Datasets:

DDDDZQ

/

imdb_reviews

like 0

A classic. A fun and feel good film to view!

tt0061418

I don't know how historically accurate or correct that this film is to the real life story of "Bonnie and Clyde", but one thing is for sure it makes for a very fun and enjoyable viewing! At it's time in 1967 the film was a milestone, now it's considered a classic and certainly for the action paced drama and black hearted humor it held up. "Bonnie and Clyde" pushed the envelope at it's time not only just because of it's historical legendary tale of two outlaws it also for 1967 was one of the more violent and bloody films to come out.Set in the early 1930's in Texas and some of the west in the depression era it begins with two drifters Clyde Barrow(Warren Beatty)who's an ex con just released from prison for armed robbery and Bonnie Parker(Faye Dunaway)who's just a pretty small town Texas blond who wants to escape the world of being a waitress. And from the beginning of the film the pair hook up and embark on a life of crime only to build up one by one to bigger and better bank robberies. Though the film is very violent for 1967 it portrays the crimes as fun and full of adventure, it's well blended with romance and sexual tension between the two central characters as both Beatty and Dunaway look as if though they had a field day playing Clyde and Bonnie respectively. The Barrow gang expands when more partners in crime come as Gene Hackman gives an over the top performance as Beatty's brother and his wife played by Estelle Parsons brings caution and slow witted humor to the gang. And worth a note is Michael J. Pollard's supporting performance as a partner in crime helper.Director Arthur Penn does the film as rough and gritty but he keeps it humble. The shootouts, chase scenes, and slang talk combined with the playing of banjo music all during the film and the cops and robbers and wild west attitude style make this a classic thrilling ride of brilliance and grace. Beatty not only produced but his portrayal of outlaw Clyde Barrow was first class work at a time when he was the movies new stud. Also at the time in 1967 the performance here of Faye Dunaway is very sexy and ravishing with her innocent but beautiful look, her performance makes her the "It" girl of 1967. Overall this is probably one of the better films of the 60's it's well paced and blended well with feel good fun and escape topped off with super performances from Beatty and Dunaway it's clearly worth many viewings.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-193

ur9927546

title: A classic. A fun and feel good film to view! review: I don't know how historically accurate or correct that this film is to the real life story of "Bonnie and Clyde", but one thing is for sure it makes for a very fun and enjoyable viewing! At it's time in 1967 the film was a milestone, now it's considered a classic and certainly for the action paced drama and black hearted humor it held up. "Bonnie and Clyde" pushed the envelope at it's time not only just because of it's historical legendary tale of two outlaws it also for 1967 was one of the more violent and bloody films to come out.Set in the early 1930's in Texas and some of the west in the depression era it begins with two drifters Clyde Barrow(Warren Beatty)who's an ex con just released from prison for armed robbery and Bonnie Parker(Faye Dunaway)who's just a pretty small town Texas blond who wants to escape the world of being a waitress. And from the beginning of the film the pair hook up and embark on a life of crime only to build up one by one to bigger and better bank robberies. Though the film is very violent for 1967 it portrays the crimes as fun and full of adventure, it's well blended with romance and sexual tension between the two central characters as both Beatty and Dunaway look as if though they had a field day playing Clyde and Bonnie respectively. The Barrow gang expands when more partners in crime come as Gene Hackman gives an over the top performance as Beatty's brother and his wife played by Estelle Parsons brings caution and slow witted humor to the gang. And worth a note is Michael J. Pollard's supporting performance as a partner in crime helper.Director Arthur Penn does the film as rough and gritty but he keeps it humble. The shootouts, chase scenes, and slang talk combined with the playing of banjo music all during the film and the cops and robbers and wild west attitude style make this a classic thrilling ride of brilliance and grace. Beatty not only produced but his portrayal of outlaw Clyde Barrow was first class work at a time when he was the movies new stud. Also at the time in 1967 the performance here of Faye Dunaway is very sexy and ravishing with her innocent but beautiful look, her performance makes her the "It" girl of 1967. Overall this is probably one of the better films of the 60's it's well paced and blended well with feel good fun and escape topped off with super performances from Beatty and Dunaway it's clearly worth many viewings.

One of those vital films that changed the face of Hollywood and biopics forever

tt0061418

To be honest, I stayed away from Bonnie and Clyde on purpose for years. I was waiting in eager anticipation for the opportunity to see it on the big screen and finally that opportunity arose. My expectations were decently high because any time anyone talks about this film they refer to it as though it is a movie changing experience. It is exactly that. On the surface level as sheer entertainment, it is good. But when you look at that importance of the film, what they accomplished and what it meant you begin to see the true greatness of this classic. I watch a lot of classic film especially in the last couple of years and as great as most of them are a lot of them don't hold up well over time. Bonnie and Clyde holds up so well and never once feels dated. In fact, because it pioneered something in its style, visceral and nearly shocking content, it could have easily been made today and still shock some. It is the most twisted romance you could ever seen. The heart of the film really is this bizarre relationship between Bonnie and Clyde. Everything else is the backdrop. The gritty scenery of the deep South, the wild and unhinged behaviour and the detail they touch on when creating Bonnie and Clyde doesn't go unnoticed. It feels real, it feels shocking and it feels downright disturbing. Its such a sad and twisted story and you are right there to witness all of it. Never once did I feel compassion for them. I never felt they were being painted as heroes but rather tragic figures of history.Warren Beatty fits this role just like a glove. He becomes Clyde Barrow. It isn't even the type of role that is in your face or bowls you over but its a subtle performance and its the little things about it that makes you realize by the end how brilliant it is. Beatty's facial expressions, the limp, the look in his eyes...he just completely lets this role pour out of him and its obvious why its iconic. Faye Dunaway is the iconic Bonnie Parker. Dunaway is fantastic in the role and actually brings the character to life in a very similar way to Beatty. The beauty of it is though the chemistry between the two of them. Its twisted and disturbing and yet you almost understand this fatal attraction. They try and touch on some of the more important aspects of their relationship but there is so much story here. Both of them absolutely deserve the classic status their performances have gotten. Without either of them this would have been a very different (and probably not as effective) film. Michael J. Pollard, the amazing Gene Hackman, and Estelle Parsons all bring their various characters to life in different ways. Parsons is excruciatingly irritating exactly like she is meant to be (a portrayal the real Blanche didn't care for.) Hackman and Beatty are sizzling opposite each other as the killer Barrow boys. Pollard could have used some more depth to his character but its a vital role and he does it well. Denver Pyle is decent but painfully predictable as the tough old Texas Marshal who finally gets his vengeance against Bonnie and Clyde.Haunting, beautiful, disturbing and shocking, this film leaves nothing to the imagination. The first time a man is shot in the face and it still feels shocking so imagine what it was like then. Director Arthur Penn obviously cared very much for this film and the historical aspect. There are so many urban legends about the two infamous killers and bank robbers and the film tries to at least scratch the surface of some of those rumours which isn't easy to do. It is likely one of those films that by sheer magic/miracle or fate everything clicks about it. The chemistry, the script, the cinematography, the cast...everything feels iconic. It wasn't perfect for me. I thought sometimes it dragged just a little bit and we do see a lot of the same material again and again because of the nature of the story. They were bank robbers and they hid from the law. That's not to say I was bored for even a moment. This is true gangster flick glory so if you like that style...Bonnie and Clyde is the epitome of that. It is an absolute must see and I will be adding it to my personal collection. Over time I think I will only learn to appreciate it more. 8.5/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-355

ur1697212

title: One of those vital films that changed the face of Hollywood and biopics forever review: To be honest, I stayed away from Bonnie and Clyde on purpose for years. I was waiting in eager anticipation for the opportunity to see it on the big screen and finally that opportunity arose. My expectations were decently high because any time anyone talks about this film they refer to it as though it is a movie changing experience. It is exactly that. On the surface level as sheer entertainment, it is good. But when you look at that importance of the film, what they accomplished and what it meant you begin to see the true greatness of this classic. I watch a lot of classic film especially in the last couple of years and as great as most of them are a lot of them don't hold up well over time. Bonnie and Clyde holds up so well and never once feels dated. In fact, because it pioneered something in its style, visceral and nearly shocking content, it could have easily been made today and still shock some. It is the most twisted romance you could ever seen. The heart of the film really is this bizarre relationship between Bonnie and Clyde. Everything else is the backdrop. The gritty scenery of the deep South, the wild and unhinged behaviour and the detail they touch on when creating Bonnie and Clyde doesn't go unnoticed. It feels real, it feels shocking and it feels downright disturbing. Its such a sad and twisted story and you are right there to witness all of it. Never once did I feel compassion for them. I never felt they were being painted as heroes but rather tragic figures of history.Warren Beatty fits this role just like a glove. He becomes Clyde Barrow. It isn't even the type of role that is in your face or bowls you over but its a subtle performance and its the little things about it that makes you realize by the end how brilliant it is. Beatty's facial expressions, the limp, the look in his eyes...he just completely lets this role pour out of him and its obvious why its iconic. Faye Dunaway is the iconic Bonnie Parker. Dunaway is fantastic in the role and actually brings the character to life in a very similar way to Beatty. The beauty of it is though the chemistry between the two of them. Its twisted and disturbing and yet you almost understand this fatal attraction. They try and touch on some of the more important aspects of their relationship but there is so much story here. Both of them absolutely deserve the classic status their performances have gotten. Without either of them this would have been a very different (and probably not as effective) film. Michael J. Pollard, the amazing Gene Hackman, and Estelle Parsons all bring their various characters to life in different ways. Parsons is excruciatingly irritating exactly like she is meant to be (a portrayal the real Blanche didn't care for.) Hackman and Beatty are sizzling opposite each other as the killer Barrow boys. Pollard could have used some more depth to his character but its a vital role and he does it well. Denver Pyle is decent but painfully predictable as the tough old Texas Marshal who finally gets his vengeance against Bonnie and Clyde.Haunting, beautiful, disturbing and shocking, this film leaves nothing to the imagination. The first time a man is shot in the face and it still feels shocking so imagine what it was like then. Director Arthur Penn obviously cared very much for this film and the historical aspect. There are so many urban legends about the two infamous killers and bank robbers and the film tries to at least scratch the surface of some of those rumours which isn't easy to do. It is likely one of those films that by sheer magic/miracle or fate everything clicks about it. The chemistry, the script, the cinematography, the cast...everything feels iconic. It wasn't perfect for me. I thought sometimes it dragged just a little bit and we do see a lot of the same material again and again because of the nature of the story. They were bank robbers and they hid from the law. That's not to say I was bored for even a moment. This is true gangster flick glory so if you like that style...Bonnie and Clyde is the epitome of that. It is an absolute must see and I will be adding it to my personal collection. Over time I think I will only learn to appreciate it more. 8.5/10

Hailed as an example of Hollywood's Brave, New, Brutally Realistic and Violent Cinema; the Barrow Gang provided all film makers with a new Zenith to aim for.

tt0061418

There was a time in the History of the United States when the institution of the Rail Road and the fancy dudes who ran them, called either Tycoons or Moguls, were none too popular with the general populace. Perhaps it was the cozy relationship that they enjoyed with the Politicos of their day; or maybe it was the high-handed methods that the different companies used to gain the Right-of-Way to expand operations from Coast to Coast, from Sea to Shining Sea.These factors were sure influential in casting common Outlaws and Robbers such as Butch, Sundance and Jesse James as some sort of god-like folk heroes to the commoners. Anyone who did any harm to the bad, old guys with the reins of the 'Iron Horse' was automatically some sort of courageous Rebel; standing up to tyrannical treatment and looking out for all. It was a simple example of that time-honored tradition and old custom of viewing, "the Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend." SO in the 1930's we would naturally substitute the Financial Institutions, namely the Banks, as being the Culprit instead of the Pennsylvania, the B & O, the Reading and the Short Line RR's. The Bank was vilified for a couple of reasons. First of all, it was the banks who would be the one to foreclose on one's property; which may well have been a family run farm that has been owned by the very same family for years and generations. The feelings of confusion, total frustration and angst were made even more muddled by the eviction strings' being pulled by a large banking interest, miles and miles away.All of this followed the "Roaring 20's", which had Rival groups of 'Gangsters' battled for 'turfs' and the 'rights' to do the illicit supplying of Bootleg Beer, Bath Tub Gin, Prostitution and 'Loud Talking & Giggling' in line. This was mostly a sort of well to do criminal enterprise; which all ended with the Repeal of Prohibition in 1933, supposedly.* There was a big difference between the Bank Robbers and their Organized Crime City thug counterparts. Perhaps it is best explained by a scene in THE PETRIFIED FOREST (Warner Brothers, 1936). In it the John Dillinger-like character Duke Mantee (Humphrey Bogart) was referred to as a 'Gangster'. Near-by character, Gramp Maple (Charley Grapwin) retorts: "Duke Mantee ain't no Gangster; he's a Desperado (pronounced Des-puh-ray-do)! Gangsters is Foreigners (Fur-rin-ehrs)." Well anyway, they sure weren't the same breed of cat!With the high-handed treatment and the terrible financial conditions of the early '30's Depression Era USA, these Hot-Rodding, Blood-Thirsty and Machine Gun Happy took on the totally false reputation of being some sort of latter-day Robin Hoods. This was patently false; but with the Nation's Newspapers afforded extensive coverage to their exploits and this surely magnified the appeal of the common moron, thug murderer and stick-up man.And to this end, our feted, Classic Film endeavor, BONNIE AND CLYDE (Tatira-Hiller Prod. /Warner Brothers-7 Arts, 1967) starts out sort of slow and full of whimsical levity. Bank Robbery appeared to be fun, a lark, a real blast. But the mood changes abruptly and for the rest of the film during a bank robbery that goes not quite as planned. After getting the proceeds at gunpoint, everything seems to go wrong for the young couple. The get-away car is out of position. There are parked cars where they shouldn't be. And they actually get some resistance from folks at the bank. The whole scene is fast-paced and provokes the audience to a great fit of collective belly-laugh; then someone from the Bank jumps up on their auto's running board, only to be shot right in the face by Clyde. When the front passenger's side window is splattered with the victim's blood; the mood suddenly becomes ever so somber.The scene and sequence of events here are expertly woven into one great Roller-Coaster of a scene; with all the ups and downs, twists and turns that any 'Bobs' or 'Space Mountain'** could ever throw at us. Then suddenly, it's an abrupt stop and a return to Earth and Reality. It's a most remarkably performed and really puts the viewer into contact with what the whole point of the story really is.The storyline is very close to Historical Fact, as far as we can tell. Like any fictionalized account of real historical occurrences, the screenplay takes certain license in an attempt to avoid getting all bogged down with additional characters, unimportant incidents and unnecessary facts. All these would only serve to extend the already 116 minute movie and ultimately confuse people like you, me and Schultz. Am I right Schultz? The Film is very violent in some sequences and the most brutal scene is the final ride by Bonnie Parker & Clyde Barrow; as they are ambushed by that Frank Hamer led posse. That particular scene is incredible in its visually splendid story telling and its cold, brutally honest portrayal of just how the murderous pair was finally dealt with.Warner Bros./7 Arts presents a Tatira-Hiller Production, BONNIE AND CLYDE. Director Arthur Penn, Producer Warren Beatty, Writers David Newman, Robert Benton, Robert Towne. Music by Charles Strouse. Starring: Warren Beatty, Faye Dunaway. With Michael J. Pollard, Gene Hackman, Estelle Parsons, Denver Pyle, Dub Taylor, Evans Evans and Gene Wilder.NOTE: * FALSE! The Organized Crime business didn't end with the repeal of the Volsted Act, as evidenced with their continued operations to this day. And to think, those temperance fools thought the were doing the Country a service! And just who was Volsted anyway? NOTE ** The Bobs was perhaps our first roller-coaster; being at the Riverview Amusement Park in Chicago (gone ever since 1967). And we all know of Space Mountain in Walt Disney World, Orlando, Florida.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-189

