great time. Sure there were some bad times, but the good times far outwieghed the bad.

 

Rules of Attraction depicts college life in a very extreme matter. But I did see some similarities from my own college days. But, the people I hung out with were no where near like the kids in the movie. But, I honestly don't think that these kids believed they were acting bad. When you are in college, you never think you are acting like a jackass until you reflect back and realize "What the f*** was I thinking?"

 

As for Patrick Bateman, he is not in the film, but he is the brother of Van Der Beek's character.

 

And I agree, Victor's European Vacation made the film.

 

Over all a good flick, not great, but definately worth teh rental.

[Guest RedJed]

The film was a unique perspective on growing up, I give it that. But something lacked from the movie, maybe a solid direction, just seemed all over the place with little depth.

[Guest Youth N Asia]

Over all a good flick, not great, but definately worth teh rental.

Or worth a download

[Guest ShooterJay]

In terms of all that college life/drug use stuff:

 

One of my goood friends, Tyler, has used the following drugs since he's been here: Cocaine, marijuana, aderol (aka prescription speed.) It's not unusual for me to walk in and see him doing lines. He's also tried acid a couple of times. But he's not dark and disturbed, he's basically a goofy quasi-hippie California dude, very mellow.

 

My friend Colleen, who I VERY briefly dated, had the darker mentality in this movie, but went no farther than pot, alcohol and cigarettes.

 

So it's a safe bet there's probably a significant portion that's a combo of the two on college campuses.

[Guest RedJed]

Yeah any college you go to, you are going to find a certain clique of students into the harder drug scene. Those are likely the same people who don't make it through the four years, but thats a whole other story. But I went to the University of MN for one year and definately saw alot of this, alot of kids come into the college scene forced in some way by parents or else its their first taste of freedom. And thats where it leads.

 

Partying as the "norm" on campuses as well usually involves beer and pot so thats nothing shocking.

[Guest NoCalMike]

Well like I stated above. I was wondering if the "liberal/creative arts" type schools are a different atmosphere than a Univeristy in a general observation. Since a lot of these colleges produces educations for much different type careers.

[Guest RedJed]

I don't think it would be much different, around the board there is always going to be even a minute few who indulge in the more, lets say, extravagent and out of control college lifestyle. I know I knew alot of people who dealed, for example. And this was even at other colleges where I had friends, one in particular was a religious college in Fargo, ND that had some of the hardest partiers I had ever seen.

[Guest TUS_02]

Well like I stated above. I was wondering if the "liberal/creative arts" type schools are a different atmosphere than a Univeristy in a general observation. Since a lot of these colleges produces educations for much different type careers.

Based on Rules of Attraction alone? I'd say that my college is very much like a liberal/creative arts school then. Minus the exagerations, a lot of what went on in the school happens here. The dorm Im in now is rather clean (from drugs) but if I were to walk into a room of an underclassman dorm, it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see someone snorting a line or drugged on heroin. The atmosphere is one in the same, to answer the question... at least here.

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

Since con and I are both huge Ellis fans, and this movie is based on the novel (which I just finished 3 weeks ago), and I've seen the movie less than a week ago (2 days, to be exact), I think I'll comment:

 

Victor is a self-obsessed snob. In his mind, the only women that ever mattered were the ones that he had sex with. He completely forgot about Lauren, but the two actually did date. The scene in question is made all the more powerful if you realize that Victor IS an idotic prick. For more details on Victor, read The Rules Of Attraction and Glamorama, both exceptional novels, and both by Bret Easton Ellis (or you lazy fucks could wait for the movie version of Glamorama to be released next summer).

 

The college, Camden University, is a real college...only it's not in New Hampshire. And the real Camden is not a Liberal Arts college, but rather your average college. In the movie/book, Camden is a big liberal arts college in New Hampshire, hence the scenes with snow and the dumb townies (if you've ever been to New Hampshire, you'll concur).

 

The movie is about the complete death of romance to the overprivileged few. I'll look for a quote by Bret Easton Ellis that he said in an interview when asked about the characters he writes about.

"What I've always been interested in as a writer is the idea of a group of people who seem to have everything going for them on the outside. Because of that, they have a lot of freedom. The theme of my fiction is the abuse of that freedom."

 

Hope that might help clarify some minor issues with the movie.

 

HollywoodSpikeJenkins, AKA UltraViolence Victim #1:

The first 15 minutes are a little boring, I agree. But after that? It's all worth it. The final 30 minutes are probably some of the most well-filmed and well-made minutes in motion picture history.

[Guest bps "The Truth" 21]

Ok. Here's what I saw.

 

The Dawson's character was obviously CRAZY

 

The Chick was also revealed to be obviously CRAZY

 

The line at the end where she turns to the gay guy and says "people like us" reffering to the Dawson, the chick and the gay guy...well...after alot of thought it can only mean that gay people are only gay because they are crazy.

 

Interestingly...since the book and story were written and take place in the 80's...the DSM III listed being gay as a mental illness. Only later was it removed from the DSM IV.

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

Wasn't homosexuality taken off of the list of mental illnesses in the 1970's?

[Guest bps "The Truth" 21]

As far as I know it wasn't removed until the most recent listings.

 

Either way the implication stands.

[Guest TUS_02]

The college, Camden University, is a real college...only it's not in New Hampshire. And the real Camden is not a Liberal Arts college, but rather your average college. In the movie/book, Camden is a big liberal arts college in New Hampshire, hence the scenes with snow and the dumb townies (if you've ever been to New Hampshire, you'll concur).

That quote made me lol because Ive been going to a New Hampshire school for the past 4 years. Snow and townies.... true dat

[Guest DrTom]

Wasn't homosexuality taken off of the list of mental illnesses in the 1970's?

And to think rape made it all the way to the 80s...

 

Really, who gives a shit what the APA says?

 

Um... ::steers the thread back on topic::

[Guest Mystery Eskimo]

The line at the end where she turns to the gay guy and says "people like us" reffering to the Dawson, the chick and the gay guy...well...after alot of thought it can only mean that gay people are only gay because they are crazy.

Um...no. He was just crazy, nothing to do with being gay. He had fantasies and delusions like the rest of them. I think you're on the wrong lines there.

 

Ellis himself is gay, as far as I know.

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

Ellis actually doesn't identify himself at all sexually. In a MetroWeekly (DC's LGBT literary magazine) interview, Ellis said that he doesn't identify himself as gay, straight, or even bisexual. He's just "there."

 

Well, now that I've laid out some basic facts about the movie, here are my two favorite scenes:

 

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

The first 10 minutes, where Lauren talks about the night she lost her virginity to a townie that ended up throwing on on her, Paul got kicked in the nuts by a closet-homosexual that hadn't yet come to terms with his preference, and Sean fucked Candice while trying to remember the last time he had sex sober.

 

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

Dick. Dinner table. 'Nuff said.

 

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

When Paul finds Sean sitting in the outdoor theatre's bleachers, drinking Jack Daniels. Paul then plays his Sean to Bateman's Lauren, and then Paul simply breaks down emotionally.

 

Roger Avary should be the only man allowed to adapt Ellis novels.