American Psycho

[The Man in Blak 0]

American Psycho strikes me as a movie that's much more interesting to discuss than watch, but that's just me. I voted that he did it because, as mentioned ad nauseum before, that seemed to be the whole crux of the story; the fact that he was doing all of these horrible acts, but people didn't take him seriously or didn't even care.

[randomguy 0]

I don't see that as the crux at all in the movie.

 

To me the crux is that these people are so caught up in their trivial existence (business card holders, soaps, etc) that seems really important and makes them "successful" but is ultimately so empty that this guy leads an imaginary double-life to deal with it. It's like the Secret Life of Walter Mitty. In real life Bale's character is basically powerless and pathetic.

 

The movie gets more and more ludicrous as it goes on. With the chainsaw and then the shootout, it crosses out of the realm of believability.

 

In the book the main focus (I've only read reviews FYI) is how enamored these people are with this 80s-style powerful people lifestyle. The movie takes a slightly different tack - while they are enamored some (or at least Bale) realize on some level that's it's quite pathetic and emasculating. It's an empty existence and he realizes it.

 

Edit: One very interesting thing about the movie is how a female director really changes the tone. The movie has plenty of sex and violence but it doesn't have sexy violence. It's not trying to kill people and give you a hard-on at the same time.

[Guest Coffey]

I rented the Machinist. It better not suck, vivisectvi.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

The only thing about American Psycho that I thought was worth a damn was his streams of thought about Huey Lewis and the News, and other 80's pop music.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

Movie was better than the book, not that I'm a big fan of the movie. The film kept the satire of the novel—which I liked—and lost Ellis' turgid, masturbatory prose. The guy's obviously talented, but he's also obviously full of shit.

[dubq 0]

Did you see the Machinist?

 

Christian Bale was the bomb in The Machinist.

 

Yes, he was. I quite enjoy his acting and I think that personally (in person I mean) he comes across much more "real" than a lot of today's actors.

 

 

Well yeah, and the fact that he legit lost all t hat weight, when the director has agreed to CGI some more off for him instead, but Bale refused.

I am proud to have seen that in the local indy theater.

 

Ditto, I saw that at the Toronto Film Fest back in 2004. Such a great flick, IMO. As for Bale, I like that he's willing to put himself through anything to get into the part.

[Nighthawk 0]

Basically some of it's real and some of it isn't. He's obviously prone to hallucinations, and as the book is in first person he probably exaggerated some of it as well. Like, he probably killed that hooker, but probably didn't drop a chainsaw down a flight of stairs onto her. Although, as it's satire, even the real parts aren't realistic.

 

Incidentally, I discussed this book in an English class, and the teacher said it was the only book he's ever thrown in the trash. We debated whether it was good or not, agreed to disagree. The other students who had read it were split down the middle too.

[Sideburnious 0]

I always figured that he had killed some of the people, which led him to have a nervous breakdown and imagine himself commiting some of the other murders/confess over the phone about stuff he thought he did.

[Sideburnious 0]

Speaking of American Pyscho, did anyone ever watch American Psycho 2?

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

No, because there is no American Psycho 2. At least not to me. The film was originally going to be titled All American Girl, but due to the cult success of American Psycho, Lion's Gate slapped the title of American Psycho 2 onto it and filmed a quick 5-minute intro to link the two. It, seriously, has abso-fucking-lutely NOTHING to do with Ellis' work.

To me the crux is that these people are so caught up in their trivial existence (business card holders, soaps, etc) that seems really important and makes them "successful" but is ultimately so empty that this guy leads an imaginary double-life to deal with it. It's like the Secret Life of Walter Mitty. In real life Bale's character is basically powerless and pathetic.

I agree to an extent. I don't believe he leads an IMAGINARY double-life, but actually DOES lead it, and everybody around him is just so wrapped up in their own material successes and meaningless ploys to greater gain that they don't notice. Again, it's an indictment of the "Me" generation.

 

In the book the main focus (I've only read reviews FYI) is how enamored these people are with this 80s-style powerful people lifestyle. The movie takes a slightly different tack - while they are enamored some (or at least Bale) realize on some level that's it's quite pathetic and emasculating. It's an empty existence and he realizes it.

Every line in the movie is taken from the book. It's quite amazing just how well of an adaptation from page to screen the film is, with only one or two scenes being out of place (that, and Bateman's true loathing of his fiancée is never truly touched upon in the film). Bateman actually makes it abundantly clear in the book that the majority of his life is pathetic, and at times it seems as though he is reaching for redemption (ie. his trip to the beach cabin for a week with his fiancée) but then goes right back to his grisly ways once real life returns. That, and his uncharacteristic bouts of mercy shown towards his secretary (nailgun scene with the sorbet).

Edit: One very interesting thing about the movie is how a female director really changes the tone. The movie has plenty of sex and violence but it doesn't have sexy violence. It's not trying to kill people and give you a hard-on at the same time.

None of the violence is meant to be sexy, though. It's meant to be gruesome, shocking, and eventually trivial as it becomes more and more apparent that Bateman does these things on an incredibly regular basis.

Movie was better than the book, not that I'm a big fan of the movie. The film kept the satire of the novel—which I liked—and lost Ellis' turgid, masturbatory prose. The guy's obviously talented, but he's also obviously full of shit.

Though he's my favorite author, I'll have to agree with you here. Ellis DOES often wax on for far too long about some things (especially in American Psycho and that 500-pager Glamorama), but I feel it helps add to the charm of his work. It helps show the complete arrogance and almost "routine randomness," I guess, of his characters' lives. Bateman giving 10-page long reviews of the latest Whitney Houston album, for instance, helps this, as does Victor describing every minute detail about his apartment in Glamorama.