ur0850869

title: Hailed as an example of Hollywood's Brave, New, Brutally Realistic and Violent Cinema; the Barrow Gang provided all film makers with a new Zenith to aim for. review: There was a time in the History of the United States when the institution of the Rail Road and the fancy dudes who ran them, called either Tycoons or Moguls, were none too popular with the general populace. Perhaps it was the cozy relationship that they enjoyed with the Politicos of their day; or maybe it was the high-handed methods that the different companies used to gain the Right-of-Way to expand operations from Coast to Coast, from Sea to Shining Sea.These factors were sure influential in casting common Outlaws and Robbers such as Butch, Sundance and Jesse James as some sort of god-like folk heroes to the commoners. Anyone who did any harm to the bad, old guys with the reins of the 'Iron Horse' was automatically some sort of courageous Rebel; standing up to tyrannical treatment and looking out for all. It was a simple example of that time-honored tradition and old custom of viewing, "the Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend." SO in the 1930's we would naturally substitute the Financial Institutions, namely the Banks, as being the Culprit instead of the Pennsylvania, the B & O, the Reading and the Short Line RR's. The Bank was vilified for a couple of reasons. First of all, it was the banks who would be the one to foreclose on one's property; which may well have been a family run farm that has been owned by the very same family for years and generations. The feelings of confusion, total frustration and angst were made even more muddled by the eviction strings' being pulled by a large banking interest, miles and miles away.All of this followed the "Roaring 20's", which had Rival groups of 'Gangsters' battled for 'turfs' and the 'rights' to do the illicit supplying of Bootleg Beer, Bath Tub Gin, Prostitution and 'Loud Talking & Giggling' in line. This was mostly a sort of well to do criminal enterprise; which all ended with the Repeal of Prohibition in 1933, supposedly.* There was a big difference between the Bank Robbers and their Organized Crime City thug counterparts. Perhaps it is best explained by a scene in THE PETRIFIED FOREST (Warner Brothers, 1936). In it the John Dillinger-like character Duke Mantee (Humphrey Bogart) was referred to as a 'Gangster'. Near-by character, Gramp Maple (Charley Grapwin) retorts: "Duke Mantee ain't no Gangster; he's a Desperado (pronounced Des-puh-ray-do)! Gangsters is Foreigners (Fur-rin-ehrs)." Well anyway, they sure weren't the same breed of cat!With the high-handed treatment and the terrible financial conditions of the early '30's Depression Era USA, these Hot-Rodding, Blood-Thirsty and Machine Gun Happy took on the totally false reputation of being some sort of latter-day Robin Hoods. This was patently false; but with the Nation's Newspapers afforded extensive coverage to their exploits and this surely magnified the appeal of the common moron, thug murderer and stick-up man.And to this end, our feted, Classic Film endeavor, BONNIE AND CLYDE (Tatira-Hiller Prod. /Warner Brothers-7 Arts, 1967) starts out sort of slow and full of whimsical levity. Bank Robbery appeared to be fun, a lark, a real blast. But the mood changes abruptly and for the rest of the film during a bank robbery that goes not quite as planned. After getting the proceeds at gunpoint, everything seems to go wrong for the young couple. The get-away car is out of position. There are parked cars where they shouldn't be. And they actually get some resistance from folks at the bank. The whole scene is fast-paced and provokes the audience to a great fit of collective belly-laugh; then someone from the Bank jumps up on their auto's running board, only to be shot right in the face by Clyde. When the front passenger's side window is splattered with the victim's blood; the mood suddenly becomes ever so somber.The scene and sequence of events here are expertly woven into one great Roller-Coaster of a scene; with all the ups and downs, twists and turns that any 'Bobs' or 'Space Mountain'** could ever throw at us. Then suddenly, it's an abrupt stop and a return to Earth and Reality. It's a most remarkably performed and really puts the viewer into contact with what the whole point of the story really is.The storyline is very close to Historical Fact, as far as we can tell. Like any fictionalized account of real historical occurrences, the screenplay takes certain license in an attempt to avoid getting all bogged down with additional characters, unimportant incidents and unnecessary facts. All these would only serve to extend the already 116 minute movie and ultimately confuse people like you, me and Schultz. Am I right Schultz? The Film is very violent in some sequences and the most brutal scene is the final ride by Bonnie Parker & Clyde Barrow; as they are ambushed by that Frank Hamer led posse. That particular scene is incredible in its visually splendid story telling and its cold, brutally honest portrayal of just how the murderous pair was finally dealt with.Warner Bros./7 Arts presents a Tatira-Hiller Production, BONNIE AND CLYDE. Director Arthur Penn, Producer Warren Beatty, Writers David Newman, Robert Benton, Robert Towne. Music by Charles Strouse. Starring: Warren Beatty, Faye Dunaway. With Michael J. Pollard, Gene Hackman, Estelle Parsons, Denver Pyle, Dub Taylor, Evans Evans and Gene Wilder.NOTE: * FALSE! The Organized Crime business didn't end with the repeal of the Volsted Act, as evidenced with their continued operations to this day. And to think, those temperance fools thought the were doing the Country a service! And just who was Volsted anyway? NOTE ** The Bobs was perhaps our first roller-coaster; being at the Riverview Amusement Park in Chicago (gone ever since 1967). And we all know of Space Mountain in Walt Disney World, Orlando, Florida.

Among cinema's most important films and still a masterpiece today

tt0061418

When it was released in 1967, "Bonnie and Clyde" was immediately a massively important and influential film. While the French had created the cinema's first true anti-hero in 1959 with "Breathless", this along with "Cool Hand Luke" brought the concept to Hollywood. Bonnie and Clyde weren't portrayed as either Robin Hoods or despicable criminals. They were never strictly good or evil, and in turn the audiences emotional response was tweaked. You found yourself liking them and even occasionally rooting for them despite feeling guilty for doing so. Its all a testament to just how complex both characters are presented as being.The film impresses on a technical as well as emotional level. The direction by Arthur Penn keeps everything moving at a lightning quick pace and makes the story interesting throughout. The performances are all groundbreaking and iconic. Warren Beatty is an actor who I haven't cared about in years, but in his prime he was always impressive. Even better is Faye Dunaway, creating a female character just as strong as her male counterpart. The supporting cast is good as well, but this is all Beatty and Dunaway's show.To be honest, while its still great today the film has lost a bit of its power over the years. The violence was shocking when originally released, but when "The Wild Bunch" was released just two years later this seemed awfully tame. However, the story itself is still as intriguing and memorable and the performances were ahead of their time. "Bonnie and Clyde" is a seminal film in American history and recommended to anyone with an interest in film. (9/10)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-175

ur0630665

title: Among cinema's most important films and still a masterpiece today review: When it was released in 1967, "Bonnie and Clyde" was immediately a massively important and influential film. While the French had created the cinema's first true anti-hero in 1959 with "Breathless", this along with "Cool Hand Luke" brought the concept to Hollywood. Bonnie and Clyde weren't portrayed as either Robin Hoods or despicable criminals. They were never strictly good or evil, and in turn the audiences emotional response was tweaked. You found yourself liking them and even occasionally rooting for them despite feeling guilty for doing so. Its all a testament to just how complex both characters are presented as being.The film impresses on a technical as well as emotional level. The direction by Arthur Penn keeps everything moving at a lightning quick pace and makes the story interesting throughout. The performances are all groundbreaking and iconic. Warren Beatty is an actor who I haven't cared about in years, but in his prime he was always impressive. Even better is Faye Dunaway, creating a female character just as strong as her male counterpart. The supporting cast is good as well, but this is all Beatty and Dunaway's show.To be honest, while its still great today the film has lost a bit of its power over the years. The violence was shocking when originally released, but when "The Wild Bunch" was released just two years later this seemed awfully tame. However, the story itself is still as intriguing and memorable and the performances were ahead of their time. "Bonnie and Clyde" is a seminal film in American history and recommended to anyone with an interest in film. (9/10)

A Slick and Stylish Landmark in American Cinema

tt0061418

If Arthur Penn's seminal Bonnie and Clyde has a moral, it's that there are few things more dangerous than bored young people with big ambition and no prospects. Clyde Barrow (Warren Beatty) and Bonnie Parker (Faye Dunaway) were two such young people in the 1930's, who robbed banks and gunned down lawmen largely because they had nothing better to do. Joined by Clyde's brother Buck (Gene Hackman), his high-strung wife Blanche, and their bumbling getaway man CW Moss, they cut a swath across the Midwest and became the most notorious outlaws since Jesse James before meeting their end in a hail of bullets.The oddest yet most alluring thing about the gang (at least as portrayed here) is despite the numerous felonies they commit, they don't seem like bad people. They come across less as hardened killers than awkward young lovers who wanted fame, fortune, and excitement, and decided the only way to find them was to go outside the law. At first, they succeed almost in spite of themselves, making rookie mistakes like robbing a recently failed bank. Even when they hit their stride, the satisfaction of a successful stick-up is eclipsed by the excitement of reading about their exploits in the paper and in becoming household names.And despite the rapid body count they amass, they never seem to relish the violence. They don't mind firing a few shots into the air, just to scare folks, but they don't shoot anyone unless they have to. For them, shootouts are an unwelcome danger that gets in the way of their real business, and killing someone is only further reason for the law to track them down, and maybe something to feel guilty over. After a struggle in grocery store results in serious injury to the proprietor, Clyde complains to Bonny "Why did he have to go and do that? Ain't got nothing against him."Together with the rest of the gang, they're almost like a big, thieving, murdering family. They have their fights and falling outs, and they make up. They get homesick. They have their personality clashes, with Bonnie and Blanche barely tolerating each other. Between Blanche's excitability, Buck's hick ways and corny jokes, and CW's good natured idiocy, much of the film has a cheery, even humorous feel. Nowhere is this truer than during the shootout in Joplin. Bullets are flying everywhere and cops are dropping left and right, but the sight of Blanche running across the yard waving her arms, screaming her lungs out, and generally making a complete fool of herself renders the scene absolutely hilarious. But despite the not infrequent comic relief, Bonnie and Clyde is no lighthearted comedy. They are wanted men and women, and danger is never far from them. In reflective moments, Clyde and Bonnie readily admit that they'll someday go out in a hail of bullets- people in their line of work don't tend to have long and happy lives. And throughout the final reel, it becomes clear that the end is drawing closer. As the number of lawmen on their trail increases, the shootouts become bigger and bloodier, the escapes become ever narrower, and their luck begins to fail, until finally the young lovers meet their destiny on a quiet country back road.These scenes, especially the latter, were larger, far bloodier, and more realistic than any put on film up to that point. Up until then, most movie violence had been largely bloodless, with actors merely grimacing or slumping over when shot, and the more horrific violence merely being implied. But Bonnie and Clyde dared to show what really happens when lead meets flesh. The now famous death scene shocked audiences upon the film's release in 1967, and is still powerful more than forty years later. It's no understatement to say that Bonnie and Clyde paved the way for nearly every modern shoot-em-up, from The Wild Bunch to Scarface.Perhaps what really makes Bonnie and Clyde special is that although it had the subject, and the budget, of a quickie exploitation film, Penn treated the material with nuance and style, giving us real people with hopes, dreams, and emotions of their own, and making graphic violence and human sexuality worthy of high cinema. With powerful performances by Beatty and Dunaway, groundbreaking effects work, and its then unique mix of gun play, humor, and personal drama, Bonnie and Clyde did more than any sensationalist headline to create the mystique that surrounds its protagonist to this day, and heralded the arrival of new wave cinema to the US. This was, and is, one of the great American movies.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-367

ur56938771

title: A Slick and Stylish Landmark in American Cinema review: If Arthur Penn's seminal Bonnie and Clyde has a moral, it's that there are few things more dangerous than bored young people with big ambition and no prospects. Clyde Barrow (Warren Beatty) and Bonnie Parker (Faye Dunaway) were two such young people in the 1930's, who robbed banks and gunned down lawmen largely because they had nothing better to do. Joined by Clyde's brother Buck (Gene Hackman), his high-strung wife Blanche, and their bumbling getaway man CW Moss, they cut a swath across the Midwest and became the most notorious outlaws since Jesse James before meeting their end in a hail of bullets.The oddest yet most alluring thing about the gang (at least as portrayed here) is despite the numerous felonies they commit, they don't seem like bad people. They come across less as hardened killers than awkward young lovers who wanted fame, fortune, and excitement, and decided the only way to find them was to go outside the law. At first, they succeed almost in spite of themselves, making rookie mistakes like robbing a recently failed bank. Even when they hit their stride, the satisfaction of a successful stick-up is eclipsed by the excitement of reading about their exploits in the paper and in becoming household names.And despite the rapid body count they amass, they never seem to relish the violence. They don't mind firing a few shots into the air, just to scare folks, but they don't shoot anyone unless they have to. For them, shootouts are an unwelcome danger that gets in the way of their real business, and killing someone is only further reason for the law to track them down, and maybe something to feel guilty over. After a struggle in grocery store results in serious injury to the proprietor, Clyde complains to Bonny "Why did he have to go and do that? Ain't got nothing against him."Together with the rest of the gang, they're almost like a big, thieving, murdering family. They have their fights and falling outs, and they make up. They get homesick. They have their personality clashes, with Bonnie and Blanche barely tolerating each other. Between Blanche's excitability, Buck's hick ways and corny jokes, and CW's good natured idiocy, much of the film has a cheery, even humorous feel. Nowhere is this truer than during the shootout in Joplin. Bullets are flying everywhere and cops are dropping left and right, but the sight of Blanche running across the yard waving her arms, screaming her lungs out, and generally making a complete fool of herself renders the scene absolutely hilarious. But despite the not infrequent comic relief, Bonnie and Clyde is no lighthearted comedy. They are wanted men and women, and danger is never far from them. In reflective moments, Clyde and Bonnie readily admit that they'll someday go out in a hail of bullets- people in their line of work don't tend to have long and happy lives. And throughout the final reel, it becomes clear that the end is drawing closer. As the number of lawmen on their trail increases, the shootouts become bigger and bloodier, the escapes become ever narrower, and their luck begins to fail, until finally the young lovers meet their destiny on a quiet country back road.These scenes, especially the latter, were larger, far bloodier, and more realistic than any put on film up to that point. Up until then, most movie violence had been largely bloodless, with actors merely grimacing or slumping over when shot, and the more horrific violence merely being implied. But Bonnie and Clyde dared to show what really happens when lead meets flesh. The now famous death scene shocked audiences upon the film's release in 1967, and is still powerful more than forty years later. It's no understatement to say that Bonnie and Clyde paved the way for nearly every modern shoot-em-up, from The Wild Bunch to Scarface.Perhaps what really makes Bonnie and Clyde special is that although it had the subject, and the budget, of a quickie exploitation film, Penn treated the material with nuance and style, giving us real people with hopes, dreams, and emotions of their own, and making graphic violence and human sexuality worthy of high cinema. With powerful performances by Beatty and Dunaway, groundbreaking effects work, and its then unique mix of gun play, humor, and personal drama, Bonnie and Clyde did more than any sensationalist headline to create the mystique that surrounds its protagonist to this day, and heralded the arrival of new wave cinema to the US. This was, and is, one of the great American movies.

