Rating: 
Summary: It took a while to sink in, but I started liking the movie..
Review: about a week after I saw it. There's something so arrogant and contrived about its sequences that you have to ask yourself "is this for real?" The answer, of course, is no. The whole film (as well as the book), in all its nonsense, is just a metaphor for a material society driven by impulse and self-gratification. You then realize that every scene portrays its characters as almost "characters" of themselves, polished and human-like "packages". Batemen, the most obvious, is basically the male distillation of everything that's reprehensible about human nature; he's overly handsome, wealthy, resouceful and witty, and is part of unique Manhatten uptown clique. What's interesting is how he represents the American Dream, everything that we secretly strive to be (or at least everything that the American culture leads us to believe is important), whether or not we know it; the only difference being that he goes as far as to act out his impulses. So is Elliot saying that, we, as an audience, are suffocated by the American dream to the point where we have become numb under its spell, have become so lost in the process of obtaining status and material that we've lost touch with each other? That we've become selfish, self-centered, ego-maniacal performers in our own lives? That our conversations are hollow and superficial? That our relationships are nothing more than devices built to enhance personal attainment? When we see Bateman, a reflection of our ideals, carry out ritualistic acts of violence, it come across as both disgusting and hilarious. I walked out of the theater feeling jipped, like I have been made fun of. And now, as I write this review, I am finally understanding that I, as an American, was being mocked. The second time I watched it I was even more humored by Bateman's dry and hammy performance. I agree that this movie is not for everyone, but watch it, think about it, give it a chance; the stuff on the screen is just a tool.
Rating:
Summary: brilliant realization of Ellis' novel
Review: Where 1999 was considered one of the most exciting years for film, 2000 has been mostly derivative and dull as it quickly approaches an end. The one movie that sticks out--I saw it twice in the theater--is "American Psycho," a rib-tickling satire about young rich men who define themselves by hairstyle, bath products, the restaurants they eat at, etc. As the hollow yet handsome yuppie serial killer Patrick Bateman, Christian Bale pulls off the act of being a soulless, angry snake quite well. Despite other reviewers who take issue with the fact that the film isn't violent enough, a detail-by-detail adaptation of Ellis' book would go beyond an NC-17 (it'd be like watching snuff, probably). Marry Harron's visual tricks imply most of the carnage, which may not be as disturbing as the scenes Ellis described, but do the trick all the same. Like all well-crafted satires of late, "American Psycho" finds humor in the extremes of human behavior and the horrors we unleash on one another. Even if this year had been as exciting as 1999, AP would still stick out. As a spit in the eye of '80s greed, this tale is just a relevant today.
Rating: 
Summary: Nothing like the Book
Review: Wow! I just finished the movie and I have to say it was very timid. It is NOTHING like the book! The story is fundamentaly the same, but the death scenes in the movie are both fewer and lighter in terms of gore. My God, the book made me want to vomit, and I've read some messed up stuff in my time. See the movie, then read the horrifying book and compare.
Rating: 
Summary: American Psycho - Is for anyone who wants to great satire
Review: I find satire sometimes a toss up, as far as, will I like tomorrow. But this movie I will LOVE forever. As dark and evil as it is, it clearly, shows us that not killers come in the same package. Which adds more depth to his character. Christian Bale and Reese Witherspoon are brilliant in bringing their characters to life. This movie I believe is under rated by those who pass satire off as "over the top" or "uncomprehensible". But this movie is hilarious and black. And the satire is breath taking. I hate that phrase but it's true. Watch this - ready to have a sense of humor. You'll feel bad at what you're laughing at - but remember, it is satire.
