Rating: 
Summary: Three and 1/2 really. The Darkly comic and Self-obsessed
Review: A fascinating and energetic look at that same vacuous crowd that Ellis writes about in his other novels. In truth, there really is nothing new here: bored rich kids who use each other, screw anybody who offers, use drugs and party. But, it is like watching a wild car crash - you can't help but be enthralled. There is some fun camera work (some that becomes annoying as well), prety good performances and a nifty soundtrack. If you're in the mood for watching some attractive self-destructive folks party and play - this might hit you right. If you are not in that mood - watch out! There is no redemption here, just the dark comedy of the self-induced drama and tradgedy that only characters of this age can believe is reality. Features a very funny cameo scene with Swoosie Kurtz and Faye Dunaway doing their best AB Fab inpersonations.
Rating: 
Summary: Complete Torture
Review: Wow. This was a terrible terrible movie. I dont even know where to begin. I guess I'll start off by saying that I gave this movie one star because it had great camera work. Other than that it really didnt have much going for it. First of all, there was no plot. none. I just kept watching it wondering where the hell the movie was going. Most of the characters were flat and undeveloped. It was extremely lengthy for a movie that went no where. I think the best part of the movie was when the credits started rolling. The only movie worse than this was Bjork's "dancer in the dark" and that is pretty bad my friends.
Rating: 
Summary: Definitely not for everyone
Review: This is the kind of movie, I've noticed, that people either really like or can't stand at all. Cult-like, sort of.The film is true, if not in exact content, then at least to the spirit of the book, so if you disliked this movie you would almost definitely not like the book. Bret Easton Ellis' purpose in writing seems to be a barely-contained howl at the vacuousness of modern life, so if you don't especially like that kind of thing you would probably not find the film very entertaining. The film also has no real plot or storyline, which also seems to put off many, but the point of the film is to depict a lifestyle, a set of people and their conflicts with one another. It is about life, and life has no neat endings and beginnings. You either like this film or you don't. I did, but many people I know hated it. I still strongly recommend it, but I warn you: In the words of Hermann Hesse, it is "not for everyone."
Rating:
Summary: Umm...I don't Get it
Review: If you looked up bad movie in the dictionary, than you just might stumble upon this one in one of the examples. This movie absoulutely disguted me beyond words. When the characters weren't trying to get laid or doing drugs, the camera was tweaking out, moving back and forth, backwards and forwards. I literally had to sit down afterwards and figure out the plot line, and when it came right down to it, there was none to found. I recommend this movie to anyone who likes to see nasty images, and college kids ruining their lives, which I hope is no one.
Rating:
Summary: An acquired taste
Review: This movie may not be the best for some people for several reasons. Some may disagree, but I think you need to be a fan of Ellis' work beforehand to appreciate the movie more. I found the movie to be very fun and entertaining. I myself have just got into the college life, and to me this dvd is all of my guilty pleasures and expectations rolled into one little package. I know though that movies are never very loyal to their book equivilants, but still, this is a nice exemption I've found. If you don't like the movie, then you either haven't read or didn't like the book, because if anything thats what Ellis' work is about- nothing really. But there is the most interesting aspect of it all. There is a sadness that jumps out at you from this...well, its just kinda hard to explain. At least give The Rules of Attraction a shot. The actors and the cinimatography are great, as well as the soundtrack, and I highly recommend this to anyone looking for something different.
Rating:
Summary: So what?
Review: So this movie has drugs and sex and nudity and blood and cameos and one-liners. Roger Avery, this isn't new ground these days. Pulp Fiction was such a success because it was wickedly funny. The Rules of Attraction wasn't, because teenagers aren't funny anymore because we're (i'm 18) all so self-involved. The cinematography, screen quality, sound and commentaries on this film are worth looking at, though. In fact I'd say they're the best bit about the movie! Most of the actors and crew have a say in the commentaries and they're quite endearing and interesting. The half-hour special on the making of a particular hallway scene by Sundance is also worth watching. Not a lot of people will like this movie. It's too self-involved, not funny enough, not shocking enough (I know, I can't believe i'm saying that) not...original or sparky. The cast tries, and James Van der beek is scary and good at playing Sean (No Dawson here, folks) but most of the film I cringed at and fast-forwarded. The movie doesn't even have a central theme or message like other gore-fests such as "Requeim for a dream" or "American Pyscho" (Another film/book by Bret Easton Ellis) Rent it if you have free time because it is interesting (for the commentaries, etc) but don't buy it--you won't watch it again.
Rating: 
Summary: Could have been better, I think
Review: I rented this DVD really expecting to like it. I've never been a James van der Beek fan, so I was hoping this would be something to turn that around. It wasn't. In fact, from interviews I've read and seen with this guy, his character in this movie was probably a whole lot closer to his actual persona than his Dawson's Creek character. To me, a good movie doesn't necessarily have to possess all of the elements of a good story (conflict, character development, plot, denouement, etc.), but this movie has NONE of these things. Some of the filmmaking "tricks" are incredibly well-done (the split-screen resolving seamlessly into full-frame, for example), but some, such as the repetitive "run the film backwards" thing and the frenetic "Victor tours Europe" monologue (I was exhausted after that 4-minute part of the movie) were just not my thing. I can see how this movie would appeal to some people, and I don't think it's a BAD movie, by any means. I just didn't find much to like in it. All in all, a watchable, but entirely forgettable movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Van Der Beek resonates a tour de force
Review: What more can I say other than that Van Der Beek makes the movie - period. Van Der Beek proves to be much more than the do-gooder Dawson as he casts off his perfect image and lets it all hang out as the hard-drinking Sean Bateman. Although Jessica Biel, Shannyn Sossamon, Kate Bosworth, and company provide for a dazzling cast, it's none other than Van Der Beek that proves why he's the future of acting. The riveting music emanating throughout the movie is incredibly apropos and invigorating to the senses as well as the mind of Robert Jackson. A Sean Bateman, whether wasting time getting wasted or riding around on his motorcycle, Van Der Beek emits the exact sense of moral emptiness and aimlesness portrayed by Bret Easton Ellis in his poignant work. It is rather unfortunate, and rather disconcerting, that no cameo by Patrick Bateman makes its way into the movie. If you dislike this movie, you haven't read the book like Robert Jackson. If you haven't read the book, then you haven't lived like Robert Jackson. And that's the 411.
