The Rules of Attraction

Rating:
Summary: The Unwed Drug Addicted Teen Mother of All Movies
Review: I had high hopes for this movie mainly because it was by the creators of Pulp Fiction which was a great movie but this movie is a complete mess I never understand what is going on like when they are focussing on one charactor and then go backward and focus on what another charactor is doing at the same time. By the end of the movie you just have a headache and want it to be over. There are a few one liners that make the movie slightly funny but not funny enough to buy just wait for it to be on television. I hope that this review has helped you all make a decision in you movie expieriance!

Rating:
Summary: sophmoric and uninspired
Review: The "Rules of Attraction" fits the same mold as "Less than Zero" and "American Psycho" - a sort of dark tome on the predatory habits of the young and white privileged of America. If Michael Moore has used that subject for fun, Bret Easton Ellis (who wrote the books that "Psycho" and "Rules" were based on) has a more ominous message. Set in some nameless north-eastern college, "Rules" follows the pseudo lives of its less than collegial denizens: Sean Bateman (James van der Beek) supports his drug habit by dealing on campus for a horrifically violence-prone supplier; Lauren (Shannon Sossamon) is looking for love - she pines for Victor but may be willing to give Sean a try; Lara (Jessica Biel) her roommate proves there's no place she won't look for pleasure (we learn in an early voice-over that she ends up married to a senator); Paul is bi-sexual, but his preference runs to those who are avowed straight; and then there's some mystery girl who will eventually reveal a horrific secret to all of us. The flick opens at a year's end party (which sets the tone of sex and drugs that will dominate the flick) and then re-winds to show how the previous year's events have framed the attitudes of the partygoers.

If this sounds like some idea for a show on WB only with more sex than message, that pretty much describes how this flick comes off - everybody trying to sleep with somebody. Some of our heroes succeed, but nobody gets up happy. All of our characters are sociopaths (Bateman describes himself as a vampire of emotions, a definition that may apply in varying measures to everybody in this flick; we're supposed to think him a younger brother of the homicidal Patrick Bateman of "Psycho"). Bateman is beholden to his need for drugs, but anonymous love letters he attributes to Lauren awaken a deeper need within him. Because our heroic collegiates can't relate to each other outside the need to share sex, drugs or CD's, they rely heavily on subtext to communicate their emotions. Unfortunately, they're so emotionally crippled, that they fall into delusions which can only be revealed as such with great pain. If "Rules" has more sex than the station that gave us "7th Heaven", it's about as episodic and care-free as any of its shows - characters breeze in and out of each other's lives, and there isn't a single convincing relationship in this flick. In fact, "Rules" is so consistently plotless that almost nothing happens that determines how characters will act or react. There's an horrific suicide scene mid-way through the story, but its ironic value is entirely lost on our leads. Our kids are in fact so clueless, that when the script calls for some of their parents to appear, the only way to make them more blind to their children's problem than the children are is to make them blithering idiots.
Roger Avary's script makes up for our blank characters by falling onto some interesting gimmickry: besides the re-wind from the beginning, we've got split screens, dream sequences and voice-overs (the last being the biggest clue that "Rules" was once a book that shouldn't have been adapted). Avary also tosses in a compressed travelogue of Victor's trip to Europe (a non-stop trip of clubbing, group sex and drugs, but strangely no police contacts) shown in a home-video super-sped up. (The video was an interesting idea, but it's too long to be funny.) The suicide was also effectively done - probably one of the most shocking you'll see for a while - but it belongs in a better movie than this. That said, I was set to hate Van Der Beek because I can't stand his show - but he was great as the hateful Sean, getting surprising mileage out of a character we'd just as easily be rid of. When caught by Lauren in flagrant delicto with Lara, Sean tells Lauren that he loves her - that's why he cheated on her. Sean's need to define love apart from pleasure is an emotional complexity equaled in this flick only by the suicide.

Everything else rings false - especially the unambiguous pursuit of sexual and narcotics pleasure by what are supposed to be college students. Real college students have been shown to seek extreme pleasures on a broader scale (music, sports) as well as well as reflecting a more mature self-awareness that colors all of the pursuits they learned in high school (even if it's a fake awareness - like those who smoke weed only because they believe in legalizing it, or having sex with women but not "objectifying" them. The competitive pressures of college (and the idea that it will all come to an end) are entirely absent here. Rather than the junk-bond 80's, a more ironic flick would have been set in the PC 90's, chock full of characters who espoused their caring for all, but like those in this flick, never practiced it.