Rating: 
Summary: This movie sucks
Review: People can pat themselves on the back for being "elite" enough to like this movie and decide in their smugness that only they are smart enough to appreciate this work...but in the end the truth is, this movie just isn't very good. There is no attempt to determine why Patrick Bateman is killing people, why he would have become so out of control, etc. It's just pointless talk about 80s singers and killing people. After the initial shock wears off...the movie just becomes silly. Chasing people around naked with a chainsaw isn't high-brow humor...it's just dumb. I tried to determine if there was some sort of connection between the songs that Patrick played for his victims and their final fate - but I could not see a link. Maybe there was one and I just missed it, but you would think if they were going to go to all the trouble of making it in obvious point that he likes 80s pop music - that the songs would tie-in someway to the killer's state of mind or his life or be some sort of guide to the movie in general. In the end, they did not add up - like most of this movie.
Rating:
Summary: AMERICAN PSYCHO IS A PSYCHO PATH !
Review: CHRISTIAN BALE PLAYS A RICH , SNOTTY LUNATIC.HE WOULD HEARS VOICES AND SH!T.THEN HE WOULD JUST SNAP AND KILL PEOPLE.IT'S KINDA A COOL MOVIE BUT IT WAS DUMB.IT'S NOT SCARY.IT'S FUNNY AT SOMETIMES.
Rating:
Summary: A failed adaptation of an inherently unfilmable novel
Review: If Mary Harron's film has the slightest chance of being regarded as a success, it will only be seen as such by viewers unfamiliar with Bret Easton Ellis's novel. The Ellis novel was relentlessly downbeat, its occasional black humour registering entirely intellectually. Flashes of brutal wit jolt the reader from the otherwise deliberate numbing produced by his obsessive-compulsive villain's soliloquays. Ellis's world is claustrophobic, oppressive: one in which every character is a monster of greed and moral apathy. Patrick Bateman is distinguished from his peers only by his commission of sickeningly and inventively brutal murders. For all the disco-ball glamour of Bateman's world, the utter crassness of his monied yuppie compatriots undercuts any sense of a reader's vicarious envy. In any one of Ellis's setpiece exclusive restaurants, the maitre-d' is shockingly rude in the ugly American sense (as oppposed to a stereotypically highbrow French or English sense), the waitresses are surly and incompetent, and the nearby diners speak far too loudly about nothing but money and shopping. The most expensive evening in Manhattan turns out to be a very unpleasant experience indeed. Harron very wrongly plays "American Psycho" for its 'comedy'. The atmosphere of its opening scene is reminiscent of an opera bouffe, as the credits are spelled in what first appears to be blood and is soon shown to be a berry sauce drizzled over elaborately presented food at--a cinematic and novelistic leitmotif---an exclusive restaurant. The film is surprisingly non-violent on an explicit level, almost as much so as the novel was graphic. Harron perhaps dodged some ratings issues, in addition to a great deal of political flack, with her use of implied and off-screen violence, and much less of it at that than occurs in the Ellis story. However necessary such a choice may have been from the point of view of marketing, however, Harron loses a critical dimension of grittiness and actual (not only spiritual) horror. Bateman's madness and detached curiosity (according to Ellis) are explicated in the novel through the agency of his treatment of corpses, his forays into dissection and cannibalism. Harron similarly airbrushes the grinding poverty, filthiness, and random, miscellaneous unpleasantnesses from Manhattan's streets. Tellingly, Ellis's novel begins with Bateman's judgemental observation of street people, depraved graffiti and garbage, as seen from a taxi window. Harron's film shows none of that, except in the brief meeting between Bateman and a beggar, a scene very much toned down from the novel. One can only imagine how disasterous the once-rumoured casting of Leonardo diCaprio as Bateman might have been. DiCaprio's slender, unthreatening frame and distinctive facial beauty would have made it impossible either to fear him or to mistake him for others, as constantly happens in the plot of both the novel and the film. Patrick Bateman, in Ellis's protrayal, is so flawlessly groomed and generically, nearly featurelessly handsome that he is occassionally taken for any vapidly perfect male model. Harron chose Christian Bale well as a physical presence. He wears his designer suits with the