The film that helped kickstart the Hollywood we cherish

tt0061418

Despite being almost fifty years old, Arthur Penn's gangster classic Bonnie and Clyde possesses a beautifully modern style and look to it, in terms of cinematography and tone. While adhering to the principles of its genre, the film is fearless in going off on its own tangents and writing its own rules, with two career-worthy performances by two screen legends, and wraparound ideas of self-condemnation rather than directorial condemnation.The film needs no real introduction, but a simple plot outline can't hurt. It's Great Depression-era America, numerous banks have either failed or have been cleaned out completely, the public is pessimistic, with many having just witnessed their financial future evaporate right before their very eyes. The setting is Southwest America, and we meet Clyde Barrow (Warren Beatty), a man just released on good behavior after committing an armed robbery, just as he is getting acquainted with Bonnie Parker (Faye Dunaway), a southern belle who works as a waitress. Clyde buys the two some Cokes, as they make small talk, with Clyde effortlessly defining Bonnie as a person just by the vibes she accentuates.Clyde recognizes that Bonnie seems unhappy in her current slog and proves to her that he still has the gumption and nerve to conduct a slick stickup before bailing, to which Bonnie finds admirable and brave. Once Clyde proves he still has it, the two set off on a violent pursuit of the American Dream, going to places in one car, but leaving in another, conducting numerous stickups, and picking up other misfits along the way. One of the people they meet is C.W. Moss (Michael J. Pollard), a gas station attendant, who wants to prove to the two that he can be just as dangerous as them. What unfolds is a cinematic road trip involving gruesome murders, devilishly entertaining violence, and ample amounts of visual style and flair.Bonnie and Clyde was originally conceived to be directed by one of the many French New Wave directors at the time in efforts to try and bring new styles to Hollywood as well as have lesser-known, French directors achieve a namesake in the peak of their careers in America. Famous French directors such as François Truffaut and Jean-Luc Godard were the original choices to direct, but both dropped out either pursuing other projects or disagreeing with parts of the film. The final product plays like an American take on French New Wave styles, toying with the idea of profiling and glorifying criminal behavior in a fashion Godard would in his films like Band of Outsiders and Breathless. It's interesting to note how Godard's films went on to achieve monstrous critical acclaim, while, before Bonnie and Clyde could bask in that realm, it had to endure conversations and debates on the acceleration of violence in American cinema.Yes, Bonnie and Clyde is a very violent film, often showcasing shootouts between the titular criminals and the law in a spontaneous, blink-and-you-miss-it manner that keeps one always engaged and never bored. Yet there's an element of sensuality to the film that doesn't always get mentioned in a conversation about the film. Consider the scene in the beginning when Bonnie is walking to work and Clyde, in a tireless pursuit of personal satisfaction, tries to convince Bonnie on his persona and who he really is - a charismatic crook. He gets her to fondle his gun before showing her what he can do with it. Then consider the scene when Clyde has a hard time having sex with Bonnie, despite her ravishing beauty and innocent facial expressions. Whether he's impotent or unsatisfied, the film never says, but in a later scene involving C.W. Moss, even a threeway is subtly hinted at between him, Bonnie, and Clyde, subtly, but evidently, implying that Clyde could in fact be bisexual or in fact homosexual. Such elements go unnoticed in the presence of great violence, which is why, I feel, it has taken longer for Bonnie and Clyde to be talked about without constantly referring to the graphic violence.Last but not least are the performances by Beatty and Dunaway, both of whom exercising their characters' most apparent traits in ways that are equal parts stimulating as they are commendable. Beatty plays slick and charismatic to a tee, while the gorgeous and sensational Dunaway uses more than her looks to get by. Dunaway has the tricky role here, playing a female character who is teetering on the edge of satisfaction and insanity. Once her character meets Beatty's, however, it's all downhill for her and she begins to show a closeted drive that seems to be less about fulfilling a quick spout of bad behavior, but almost psychologically pleasing for her id, resulting in a performance that is complex enough to illustrate her emotional gap.Bonnie and Clyde, along with Mike Nichols' extraordinary Graduate, were kickoffs to the movement in American cinema called "New Hollywood," which attracted the young generation with its relatable stories, graphic violence, special effects, grittiness, and interesting ideas that didn't seem so encased in the same world of unrealistic happiness that the 1930's - 1950's mainstream films, such as musicals, were. What unleashed were untameable films that didn't feel like disguising the often moral ugliness of the world, with directors such as Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, Brian De Palma, and Clint Eastwood taking the forefront in the movement. Bonnie and Clyde couldn't have been a better start to such a bold movement nor could it have better represented what the era was really about.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-357

ur23483288

title: The film that helped kickstart the Hollywood we cherish review: Despite being almost fifty years old, Arthur Penn's gangster classic Bonnie and Clyde possesses a beautifully modern style and look to it, in terms of cinematography and tone. While adhering to the principles of its genre, the film is fearless in going off on its own tangents and writing its own rules, with two career-worthy performances by two screen legends, and wraparound ideas of self-condemnation rather than directorial condemnation.The film needs no real introduction, but a simple plot outline can't hurt. It's Great Depression-era America, numerous banks have either failed or have been cleaned out completely, the public is pessimistic, with many having just witnessed their financial future evaporate right before their very eyes. The setting is Southwest America, and we meet Clyde Barrow (Warren Beatty), a man just released on good behavior after committing an armed robbery, just as he is getting acquainted with Bonnie Parker (Faye Dunaway), a southern belle who works as a waitress. Clyde buys the two some Cokes, as they make small talk, with Clyde effortlessly defining Bonnie as a person just by the vibes she accentuates.Clyde recognizes that Bonnie seems unhappy in her current slog and proves to her that he still has the gumption and nerve to conduct a slick stickup before bailing, to which Bonnie finds admirable and brave. Once Clyde proves he still has it, the two set off on a violent pursuit of the American Dream, going to places in one car, but leaving in another, conducting numerous stickups, and picking up other misfits along the way. One of the people they meet is C.W. Moss (Michael J. Pollard), a gas station attendant, who wants to prove to the two that he can be just as dangerous as them. What unfolds is a cinematic road trip involving gruesome murders, devilishly entertaining violence, and ample amounts of visual style and flair.Bonnie and Clyde was originally conceived to be directed by one of the many French New Wave directors at the time in efforts to try and bring new styles to Hollywood as well as have lesser-known, French directors achieve a namesake in the peak of their careers in America. Famous French directors such as François Truffaut and Jean-Luc Godard were the original choices to direct, but both dropped out either pursuing other projects or disagreeing with parts of the film. The final product plays like an American take on French New Wave styles, toying with the idea of profiling and glorifying criminal behavior in a fashion Godard would in his films like Band of Outsiders and Breathless. It's interesting to note how Godard's films went on to achieve monstrous critical acclaim, while, before Bonnie and Clyde could bask in that realm, it had to endure conversations and debates on the acceleration of violence in American cinema.Yes, Bonnie and Clyde is a very violent film, often showcasing shootouts between the titular criminals and the law in a spontaneous, blink-and-you-miss-it manner that keeps one always engaged and never bored. Yet there's an element of sensuality to the film that doesn't always get mentioned in a conversation about the film. Consider the scene in the beginning when Bonnie is walking to work and Clyde, in a tireless pursuit of personal satisfaction, tries to convince Bonnie on his persona and who he really is - a charismatic crook. He gets her to fondle his gun before showing her what he can do with it. Then consider the scene when Clyde has a hard time having sex with Bonnie, despite her ravishing beauty and innocent facial expressions. Whether he's impotent or unsatisfied, the film never says, but in a later scene involving C.W. Moss, even a threeway is subtly hinted at between him, Bonnie, and Clyde, subtly, but evidently, implying that Clyde could in fact be bisexual or in fact homosexual. Such elements go unnoticed in the presence of great violence, which is why, I feel, it has taken longer for Bonnie and Clyde to be talked about without constantly referring to the graphic violence.Last but not least are the performances by Beatty and Dunaway, both of whom exercising their characters' most apparent traits in ways that are equal parts stimulating as they are commendable. Beatty plays slick and charismatic to a tee, while the gorgeous and sensational Dunaway uses more than her looks to get by. Dunaway has the tricky role here, playing a female character who is teetering on the edge of satisfaction and insanity. Once her character meets Beatty's, however, it's all downhill for her and she begins to show a closeted drive that seems to be less about fulfilling a quick spout of bad behavior, but almost psychologically pleasing for her id, resulting in a performance that is complex enough to illustrate her emotional gap.Bonnie and Clyde, along with Mike Nichols' extraordinary Graduate, were kickoffs to the movement in American cinema called "New Hollywood," which attracted the young generation with its relatable stories, graphic violence, special effects, grittiness, and interesting ideas that didn't seem so encased in the same world of unrealistic happiness that the 1930's - 1950's mainstream films, such as musicals, were. What unleashed were untameable films that didn't feel like disguising the often moral ugliness of the world, with directors such as Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, Brian De Palma, and Clint Eastwood taking the forefront in the movement. Bonnie and Clyde couldn't have been a better start to such a bold movement nor could it have better represented what the era was really about.

the "true story" will never be known

tt0061418

Time does strange things to a movie.When I saw this film in 1981, not having seen it for five years, I was surprised at what borderline sociopaths Bonnie and Clyde really are. It was always in evidence, as when Clyde tells Bonnie's mother about not robbing a bank for fear of getting Bonnie hurt; or when Bonnie decides to enjoy the Busby Berkley musical shortly after witnessing a man shot in the face. So why hadn't I seen this before? The truth is, this film does not romanticize these criminals - its AUDIENCE does. That is the real key to this film's success over the course of now forty years. The audience wants this couple to be "young and in love and (to) kill people." The film thus quietly reproduces the cultural phenomenon it is really about - the glamorization of Bonnie and Clyde that began almost as soon as they robbed their first bank, back in the thirties.Penn has to be congratulated for achieving this; the question lingers, should he have made this point more obvious? or was he right to let the audience experience this and later figure it out for themselves? Frankly, I don't know.As for the historical truthfulness of the film: This has never been an issue for me, I didn't expect any more historical accuracy from this than I would from a Western. Actually, however, the decision to jettison accuracy right from the start was a good one, in retrospect - in researching the real bandits involved, it soon becomes apparent that the "true story" of Bonnie and Clyde will never be known. Bonnie's family lies for her; the surviving Barrow gang members were all liars; Clyde himself was a liar; and the policemen who ambushed them lied about the brutality of the shooting.Sure, the posse admitted they shot the bandits in cold blood; but Bonnie had six pistol wounds close together in her back, going straight in - which means someone walked up to the car with a loaded revolver and emptied it into her at close range. And Clyde was shot mostly from the left, Bonnie from the right - that means the car was surrounded.The coroner's report also states that Bonnie's right hand had been completely mangled by gun shots, leaving him unable to take her fingerprints. That's not true; the posse had taken her fingers for souvenirs (and a couple of Clyde's). The coroner knew this well enough - he was the one who insisted that the souvenir hounds be brought under control by Texas Ranger Hamer - who had no jurisdiction in Louisiana, by the way.And a later search through criminal records discovered that Bonnie had never been charged with any crime committed while with Clyde, even in absentia via warrant. Technically, "wanted" posters not withstanding, she wasn't wanted by any state for any crime at all.In short - they were murdered.I mention these facts, having only recently discovered them on the web, not to defend the bandits. Clyde could be a cold-blooded killer, there's plenty of evidence of that; and Bonnie's fascination for him was decidedly perverse. But the wild thing here is that nobody connected with the real case was truly innocent - except maybe the dead victims of the gang (who were never given a chance to lie). Lie atop lie; crime atop crime. That's truly remarkable; and it is to Penn's credit that his film does not resolve any of these issues. That too is left to the audience.One other note - although Burnett Guffey's cinematography does a marvelous job projecting historical scenes without nostalgia (the 'nostalgia' craze surrounding the film at release was yet another imposition by its audience), the distance of time now reveals that it is generally rather flat and coldly competent, with a couple of important scenes as exceptions. in short, it looks headed toward television; time has not been favorable to the visuals of this film.Yet that too leaves us with the haunting questions concerning historical truth - I though the camera work stunningly beautiful when I was young; now it just looks like so much TV. Was I lying to myself then? or am I now? We want to say, "time will tell;" but that's exactly what time does not do.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-172

ur4627372

title: the "true story" will never be known review: Time does strange things to a movie.When I saw this film in 1981, not having seen it for five years, I was surprised at what borderline sociopaths Bonnie and Clyde really are. It was always in evidence, as when Clyde tells Bonnie's mother about not robbing a bank for fear of getting Bonnie hurt; or when Bonnie decides to enjoy the Busby Berkley musical shortly after witnessing a man shot in the face. So why hadn't I seen this before? The truth is, this film does not romanticize these criminals - its AUDIENCE does. That is the real key to this film's success over the course of now forty years. The audience wants this couple to be "young and in love and (to) kill people." The film thus quietly reproduces the cultural phenomenon it is really about - the glamorization of Bonnie and Clyde that began almost as soon as they robbed their first bank, back in the thirties.Penn has to be congratulated for achieving this; the question lingers, should he have made this point more obvious? or was he right to let the audience experience this and later figure it out for themselves? Frankly, I don't know.As for the historical truthfulness of the film: This has never been an issue for me, I didn't expect any more historical accuracy from this than I would from a Western. Actually, however, the decision to jettison accuracy right from the start was a good one, in retrospect - in researching the real bandits involved, it soon becomes apparent that the "true story" of Bonnie and Clyde will never be known. Bonnie's family lies for her; the surviving Barrow gang members were all liars; Clyde himself was a liar; and the policemen who ambushed them lied about the brutality of the shooting.Sure, the posse admitted they shot the bandits in cold blood; but Bonnie had six pistol wounds close together in her back, going straight in - which means someone walked up to the car with a loaded revolver and emptied it into her at close range. And Clyde was shot mostly from the left, Bonnie from the right - that means the car was surrounded.The coroner's report also states that Bonnie's right hand had been completely mangled by gun shots, leaving him unable to take her fingerprints. That's not true; the posse had taken her fingers for souvenirs (and a couple of Clyde's). The coroner knew this well enough - he was the one who insisted that the souvenir hounds be brought under control by Texas Ranger Hamer - who had no jurisdiction in Louisiana, by the way.And a later search through criminal records discovered that Bonnie had never been charged with any crime committed while with Clyde, even in absentia via warrant. Technically, "wanted" posters not withstanding, she wasn't wanted by any state for any crime at all.In short - they were murdered.I mention these facts, having only recently discovered them on the web, not to defend the bandits. Clyde could be a cold-blooded killer, there's plenty of evidence of that; and Bonnie's fascination for him was decidedly perverse. But the wild thing here is that nobody connected with the real case was truly innocent - except maybe the dead victims of the gang (who were never given a chance to lie). Lie atop lie; crime atop crime. That's truly remarkable; and it is to Penn's credit that his film does not resolve any of these issues. That too is left to the audience.One other note - although Burnett Guffey's cinematography does a marvelous job projecting historical scenes without nostalgia (the 'nostalgia' craze surrounding the film at release was yet another imposition by its audience), the distance of time now reveals that it is generally rather flat and coldly competent, with a couple of important scenes as exceptions. in short, it looks headed toward television; time has not been favorable to the visuals of this film.Yet that too leaves us with the haunting questions concerning historical truth - I though the camera work stunningly beautiful when I was young; now it just looks like so much TV. Was I lying to myself then? or am I now? We want to say, "time will tell;" but that's exactly what time does not do.

The Shadow of Influence

tt0061418

This wry, irreverent ride was hailed the first modern American film. It came down like a bucket of water. American moviegoers had seen nothing like it before. In feeling and liberty it prevailed from the French New Wave, especially Truffaut's own film about star-crossed sweethearts, Jules and Jim. Actually, Truffaut initially accepted David Newman and Robert Benton's original screenplay---which with director Arthur Penn's support is a stunning success at character psychology through action---and brought it to the scrutiny of Beatty, who was single-minded in producing it.The tale of the production has become virtually as renowned as its heroes. Chronicles are recounted about how Beatty prostrated at the feet of Jack Warner, pleading for the permission to greenlight the film. How Warner saw the original cut and detested it. How the movie was lambasted and Warner Bros. was resolved to abandon it in a chain of Texas drive-ins, and how Beatty begged the studio to take a chance. How it opened and rapidly closed in fall 1967, berated by the critics, getting but one overjoyed opening-day newspaper notice. 1967's quirky, visceral crime spree wouldn't disappear. The bluegrass soundtrack shot to the top of the billboards. Critics notably retracted their initial damaging reviews. The movie re-released, went on to become one of Warner Bros.' biggest hits and won 10 nominations. Ha! There are more ways than just the standard ones you're used to in which a story can be effectively filmed and be gratifying! Movies are not a technical high school! Ha! But less valuable was the effect it had on the American film business. Beatty's readiness to play a brutal character with sexual dysfunction was rare for an established 1960s male lead. Actually, Beatty and Penn cast the movie generally with unfamiliar stage actors, so effectively that all the major players became stars due to this film. Behind the camera, the movie catapulted the careers the entire production crew. And Guffey's cinematography catapulted an entire new wave of its own, of films shot and edited in the more impressionistic French style.Penn came garden-crisp to the project after a booming letdown also made with Beatty. Robert Benton became a significant director. It's like this one film sent all those careers gushing through to the present. It was a film in which all of the dubious pieces convened at the appointed hour.But more than anything, it was a tour de force of tone, in which the actors and filmmakers were all on the same wavelength as they shifted the material from side to side between comedy and tragedy. The opening scenes are flippant, beginning with Clyde's audacity after Bonnie catches him attempting to pinch her mother's car. She intuits in him immediately the agency of her getaway from a tedious Depression-era Texas town. What he basically gives her, for the adorable, idolizing wheelman C.W. Moss and for the eager newspaper readers is the prospect of thrill in lives of monotonous hardship. Clyde announces them at the commencement of a bank heist so they'll be certain to receive acknowledgment. Gene Wilder is as hilarious in his bit role here as in his whole riotous performance in The Producers. And one of the movie's great moments comes as Clyde offers his gun to an evicted black sharecropper so he can put a bullet through a bank's foreclosure sign.If Clyde provides fascination, what with all the symbolic overcompensating by guns and rampaging cars, Bonnie provides hype. She writes The Ballad of Bonnie and Clyde and sends it to a newspaper, and she models for photos sporting a pistol and a cigar. Clyde's brother Buck is less clouded by compensating for sexual inadequacy and more interested in bank jobs than tabloid headings. He comes fastened to Blanche, whose shrill protests aggravate Bonnie, and us. When agents besiege one of their hideaway, she runs earsplitting across the lawn, still holding the spatula she was using to cook. Gene Hackman's Buck Barrow is a jolly, simple, big-hearted man, a little flabby, prone to noisy jokes, knee-slapping and broad reactions. When we first see him, there's a lull in the conversation, as if they've said everything already. It's too much for Buck, who abruptly claps his hands together and spouts out spiritedly.Penn helms the film as a succession of set pieces, which linger in the memory, concentrated and unmistakable. The Okie camp where destitute farmers, tractored off their land by the banks, huddle over campfires. Bonnie's gloomy, dull, bewildered family reunion. The heist that goes awry when C.W. unthinkingly parks the car. The way amusement twirls blindingly into brutality, as when a robbery concludes with a meat cleaver and a bag of flour, or a bungled escape with a bullet in a bank man's face. The confrontation with a state trooper who's made to sit for the gang's photos, and then foolishly freed. The scene where C.W., a gas station helper, impulsively flees with the couple. The scene where C.W.'s father easily badgers him for getting a tattoo. And then the slow-motion formalized dance of the ultimate massacre.The movie ends in a volley of bullets that eternally revolutionized the way the movies portray violence. But the entire film offered a pattern that would be used frequently in subsequent films. It created a genre as well as a cinema movement. Nowadays, the innovation of Bonnie and Clyde has been immersed in innumerable other films, and it's difficult to see how novel and unique it must've felt in 1967, similar to how the 1941 shock of Citizen Kane might not be palpable to those reared in the dusk of its impact.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-270