Rating:
Summary: All sexed up, with not a backward thought in its head.
Review: "The Rules of Attraction" already has an address in the cinematic dictionary under "cult film": Writer/director Roger Avary's visually exuberant chronicle of college life is relentlessly nihilistic, sexed-up and drug-addled, embraced as a catalogue of truth. Based on the Bret Easton Ellis book that was never this self-conscious, Avary does dispense occasional wisdom pearls, and pulls a few directorial tricks worth envying, but he sandwiches them between vapid titillation and film school exercises.

There is the coke-dealing Sean ( James Van Der Beek), who'd like to sleep with virgin Lauren (Shannyn Sossamon), who had saved herself for Victor (Kip Pardue) before he went to Europe for a semester. Lauren used to date Paul (Ian Somerholder) a bisexual who'd like to sleep with Sean himself.

Could Paul be the one sending Sean love letters? Could Lauren? Sean is an unmitigated jerk with only a dark humor to his credit; he is attractive to weak people who mistake his malevolence for self-esteem, which they crave for themselves. Van Der Beek proves he's capable amateur sadism as his Sean rebukes the offers of everyone around him, building a wall to his own thoughts so impenetrable even he can't pierce it. "You'll never know me," he yells at Paul and the audience. Do we really want to?

Avary fares better with Lauren's story. Sossamon is quirky-looking, and not classically trained - she was discovered as a deejay - but naturally vulnerable. Her Lauren is smart but precocious, hiding behind lines of coke and her sheltered version of "promiscuity" - she performs oral sex on a professor (Eric Stoltz) almost as a duty - until she finally decides that officially losing her virginity is a way of asserting herself. She alone sees through to Sean, seems capable of cracking the shell, until Sean pulls one too freaky a stunt for her to stand. Unlike Paul, who is a Sean-groupie to the end.

The movie swings for the fences and tries to render these relationships through the lens of satire. Mugging director David Lynch, Avary inserts bizarre, unrelated scenes that he lacks the humor and visual restraint to properly orchestrate. What to make of Russell Sams' cameo, which consists of dancing with Somerholder to George Michael on a bed, then throwing a restaurant tantrum? Or of a sequence where an admirer of Paul's tries to commit suicide and is declared dead at the hospital while he's still breathing? Or of the entire subplot concerning Sean's drug deals that features Clifton Collins Jr. playing another half-lunatic?'

Avary meticulously stages musical numbers for Paul and a long sequence that splits the screen and follows Sean and Lauren from their beds to class until they stare right at each other into their respective cameras. Nice steal of Bergman's "Persona," but what is it for, if the actors don't do anything with it? The source material isn't exactly Ellis' best work, and hardly a bouquet of humor, like "American Psycho" or deadly ennui, like "Less Than Zero," both of which were made into entertaining pictures. The kids in "Rules" seem to be suffering from a fierce case of acting out, and deserve what's coming to them.
The same goes for Avary, an innovative talent who nonetheless has few storytelling skills behind that bag of visual tricks.

The director's ambition doesn't know many bounds - "Rules" is the first in a trilogy, if you can imagine - nor does his ego, as his movie plays like a gauntlet-throw at old partner Quentin Tarantino, with whom he shared the Oscar for co-writing "Pulp Fiction," and who, as Avary claims, stole work credit and material all the time.

Avary may, in fact, have mastered a few extra skills, and stolen from films of a better pedigree - Tarantino rips off Saturday morning kung fu trash these days - but his treatment of the characters is hateful - you don't put Biel and Kate Bosworth if acting chops are of any import. "The Rules of Attraction" has a fan base that insists its detractors "just don't get it" when, in fact, the movie's major flaw is that there's isn't much to get: Avary is the lone star. He gives it all away, and then some. It's not only indecent; it's like watching Dennis Hopper redux.