oblivious comfort of the well-born, and his nearly perfect face is oddly forgettable. There is something enigmatic and seemingly incomplete about Bale's physiognomy: even watching direct shots of him taken at close-range, one has the sense of seeing something obliquely, as if part of his face were constantly obscured, or faceted ever so slightly out of the line of vision. Bale's lovely face is indeed one which, as the plot and characterization require, could be mistaken for that of any other equally handsome man. The choice of a British actor for Bateman, however talented he may be, no doubt appeared to be a good idea in the initial casting process. Few American actors would appreciate the hyper-sensitivity to class issues which Ellis's Bateman ruminates on, endlessly and disdainfully, nor could they easily generate his droit de seigneur bearing. There is, however, the very unfortunate matter of Bale's attempted American accent. Bale clearly spent mucht time studying the particular nasal bray of the Andover-Harvard aristocracy, but he never once pulls it off, sounding instead as if he had a slight speech impediment. Given that Bale is the lead, this constant distraction is most unfortunate for the film overall. By soft-shoeing the hideousness of Bateman's acts; by relatively normalizing the members of his social circle; and by completely removing the other, darker, despairing New York from Bateman's designer world, Harron does much to reduce her lead to a bizarre but meaninglessly destructive cipher. Unfortunately, Ellis's extraordinary sensitivity to sociological phenomena is rarely in evidence here. The more conflicted, intelligent, 'deeper' Bateman which Ellis so carefully constructs as a sort of human 'cautionary tale' ends up as something like the evil twin of Christian Bale's smirking, guffawing incarnation.
Rating:
Summary: Masterpiece
Review: This is a black comedy done to perfection. Once in awhile a film comes along that exceeds all expectations, and this is that movie. It can be watched several times. This is a movie to watch without distractions, if you walk away for a second, pause the movie. It is entertaining on so many levels. The monologue/dialogue is superb! The storyline takes you back to the materialistic 80's, Regan era and makes you laugh out loud. Christian Bale's performance of Patrick Bateman is flawless. Patrick Bateman is a sadistic, good looking, professional, educated, serial killer, that can hold down a brilliant conversation about his seemingly very caring views on world affairs. Mary Harron (director) takes you on a journey you will not soon forget. I would not recommend this movie to anyone that needs a plot spoon fed to them. Anyone, else....Own it!
Rating:
Summary: Mr. Dahmer Goes to Wall Street...
Review: ....this world is so sterile that mebbe, just mebbe, one could be a mass murdering conspicuous consumer. See it for Bale's great performance, compare with "Fight Club", "The Talented Mr. Ripley" "Rope" and any Pee Wee Herman tape...why use a hammer gun when a ball peen would do nicely...?
Rating:
Summary: American Satire
Review: American Psycho left the same impression on me that The Talented Mr. Ripley did; An unsatisfying or unfulfilled ending. It is not necessarily that I expected for Bateman to get his upcommance.Maybe I just missed the powerful subtlety of the climax of the film itself. Christian Bale is an excellent actor who must have had some kind of personal chuckle imitating an uptight, arrogant, wall-street American yuppie. Even his "American" accent was flawless !He played a character that you really not only hated for his literal cutthroat antics but for his annoying behavior and obessession as a neat freak !Yet, there appeared to be times in the story where his "sickness" was also a cry for help...like a rabid or diseased dog waiting to be caught and put out of it's misery. Bale gets 5 stars for his stellar performance. My understanding of the film was that it was a twisted/dark satirical comedy coinciding with a slasher/thriller movie (sort of like a recording artist ala Sarah Brightman singing opera while on the next track singing a pop ballad all on the same album); Different genres within the same context or realm. It was not just about a nutcase hacking people, but it was also a social commentary about commercialism, consumerism, and capitalism (the "holy trintiy" of Wall Street and upper class America)! This film falls under the category of "eclectic and off-beat". While it sports all the glamor and typical nuance of a Hollywood big budget film it also serves well as an art house independent film for the Cannes Film Festival !
|
