Home PEx International Entertainment General Entertainment

American Psycho


saw this film yesterday at Glorietta. has anybody else seen it? "mystified" doesn't even come close to how i felt after it was over. the storyline was so convoluted! at ang daming cut! and i must admit, i didn't quite get the ending. i'm really interested to know what you guys think :)

(Christian Bale was great, though)

and also, i know the film is based on the book by Bret Easton Ellis. anybody read the book?

Comments

  • A movie that aims to be profound, but only ends up being laughable.

    Click here for enlightenment.

  • wow, i didn't think it was THAT awful, aenema! siguro it would've been better if it was handled by a more competent director. i still don't understand the ending though...did it all happen in his mind? did those murders really happen? if it did, then what were the things that the prostitute Christie saw in that apartment? hay naku, i wish somebody can give me the answers...:(
  • I thought Christian Bale was pretty good.

    I don't think you should take the whole movie literally. It would be easier to take with the premise of everything happening in the mind of Christian Bale's character.

    It's an exercise in surrealism, you can't take everything at face value. In the case of the parody in my previous post, Bale's homicidal habits are akin to the cut throat world of Wall Street. It would have made a better movie had the director not taken the parallelism too far. The symbolism/metaphor/whatever between murder and business was painstakingly drawn out and was made to last for the duration of the movie. The novelty began to wear out after the first fifteen minutes if you ask me.

    SPOILER ALERT
    Here's my take on the ending: We are so rooted in a capitalist world that sometimes we fail to see how far we can go just to get ahead. Regular practice has blurred the lines between what's right and what's wrong. When Bale's character finally grew a conscience, it was too late to come clean because by then, nobody cared.
  • It's a black comedy and it's wickedly funny, especially his discourse over Huey Lewis and the News while preparing to carve up Jared Leto.
  • I'VE SEEN THE MOVIE LAST YEAR, AND IT GAVE ME THE CHILLS.
    CHRISTIAN BALE WAS GREAT IN THAT MOVIE. HE'S GONE A LONG WAY SINCE "EMPIRE OF THE SUN". THE THREE- SOME WAS THE BEST SCENE IN THE MOVIE, I'VE BEEN THINKING OF DOING IT TOO.
  • it was supposed to be funny naman right?

    i understand the cuts...it's a gory movie and medyo vulgar (the two three ways prove it)...it has all the elements which can warrant an X rating (SEX, DRUGS, VIOLENCE)....

    i thought the movie was pretty good...i think sa ending he just imagined doing all those stuff due to his extensive drug use!

  • so Patrick Bateman is living in the cutthroat world of high business, only he took the word "cutthroat" a little too far (okay, so he took it WAY too far). the symbolism there is staring you in the face - you don't have to be Roger Ebert to figure it out.

    i still have a lot of questions about the movie, though. either i'd watch it again or i have to buy the book to find the answers. thanks, aenema, for your insights.
  • Originally posted by homeBuddy
    it was supposed to be funny naman right?

    Yes, the movie was supposed to be funny; and in some parts it actually is. Don't get me wrong, I didn't think that it was that bad (as my first post in this thread would lead you to believe) , the movie had guts, it had a slick visual style, and the performance of the whole cast was a treat. However, I would have enjoyed it better had the director enforced a little more subtlety.
  • Christian Bale = hot!!!! yummy!!!!
  • i consider it a crime to watch the film version first before reading the novel. you guys should have read the book before watching the movie (that's what i did). the movie was true to its source although the violence was majorly toned down and made into a cliche played for laughs. the director, Mary Harron, approached the violence in the movie with a light touch that the murder scenes turned out to be comical rather than grisly.

    i found it quite disappointing that the most intriguing parts in the book weren't included at all in the film version :( i have to give props to christian bale, though. he really pulled it off!

    ps: ellis' american psycho is a good read! it'll make your stomach churn but it's quite a good read.
  • Noel VeraNoel Vera PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    I didn't quite like it.

    The first half was very witty, and the best single scene the one between Chloe Sevigzny (sp?) and Bale (yes, he's good)--for once you had an engaging character onscreen (Chloe was very good), and you cared what happened to her. The rest were chainsaw fodder.

    But I saw it twice too, and my reaction remains the same--the horror scenes aren't bloody enough, the funny scenes aren't funny enough. That long chase--okay, okay, it isn't real; I got the point way back at the ATM machine. Fight Club is slightly more amusing (at least it has a sumptuous, decadent look). But it isn't really so much the movie's fault-- that chase was in the book, and didn't work there either.

    The book, truth to tell, I felt was worse. Brilliantly simpleminded premise--the yuppie scum's ultimate incarnation is the psycho killer, both '80s icons. But Ellis just doesn't have the chops or prose to bring it about interestingly. He tries--founders over the endless horror scenes, which are mildlly interesting because he pushes so hard, but the rest of it? Sophomoric games about illusion and reality. Long, long, LONG lists of expensive cosmetic products. It's a lengthy joke that would be funnier cut in half.

    Personally, I prefer Lecter--he's at least witty. And for disturbing, there's Peter Weller in "Clean, Shaven" and whatsisname (can't remember, but great performance) in "Henry, Portrait of a Serial Killer." Even that serial killer movie set in Russia (Citizen X) was more intersting, for its portrait of both killer and hunter, and the bureaucracy that kept the killer hunting so long.

  • Originally posted by FragileFlame98
    i consider it a crime to watch the film version first before reading the novel. you guys should have read the book before watching the movie (that's what i did). the movie was true to its source although the violence was majorly toned down and made into a cliche played for laughs. the director, Mary Harron, approached the violence in the movie with a light touch that the murder scenes turned out to be comical rather than grisly.

    i found it quite disappointing that the most intriguing parts in the book weren't included at all in the film version :( i have to give props to christian bale, though. he really pulled it off!

    ps: ellis' american psycho is a good read! it'll make your stomach churn but it's quite a good read.

    i'm a purist myself, fragileframe and as much as possible, i try to read the book first before i watch the film. almost always, i find the movie a disappointment. but you have to give the directors, writers, etc. credit. we have to assume that they did their best...

    anyways, as for american psycho, i think the fact that the director chose not to delve too much on the murder scenes worked to its advantage. we're left to involuntarily cringe inside the theatre and imagine what would've happened. also, i think the film nailed the eighties setting perfectly, from the costumes down to the soundtrack.

    ;)

  • I guess the movie is meant to make you feel like that, tequilapj. Yung tipong paglabas mo di mo alam kung sisibangot ka o matutuwa sa napanood mo.

    I think it was not meant to make you think.




  • JENSIE_GJENSIE_G PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    I really really liked the movie. It's as creepy as the movie "Psycho". I agree with people who say na the ending's kinda malabo or kinda parang bitin in a sense. I hope there will be a sequel... Thumbs up for Christian Bale!
Sign In or Register to comment.