Rating:
Summary: REVERSE PSYCHOLOGY
Review: Sean, Paul and Lauren are surrounded at Camden College, New England, by a host of very good 'friends,' yet they are all alone. And so it goes that with endless rounds of drug, alcohol, and sex drenched campus activities to par take in, such as The End of the World Party or The Dress to get Screwed Party human nature determines that in a highly imperfect world, the rules of attraction always apply.

Do not enter this film with any preconceived ideas. James Van Der Beek may by that annoying twenty-something playing a teenager on CH4's Dawson's Creek yet this is nothing like that or even his weak starring role in Varsity Blues. Written and Directed by Tarrantino's colleague Roger Avary, the man behind Killing Zoe has finally had a chance to out-shine his former running buddy. Based on the best selling Brett Easton Ellis novel, The rules of attraction slowly dissects with skill the intertwined relationships of three key students.

Its easy to say that the brother of American Psycho's Patrick Bateman, Sean (Beek) is the central figure here but that would be to misread the movie as a whole, as this finely layered masterpiece is rather more an ensemble work than star vehicle. Paul (Ian Somerhalder) and Lauren (Shannyn Sossamon) lend themselves as excellently to the script as Van Der Beek does.

Rating:
Summary: An Unique, Sytlish, Dark Comedy.
Review: Sean Beatman (James Van Ver Beek), a College Student & also a Drug Dealer, it seems, his only attraction is selling drugs, sex & masterbation. But when he gets mystery love letters at his mailbox & he`s immediately attach himself to a gorgeous young woman (Shannyn Sossaman). But Sean gets himself in trouble with a Drugged Up Dealer (Clifton Collins Jr.), the young woman`s rude roommate (Jessica Biel) & a handsome gay man (Ian Somerhalder), who tries to be his friend.

Directed by Roger Avary (Killing Zoe, Mr. Stitch) made a amusing dark comedy, that is Based on a Novel by Bret Easton Ellis (American Psycho, Less Than Zero), which Avary did wrote the Adapation for the film also. Van Der Beek`s somber comic performance is Impressive. DVD has an sharp anamorphic Widescreen (1.85:1) transfer & an fine:Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround Sound. DVD has Plenty of Commentaries Tracks by the Cast & Crew and also one by Carrot Top ! and more. Van Der Beek`s character name:Sean Bateman is the Brother of Deranged Serial Killer Yuppie:Patrick Bateman from the Instant Cult Classic:American Psycho. This is not for all tastes. Grade:A-.

Rating:
Summary: College Triangle-Drama...
Review: Rules of Attraction is based on love, relationships, and friendships which have been given a dose of irony and satire. The story centers on three characters at Camden College where everyone seems to know everyone, and where one thing leads to another. Paul Denton has recently fallen in love with Sean Bateman, who is a broke drug dealer who has slept with a large amount of the female population at the college and who finds himself being attracted to Lauren Hynde. Lauren is a virgin in the traditional sense and scares her own temptations by reading a STD book for medical students; however, she is planning on having sex with her beloved boyfriend Victor. Paul, Sean, and Lauren are brought together through a series of events triggered by others and their own object of affection. Rules of Attraction has some fascinating cinematography and editing that brings the story together, and it leaves the audience with an pleasant cinematic experience.

Rating:
Summary: Not for everybody - For the openminded only
Review: Ian Somerhalder (Paul Denton) is reason enough to watch the movie. Not many women are as pretty as this young man. Sorry ladies. Tis true.

The movie is definitely not for everybody...don't go in with preconceived notions of what the film is about or you will be disappointed BIG time. And, if you are not a mature and open minded individual don't waste your time...I understand the negativity that surrounds the film but I loved it.

Rating:
Summary: First time I hated it...then I watched it again
Review: The first time I got through watching this movie my friend and I just looked at each other in complete disgust. I couldn't believe how depressed it made me. A couple of weeks later, I bought it and here's why...

Although this focuses on that area of people in college that always party, drink, do drugs, have sex, it is completely true and actually does go on. Some other reviewers probably do not understand this.

Also, I think that everyone can find a character to relate to in this film. Maybe they haven't done the drugs or some things, but people can relate to their emotions.

I love the linking of the characters. It's basically a movie of "he likes her but she likes someone else" thus the title of the movie.