ur8625456

title: The Shadow of Influence review: This wry, irreverent ride was hailed the first modern American film. It came down like a bucket of water. American moviegoers had seen nothing like it before. In feeling and liberty it prevailed from the French New Wave, especially Truffaut's own film about star-crossed sweethearts, Jules and Jim. Actually, Truffaut initially accepted David Newman and Robert Benton's original screenplay---which with director Arthur Penn's support is a stunning success at character psychology through action---and brought it to the scrutiny of Beatty, who was single-minded in producing it.The tale of the production has become virtually as renowned as its heroes. Chronicles are recounted about how Beatty prostrated at the feet of Jack Warner, pleading for the permission to greenlight the film. How Warner saw the original cut and detested it. How the movie was lambasted and Warner Bros. was resolved to abandon it in a chain of Texas drive-ins, and how Beatty begged the studio to take a chance. How it opened and rapidly closed in fall 1967, berated by the critics, getting but one overjoyed opening-day newspaper notice. 1967's quirky, visceral crime spree wouldn't disappear. The bluegrass soundtrack shot to the top of the billboards. Critics notably retracted their initial damaging reviews. The movie re-released, went on to become one of Warner Bros.' biggest hits and won 10 nominations. Ha! There are more ways than just the standard ones you're used to in which a story can be effectively filmed and be gratifying! Movies are not a technical high school! Ha! But less valuable was the effect it had on the American film business. Beatty's readiness to play a brutal character with sexual dysfunction was rare for an established 1960s male lead. Actually, Beatty and Penn cast the movie generally with unfamiliar stage actors, so effectively that all the major players became stars due to this film. Behind the camera, the movie catapulted the careers the entire production crew. And Guffey's cinematography catapulted an entire new wave of its own, of films shot and edited in the more impressionistic French style.Penn came garden-crisp to the project after a booming letdown also made with Beatty. Robert Benton became a significant director. It's like this one film sent all those careers gushing through to the present. It was a film in which all of the dubious pieces convened at the appointed hour.But more than anything, it was a tour de force of tone, in which the actors and filmmakers were all on the same wavelength as they shifted the material from side to side between comedy and tragedy. The opening scenes are flippant, beginning with Clyde's audacity after Bonnie catches him attempting to pinch her mother's car. She intuits in him immediately the agency of her getaway from a tedious Depression-era Texas town. What he basically gives her, for the adorable, idolizing wheelman C.W. Moss and for the eager newspaper readers is the prospect of thrill in lives of monotonous hardship. Clyde announces them at the commencement of a bank heist so they'll be certain to receive acknowledgment. Gene Wilder is as hilarious in his bit role here as in his whole riotous performance in The Producers. And one of the movie's great moments comes as Clyde offers his gun to an evicted black sharecropper so he can put a bullet through a bank's foreclosure sign.If Clyde provides fascination, what with all the symbolic overcompensating by guns and rampaging cars, Bonnie provides hype. She writes The Ballad of Bonnie and Clyde and sends it to a newspaper, and she models for photos sporting a pistol and a cigar. Clyde's brother Buck is less clouded by compensating for sexual inadequacy and more interested in bank jobs than tabloid headings. He comes fastened to Blanche, whose shrill protests aggravate Bonnie, and us. When agents besiege one of their hideaway, she runs earsplitting across the lawn, still holding the spatula she was using to cook. Gene Hackman's Buck Barrow is a jolly, simple, big-hearted man, a little flabby, prone to noisy jokes, knee-slapping and broad reactions. When we first see him, there's a lull in the conversation, as if they've said everything already. It's too much for Buck, who abruptly claps his hands together and spouts out spiritedly.Penn helms the film as a succession of set pieces, which linger in the memory, concentrated and unmistakable. The Okie camp where destitute farmers, tractored off their land by the banks, huddle over campfires. Bonnie's gloomy, dull, bewildered family reunion. The heist that goes awry when C.W. unthinkingly parks the car. The way amusement twirls blindingly into brutality, as when a robbery concludes with a meat cleaver and a bag of flour, or a bungled escape with a bullet in a bank man's face. The confrontation with a state trooper who's made to sit for the gang's photos, and then foolishly freed. The scene where C.W., a gas station helper, impulsively flees with the couple. The scene where C.W.'s father easily badgers him for getting a tattoo. And then the slow-motion formalized dance of the ultimate massacre.The movie ends in a volley of bullets that eternally revolutionized the way the movies portray violence. But the entire film offered a pattern that would be used frequently in subsequent films. It created a genre as well as a cinema movement. Nowadays, the innovation of Bonnie and Clyde has been immersed in innumerable other films, and it's difficult to see how novel and unique it must've felt in 1967, similar to how the 1941 shock of Citizen Kane might not be palpable to those reared in the dusk of its impact.

Brilliant gangster movie

tt0061418

Arthur Penn's Bonnie and Clyde is a gangster movie like no other one I have ever seen before as well as being one of the most diverse compared to the other gangster movies I have seen like Goodfellas (1990), Angels with Dirty Faces (1938), American Gangster (2007), Bugsy (1991),and The Departed (2006). The movie tells the true romantic crime story of Bonnie Parker (played by Faye Dunaway) and Clyde Barrow (played by Warren Beatty)who rob banks but however are not particularly good at it except for the entrance and escape parts of their robberies. Then later in the movie Clyde's brother Buck (played by Gene Hackman in an Oscar nominated performance)and his wife Blanche (played by Estelle Parsons in an Oscar winning performance). The way that Penn directs this film is very realistic (besides romantic) especially with the end scene, and I almost forgot to mention is the brilliant performance by Michael J. Pollard as C.W. Moss a former auto repair shop worker and a new member on the Barrow gang. Fantastic movie

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-364

ur33697153

title: Brilliant gangster movie review: Arthur Penn's Bonnie and Clyde is a gangster movie like no other one I have ever seen before as well as being one of the most diverse compared to the other gangster movies I have seen like Goodfellas (1990), Angels with Dirty Faces (1938), American Gangster (2007), Bugsy (1991),and The Departed (2006). The movie tells the true romantic crime story of Bonnie Parker (played by Faye Dunaway) and Clyde Barrow (played by Warren Beatty)who rob banks but however are not particularly good at it except for the entrance and escape parts of their robberies. Then later in the movie Clyde's brother Buck (played by Gene Hackman in an Oscar nominated performance)and his wife Blanche (played by Estelle Parsons in an Oscar winning performance). The way that Penn directs this film is very realistic (besides romantic) especially with the end scene, and I almost forgot to mention is the brilliant performance by Michael J. Pollard as C.W. Moss a former auto repair shop worker and a new member on the Barrow gang. Fantastic movie

An Extremely Important And Ground-breaking American Film.

tt0061418

Whether you love or hate it, Bonnie and Clyde was, and remains to this day, a ground-breaking film in the history of American cinema, and should be praised hugely for that alone. Aside from the re-defining techniques of showing violence on-screen and the depiction of main characters who are far from typical heroes, it contains career-boosting roles for many actors, and comes from a very talented director of the time, Arthur Penn.The story follows the titular real-life bandit couple of Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker. The story traces them from first meeting, and follows their crime-spree throughout a Depression-era America with their gang, robbing banks, evading police and creating a notorious reputation for themselves. The film is slightly romanticised, depicting the couple as young, foolish kids who don't really seem to realise what they're getting into, but the violent and unpredictable undertone and the impressive period detail ensures an edge that lifts it above typical gangster movies, and always assures us that what's happening isn't remotely romantic, while granting the characters and events gritty depth.Penn is on fine form from the beginning, and handles a range of different scenes with ease and a huge amount of skill, from thrilling banks-robberies and shootouts, to the more intimate character scenes, in particular those between Bonnie and Clyde, which depict one of the most interesting and unusual screen couples to date. The cinematography and editing are used to huge effect, and resulted in some of the most ground-breaking scenes of the 60's, while the folk-style soundtrack gives an air of humour.The film tends to play a bit fast-and-loose with the facts- like condensing several real-life members of the gang into the single character C.W. Moss, and neglecting the fact that for nearly a year, Bonnie was almost unable to walk due to a car crash, but writers David Newman and Robert Benton can be forgiven for these inaccuracies considering they succeeded in crafting a story that is both thrilling and exciting as well as tragic and thought-provoking.But the story would be nothing without first-rate cast it boasts. Warren Beatty as Clyde excels in the multi-layered, dramatic role that he had sought after for so long, and more than succeeded in his attempt to be taken seriously as an actor. Beatty's depiction of a confident, intelligent, but naive young man looking to make his name and fortune is spot-on, and while romanticised to a certain degree, is never glorified. His Clyde is more than matched by Faye Dunaway's Bonnie, who gives a hugely convincing portrayal of an everyday girl getting caught up in something she should never have become part of. The two have an excellent and very unusual chemistry, even by today's standards, and work together brilliantly as a man not used to such intimacy and a woman desperate to live the romantic life of an outlaw with him.The supporting players may not be quite as strong as the leads, but hold their own quite well, particularly Gene Hackman as Buck. In my opinion one of the greatest actors of all time, Hackman gives a brilliant performance that's both spirited and grounded as Clyde's brother, expressing the same wide-eyed desire for the life of an outlaw as the others and maintains a hugely convincing brotherly relationship with Beatty throughout. Michael Pollard also performs well as gang member C.W, whose quiet demeanour assures his character stands out, despite being relatively small. Estelle Parsons suffers with Blanche, a supremely annoying character that personally I found too irritating. But in fairness, that's precisely the intention behind the character, and Parsons certainly manages to convey it. Throw in one of Gene Wilder's first screen performances and you have an extremely talented and interesting cast.But aside from the great cast and direction, the truly ground-breaking, incredibly influential aspect of the film is much simpler and much more important- the depiction of on-screen violence and the impact it makes. For the first time, when people were shot or killed, it looked like it hurt. Bad. Penn and his crew pushed boundaries that before, hadn't even been considered. Suddenly, violence was being portrayed in a gritty, shocking and unsettling way. For the first time, screen violence was truly violent. This is what made the story of a group of young and naive people deciding to become criminals so powerful- the fact that we really saw what that really meant. We see what it's like to be shot, and this helps to drive home their story with such impact and power. This was the first step taken that shaped the entire future of motion-picture, and inspired other films to follow it's example, such as The Wild Bunch, and later films like MASH and Jaws that continued to push the limits of what could be done on screen.Now, I am definitely NOT a fan of gore or extreme violence. Give me E.T and Toy Story before all the Saws and Texas Chainsaw Massacres in the world. But that doesn't mean violence in films is wrong. Violence can be a means of driving home a point, or setting a film's atmosphere, or at times it can even just be pretty damn satisfying. But whether you're a pacifist or a gore-hound, it can't be denied that violence in films is prominent, and many times it's done well, while other times it's not. This film revolutionised it. And more than that, it gave film-makers the influence to do other new things, and was the perfect film to kick-start the revolutionary era of the late 60's and 70's, and inspired them to use their own ideas rather than what would make money.This is a very special film. Personally, not one of my favourites, but it deserves a good 8 out of 10 purely for its historical relevance and powerhouse cast. It may not be perfect, but if you haven't seen it, see it, and know that you're watching history being made.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-315

ur34941097

title: An Extremely Important And Ground-breaking American Film. review: Whether you love or hate it, Bonnie and Clyde was, and remains to this day, a ground-breaking film in the history of American cinema, and should be praised hugely for that alone. Aside from the re-defining techniques of showing violence on-screen and the depiction of main characters who are far from typical heroes, it contains career-boosting roles for many actors, and comes from a very talented director of the time, Arthur Penn.The story follows the titular real-life bandit couple of Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker. The story traces them from first meeting, and follows their crime-spree throughout a Depression-era America with their gang, robbing banks, evading police and creating a notorious reputation for themselves. The film is slightly romanticised, depicting the couple as young, foolish kids who don't really seem to realise what they're getting into, but the violent and unpredictable undertone and the impressive period detail ensures an edge that lifts it above typical gangster movies, and always assures us that what's happening isn't remotely romantic, while granting the characters and events gritty depth.Penn is on fine form from the beginning, and handles a range of different scenes with ease and a huge amount of skill, from thrilling banks-robberies and shootouts, to the more intimate character scenes, in particular those between Bonnie and Clyde, which depict one of the most interesting and unusual screen couples to date. The cinematography and editing are used to huge effect, and resulted in some of the most ground-breaking scenes of the 60's, while the folk-style soundtrack gives an air of humour.The film tends to play a bit fast-and-loose with the facts- like condensing several real-life members of the gang into the single character C.W. Moss, and neglecting the fact that for nearly a year, Bonnie was almost unable to walk due to a car crash, but writers David Newman and Robert Benton can be forgiven for these inaccuracies considering they succeeded in crafting a story that is both thrilling and exciting as well as tragic and thought-provoking.But the story would be nothing without first-rate cast it boasts. Warren Beatty as Clyde excels in the multi-layered, dramatic role that he had sought after for so long, and more than succeeded in his attempt to be taken seriously as an actor. Beatty's depiction of a confident, intelligent, but naive young man looking to make his name and fortune is spot-on, and while romanticised to a certain degree, is never glorified. His Clyde is more than matched by Faye Dunaway's Bonnie, who gives a hugely convincing portrayal of an everyday girl getting caught up in something she should never have become part of. The two have an excellent and very unusual chemistry, even by today's standards, and work together brilliantly as a man not used to such intimacy and a woman desperate to live the romantic life of an outlaw with him.The supporting players may not be quite as strong as the leads, but hold their own quite well, particularly Gene Hackman as Buck. In my opinion one of the greatest actors of all time, Hackman gives a brilliant performance that's both spirited and grounded as Clyde's brother, expressing the same wide-eyed desire for the life of an outlaw as the others and maintains a hugely convincing brotherly relationship with Beatty throughout. Michael Pollard also performs well as gang member C.W, whose quiet demeanour assures his character stands out, despite being relatively small. Estelle Parsons suffers with Blanche, a supremely annoying character that personally I found too irritating. But in fairness, that's precisely the intention behind the character, and Parsons certainly manages to convey it. Throw in one of Gene Wilder's first screen performances and you have an extremely talented and interesting cast.But aside from the great cast and direction, the truly ground-breaking, incredibly influential aspect of the film is much simpler and much more important- the depiction of on-screen violence and the impact it makes. For the first time, when people were shot or killed, it looked like it hurt. Bad. Penn and his crew pushed boundaries that before, hadn't even been considered. Suddenly, violence was being portrayed in a gritty, shocking and unsettling way. For the first time, screen violence was truly violent. This is what made the story of a group of young and naive people deciding to become criminals so powerful- the fact that we really saw what that really meant. We see what it's like to be shot, and this helps to drive home their story with such impact and power. This was the first step taken that shaped the entire future of motion-picture, and inspired other films to follow it's example, such as The Wild Bunch, and later films like MASH and Jaws that continued to push the limits of what could be done on screen.Now, I am definitely NOT a fan of gore or extreme violence. Give me E.T and Toy Story before all the Saws and Texas Chainsaw Massacres in the world. But that doesn't mean violence in films is wrong. Violence can be a means of driving home a point, or setting a film's atmosphere, or at times it can even just be pretty damn satisfying. But whether you're a pacifist or a gore-hound, it can't be denied that violence in films is prominent, and many times it's done well, while other times it's not. This film revolutionised it. And more than that, it gave film-makers the influence to do other new things, and was the perfect film to kick-start the revolutionary era of the late 60's and 70's, and inspired them to use their own ideas rather than what would make money.This is a very special film. Personally, not one of my favourites, but it deserves a good 8 out of 10 purely for its historical relevance and powerhouse cast. It may not be perfect, but if you haven't seen it, see it, and know that you're watching history being made.

