Rating: 
Summary: Totally blew the pooch
Review: I really liked the book and was looking forward to the movie. The movie is so-so. As movies usually do, this one totally missed the mark and the book was better. While I won't say the movie was bad (I'm not buying it) it wasn't very good either. Maybe I expected more, I don't know. The actors were good and fit their parts. But, the movie just left out parts and changed this around from how the book did them, so I feel the movie blew it.
Rating:
Summary: Hits and misses
Review: "American Psycho" is not a great film, but it has enough style and gloss to make you virtually disregard it's array of weaknesses. The only solid reason why it should be seen is for Christian Bale's performance as Patrick Bateman. He captures the character's dual personalities; the plastic-faced ladykiller and the chainsaw wielding maniac, and performs with enough dynamic charisma to keep you diverted even when the film misfires, which it does quite often. I was also quite impressed with film's flamboyant visualization of upper-crust Manhattan during the 80's, watching those nightclub scenes evoke strong memories of a time when excess and campiness were in vogue. But even with these assets, "American Psycho" suffers from a lack of visceral impact (the book, admittedly, did have that) and a screenplay which can't seem to make up it's mind. Is it a satire on yuppie materialism or a thriller about a man's increasing bloodlust? If it was intended to be both, the results were confused, especially during the final 20 minutes. There are indeed moments of insight into the connection between then emptiness of society's values and Patrick Bateman's absence of a soul (some of them funny, others disturbing) but the film fails to get right inside the character's head. Overall, "American Psycho" is nothing to brag about, but it will still keep you interested, and Christian Bale gives a terrific performance as well.
Rating:
Summary: Read the Book, Saw the Movie
Review: Reading the book and seeing the movie were two completely different experiences. I read the book in 1993 and was repulsed, horrified, and intrigued at the same time. The book did what media strive to do - evoke genuine emotion in the reader/viewer/listener.The movie does a better job of capturing what Ellis was probably trying to do - satirizing the greed and materialism of Wall Street in the 80's (wait - did it go away?). The film seemed very intimate - you were along for the hell ride that is Bateman's life. You could almost sympathize with his disdain for and detachment from the life that was going on around him. I got very nervous every time the film reached a point that I remembered as being particularly disturbing or grisly in the book. Thankfully, the director had the sense to imply the violence rather than throw it in our faces (ala Oliver Stone). In all, the movie worked for me as more of a study in how to portray a serial killer theme differently. Christian Bale's performance was excellent. Although I was initially distracted by the robo-yuppie inflection in his voice, I eventually realized that it was part of the "act" that Bateman put on for the crowd. Enjoy.
Rating:
Summary: Unrated? One minute of extra scenes??
Review: If you're buying this DVD cause you saw the movie, liked it, and wanted to see what scenes were cut, DO NOT BUY THIS DVD!! I ahve seen the rated version several times, and recently I purchased the unrated version so that I could see what they had to cut from the film. The results were about one or two minutes of scene that is not even that controversial!! I was VERY disappointed, being a big fan of Easton Ellis. Not to knock it, it is worth buying, but do not get your hopes up for any new revelations.
Rating:
Summary: worth watching
Review: Does Amercan Psycho reveal anything about the 80's that most literate people don't already know? Certainly not. As a social commentary, it rarely goes beyond the obvious. In fact, lines like: "There is an idea of Patrick Bateman... but I simply am not there" are ridiculous cliches, as is the ending, which I won't spoil. The area in which American Psycho succeeds is as a black comedy. I've seen some reviewers say the dialogue is poorly written. I think they might be missing the point. The dialogue is intentionally vapid and superficial to the point where it becomes humorous. Bale does a tremendous job adding to the film's sharp comic wit. His saccarine grin and phony newscaster voice often benefit the film by making his lines quite hilarious. In fact, the scene in which Bateman kills Paul Allen after spending 5 minutes explaining the musical genius of Huey Lewis and the News is quite possibly the funniest thing I've seen in a while. Bale is almost Jim Carreyesque as he dances around with an ax while pointing out the merits of "Hip to be Square" to the unsuspecting victim. It's only when the film strives to make a statement on greed and emptiness that it fails. It's points and targets are obvious; and the director beats us over the head with them by having the narrator spell out every single statement the film is trying to make. As a black comedy, however, American Psycho manages to capture a certain manic hilarity that only a handful of films has been able to capture.
Rating: 
Summary: a new classic for the rest of us!
Review: American pyscho isn't as violent as the novel, but the moive is dark as hell. From the open scene to the closing frame, the movie prys at you in a way that doesn't let go. This is a movie that stays with you, and will thrill you at every viewing. By the way. Christian bale delivers a excellent performance as a man with no morals and values.