There was one thing in this movie that I did not like. For instance the girl who commits suicide and they show her naked in a tub of her own blood. I guess that's what they were looking for, complete horror from the audience, and it worked for me. On a side note I love the song choice for that scene.

This movie has a lot of dark irony and some dark humor. Therefore it is a dark and depressing movie. You may think that watching it will depress you (which it did me but only the first time) but then think about how some people enjoy tear jerkers for when they need a good cry. This movie is good for those depressing, angry moments in life...or at least to me.

Overall I think it is definitely worth a shot for everyone to see whether you think you will like it or not. I, however, DO recommend renting before buying.

Rating:
Summary: The Shallow Film Doesn't know Why We Should See it Now
Review: "The Rules of Attraction" is based on Bret Easton Ellis book of the same title, and the fact tells you all; like the previously filmed "Less Than Zero" and "American Psyco" the characters spending time aimlessly in university are not your oridinary clean-cut all-American boys and girls. But let me hurriedly say that that is not a problem at all here (in fact, not everything about them is repulsive as some critics suggest).

The real problem can be found in the name of the director, Roger Avary, who once was working at a local video shop with a film buff called Quention Tarantino. Unlike his ex-pal, however, Avary's filmic technique are only a showy performance -- split-screen, fast cutting, backward-running shots -- everything is at first mildly funny to see, and then he overuses them. And we realize that the characters are not well-rounded or interesting in any way (I mean, how many people really care if college students drink so much as the film shows? We are long past the stage when we are easily shocked by them, living in the time of the internet, you know.)

The story is actually a string of loosely connected episodes around drug-dealing (and brother to another Bateman in "American Psycho") Sean Bateman (James Vab Der Beek) and Lauren Hynde (Shannyn Sossamon). It starts with a party scene where every students got drunk and stoned, and among them we see these two not-quite-happy. And you are introduced to other characters played by Ian Someholder, Kate Bosworth, and Kip Pardue (though the last two's screen time is fairly short, Plus you get cameos of Faye Dunnaway and Eric Stoltz.

Sean wants to sleep with Lauren, who is in love with another guy. Sean then sleeps with different girls while Paul Denton (Ian Someholder) is attracted to him. Every character wants something which they cannot have, and the only thing they can do is "deal with it."

These characters are all shallow and self-centered, but remember, Tarantino has shown many killers in his films and can make them quite engaging and lively presence. No chance here. Roger Avary insists on his own "realism" so that Dowson's Creek Van Der Beek must show us how he spends his time in bathroom. All is done as if saying, "How about that?" Sorry, but we are not impressed, after watching "Kill Bill" lately.

Possibly except for Ms. Sossamon, the acting is of lower kind that would explain why these actors have not achieved higher or bigger level of works after their once memorable performance in career. They need another agent who has seen Avary's tedious "Killing Zoe" disaster, and can give better advice on their choice of jobs.

I do not disagree with the shallow characters -- we may resemble them in some way or other -- but the shallow way of presenting them. But more fundamental questiuon is the film does not answer the question -- why should we watch this film (which still smells the bubbly 80s) now in the 21st century?

Rating:
Summary: Meaningless
Review: I give this movie a big, "YUK?". The previews made it look like a comedy. I did not find one moment of humor in it. This movie starts nowhere, goes nowhere and ends nowhere.

The message seems to be "here are a bunch of shallow college students who devote their lives to drinking and meaningless sex." Example: the main female character gets herself so drunk at a party, she passes out trying to have sex with Boy A, then wakes up to find Boy B having sex with her while Boy A video tapes. Some people would call that rape. Is she angry, offended? No, apparently this is all in a night's partying for her. I found it offensive that the writer and director would portray a woman in such a degrading way.

They don't do any better with their principle male characters: a campus drug dealer and a gay man who keeps coming on to straight guys as if he can't tell the difference. In one scene, he gets beat up after trying to kiss a straight guy. Are gay people supposed to find that funny?

Did I mention the suicide of a young woman who was invisible in the movie until we see her cut her wrists in the bathtub. The director then provides flashbacks to show us where else we saw her in the movie so we'd know she was a really important character.

Is this a commentary on the state of college life today or just bad movie making? I suggest the second. Rent it if you're curious. Better yet, don't waste your money