Landmark film--like it or not

tt0061418

Somewhat fictionalized account of the 1930s bank robbers Clyde Barrow (Warren Beatty) and Bonnie Parker (Faye Dunaway). It shows how they met and organized their gang including C.W. Moss (Michael J. Pollard), Clyde's brother Buck (Gene Hackman) and his annoying wife Blanche (Estelle Parsons).This was criticized when it came out for glorifying criminals and killing and attacked for using extreme (for the time) violence. First off it does NOT glorify Bonnie, Clyde or the gang for their robberies and killing people. They do have to shoot and kill people but it's not shown as anything that they like or are proud of. They have no choice in the matter and feel terrible afterwards. It DOES show them as likable, ordinary people but, considering how things end, it doesn't show it as anything to look up to. This film broke new ground in American cinema--it has perhaps the first anti-heroes ever allowed in a major motion picture. Also the violence was (for its time) VERY graphic--much more extreme than anything being shown on screen at that time. This film was attacked left and right but became a huge hit and a big boost to the careers of all the actors involved. It's now considered a masterpiece of cinema. I wouldn't go THAT far but it is a very good movie.It's beautifully directed by Arthur Penn (I'm surprised Beatty let him do that) and has a good feeling of the 1930s. The film is VERY quiet (except for the occasional shootouts) and has good performances all around. Dunaway and especially Beatty are superb. They don't seem to be acting--they ARE the characters. Pollard isn't used much here but is good. The same with Hackman. Parsons character (and voice) are extremely annoying--but she's supposed to be. The interactions are interesting and the story moves very quickly. Well worth catching just for the acting alone, but don't expect a masterpiece.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061418/reviews-237

ur0463200

title: Landmark film--like it or not review: Somewhat fictionalized account of the 1930s bank robbers Clyde Barrow (Warren Beatty) and Bonnie Parker (Faye Dunaway). It shows how they met and organized their gang including C.W. Moss (Michael J. Pollard), Clyde's brother Buck (Gene Hackman) and his annoying wife Blanche (Estelle Parsons).This was criticized when it came out for glorifying criminals and killing and attacked for using extreme (for the time) violence. First off it does NOT glorify Bonnie, Clyde or the gang for their robberies and killing people. They do have to shoot and kill people but it's not shown as anything that they like or are proud of. They have no choice in the matter and feel terrible afterwards. It DOES show them as likable, ordinary people but, considering how things end, it doesn't show it as anything to look up to. This film broke new ground in American cinema--it has perhaps the first anti-heroes ever allowed in a major motion picture. Also the violence was (for its time) VERY graphic--much more extreme than anything being shown on screen at that time. This film was attacked left and right but became a huge hit and a big boost to the careers of all the actors involved. It's now considered a masterpiece of cinema. I wouldn't go THAT far but it is a very good movie.It's beautifully directed by Arthur Penn (I'm surprised Beatty let him do that) and has a good feeling of the 1930s. The film is VERY quiet (except for the occasional shootouts) and has good performances all around. Dunaway and especially Beatty are superb. They don't seem to be acting--they ARE the characters. Pollard isn't used much here but is good. The same with Hackman. Parsons character (and voice) are extremely annoying--but she's supposed to be. The interactions are interesting and the story moves very quickly. Well worth catching just for the acting alone, but don't expect a masterpiece.

A classic of world cinema in the making

tt1032856

The Band's Visit is without a doubt one of the best films of 2007.The plot of the eight players of the Alexandria Police Ceremonial Classical Orchestra finding themselves in a housing estate in the middle of the desert in Israel is itself a brilliant stroke of genius - the juxtaposition of cultures is not heavy-handed and political - it just concentrates on humanity and human beings being human.Above all it is unbelievably funny, and also clever, touching and direct, and with such a small plot and a small cast the film delivers a huge impact. Every scene delivers wonderful dialog (And it is a real shame that the Academy chose to exclude it on the basis that English is used in the film - it is definitely a Foreign Film in all aspects).Many film-makers could learn much from it - the way it is shot is so honest and simple but says more than just about any film I have seen this year.I cannot recommend this highly enough - it is absolutely one of my favorites of 2007, a wonderful, slow, involving comedy that made us see the world as a better place.Absolutely excellent.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032856/reviews-25

ur2419668

title: A classic of world cinema in the making review: The Band's Visit is without a doubt one of the best films of 2007.The plot of the eight players of the Alexandria Police Ceremonial Classical Orchestra finding themselves in a housing estate in the middle of the desert in Israel is itself a brilliant stroke of genius - the juxtaposition of cultures is not heavy-handed and political - it just concentrates on humanity and human beings being human.Above all it is unbelievably funny, and also clever, touching and direct, and with such a small plot and a small cast the film delivers a huge impact. Every scene delivers wonderful dialog (And it is a real shame that the Academy chose to exclude it on the basis that English is used in the film - it is definitely a Foreign Film in all aspects).Many film-makers could learn much from it - the way it is shot is so honest and simple but says more than just about any film I have seen this year.I cannot recommend this highly enough - it is absolutely one of my favorites of 2007, a wonderful, slow, involving comedy that made us see the world as a better place.Absolutely excellent.

Egyptian-Israeli relations

tt1032856

This little police orchestra from Egypt arrives in Israel and gets lost. They end up in the most boring village you've ever seen. On the surface. Soon different kinds of relations starts, between different kinds of people. We are all individuals.This is not just a small-talk tale about the fruitful meeting between two cultures and two powers. It's also about loneliness and how people cope with it. There's the loneliness from being old, the loneliness from being sexually outspoken, the loneliness from being retarded when it comes to passion. It's both a very sad and hopeful movie.Perhaps the main theme is music and the consolation which is possible from it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032856/reviews-9

ur1419266

title: Egyptian-Israeli relations review: This little police orchestra from Egypt arrives in Israel and gets lost. They end up in the most boring village you've ever seen. On the surface. Soon different kinds of relations starts, between different kinds of people. We are all individuals.This is not just a small-talk tale about the fruitful meeting between two cultures and two powers. It's also about loneliness and how people cope with it. There's the loneliness from being old, the loneliness from being sexually outspoken, the loneliness from being retarded when it comes to passion. It's both a very sad and hopeful movie.Perhaps the main theme is music and the consolation which is possible from it.

You Speak. You Don't Speak

tt1032856

Greetings again from the darkness. Stellar film from rising star, Israeli filmmaker Eran Kolirin. This film offers the beautifully delivered message that regardless of our culture, we all want to be connected to another person. Other than the language we speak, we really aren't so dissimilar.The Egyptian Police Orchestra is stranded on their way to play at the opening of an Arab Culture Center. The language barrier causes them to be stuck in a one-horse town with a similar type name. What follows is a touching story and terrific film-making. So much is communicated with so few words.There are three of four amazing scenes. My favorite is probably the funniest in the film. At the roller rink, one of the band members assists an awkward local with the proper technique in consoling a girl whose feelings he has hurt. It is funny and touching and moving and insightful all at once. The band leader's scenes with Dena, the beautiful and lonely restaurateur who takes the band in for the evening, are so emotional and sincere that I kept wanting to scream at them both! Just great stuff.I look forward to more from Eran Kolirin and it is very sad that this film was disqualified in the Foreign Language category due to the determination that too much English was used. Still, it doesn't change the fact that this is a terrific movie and story.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032856/reviews-16

ur0806494

title: You Speak. You Don't Speak review: Greetings again from the darkness. Stellar film from rising star, Israeli filmmaker Eran Kolirin. This film offers the beautifully delivered message that regardless of our culture, we all want to be connected to another person. Other than the language we speak, we really aren't so dissimilar.The Egyptian Police Orchestra is stranded on their way to play at the opening of an Arab Culture Center. The language barrier causes them to be stuck in a one-horse town with a similar type name. What follows is a touching story and terrific film-making. So much is communicated with so few words.There are three of four amazing scenes. My favorite is probably the funniest in the film. At the roller rink, one of the band members assists an awkward local with the proper technique in consoling a girl whose feelings he has hurt. It is funny and touching and moving and insightful all at once. The band leader's scenes with Dena, the beautiful and lonely restaurateur who takes the band in for the evening, are so emotional and sincere that I kept wanting to scream at them both! Just great stuff.I look forward to more from Eran Kolirin and it is very sad that this film was disqualified in the Foreign Language category due to the determination that too much English was used. Still, it doesn't change the fact that this is a terrific movie and story.

touching if overly slight tale of international brotherhood

tt1032856

In Eran Kolirin's stripped-down and understated human comedy "The Band's Visit," a small orchestra made up of eight uniformed Egyptian policemen travels to Israel as part of a cultural-exchange program. Thanks to a scheduling snafu, the band members find themselves stranded in a tiny village in the Negev Desert where they are looked after by a kind and attractive restaurateur (the luminous Ronit Elkabetz) and one of her friends who agree to put the men up for the night. The musicians include a crusty old conductor, played by the marvelously deadpan Sasson Gabai, and a handsome young womanizer and trumpet player (Saleh Bakri) who don't exactly see eye-to-eye on much concerning either music or life.Like many such films from abroad, "The Band's Visit" eschews obvious narrative flourishes in favor of a more slice-of-life approach to storytelling - indeed, almost to a fault in the case of this particular film. Yet, while there are times when the movie's "smallness" is of so determined and deliberate a nature that it begins to border on the self-conscious, "The Band's Visit" finds its truths in the minutiae of everyday life, in the heartfelt exchanges between characters (particularly between Gabai and Elkabetz), and in the way it acknowledges the commonality of the human condition. The people in the film may come from different - even antagonistic - cultures, but they are quick to discover that there is far more that unites them than divides them in the grander scheme of things.Coming in at a brief 86-minute running time, "The Band's Visit" is a mere vignette in what is obviously a larger tale of Egypt/Israel relations, one that makes its case for cooperation among all the world's peoples without undue fuss or fanfare.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032856/reviews-48

ur0375636

title: touching if overly slight tale of international brotherhood review: In Eran Kolirin's stripped-down and understated human comedy "The Band's Visit," a small orchestra made up of eight uniformed Egyptian policemen travels to Israel as part of a cultural-exchange program. Thanks to a scheduling snafu, the band members find themselves stranded in a tiny village in the Negev Desert where they are looked after by a kind and attractive restaurateur (the luminous Ronit Elkabetz) and one of her friends who agree to put the men up for the night. The musicians include a crusty old conductor, played by the marvelously deadpan Sasson Gabai, and a handsome young womanizer and trumpet player (Saleh Bakri) who don't exactly see eye-to-eye on much concerning either music or life.Like many such films from abroad, "The Band's Visit" eschews obvious narrative flourishes in favor of a more slice-of-life approach to storytelling - indeed, almost to a fault in the case of this particular film. Yet, while there are times when the movie's "smallness" is of so determined and deliberate a nature that it begins to border on the self-conscious, "The Band's Visit" finds its truths in the minutiae of everyday life, in the heartfelt exchanges between characters (particularly between Gabai and Elkabetz), and in the way it acknowledges the commonality of the human condition. The people in the film may come from different - even antagonistic - cultures, but they are quick to discover that there is far more that unites them than divides them in the grander scheme of things.Coming in at a brief 86-minute running time, "The Band's Visit" is a mere vignette in what is obviously a larger tale of Egypt/Israel relations, one that makes its case for cooperation among all the world's peoples without undue fuss or fanfare.

A touching film about a dream of humanity

tt1032856

This film is nothing but a trip into an absolutely an unreal, surreal, supernatural and surrealistic world that exists nowhere except in the narrow channels of our silent and peace-loving minds. We cannot stop imagining what the Middle East could be if it were not shaken day after day by bombs, shells, missiles, tanks, and so many other trepidations. This film is a smile on a day of mourning, it is disarmingly charming. And it is just what we need, disarmament. So we let ourselves slip into this rather slow and easy going silent world of another time that would be felt like a nightmare by all those who consider war is part of our daily tasks and duties. The funniest part is the mixture of Arabic, Hebrew and English, as if we were trapped in some international airport whose human customers have been eaten up and silenced by some Stephen King-ian Langoliers. The tapes of the intercom are still running and announcing flights and departures, gates and arrivals in a patchwork of several languages we hardly listen to. It thus becomes nostalgic of peace in a country that has not known peace for decades or even centuries. But is there any harm in dreaming what has never and will probably never exist? Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032856/reviews-11

ur3836774

title: A touching film about a dream of humanity review: This film is nothing but a trip into an absolutely an unreal, surreal, supernatural and surrealistic world that exists nowhere except in the narrow channels of our silent and peace-loving minds. We cannot stop imagining what the Middle East could be if it were not shaken day after day by bombs, shells, missiles, tanks, and so many other trepidations. This film is a smile on a day of mourning, it is disarmingly charming. And it is just what we need, disarmament. So we let ourselves slip into this rather slow and easy going silent world of another time that would be felt like a nightmare by all those who consider war is part of our daily tasks and duties. The funniest part is the mixture of Arabic, Hebrew and English, as if we were trapped in some international airport whose human customers have been eaten up and silenced by some Stephen King-ian Langoliers. The tapes of the intercom are still running and announcing flights and departures, gates and arrivals in a patchwork of several languages we hardly listen to. It thus becomes nostalgic of peace in a country that has not known peace for decades or even centuries. But is there any harm in dreaming what has never and will probably never exist? Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines

Low key dramedy needs more character development

tt1032856

This low key "dramedy" from Israel is about a police band from Alexandria, Egypt scheduled to play at an Arab Cultural Center in a particular Israeli town. They end up in the wrong town and spend the night as guests of a single Israeli woman and a young married Israeli man. Although the band consists of eight men, the screenwriter fleshes out only three of them.The main character is the band's leader, Tawfiq who mainly interacts with the film's protagonist, Dina, the single Israeli woman who tries to make the best of life in what she considers a boring town. There's also Khaled, the youngest member of the band who goes into town with a young Israeli guy and ends up coaching him on how to be more successful with woman. And finally there's Simon, who ends up playing his unfinished "concerto" for Itzik, the young Israeli married man trapped in an unhappy marriage. The movie tries to stress the common humanity of both the Israelis and the Egyptians as they awkwardly interact with one another. The only two characters who rise above sentimental stereotypes are Tawfiq and Dina. Tawfiq is first introduced as being a bit of an authoritarian, especially how he won't allow Simon to conduct the band and orders Khaled around as if he's a child. But later, Dina brings out Tawfiq's softer side when he confesses that his son committed suicide and his wife died of a broken heart; revealing that it was his own heavy handed methods of child-rearing that led to the son's suicide. One wonders what causes Tawfiq to be so impressed with Dina. She confesses while they have coffee in a diner that she's having an affair with a married man. Later at the end of the film, Tawfiq gets up in the middle of the night and overhears Dina and Khaled having sex. Nonetheless, he thanks Dina for her hospitality when the group leaves the next morning.Dina is impressive as a world weary single still looking for love but again I question how she was able to open up shy Tawfiq in the space of one night. Khaled isn't all that believable as both "love counselor" and rebellious band member. Beyond the little comic moment when he shows Papi how to be successful with women at the skating rink, a few moments of tension with Tawfiq and the fleeting glance of him having sex with Dina, we don't find out much more about him. Even worse is Simon and Itzik who bond over Simon's unfinished musical composition. Itzik has a few comic lines about the difficulties of his marriage and Simon has nothing more to do than his play his clarinet. The other band members are mainly content to remain silent and let the three principals do the talking. Much of the conflict between the characters in this film is too "soft". It allows the filmmaker to suggest that Arabs and Israelis can overcome their differences since they are so alike. But people are more complex and the screenwriter fails to give his characters enough nuances and enough conflict for this drama to work on a deeper level.Nonetheless, the film keeps one's interest to the end and there are enough revelations (albeit underdeveloped) that make this film worthwhile seeing.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032856/reviews-20

ur0225436

title: Low key dramedy needs more character development review: This low key "dramedy" from Israel is about a police band from Alexandria, Egypt scheduled to play at an Arab Cultural Center in a particular Israeli town. They end up in the wrong town and spend the night as guests of a single Israeli woman and a young married Israeli man. Although the band consists of eight men, the screenwriter fleshes out only three of them.The main character is the band's leader, Tawfiq who mainly interacts with the film's protagonist, Dina, the single Israeli woman who tries to make the best of life in what she considers a boring town. There's also Khaled, the youngest member of the band who goes into town with a young Israeli guy and ends up coaching him on how to be more successful with woman. And finally there's Simon, who ends up playing his unfinished "concerto" for Itzik, the young Israeli married man trapped in an unhappy marriage. The movie tries to stress the common humanity of both the Israelis and the Egyptians as they awkwardly interact with one another. The only two characters who rise above sentimental stereotypes are Tawfiq and Dina. Tawfiq is first introduced as being a bit of an authoritarian, especially how he won't allow Simon to conduct the band and orders Khaled around as if he's a child. But later, Dina brings out Tawfiq's softer side when he confesses that his son committed suicide and his wife died of a broken heart; revealing that it was his own heavy handed methods of child-rearing that led to the son's suicide. One wonders what causes Tawfiq to be so impressed with Dina. She confesses while they have coffee in a diner that she's having an affair with a married man. Later at the end of the film, Tawfiq gets up in the middle of the night and overhears Dina and Khaled having sex. Nonetheless, he thanks Dina for her hospitality when the group leaves the next morning.Dina is impressive as a world weary single still looking for love but again I question how she was able to open up shy Tawfiq in the space of one night. Khaled isn't all that believable as both "love counselor" and rebellious band member. Beyond the little comic moment when he shows Papi how to be successful with women at the skating rink, a few moments of tension with Tawfiq and the fleeting glance of him having sex with Dina, we don't find out much more about him. Even worse is Simon and Itzik who bond over Simon's unfinished musical composition. Itzik has a few comic lines about the difficulties of his marriage and Simon has nothing more to do than his play his clarinet. The other band members are mainly content to remain silent and let the three principals do the talking. Much of the conflict between the characters in this film is too "soft". It allows the filmmaker to suggest that Arabs and Israelis can overcome their differences since they are so alike. But people are more complex and the screenwriter fails to give his characters enough nuances and enough conflict for this drama to work on a deeper level.Nonetheless, the film keeps one's interest to the end and there are enough revelations (albeit underdeveloped) that make this film worthwhile seeing.

