sorry but i found it to romantized with the whole dark comdey genre. Lots of glitz but no real substance. I also found almost all the characters streched to the point of being unbelievable and unuseable. Big disapointment after hearing much hype about this one.

Question:

current UK theatrical version is being advertised as the "uncut" (NC-17 version)

any truth to this?

I liked it in some instances - and I agree that it was supposed to leave the viewer feeling dissatisfied, as are the main characters in the film.

I liked the camerawork in the flick. When they brought the split screens together as two of the main characters meet in the hall - I thought it was very interesting and innovative.

I really liked the speedy little tangent the film went off on when explaining Victor's trip through Europe - it would have made an interesting short film (as someone mentioned previously).

I didn't love it, but I am glad I saw it - I don't know how much it could be watched though because the characters are just so foul. I could care less about them, so why would I want to watch more of them?

Just watched it again (2nd time) after having enjoyed it the first time many months ago. My impression this time is that it is a really enjoyable film that doesn't shield the viewer from it's character's rough edges. I particularly liked the scene where Sean Bateman is sniffing the mysterious love letters while jerking off. Classic! The camera work was awesome.

Agreed! Although I never thought I would see a pudgy Fred laying a bed in his underwear.

I thought this was a great movie, most of my roommates disagreed with me. But they are morons so I wasn't concerned.

Watched it and didn't really see any point at all. Just a bunch of loser dopers ****ing eachother. I almost fell asleep.

I have a theory about the abrupt ending. I interpret the sudden end of Sean's train of thought as meaning that he met with a fatal motorcycle accident. I mean it was clear in the final scene that he was driving off fishtailing into a snowy night on a motorcycle with no helmet. Perhaps he ended up as an ornament on someone's windsheild, or landed in the trunk of an old tree. How else can you explain the ending to this movie?

loved it as well.

I think the main reason that the movie ended in mid sentence is because the book did. For those who have not read it, the book both begins and ends in the middle of a sentence. The film copied this. I am pretty sure the film begins in mid-sentence as well but it is not nearly as noticeable.

I've debated about reading the book after seeing this movie. However, I would agree with a few posters that the movie is nothing more than a bunch of dopers desperate for sex.

The style of the movie tired me out. Constant stopping, the two or three times the audience had to be told what was happening on screen, and the overall "been there, done that before in movies" feel got to me.

Then again, I saw this six months ago, so I'm having to remember from that viewing. I still don't think I'll see it again unless it comes on HBO or Showtime.

Any movie that features two guys in their underwear dancing on a bed to George Michael's " Faith ", is a masterpiece.

" Well, Dick, how is school ? "

" It sucksssssss **** !!! "

I thought it was a great movie. I recommend it to anyone.

The one part i thought was great was when james vander beek said

"what......... i told you i came"

Classic

The movie does start in mid sentence, Lauren says , " and it's a story that might ....... ".

Can you expand on this, I have no plans to read the book but your answer may sway me.

Something about that Avary, at least his movies stay with me. I watched last night, and I haven't decided if I like it or not, but I'll definately revisit it.

Saw it yesterday (for the first time.) I honestly hope that the book had a better point to make because all the movie did was show a bunch of callous college students tread water. Some of the effects were clever but largely unnecessary and overused. Maybe its to accentuate the superficial charaters and the problems of their own making.

I did like the 'Dick' character - he pretty much said all that needed to be said.

Finally saw this and I have a couple of problems/concerns. If Lauren was so against sex, or saving it or whatever, what is up with her giving her professor a BJ, and what about her non-reaction to being raped and video taped? Were they attending Party U? All the parties seemed to take place in the dorms, yet no sighting of anyone in charge. Nothing like the dorms I have seen.

All in all I enjoyed the movie and I actually liked the character Sean, and loved Victor's catch up story.


One other thing, are we suppose to know Sean's real story? Did he go to Nebraska, NY or the other location for the summer, or stay at school and work? Did his bro wire him the money?

though i don't think it's an awful film, it's not exactly a good one either. a strangely compelling mess would be a better description. the visuals are distracting, to say the least. the backwards stuff seems especially pointless. james van der beek is terrible in this film. there's already narration to let us know what a colossal jerk his character is, so van der beek shouldn't be scowling ferociously the way he does throughout the film. avary also managed to get a bad performance out of the otherwise dependable clifton collins. and the less said about shannon sossamun, the better. her idea of acting is to bite her lower lip. a lot. get that girl some chapstick, ASAP! but jessica biel and kip pardue are both quite good. i've seen this film twice because there are some wonderful moments scattered around, especially a sequence involving suicide that is remarkably effective. it's compelling in spite of the things i think are wrong about it but boy, there really is a LOT wrong.

Wow. 2nd post is a 5 year bump.

Oh, and this....


Welcome to the forums.

It's funny that this thread was bumped. I just watched this a week or two ago for the first time, loved it, and now I'm planning on importing the region free Blu-ray.

I really felt the movie was amazing. It's good to know there are others that feel the same.

It's still the only adaptation of Ellis' work that doesn't suck.

The whole film just shows how much of a fan Avary was of the source material (the same can't be said for Less Than Zero, American Psycho and The Informers) and it really is a great film. Granted, a lot was cut from the book for numerous reasons, but the film is the only adaptation that captures Ellis' vision.

I really do enjoy the film adaptation of this, but at the same time, it's disappointing because the book is so rich in depth and execution and only 1/2 of it made into the film.

"well dick, hows school?"
"it sucks cooooooock ck ck ck"

Love this flick. Very underrated.

I never liked this movie...been awhile since Ive seen it, but it felt like cocaine was just what people did...people were doing coke in it like most people breath...

but the Carrottop commentary is hilarious.

wasn't an uncut version of this film supposed to be released sometime? or am i way off...

i had heard that it was naturally an NC-17 rating