Inc, please tell me you've read The Rules of Attraction. IMO, it's Ellis' best work, and is a complete breeze to read.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

I always did like the idea of Batman being the American Psycho in disguise and coming out of the shadows to shenk criminals.

[Coffin Surfer 0]

I rented the new "Special Edition" DVD at some point several months ago and I remember the director saying something like Bateman was really killing those people but he thinks he dropped the ball when it came to fully getting that point across in the finish. Sorry my memory sucks if anyone has the new DVD please double check.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

Yeah. IMO, the placement of Bateman's nervous breakdown didn't help to construe that he really WAS killing those people.

 

In the book, the nervous breakdown (the one at the phone booth when he's calling his secretary) happens either shortly before or VERY shortly after we discover he is a serial killer. In the film it happens after the majority of the killing. That didn't help it, IMO, stress that it was really happening.

[randomguy 0]

None of the violence is meant to be sexy, though. It's meant to be gruesome, shocking, and eventually trivial as it becomes more and more apparent that Bateman does these things on an incredibly regular basis.

 

99/100 male directors try to make violence+sex scenes sexy, even if they are supposed to be shocking and gruesome.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

Ah, so I misunderstood you. I thought you were trying to say that the scenes in the book were meant to be sexy, so I was like "wow...no they're not."

 

But yeah, you're right. That's a thing that irks me about most directors: trying to make the scenes accessible. I don't want easily accessible scenes where the killer slices and dices his/her victim(s). I want it to be so graphic I can barely watch it.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

Okay so basically in a nutshell, the book says he did it. The movie version says it was all in his head.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

...no. Both versions say he did it, but the movie is so vague in saying that he did it that you can interpret it as it all being in his head (which is the "safe" interpretation, IMO).

[Lil' Bitch 0]

The movie is absurd because even if it did all happen as you put it:

 

The Chainsaw Chase Scene

 

The Conversation With The Lawyer At The End

 

Those scenes clearly are contradictive and that's how I look at it.

[Si82 0]

None of the violence is meant to be sexy, though. It's meant to be gruesome, shocking, and eventually trivial as it becomes more and more apparent that Bateman does these things on an incredibly regular basis.

 

99/100 male directors try to make violence+sex scenes sexy, even if they are supposed to be shocking and gruesome.

But "American Psycho" was directed by a woman.

[Special K 0]

99/100 male directors try to make violence+sex scenes sexy, even if they are supposed to be shocking and gruesome.

 

Plus, that's total bullshit. Man, Ichi the Killer and Irreversible sure were fucking sexy! Not everyone is Joe Estrhaz or whatever the fuck his name is.

[Nighthawk 0]

You know, this is like arguing that Looney Tunes were all in Bugs' head because you couldn't survive having an anvil dropped on your head.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

The movie is absurd because even if it did all happen as you put it:

 

The Chainsaw Chase Scene

Which can be summed up as everybody in the apartment building being so self-centered that they don't care that it's happening (again, the entire point of the story).

The Conversation With The Lawyer

 

Those scenes clearly are contradictive and that's how I look at it.

Okay, I took the spoiler tags off of this, and edited the quote slightly, to better explain it. Earlier in the film, near the beginning, Bateman talks about how Paul Allen constantly mistakes him for another coworker and rather than correct him, Bateman just lets him continue making the mistake over and over again. The lawyer also calls Bateman by the wrong name during their conversation, and when Patrick says who he is, the lawyer says "you're not Patrick Bateman, Bateman's a wimp," or something to that effect. Once more, mistaken identity and self-absorption.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

Which can be summed up as everybody in the apartment building being so self-centered that they don't care that it's happening (again, the entire point of the story).

 

I'm sorry, I just find that to be bullshit because if a chainsaw was heard going off in the middle of the night along with a woman screaming, you'd figure somebody would call the police. I know its a movie and all, but its suppose to have a realistic tone.

 

Earlier in the film, near the beginning, Bateman talks about how Paul Allen constantly mistakes him for another coworker and rather than correct him, Bateman just lets him continue making the mistake over and over again. The lawyer also calls Bateman by the wrong name during their conversation, and when Patrick says who he is, the lawyer says "you're not Patrick Bateman, Bateman's a wimp," or something to that effect. Once more, mistaken identity and self-absorption.

 

Which IMO proves he didn't actually do the killings because of what the lawyer said. It was all inside his head since it turns out he's not really Patrick Bateman and it was also revealed Paul Allen is still alive after all. I doubt the same person would have a problem with mistaken identity for everybody. Seriously, you would have to be a complete, utter idiot. Oh yes and Allen's apartment was cleaned of the bodies because there never were any bodies.

[Nighthawk 0]

Dude... it's not supposed to have a realistic tone in the slightest.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

Yeah, it's really not. Bateman did the killings and everybody around him is too focused on themselves that they don't even know the names of the people they talk to.

 

If he just THINKS he's Bateman, then why does everybody - EVERYBODY - but Paul Allen and his lawyer call him Bateman? Allen calls him Marcus Alberstram, and I don't even think his lawyer refers to him by name.

 

Also, it's possible that Paul Allen was under a mistaken name as well. Seems likely.

 

But yeah. Since the movie and the novel are satires of the self-centered ways of 80's yuppies, Deon, it DOES make sense that nobody in the apartment building called the police when they heard the chainsaw.