An unusual film of lasting impact and unexpected perspective

tt1032856

Saw this film at the Ebertfest on the big screen last month, and though I was ready to dislike this Israeli offering, I couldn't help admiring it. The two leads, Tawfiq and Dina, are pretty unforgettable. Tawfiq is the straitlaced head of an Egyptian band while Dina is one of those willing to take them in for the night. Nothing very exciting happens but what does happen is so right on the money and true to life that it's unlikely you're going to be doing any squirming. It's even moving in its own offbeat way. I particularly liked Ronit Elkabetz as Dina. She portrays sexual restlessness in such an undiluted way that even thick guys like me can't help but notice. I also liked Saleh Bakri as Haled the young womanizer who finds himself out of his element. And Sasson Gabai as Tawfiq pretty much anchors the entire picture. But it's got to be the directing that's the most impressive. Some of the choices this young director makes seem almost unbelievably daring. Here's hoping Eran Kolirin has a long career and that he keeps the propaganda down to a minimum. I say minimum because I now see how there is propaganda here. The US has been using Egypt as a destination in its rendition program. See recent news reports about those taken from Italy to be tortured in Egypt.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032856/reviews-28

ur1493052

title: An unusual film of lasting impact and unexpected perspective review: Saw this film at the Ebertfest on the big screen last month, and though I was ready to dislike this Israeli offering, I couldn't help admiring it. The two leads, Tawfiq and Dina, are pretty unforgettable. Tawfiq is the straitlaced head of an Egyptian band while Dina is one of those willing to take them in for the night. Nothing very exciting happens but what does happen is so right on the money and true to life that it's unlikely you're going to be doing any squirming. It's even moving in its own offbeat way. I particularly liked Ronit Elkabetz as Dina. She portrays sexual restlessness in such an undiluted way that even thick guys like me can't help but notice. I also liked Saleh Bakri as Haled the young womanizer who finds himself out of his element. And Sasson Gabai as Tawfiq pretty much anchors the entire picture. But it's got to be the directing that's the most impressive. Some of the choices this young director makes seem almost unbelievably daring. Here's hoping Eran Kolirin has a long career and that he keeps the propaganda down to a minimum. I say minimum because I now see how there is propaganda here. The US has been using Egypt as a destination in its rendition program. See recent news reports about those taken from Italy to be tortured in Egypt.

Lost in the desert

tt1032856

The Band's Visit (2007) aka Bikur Ha-Tizmoret (2007), the directorial debut of Erin Kolirin, is the winner of three 2007 Cannes Festival's awards and 8 Awards of Israeli Academy of Film. Even though its subject, the relations between Jews and Arabs, is complex and controversial, the movie is gentle, sweet, hopeful, optimistic, a little sad, and well worth of seeing. The movie tells about the Egyptian policemen-musicians, the members of the Alexandria Police Ceremonial Orchestra and how they arrived to Israel one day to play at the opening of the Arab Cultural Center in Pet Hatikvah. Somehow, no one met them at the airport, and they took the bus that got them to the small town or rather village of Bet Hatikvah, in the middle of nowhere, or to be precise, somewhere in Negev desert. The musicians with their instruments wearing sky-blue uniforms stuck in Bet Hatikvah for the night because the right bus only comes once a day. How Egyptians and Jews communicate during that night, how they impact one another, what they learn about complete strangers and about themselves - makes the simple but very real and very hopeful story. The film is minimalistic, it does not use special effects or many words but it managed to tell us something important about these people by looking closely at their faces, observing their body language, sympathizing with them. You know, it is so good to see or a chance a movie with no villains, chases, guns, predictable situations, obligatory affairs, etc. It is really nice to be able to get drawn inside the movie, to feel like you've met good friends, not perfect or heroic, sometimes shy and awkward, but real and interesting to us. Two main characters as played by very good Israeli actors who are terrific in their riles and I'd love to see them getting international acclaim. Ronit Elkabeth is stunning - I could not take off my eyes off her face. Intense, passionate, sexy, three times winner of Israel Academy awards for acting, actress/director/writer, she is a national treasure. Sasson Gabai, who is apparently famous in Israel but not outside the country, was also outstanding as the repressed and shy leader of the band, Lieutenant-colonel Tawfiq Zacharya. With the running time only 87 minutes, The Band's Visit is one of the best and most memorable films from last year.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032856/reviews-38

ur1098460

title: Lost in the desert review: The Band's Visit (2007) aka Bikur Ha-Tizmoret (2007), the directorial debut of Erin Kolirin, is the winner of three 2007 Cannes Festival's awards and 8 Awards of Israeli Academy of Film. Even though its subject, the relations between Jews and Arabs, is complex and controversial, the movie is gentle, sweet, hopeful, optimistic, a little sad, and well worth of seeing. The movie tells about the Egyptian policemen-musicians, the members of the Alexandria Police Ceremonial Orchestra and how they arrived to Israel one day to play at the opening of the Arab Cultural Center in Pet Hatikvah. Somehow, no one met them at the airport, and they took the bus that got them to the small town or rather village of Bet Hatikvah, in the middle of nowhere, or to be precise, somewhere in Negev desert. The musicians with their instruments wearing sky-blue uniforms stuck in Bet Hatikvah for the night because the right bus only comes once a day. How Egyptians and Jews communicate during that night, how they impact one another, what they learn about complete strangers and about themselves - makes the simple but very real and very hopeful story. The film is minimalistic, it does not use special effects or many words but it managed to tell us something important about these people by looking closely at their faces, observing their body language, sympathizing with them. You know, it is so good to see or a chance a movie with no villains, chases, guns, predictable situations, obligatory affairs, etc. It is really nice to be able to get drawn inside the movie, to feel like you've met good friends, not perfect or heroic, sometimes shy and awkward, but real and interesting to us. Two main characters as played by very good Israeli actors who are terrific in their riles and I'd love to see them getting international acclaim. Ronit Elkabeth is stunning - I could not take off my eyes off her face. Intense, passionate, sexy, three times winner of Israel Academy awards for acting, actress/director/writer, she is a national treasure. Sasson Gabai, who is apparently famous in Israel but not outside the country, was also outstanding as the repressed and shy leader of the band, Lieutenant-colonel Tawfiq Zacharya. With the running time only 87 minutes, The Band's Visit is one of the best and most memorable films from last year.

The Bands Visit is slow, BUT somehow compelling & interesting.

tt1032856

The Bands Visit.A film from from Isreal was filmed in the very barren Negrev Desert.An Egyptian 10 member band is stranded in a very isolated area in the desert. They are helped by people at a small diner.This is a nice film, non violent, no sex scenes,very few so called objectionable words,BUT it is not grim even tho it is about lonely people.It is also short 82 minutes plus 5 minutes of credits.They all seem lonely & lost. It also has a charm that will make you enjoy what you are seeing, while you are seeing it.The acting seems very natural,the production values are good, the film was obviously made on a very tight budget.I would recommend seeing this with another film,it really is a co-feature & not a main movie.Ratings *** (out of 4) 82 points (out of 100) IMDb 7 (out of 10)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032856/reviews-31

ur0495697

title: The Bands Visit is slow, BUT somehow compelling & interesting. review: The Bands Visit.A film from from Isreal was filmed in the very barren Negrev Desert.An Egyptian 10 member band is stranded in a very isolated area in the desert. They are helped by people at a small diner.This is a nice film, non violent, no sex scenes,very few so called objectionable words,BUT it is not grim even tho it is about lonely people.It is also short 82 minutes plus 5 minutes of credits.They all seem lonely & lost. It also has a charm that will make you enjoy what you are seeing, while you are seeing it.The acting seems very natural,the production values are good, the film was obviously made on a very tight budget.I would recommend seeing this with another film,it really is a co-feature & not a main movie.Ratings *** (out of 4) 82 points (out of 100) IMDb 7 (out of 10)

We were all in love with love.

tt1032856

Even if the Academy didn't allow this film to compete for an Oscar because half of it is in English, it has won 38 awards around the world, including three at Cannes. I never heard of a film winning three awards at Cannes, so you have to figure it is something special.It is certainly one of the funniest films I have seen. Just imagine an Egyptian police band lost at an Israeli kibbutz out in the middle of nowhere. That premise makes you start laughing before you have seen a single frame.Ronit Elkabetz is outstanding as the Israeli that takes the band under her wing while they wait for transportation to get to their destination. Sasson Gabai was a riot as the band leader. Stiff as a board, he made it a joy to see him in his discomfort.But this trip brought the band together, brought some Israelis and Egyptians together, and just showed that there are not really many differences between us.You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll simply enjoy this great film.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032856/reviews-40

ur2171244

title: We were all in love with love. review: Even if the Academy didn't allow this film to compete for an Oscar because half of it is in English, it has won 38 awards around the world, including three at Cannes. I never heard of a film winning three awards at Cannes, so you have to figure it is something special.It is certainly one of the funniest films I have seen. Just imagine an Egyptian police band lost at an Israeli kibbutz out in the middle of nowhere. That premise makes you start laughing before you have seen a single frame.Ronit Elkabetz is outstanding as the Israeli that takes the band under her wing while they wait for transportation to get to their destination. Sasson Gabai was a riot as the band leader. Stiff as a board, he made it a joy to see him in his discomfort.But this trip brought the band together, brought some Israelis and Egyptians together, and just showed that there are not really many differences between us.You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll simply enjoy this great film.

After Good Start, Falls Apart

tt0144084

During the 1980s, a Wall Street yuppie leads an alternate life as a serial killer. This starts out as a delicious black comedy, with Bale delivering a terrific performance as a man who is not only a cold-blooded killer but a connoisseur of pop music. It's quite amusing listening to him analyze the music of Huey Louis and Whitney Houston. Unfortunately, the film falls apart down the stretch. Harron's direction is crisp, but the screenplay fails to reach a satisfactory conclusion, perhaps a difficult feat to pull off given the nature of the source novel. There are too many loose ends and the ending is much too ambiguous.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1004

ur2590596

title: After Good Start, Falls Apart review: During the 1980s, a Wall Street yuppie leads an alternate life as a serial killer. This starts out as a delicious black comedy, with Bale delivering a terrific performance as a man who is not only a cold-blooded killer but a connoisseur of pop music. It's quite amusing listening to him analyze the music of Huey Louis and Whitney Houston. Unfortunately, the film falls apart down the stretch. Harron's direction is crisp, but the screenplay fails to reach a satisfactory conclusion, perhaps a difficult feat to pull off given the nature of the source novel. There are too many loose ends and the ending is much too ambiguous.

"There is an idea; some kind of abstraction."

tt0144084

American Psycho is about a wealthy New York investment banking executive, Patrick Bateman. Bateman hides his alternate psychopathic ego from his co-workers and friends as he escalates deeper into his illogical, gratuitous fantasies. Patrick Bateman is a psychopath. On the surface, he appears to be normal, like everyone else – but under the surface he feels lethal, on the verge of frenzy. He feels as if his mask of sanity is about to slip, there is no better example than this then when he states: "I have all the characteristics of a human being: blood, flesh, skin, hair; but not a single, clear, identifiable emotion, except for greed and disgust. Something horrible is happening inside of me and I don't know why. My nightly blood-lust has overflown into my days. I feel lethal, on the verge of frenzy. I think my mask of sanity is about to slip." Patrick Bateman is a Wall Street broker who seems to have it all going for him, he is extremely intelligent, good looking, and he has an expensive apartment suite, his own limo and a fancy business card. But on the inside, he's a psychopath with an insatiable blood lust and lack of empathy for other people. It is my opinion that as a movie and a novel, "American Psycho" is a depiction on the materialism and vanity of society – sometimes the portrayal might not be very accurate but the general idea is there , in fact it's often made very evident, but I really loved it. The soundtrack is just sublime and Christian Bale's performance as the psychopathic Patrick Bateman is just superb, American Psycho is a movie not to be missed.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1141

ur26897720

title: "There is an idea; some kind of abstraction." review: American Psycho is about a wealthy New York investment banking executive, Patrick Bateman. Bateman hides his alternate psychopathic ego from his co-workers and friends as he escalates deeper into his illogical, gratuitous fantasies. Patrick Bateman is a psychopath. On the surface, he appears to be normal, like everyone else – but under the surface he feels lethal, on the verge of frenzy. He feels as if his mask of sanity is about to slip, there is no better example than this then when he states: "I have all the characteristics of a human being: blood, flesh, skin, hair; but not a single, clear, identifiable emotion, except for greed and disgust. Something horrible is happening inside of me and I don't know why. My nightly blood-lust has overflown into my days. I feel lethal, on the verge of frenzy. I think my mask of sanity is about to slip." Patrick Bateman is a Wall Street broker who seems to have it all going for him, he is extremely intelligent, good looking, and he has an expensive apartment suite, his own limo and a fancy business card. But on the inside, he's a psychopath with an insatiable blood lust and lack of empathy for other people. It is my opinion that as a movie and a novel, "American Psycho" is a depiction on the materialism and vanity of society – sometimes the portrayal might not be very accurate but the general idea is there , in fact it's often made very evident, but I really loved it. The soundtrack is just sublime and Christian Bale's performance as the psychopathic Patrick Bateman is just superb, American Psycho is a movie not to be missed.

"Great Dark-Humored Thriller!"

tt0144084

Christian Bale, Chloe Sevigny, Reese Witherspoon, Jared Leto, Samantha Mathis and Willem Dafoe star in this 2000 thriller based on the novel. A young Wall Street businessman goes into a homicidal rage. This takes place in the 1980's and Patrick Bateman (Bale) is a young yuppie Wall Street businessman who gets consumed with disgust towards people. Soon, Patrick goes on a killing spree starting with one of his colleagues, Paul Allen (Leto) who turns up missing. Dafoe plays, detective, Donald Kimball who investigates the case and starts questioning Patrick, Sevigny plays Patrick's naive secretary, Jean who grows close to him and starts to worry about him, Witherspoon plays Patrick's girlfriend, Evelyn, who doesn't really listen to him and Mathis plays her friend, Courteney whom Patrick is having an affair with. Soon, Patrick becomes unsure if the murders really happen or if he imagines them. Christian is terrific in this and I recommend this great dark-humored thriller.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1052

ur6918917

title: "Great Dark-Humored Thriller!" review: Christian Bale, Chloe Sevigny, Reese Witherspoon, Jared Leto, Samantha Mathis and Willem Dafoe star in this 2000 thriller based on the novel. A young Wall Street businessman goes into a homicidal rage. This takes place in the 1980's and Patrick Bateman (Bale) is a young yuppie Wall Street businessman who gets consumed with disgust towards people. Soon, Patrick goes on a killing spree starting with one of his colleagues, Paul Allen (Leto) who turns up missing. Dafoe plays, detective, Donald Kimball who investigates the case and starts questioning Patrick, Sevigny plays Patrick's naive secretary, Jean who grows close to him and starts to worry about him, Witherspoon plays Patrick's girlfriend, Evelyn, who doesn't really listen to him and Mathis plays her friend, Courteney whom Patrick is having an affair with. Soon, Patrick becomes unsure if the murders really happen or if he imagines them. Christian is terrific in this and I recommend this great dark-humored thriller.