Rating: 
Summary: A Guilty Pleasure
Review: This film, based on the impenetrable 1991 novel by Bret Easton Ellis, performs an act that perhaps has never been done before by any film based on a book: it improves the story. Not that there was a whole lot of story to begin with: a Wall Street account manager goes to a lot of clubs and parties, frets about restaurant reservations, delivers wry, condescending political manifestoes to amuse his friends, catalogues his own and his friends' clothing (endlessly), reflects in curiously erudite fashion upon '80s pop music, and.......oh yes, commits spectacularly violent murders in his off-hours. In the book, the scenes seem cut-and pasted together, the characters and events completely interchangeable. If the story in the classic novel is supposed to represent an arc, perhaps this story might be well represented by a flat horizontal line. (EKG visual pun not intended.) Ellis has trouble writing actual stories. But he has some literary gifts: he can compose witty dialogue, composes apt descriptions of settings, and is a decent expository writer. Somewhere along the line, Mr. Ellis may have gotten the mistaken idea that a novel is merely the sum of its parts. Mr. Ellis also has a most un-writerlike knack for publicity. It is of course this gift that made his book such a notorious success. It was bound to be made into a movie, and, to the delight and chagrin of many, it was. It was not a great book. The movie, however, is very good. Part of this is because violence for its own sake is more a subject for films than books, and part is because director Mary Harron took advantage of the book's lack of structure and of distinctiveness of its characters by ruthlessly editing the book. She cuts out scenes, moving dialogue freely from one character to another, moving action from one location to another. She has eliminated all the book's novelistic pretension and fashioned a film of visual elegance and sly wit from the remains. Right off the bat, Ellis' infuriating digressions on attire are easily disposed of by, well, the very medium of film. The characters wear the clothes. You can see them. They're very nice. You can't afford them. Point made. In addition, the book's amusing but context-free essays on pop music are woven into the film's story as eerily out-of -place monologues by the protagonist Bateman as he prepares his grisly work, helping define him as a person utterly without social responsibity. In one such scene that recalls the famous Michael Madsen "ear" dance from Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs, Christian Bale as Bateman jogs with manic joy around his living room, brandishing a raincoat and axe to the tune of "Hip to be Square" while pleading the case of Huey Lewis and the News for musical posterity to Jared Leto's drunken, hapless victim Paul Allen. Christian Bale's performance as Patrick Bateman is a tour de force of smugness. His delivery of Bateman is sheer hyperbole, a caricature of the voice of a spoiled urban prep-school brat. He must have known that this material could not possibly succeed if it were played straight. It is the single most redeeming feature of this film, this oddly off-kilter starchiness of Bateman, and it is never less than fascinating. He never betrays a single genuine emotion (except murderous rage) , and you wonder why it works. I am not sure that the reaction to this film will be what Harron intended. Apparently the film was meant to be a withering indictment of greed and testosterone, and yet I can visualize fraternity brothers across the country rewinding the "Huey Lewis" scene countless times in the TV room and hooting with glee. It is to be admitted that this film will certainly do nothing to remedy the de-sensitization of the American public to media violence. But said de-sensitization is, for many, sad to say, a fait accompli. Seeing as how we cannot make violence truly horrifying again when seen on film, it is refreshing to see work by people who at least know how to make it entertaining.
Rating: 
Summary: A Directorial Hack Job
Review: Not having read the book, I will take this film on its own merits. "American Psycho" is a satirical horror film that had greater potential than was realized. Mary Harron's adaptation and direction seems to be the problem. Part of the story was a lampoon of the excessive materialism of the 1980's, focusing particularly on the yuppie lifestyle. That should have served as the background for the character study. However, Harron pushed it to the foreground and exaggerated the portrayals of yuppie superficiality and arrogance to the point where it became sophomoric. She then pounded on the point until it was threadbare. The film would have benefited from more development of Bateman's tortured inner self rather than this obsession with his and his friends' way of life. The story presented an opportunity for a fresh approach to the horror genre. Most horror films are presented from the perspective of the victims, whereas this story was from the killer's perspective. In addition, since it was a first person narrative, we had an opportunity to look inside the killer's head. Though some of that was done, too much of the introspection focused on his thoughts about his lifestyle and not enough on his feelings about the people he was killing or the acts themselves. The acting by Bale was excellent. Though I didn't agree with Harron's vision of Bateman as the poster child for yuppie conceit and tawdriness, Christian Bale played the caricature to the hilt. He was more pompous, supercilious and decadent than your typical Roman Emperor. The scene depicting his emotional disintegration was terrifically done and very intense. Overall, the way the story was presented created an air of incredulity about all the characters and their behavior which took the effectiveness out of the psychological angle. That left us with a mindless horror flick with only mediocre effects. Despite some excellent acting, I rated this film a 4/10. A directorial hack job marred a good story concept. Since it failed miserably at the box office, the film's best hope is that it becomes a cult classic in rental. It is kitsch enough for that to be a distinct possibility.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant
Review: I have waited a long time to see this movie and I was worried about getting disappointed. But I shouldn't have been worried, Mary Herron created a masterpiece with this movie, and this movie captured a lot of the fascination of the book. So if you liked the book, you will like the book, but if you liked the book but thought it was too detailed in explaining Bateman's acts of violence, then you're gonna LOVE the movie. Because Mary Herron tries to scare you by what you not see. The movie shows mostly the bitter black humor of the book, and the actors are brilliant. Christian Bale is at his best, he plays with such a credibility that you're are kinda worried about a possible dark side in the actor's life.
Rating:
Summary: I WAS REALLY SURPRISED
Review: ...at how funny I found this movie. I do have the book, and I think it is too drawn out. It is definately crude and crass. I love the way it makes fun of the "I have this and you don't---Mine is better than yours" society. I have worked with this kind of a crowd-----who has the most expensive shoes, who can use verbage with big words. It is definately not one to watch with the kids around. If you have an open mind and a twisted sense of humor. You will like this movie.
| 