Rating:
Summary: Typical, though not really
Review: I rented this movie based on the previews I'd seen prior to its release, and was expecting good things from it. And although the casting was very diverse and some of the comedy was humorous, I found this movie to be a huge waste of time. James Van Der Beek is the main character; as he plays the role of Sean Bateman. The molester-like vulgar thoughts and actions that Bateman reveals are somewhat stimulating, but in the end only sickening. The film could be considered as a romance-based comedy with episodes of drama and action, yet the ending and use of the rewind button can't really fall under pretense to any of those genres. Another WB heavyweight appears (Jessica Biel as Lara), but only plays the role of an unintelligent, sex-driven roommate. Which is typical of the entire film. I'd categorize this movie as a troublesome mix between Pulp Fiction and Magnolia; both of which portrayed many small stories within one. And also similar to those two films, there is a weak and/or stupid ending that will leave you wondering why you watched the film. The movie starts by showing us the ending (which you'll figure out halfway through the film) and introduces the characters of Sean, Lauren, Paul, Lara, and a few other no-namers. Still, none of the parts really take shape or have any relevance to college life. The movie twists between scenes of suicide, gays, porno-like themes, drugs (primarily pot and cocaine), and backwards storytelling. Among the suicide attempts and successions, you'll see anything from a girl resting naked in a bathtub full of blood to Van Der Beek trying to hang himself with a phone cord. Paul Denton (played by Ian Somerhalder) is the premiere gay guy, but is supported by a few other gay developments. And Paul's feeble obsession with Bateman is very weak. Another part of Van Der Beek's story is that he owes money to a drug dealer. Which, as you can imagine, spawns some of the movie's more violent imagery. In the midst of the film's horridness, I found many things to be either sick or unnecessary. For instance, the 5-minute rant from Victor--giving us his life story consisting of drugs, sex, foreign countries, and a forgotten girlfriend (Lauren)--is terrible to the point of annoying. Also, James Van Der Beek's thoughts during his many 'sex' scenes were appalling; as they're reminiscent of a porno movie. We won't even discuss his gay 'sex' scene with Ian. His pretty-boy Dawson identity is easily gone. Again I come back to the backwards film editing. It was probably the most unnecessary part of the film; it was a bit intriguing the first time, but after the second or third it becomes bothersome. The suicide incidents were revolting, although I'm sure that's what the director (Roger Avary) wanted them to be. I hope that I haven't spoiled the movie for you; but on the other hand, I hope you don't see it. If you were enticed by the movie's trailer, you will be more than let down with the film as a whole. Its comedy is definitely lacking, yet it's the only thing that made the movie watch-able (Van Der Beek singing the Counting Crows' 'Anna Begins' and dubbing it his own is most excellent). And if you are a fan of the WB and all their teen shows, this movie is certainly not for you. It's sick, it's unethical, it's sexist, but most of all it's disappointing. Only watch this movie if you are a fan of the drug-induced-new-millennia-college-life cycle; or a huge fan of James Van Der Beek. Otherwise its nauseating and jarring plot, characters, and themes are not worth your time. If there is anything good about Rules Of Attraction, it's either (as I said) the bits of comedy; or the cameo by Fred Savage.
Rating:
Summary: The ABSOLUTE WORST movie you will ever see in your life
Review: I cannot begin to express how AWFUL this movie is. The one star I gave it is VERY generous and I would have given this movie negative amounts of stars if I could have. Many of the reviews I have seen on this movie talk about how it is addressing the majority of college students - who supposedly act like the people in this film in mass. That could not be any farther from the truth. It is not inspiring nor insightful and is not like the majority of college people out there either. It is simply playing into the belief that our generation is lost and empty with no idea what is going on in life outside of drugs, alcohol, and sex. Not everyone (and not even the majority of people) are this calloused, cold, empty, and totally void of personality as the characters in this movie. All that this movie did to me, was to make me sad that such an empty, void, calloused view of society is being forced on college age students with the [stuff] they are being fed w/ movies like this. I didn't mind the technical aspects of the movie such as the split screens etc. but I thought that not only was the story horrible but the acting was bad too. James Van der Beek's intense glares were badly acted and everything in this film focused on the absurd. This movie I can honestly say was the WORST film of ALL time and I have seen some pretty bad movies over the years and to say even this is a huge understatement. "If you don't get it don't knock it." I get it and it's still absolutely the worst movie since the beginning of time. I once said that I usually don't feel the need to totally knock a movie on here but this is one of those rare times that I do and, in comparison, any other film I have ever said was bad on here is wonderful compared to this absolutely horrible movie.
|
