DVD Talk Forum
Page 2 of 2
1
2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Movie Talk (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk-17/)
-   -   Just saw American Psycho for the first time... (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/470950-just-saw-american-psycho-first-time.html)

GIjon213 07-08-06 07:41 PM
Spoiler:
Nope, not a single spoiler here.

mndtrp 07-08-06 07:58 PM
This is one of my favorite movies. The narration Bale gives is very subdued, which is a nice contrast to his onscreen actions. The comments he makes are perfect in a passive-aggressive way.

I always thought he did it, but no one really noticed.

Michael Ballack 07-08-06 11:09 PM
I simply loved the film. I love to hear the clips on the radio and refrences to the movie's classic lines "Don't just stare at it, eat it" or hearing Christian Bale talk about Huey Lewis and the news before he kills people. Christian Bale is bloody brilliant.

I like to belive he did it and got away with it as well.

MartinBlank 07-09-06 01:04 AM
I always figured everything was real up until the point of the ATM telling him to stuff the cat inside....after that there's the revolving door shooting, that cop shoot out w/exploding car AND the fact that he was spot on with every pull of the trigger.

Parcher 07-09-06 06:26 PM
My favorite book, and a very very good movie - entertaining, interesting, just very creative. I think there are sooo many funny scenes in the movie, and I think Bale does a really, really good job. When reading the book I think the movie does VERY well.

"I have a lunch appointment with Cliff Huxtable".
"Is Paul still handling the Fischer-account?"
"Tell him I'm at lunch"
"I guess I had to return some videotapes. And then I had some sorbet."
"I have to return some videotapes"
"Is that Ivana trump??"
"The thickness of it. My God...it even has a watermark!"
"Did you see the ad in the times?"

- and the list goes on and on, truly one of the funnies movies (kinda scary book though) I have seen.

DeanoBKN 07-09-06 07:54 PM
Originally Posted by MartinBlank
I always figured everything was real up until the point of the ATM telling him to stuff the cat inside....after that there's the revolving door shooting, that cop shoot out w/exploding car AND the fact that he was spot on with every pull of the trigger.
It was these chain of events that always confused the hell out of me. But I'm tired of figuring out if he did them or not. I just look at the film as a social satire of the 80's ;)

JIF 07-19-06 08:29 PM
The book really disgusted me. I had to actually put it down for a year before restarting and completing it. The killings were a lot more graphic and sadistic (i.e. rat+tube+cheese+victim).

Harron actually made the movie a lot more palatable. There was no way they could have been faithful to the book.

Ravenous 07-19-06 08:53 PM
After seeing the movie again I wonder ONE thing

Are we relying on what the filmakers have said in interviews and shit to determine the killings were real? In the movie it still seems like a big illusion. If the movie cant make it clear than I think its a huge hole that totally fucks the movie. I shouldnt have to read a BB or an interview to learn what the movie means or is trying to portray. If it wasnt clear in the movie, someone didnt do their job well.

That 3 way with Phil Collins "sosudio" (or whatever the fuck it is) is damn hilarious.

sethsez 07-19-06 09:08 PM
It wasn't supposed to be clear, though. It was supposed to be confusing, vague, ambiguous, etc. Much like the rest of the 80s, really.

American Psycho doesn't try to tell a neat and tidy little story, so it's not a bad movie for failing to do so.

JZ1276 07-20-06 08:50 PM
ive seen this movie many times over the years and still do not understand the ending where the lawyer is calling him by a totally different name.

dick_grayson 07-20-06 08:51 PM
it's ambiguous. you're not supposed to bu sure if he killed anyone. he's nuts.

Supermallet 07-20-06 09:24 PM
If he didn't kill them, then the movie has no point.

Spoiler:
The very reason Bateman is off the hook with the detective is because no one can remember who is who, and so someone incorrectly names Bateman as being in a group that went to a club at the time Bateman was killing Paul. Thus, he does all the killings with impunity and no one even thinks that he could have done it. That's the whole point of the film. Even after he confesses, the confession is confounded by the same mistake; people see someone they think is Paul in London, but it's not. During the whole film, people are constantly saying, "Is that, so-and-so? No, it's someone else," and so on. Hell, Bateman's own lawyer doesn't recognize Bateman when he sees him face-to-face. And thus the ending, where he sits laughing, echoes the beginning, where he declares that he is empty. After killing so many people and no one even daring to think he was the one that did it, he realizes that the entire world he is in is actually even more empty than he is.


The book is far more ambiguous as to whether or not he actually killed anyone. The whole thing reads like a laundry list. "Drank Perrian, made reservations, pulled out a bum's eyeball, returned some tapes," and so on. The murders get lost in the intentional monotony of the narrative.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:13 AM.
Page 2 of 2
1
2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.