Equally a great character-study as it is a comedy

tt0144084

This movie is, on many levels, very identical to the film "Falling Down", but is by no means a bad remake. In fact, both of them are equally great. This film is from back in the day, back when Christian Bale had some great roles (before he devoted himself to a lousy portrayal of Bat(-e)man.) I'd go as far and say that his portrayal of Patrick Bateman is one of the best performances of the decade.As the movie progresses, we see how Bateman minute by minute slowly turns into a cruel, ruthless monster. Already 5 minutes in, we begin to feel disgust towards him, but it is only the beginning. As weird as this sounds, every time he gets more ruthless he gets funnier too. There are even scenes where you feel disgust towards him, but on the same time can't stop laughing at the decisions he makes, combined with his use of words. It's a really thrilling (not to mention rewarding) experience. If you removed either the character-study or the humour, this would still have been a great movie. Both elements works really, really well, but the fusion of those two elements makes the film work exceptionally well.The way this film combines dark humour, madness, great performances and character study is phenomenal. I can't recommend this movie enough - Moose finds this film worthy of a 10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1034

ur25092247

title: Equally a great character-study as it is a comedy review: This movie is, on many levels, very identical to the film "Falling Down", but is by no means a bad remake. In fact, both of them are equally great. This film is from back in the day, back when Christian Bale had some great roles (before he devoted himself to a lousy portrayal of Bat(-e)man.) I'd go as far and say that his portrayal of Patrick Bateman is one of the best performances of the decade.As the movie progresses, we see how Bateman minute by minute slowly turns into a cruel, ruthless monster. Already 5 minutes in, we begin to feel disgust towards him, but it is only the beginning. As weird as this sounds, every time he gets more ruthless he gets funnier too. There are even scenes where you feel disgust towards him, but on the same time can't stop laughing at the decisions he makes, combined with his use of words. It's a really thrilling (not to mention rewarding) experience. If you removed either the character-study or the humour, this would still have been a great movie. Both elements works really, really well, but the fusion of those two elements makes the film work exceptionally well.The way this film combines dark humour, madness, great performances and character study is phenomenal. I can't recommend this movie enough - Moose finds this film worthy of a 10.

Cutting 80's satire

tt0144084

Mary Harron's "American Psycho" is an adaptation of the infamous book by Bret Easton Ellis. As a film it's tough to categorize. It's part horror flick, part crime thriller, part drama and part satire. It's a bit of a tough sell since those interested in blood & guts aren't likely to grasp the film's thematic underpinnings while those interested in delving beneath the surface may be turned off by the film's violence.The meat of the flick lies in the script. A reading of the novel would probably improve comprehension for some but I've never read it and I understand it just fine. For all of its outward appearances as a slasher flick, the film is actually an astute commentary on conformity in the slick business world of the 1980's. The film employs touches of black humour while also functioning as a compelling thriller.The cast includes Christian Bale in one of his best performances to date. For me, this role, along with his part in "Velvet Goldmine" a couple of years earlier, made him a notable young actor in my eyes. The cast also includes some other noteworthy names like Chloë Sevigny, Jared Leto & Willem Dafoe. As I see it, the only weak link is Reese Witherspoon, who just strikes me as out of place.Mary Harron's direction fits the subject matter well. Much of the film has a sleek, polished look which fits Patrick Bateman's character to a tee. The film's score nicely complements the visuals and a handful of inspired soundtrack choices help to establish the film's satirical bent.In the end, "American Psycho" is definitely not a film for everyone. I recommend it if you're not particularly bothered by screen violence and you appreciate stories with depth and a satirical tone.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-977

ur17822437

title: Cutting 80's satire review: Mary Harron's "American Psycho" is an adaptation of the infamous book by Bret Easton Ellis. As a film it's tough to categorize. It's part horror flick, part crime thriller, part drama and part satire. It's a bit of a tough sell since those interested in blood & guts aren't likely to grasp the film's thematic underpinnings while those interested in delving beneath the surface may be turned off by the film's violence.The meat of the flick lies in the script. A reading of the novel would probably improve comprehension for some but I've never read it and I understand it just fine. For all of its outward appearances as a slasher flick, the film is actually an astute commentary on conformity in the slick business world of the 1980's. The film employs touches of black humour while also functioning as a compelling thriller.The cast includes Christian Bale in one of his best performances to date. For me, this role, along with his part in "Velvet Goldmine" a couple of years earlier, made him a notable young actor in my eyes. The cast also includes some other noteworthy names like Chloë Sevigny, Jared Leto & Willem Dafoe. As I see it, the only weak link is Reese Witherspoon, who just strikes me as out of place.Mary Harron's direction fits the subject matter well. Much of the film has a sleek, polished look which fits Patrick Bateman's character to a tee. The film's score nicely complements the visuals and a handful of inspired soundtrack choices help to establish the film's satirical bent.In the end, "American Psycho" is definitely not a film for everyone. I recommend it if you're not particularly bothered by screen violence and you appreciate stories with depth and a satirical tone.

An apt title

tt0144084

I'm not sure whether 9/11 had anything to do with the quality of movies being churned out of Hollywood, but films seem to have dipped in quality since. Whilst American Psycho may not be a classic it is certainly bold, brash, exciting and even makes you think. Christian Bale stars as Patrick Bateman who works on Wall Street by day and is a serial killer by night. Never as the business card seemed quite as interesting as it does in this movie, but if we are so interested in business cards isn't that a damning condemnation about the rest of our life ? The film mixes comedy and horror quite skillfully and you never quite know what is coming around the corner.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-650

ur2449095

title: An apt title review: I'm not sure whether 9/11 had anything to do with the quality of movies being churned out of Hollywood, but films seem to have dipped in quality since. Whilst American Psycho may not be a classic it is certainly bold, brash, exciting and even makes you think. Christian Bale stars as Patrick Bateman who works on Wall Street by day and is a serial killer by night. Never as the business card seemed quite as interesting as it does in this movie, but if we are so interested in business cards isn't that a damning condemnation about the rest of our life ? The film mixes comedy and horror quite skillfully and you never quite know what is coming around the corner.

Violence for the sake of violence

tt0144084

American Psycho is highly regarded on IMDb, many have listed it in their favorite movies lists, this movie is based on the book by the same name. But I just don't understand what's so good about it. American Psycho is basically a story about a man who goes on a rampage killing everyone for no apparent reason, apparently he is a sociopath, a psychopath, a man who has mood disorders or multiple personality disorder or something else which is never made clear. One time before killing he has a sudden change of heart and chooses not to kill. He just doesn't kill but completely mutilates the bodies of the victims and cuts them to pieces and displays them in his second house which he uses for most of killings.Now I enjoy stories about serial killers, and Bateman shares many of their antics and method of operations, which is a plus point for me, I have also read stories and articles about serial killers and investigations, and also watched movies like Silence of the Lambs and Se7en which were both fantastic mind you. But while those films were very violent they had a meaning behind the killings, in this films there is no excuse or reason for Bateman's actions other than he is mentally unstable. Perhaps some therapy sessions with a psychologist or psychiatrist could have been used to make all this seem clear and find out what is really in his head and what's going on in his mind. Many directors alter the stories in movies as compared to the book so why not? The main part which bothers me is the investigation part, Bateman kills so many people in the film but apparently the cops don't care about investigating the whereabouts, finding out what happened and find out who maybe involved, gather a list of suspects, perhaps try to find Bateman's house where many people went missing, other movies based on serial killers had this aspect but it is missing in American Psycho? It could have seriously made this film more fun to watch. Instead we have one detective who investigates the disappearance of Bateman's business rival but still finds nothing after his minor and very brief appearances.The cops in the climax come after Bateman in force and overpower forcing him to escape, take refuge and confess all killings to his lawyer, but the cops did not go after him because of all the murders but because he shot an old lady who saw him trying to kill a cat. Right!. Then we are left with a wonderful twist in the ending that the murders were all Bateman's imagination. Bateman's flat where he did the serial killing was empty up for sale and not even his, apparently he killed no one all this was in his head. Again the "it was a dream" concept used to get rid of the cop investigation aspect. The director of the film said that she did not want the people to think it was all Bateman's imagination, but honestly that is the only way to analyze the ending otherwise the ending makes no sense to me at all. No matter how you analyze the ending, dream or no dream the film's overall plot is boring and the ending is nothing we haven't seen before. One way or the other this movie will confuse the hell out of you to decide what is real and what is Bateman's imagination. Bateman's conversations with the investigator were they real? Was his assistant being in his flat real or not? Bateman attempting to attack that homosexual businessman in the toilet was that also real or all in his head? Seriously this movie messes with your head. Movies like the Usual Suspects and even Fight Club which follow a similar concept, made it all perfectly clear by the end.Other than Bateman's serial killing the movie is filled with a lot of boring dialogue which is too cliché and almost painful to sit through, that dialogue bores me out of my mind and is not even a contributing factor to any of his killings apart from one perhaps, when he kills a businessman. The Investigator and Bateman's conversations are also nothing special. Bateman also spills out random threats for no reason but the people pretend they did not hear him as if he did not say anything, which ends up looking stupid. Christian Bale's performance in the only saving grace of this film as he is really into the Bateman character and is given almost all the screen time, the other's are honestly nothing special and only there to fill a gap. Obviously if you enjoy tons of violence in films and the gore you will also find it as a high point, I don't, I am fine with violence but not only this is too much, there is no real meaning behind it all but the ending makes it all meaningless. I don't understand why this film is so highly regarded. Maybe the book makes things more clear and may make an interesting read but this film was a chore to watch in my opinion.Overall: 4/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1115

ur48130395

title: Violence for the sake of violence review: American Psycho is highly regarded on IMDb, many have listed it in their favorite movies lists, this movie is based on the book by the same name. But I just don't understand what's so good about it. American Psycho is basically a story about a man who goes on a rampage killing everyone for no apparent reason, apparently he is a sociopath, a psychopath, a man who has mood disorders or multiple personality disorder or something else which is never made clear. One time before killing he has a sudden change of heart and chooses not to kill. He just doesn't kill but completely mutilates the bodies of the victims and cuts them to pieces and displays them in his second house which he uses for most of killings.Now I enjoy stories about serial killers, and Bateman shares many of their antics and method of operations, which is a plus point for me, I have also read stories and articles about serial killers and investigations, and also watched movies like Silence of the Lambs and Se7en which were both fantastic mind you. But while those films were very violent they had a meaning behind the killings, in this films there is no excuse or reason for Bateman's actions other than he is mentally unstable. Perhaps some therapy sessions with a psychologist or psychiatrist could have been used to make all this seem clear and find out what is really in his head and what's going on in his mind. Many directors alter the stories in movies as compared to the book so why not? The main part which bothers me is the investigation part, Bateman kills so many people in the film but apparently the cops don't care about investigating the whereabouts, finding out what happened and find out who maybe involved, gather a list of suspects, perhaps try to find Bateman's house where many people went missing, other movies based on serial killers had this aspect but it is missing in American Psycho? It could have seriously made this film more fun to watch. Instead we have one detective who investigates the disappearance of Bateman's business rival but still finds nothing after his minor and very brief appearances.The cops in the climax come after Bateman in force and overpower forcing him to escape, take refuge and confess all killings to his lawyer, but the cops did not go after him because of all the murders but because he shot an old lady who saw him trying to kill a cat. Right!. Then we are left with a wonderful twist in the ending that the murders were all Bateman's imagination. Bateman's flat where he did the serial killing was empty up for sale and not even his, apparently he killed no one all this was in his head. Again the "it was a dream" concept used to get rid of the cop investigation aspect. The director of the film said that she did not want the people to think it was all Bateman's imagination, but honestly that is the only way to analyze the ending otherwise the ending makes no sense to me at all. No matter how you analyze the ending, dream or no dream the film's overall plot is boring and the ending is nothing we haven't seen before. One way or the other this movie will confuse the hell out of you to decide what is real and what is Bateman's imagination. Bateman's conversations with the investigator were they real? Was his assistant being in his flat real or not? Bateman attempting to attack that homosexual businessman in the toilet was that also real or all in his head? Seriously this movie messes with your head. Movies like the Usual Suspects and even Fight Club which follow a similar concept, made it all perfectly clear by the end.Other than Bateman's serial killing the movie is filled with a lot of boring dialogue which is too cliché and almost painful to sit through, that dialogue bores me out of my mind and is not even a contributing factor to any of his killings apart from one perhaps, when he kills a businessman. The Investigator and Bateman's conversations are also nothing special. Bateman also spills out random threats for no reason but the people pretend they did not hear him as if he did not say anything, which ends up looking stupid. Christian Bale's performance in the only saving grace of this film as he is really into the Bateman character and is given almost all the screen time, the other's are honestly nothing special and only there to fill a gap. Obviously if you enjoy tons of violence in films and the gore you will also find it as a high point, I don't, I am fine with violence but not only this is too much, there is no real meaning behind it all but the ending makes it all meaningless. I don't understand why this film is so highly regarded. Maybe the book makes things more clear and may make an interesting read but this film was a chore to watch in my opinion.Overall: 4/10

Quite possibly Bale's finest hour.

tt0144084

Without a doubt, one of the most highly watchable movies I've ever seen. Mary Harron's "American Psycho", adapted from the novel by Bret Easton Ellis, tells the story of Patrick Bateman: Wall St. investment broker by day, serial killer by night. Indeed, the movie (just like the novel) uses this "slasher" angle to turn the satirical microscope on the blinding excess of the Reagan '80s, populating its world with well-coiffed yet vapid young professionals.Bateman (the perfectly cast Christian Bale) lives in the world where image is everything, nobody really knows anyone else, and the working day is spent playing a constant game of one-upmanship with one's well-dressed colleagues. This is perfectly exemplified in a particular scene involving Bateman comparing business cards with the guys. Bateman is thoroughly outdone by the rest, and he can barely suppress his murderous rage. Overly dramatic? Absolutely. But it's the status quo here, and it's played for maximum amusement.And with regard to Bateman, himself, there isn't much of anything to this character. In his own words: "There is an idea of a Patrick Bateman; some kind of abstraction. But there is no real me: only an entity, something illusory. And though I can hide my cold gaze, and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable... I simply am not there." The man has nothing substantive to say to anyone, and he comes off as more of a salesman, whether it's with regard to his attire of the music he listens to - entirely artificial. But the film's script (written by Mary Harron and Guinevere Turner) tells us all we need to know about him through his actions (chopping his victims with an axe just after extolling the virtues of Huey Lewis and the News) and fleshes out a hollow character simply through juxtaposition. Bateman becomes one of the great movie characters without getting to know him, at all. Such hopeless nihilism has never been so entertaining.And with such controversial source material, there's plenty of violence to go around - though, Harron keeps most of it off-screen. Everything we need to be horrified is suggested. There tends to be far more sex than violence with such a "bloody" picture.Even so, the film is simply beautiful to look at. The dialogue scenes are artfully framed, while the production design lends a steely coolness to the palate. The movie tends to entrance us with the sumptuousness of '80s money, while simultaneously taking satirical jabs at the gross excess of the yuppie culture. The end result is a highly quotable film with replay value that's through the roof, with a character that (with the enormous help of Christian Bale) is both repulsive, charming and memorable in every way. 9/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1046

ur1994077

title: Quite possibly Bale's finest hour. review: Without a doubt, one of the most highly watchable movies I've ever seen. Mary Harron's "American Psycho", adapted from the novel by Bret Easton Ellis, tells the story of Patrick Bateman: Wall St. investment broker by day, serial killer by night. Indeed, the movie (just like the novel) uses this "slasher" angle to turn the satirical microscope on the blinding excess of the Reagan '80s, populating its world with well-coiffed yet vapid young professionals.Bateman (the perfectly cast Christian Bale) lives in the world where image is everything, nobody really knows anyone else, and the working day is spent playing a constant game of one-upmanship with one's well-dressed colleagues. This is perfectly exemplified in a particular scene involving Bateman comparing business cards with the guys. Bateman is thoroughly outdone by the rest, and he can barely suppress his murderous rage. Overly dramatic? Absolutely. But it's the status quo here, and it's played for maximum amusement.And with regard to Bateman, himself, there isn't much of anything to this character. In his own words: "There is an idea of a Patrick Bateman; some kind of abstraction. But there is no real me: only an entity, something illusory. And though I can hide my cold gaze, and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable... I simply am not there." The man has nothing substantive to say to anyone, and he comes off as more of a salesman, whether it's with regard to his attire of the music he listens to - entirely artificial. But the film's script (written by Mary Harron and Guinevere Turner) tells us all we need to know about him through his actions (chopping his victims with an axe just after extolling the virtues of Huey Lewis and the News) and fleshes out a hollow character simply through juxtaposition. Bateman becomes one of the great movie characters without getting to know him, at all. Such hopeless nihilism has never been so entertaining.And with such controversial source material, there's plenty of violence to go around - though, Harron keeps most of it off-screen. Everything we need to be horrified is suggested. There tends to be far more sex than violence with such a "bloody" picture.Even so, the film is simply beautiful to look at. The dialogue scenes are artfully framed, while the production design lends a steely coolness to the palate. The movie tends to entrance us with the sumptuousness of '80s money, while simultaneously taking satirical jabs at the gross excess of the yuppie culture. The end result is a highly quotable film with replay value that's through the roof, with a character that (with the enormous help of Christian Bale) is both repulsive, charming and memorable in every way. 9/10

The originality and craziness almost compensate for the awkwardness throughout

tt0144084

American Psycho (2000)This isn't quite a dark comedy, not a satire of psycho slasher movies, and not a straight up suspense crime flick, either. Or is it all these things?It might depend on your sense of humor. If you try to take it seriously, which you shouldn't (the first clue is in the credits when the dripping blood turns out to be a red sauce for a fancy meal), you'll end up mystified and unhappy. If you find this funny, if Christian Bale in this pre-Batman demanding role is really wry and comic for you, you'll love it. Most of the time. I was somewhere in the middle. Bale is playing a caricature--the overly rich and conceited playboy businessman in the Reagan 80s. But he plays too often the caricature directly rather than letting it come through the performance organically. Sometimes this is fine, or even great, but it puts a little strain on other scenes. (The women I know who saw it or have seen it don't think this matters so much because he's really hot, and really naked, in lots of it. And it's directed by a woman, Canadian Mary Harron who cut her teeth, not surprisingly, with the artsy "Who Shot Andy Warhol.")The plot is important and clever, and hard to talk about because there are some key twists, the twists becoming really huge by the end. Appropriately. Because above all this is camp. It's hammy without being slapstick. It works best, in a weird example, with the recurring fascination with the business cards among this group of young pampered business jerks. Jealousies over the color of the paper and the quality of the type lead to, well, some unrestrained behavior.The movie is sometimes bloody for sure, but most of the blood is so gratuitous it isn't quite disturbing. The main character is insane as the title implies--more than you realize at first--and the people around him don't always see him for what he is. Or do they? Or do we?There are a lot of movie tricks here. Scenes shift reality, or echoes from one situation visually resemble another, and in that sense it's a smartly made. But it also manipulates too openly for anyone trying to actually enter the movie. And "entering' the movie is a mistake. It's all show, and once you realize it's a farce and the characters don't really matter because they don't really exist (it's just a movie, the movie insists), once you realize that you're going to enjoy it more, but also realize it's a capped off experience. It only goes so far.By the end I wanted it to end. It's an odd, affected, curious, and almost period-defining movie. If you liked slightly odd creepy moves like "American Beauty" which has an odd echo in the title, you might want to give a go.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1070

ur20961309

title: The originality and craziness almost compensate for the awkwardness throughout review: American Psycho (2000)This isn't quite a dark comedy, not a satire of psycho slasher movies, and not a straight up suspense crime flick, either. Or is it all these things?It might depend on your sense of humor. If you try to take it seriously, which you shouldn't (the first clue is in the credits when the dripping blood turns out to be a red sauce for a fancy meal), you'll end up mystified and unhappy. If you find this funny, if Christian Bale in this pre-Batman demanding role is really wry and comic for you, you'll love it. Most of the time. I was somewhere in the middle. Bale is playing a caricature--the overly rich and conceited playboy businessman in the Reagan 80s. But he plays too often the caricature directly rather than letting it come through the performance organically. Sometimes this is fine, or even great, but it puts a little strain on other scenes. (The women I know who saw it or have seen it don't think this matters so much because he's really hot, and really naked, in lots of it. And it's directed by a woman, Canadian Mary Harron who cut her teeth, not surprisingly, with the artsy "Who Shot Andy Warhol.")The plot is important and clever, and hard to talk about because there are some key twists, the twists becoming really huge by the end. Appropriately. Because above all this is camp. It's hammy without being slapstick. It works best, in a weird example, with the recurring fascination with the business cards among this group of young pampered business jerks. Jealousies over the color of the paper and the quality of the type lead to, well, some unrestrained behavior.The movie is sometimes bloody for sure, but most of the blood is so gratuitous it isn't quite disturbing. The main character is insane as the title implies--more than you realize at first--and the people around him don't always see him for what he is. Or do they? Or do we?There are a lot of movie tricks here. Scenes shift reality, or echoes from one situation visually resemble another, and in that sense it's a smartly made. But it also manipulates too openly for anyone trying to actually enter the movie. And "entering' the movie is a mistake. It's all show, and once you realize it's a farce and the characters don't really matter because they don't really exist (it's just a movie, the movie insists), once you realize that you're going to enjoy it more, but also realize it's a capped off experience. It only goes so far.By the end I wanted it to end. It's an odd, affected, curious, and almost period-defining movie. If you liked slightly odd creepy moves like "American Beauty" which has an odd echo in the title, you might want to give a go.

"I think my mask of sanity is about to slip."

tt0144084

I'd be lying if I didn't admit that Bret Easton Ellis' novel, "American Psycho," completely sickened me. It's a fascinating dark satire, but mostly for all the wrong reasons, with chapters of indescribably graphic sexual content and violence. If Ellis was aiming to receive a strong emotional response with his novel, then he certainly succeeded. I most definitely didn't enjoy it – in fact, I felt so uncomfortably filthy that I could hardly get to sleep – but he certainly knows which buttons to push. Thus, it was with some trepidation that I approached Mary Harron's 2000 film adaptation, which starred an up-and-coming Christian Bale as Patrick Bateman, a murderous psychopath who finds himself caught up in the rampant materialism of the 1980s and early 1990s. Thankfully, and I say this with the greatest relief imaginable, the intense violence of the novel was toned down considerably for its translation to the screen, and, despite some weak direction in various scenes, Christian Bale's performance is positively awesome.To look at him, you would never have guessed that Patrick Bateman was a disturbed serial killer. He is 27 years of age, handsome, intelligent, impeccably-stylish and holds a high-paying job at the respected Wall Street investment firm of Pierce & Pierce. He tries everything within his power to fit into society, but cannot suppress his distaste towards it, erupting into nightly sprees of blood-lust, during which he tortures and murders women and others who evoke his revulsion. Though we are not offered any concrete explanations for Bateman's psychosis, these acts of incredible violence appear to act as a distraction from the frustrating monotony of his 1980s yuppie lifestyle, and as a means of overcoming the intense feelings of inadequacy he harbours among his peers. Though Bateman candidly speaks of his horrific crimes on more than one occasion, the people around him are seemingly so absorbed in their chaotic, materialist lives that they hardly acknowledge his presence. In a stark indictment of American life, society is so busy comparing business cards, booking restaurant reservations, using recreational drugs and discussing fashion trivia that nobody even notices when one unhinged mad-man slaughters dozens of innocent people.Less than a decade ago, Christian Bale was pretty much an unknown, having starred in a few notable films {such as Steven Spielberg's 'Empire of the Sun (1987)'}, but nothing that would make him a household name. After a string of actors – Johnny Depp, Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio – showed a passing interest in the film's main role, the opportunity fell to Bale, who delivers an absolutely extraordinary performance, portraying the infamous Patrick Bateman as cool, calm and collected character on the surface. However, to the scenes of violence, he brings a frenzied intensity to the role that is both disturbing and darkly amusing. Bateman's cocky lectures on 1980s pop music, prior to each of his killing sprees, are delivered with relish. It's perhaps a good thing that the film's director, Mary Harron, was a female, otherwise much of 'American Psycho' might easily have been misconstrued as sexist. In actual fact, the film always stops short of glorifying its gruesome protagonist, following his exploits with obvious disapproval and repulsion.Now we come to the most fascinating question posed by the film: how much of what Bateman does may we accept as reality? In the novel, Bret Easton Ellis cleverly keeps the answer to this completely ambiguous, offering scattered hints that support each of the possibilities. In media interviews, director Mary Harron has stated that she had always intended for Bateman's murders to be completely real, though I think that this is where her direction was a bit weak; I'll wager that almost everybody who hasn't read the book finished the film with the belief that Bateman had imagined all the killings. The final scene, in which Harold Carnes (Stephen Bogaert) claims to have recently had dinner with one of Bateman's victims, Paul Allen (Jared Leto), was handled quite well, since we already know that, throughout the film, it is commonplace for characters to mistake each other for somebody else {indeed, at the start of that very conversation, Carnes refers to Bateman as "Davis"}. The scene of which I am not quite so enthusiastic is Bateman's revisit to Paul Allen's residence, where he finds a perfectly-clean apartment and a real estate agent. In the novel, it was written in a way that made the reader wonder "why has the real estate company covered up the horrific murders?" In the film, we're left without any doubt that Bateman is delusional.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-899

ur10334028

title: "I think my mask of sanity is about to slip." review: I'd be lying if I didn't admit that Bret Easton Ellis' novel, "American Psycho," completely sickened me. It's a fascinating dark satire, but mostly for all the wrong reasons, with chapters of indescribably graphic sexual content and violence. If Ellis was aiming to receive a strong emotional response with his novel, then he certainly succeeded. I most definitely didn't enjoy it – in fact, I felt so uncomfortably filthy that I could hardly get to sleep – but he certainly knows which buttons to push. Thus, it was with some trepidation that I approached Mary Harron's 2000 film adaptation, which starred an up-and-coming Christian Bale as Patrick Bateman, a murderous psychopath who finds himself caught up in the rampant materialism of the 1980s and early 1990s. Thankfully, and I say this with the greatest relief imaginable, the intense violence of the novel was toned down considerably for its translation to the screen, and, despite some weak direction in various scenes, Christian Bale's performance is positively awesome.To look at him, you would never have guessed that Patrick Bateman was a disturbed serial killer. He is 27 years of age, handsome, intelligent, impeccably-stylish and holds a high-paying job at the respected Wall Street investment firm of Pierce & Pierce. He tries everything within his power to fit into society, but cannot suppress his distaste towards it, erupting into nightly sprees of blood-lust, during which he tortures and murders women and others who evoke his revulsion. Though we are not offered any concrete explanations for Bateman's psychosis, these acts of incredible violence appear to act as a distraction from the frustrating monotony of his 1980s yuppie lifestyle, and as a means of overcoming the intense feelings of inadequacy he harbours among his peers. Though Bateman candidly speaks of his horrific crimes on more than one occasion, the people around him are seemingly so absorbed in their chaotic, materialist lives that they hardly acknowledge his presence. In a stark indictment of American life, society is so busy comparing business cards, booking restaurant reservations, using recreational drugs and discussing fashion trivia that nobody even notices when one unhinged mad-man slaughters dozens of innocent people.Less than a decade ago, Christian Bale was pretty much an unknown, having starred in a few notable films {such as Steven Spielberg's 'Empire of the Sun (1987)'}, but nothing that would make him a household name. After a string of actors – Johnny Depp, Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio – showed a passing interest in the film's main role, the opportunity fell to Bale, who delivers an absolutely extraordinary performance, portraying the infamous Patrick Bateman as cool, calm and collected character on the surface. However, to the scenes of violence, he brings a frenzied intensity to the role that is both disturbing and darkly amusing. Bateman's cocky lectures on 1980s pop music, prior to each of his killing sprees, are delivered with relish. It's perhaps a good thing that the film's director, Mary Harron, was a female, otherwise much of 'American Psycho' might easily have been misconstrued as sexist. In actual fact, the film always stops short of glorifying its gruesome protagonist, following his exploits with obvious disapproval and repulsion.Now we come to the most fascinating question posed by the film: how much of what Bateman does may we accept as reality? In the novel, Bret Easton Ellis cleverly keeps the answer to this completely ambiguous, offering scattered hints that support each of the possibilities. In media interviews, director Mary Harron has stated that she had always intended for Bateman's murders to be completely real, though I think that this is where her direction was a bit weak; I'll wager that almost everybody who hasn't read the book finished the film with the belief that Bateman had imagined all the killings. The final scene, in which Harold Carnes (Stephen Bogaert) claims to have recently had dinner with one of Bateman's victims, Paul Allen (Jared Leto), was handled quite well, since we already know that, throughout the film, it is commonplace for characters to mistake each other for somebody else {indeed, at the start of that very conversation, Carnes refers to Bateman as "Davis"}. The scene of which I am not quite so enthusiastic is Bateman's revisit to Paul Allen's residence, where he finds a perfectly-clean apartment and a real estate agent. In the novel, it was written in a way that made the reader wonder "why has the real estate company covered up the horrific murders?" In the film, we're left without any doubt that Bateman is delusional.

Eh, whatever, let me go get some pizza. Did you do the laundry?

tt0144084

If there is a single movie that suffuses as the poster-child for the countless "What was the point of that?" movies, it's American Psycho. It's not necessary bad, it's just boring and pointless. It's the kind of movie that will leave the average person thinking about their laundry when the credits roll rather than the movie itself. In other blunter words, the movie is wholesale forgettable from opening to closing. If you know anything about real-life serial killers, or have seen any other cliché serial killer movie, you've seen this. Hundreds of times.It opens up just like every other first-person narrative movie, and some lines even made me wonder if they were copied directly from Fight Club. Regardless of when the two original novels were written, I think this just proves the insane unoriginality of both.Speaking of unoriginality, American Psycho is nothing but one long, bloated serial killer cliché with nothing to differentiate it from the countless others just like it. The main character is a mix of Hannibal Lector and your average no-name B-movie serial killer. He does exactly what every other serial killer ever does: kill, have sex, and kill having sex. He's a dull cliché with legs. (And a butt, if you want me to mention the constant immature use of rear nudity that has no point but to make the 13-year-old girls horny.) There is no real plot, just, as I said, kill and have sex, and that's the "brilliant, masterful" plotting that everyone is speaking of. Kill, sex, kill, sex—I think we know what sells in America. That's why American Psycho is just so safe. It's a safe idea that has been used hundreds of times—kill, sex—and was destine to get great reviews because it plays so safe. I think we've learned by now that safe movies get the critic's good scores, and safe movies sell. Am I really the only one who gets it? American Psycho is a movie for safe pansies who's idea of a "brilliant, masterful" plot is: kill, sex, kill.But with all the killing, I was left wondering: where is all this gore everyone is speaking of? How is this gory? Every single kill is off-screen. I've seen low-budget 60's horror movies that show more gore on screen. There isn't a single moment of brutality. There is less blood on screen than your average TV show. Did I mention this movie plays it all 100% safe? If everything I just mentioned wasn't bad enough, let me move on to the boring factor. The entire run time is a long, drawn-out talking scene. It goes from one conversation scene to another, with less action than your average drama. Maybe that's because, no matter what you want to believe, American Psycho is a drama. It isn't a horror movie—just the idea of typing that makes me laugh—and it isn't an action movie. It's just a cliché, dull drama.The only good I can manage to scrounger up: - Bale knows how to act. - The chainsaw scene was interesting.Now, back to the bad for my conclusion. American Psycho is a safe, boring, cliché drama and nothing more. It has some humor, but it's all humor you've heard before. There is no intellectual meaning, unlike what some seem to think, and it isn't entertaining. It's so forgettable the exact thing I thought when the credits came on screen was: "I need to order some pizza . . ." and didn't even remember I watched it until I sat down to write this review the next morning. There are countless movies out there exactly like this, and I sometimes wonder if I'm the only person alive who even gets that there actually ARE interesting, entertaining, original movies out there to watch. Why did I waste my time on American Psycho? 0/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-946

ur19835265

title: Eh, whatever, let me go get some pizza. Did you do the laundry? review: If there is a single movie that suffuses as the poster-child for the countless "What was the point of that?" movies, it's American Psycho. It's not necessary bad, it's just boring and pointless. It's the kind of movie that will leave the average person thinking about their laundry when the credits roll rather than the movie itself. In other blunter words, the movie is wholesale forgettable from opening to closing. If you know anything about real-life serial killers, or have seen any other cliché serial killer movie, you've seen this. Hundreds of times.It opens up just like every other first-person narrative movie, and some lines even made me wonder if they were copied directly from Fight Club. Regardless of when the two original novels were written, I think this just proves the insane unoriginality of both.Speaking of unoriginality, American Psycho is nothing but one long, bloated serial killer cliché with nothing to differentiate it from the countless others just like it. The main character is a mix of Hannibal Lector and your average no-name B-movie serial killer. He does exactly what every other serial killer ever does: kill, have sex, and kill having sex. He's a dull cliché with legs. (And a butt, if you want me to mention the constant immature use of rear nudity that has no point but to make the 13-year-old girls horny.) There is no real plot, just, as I said, kill and have sex, and that's the "brilliant, masterful" plotting that everyone is speaking of. Kill, sex, kill, sex—I think we know what sells in America. That's why American Psycho is just so safe. It's a safe idea that has been used hundreds of times—kill, sex—and was destine to get great reviews because it plays so safe. I think we've learned by now that safe movies get the critic's good scores, and safe movies sell. Am I really the only one who gets it? American Psycho is a movie for safe pansies who's idea of a "brilliant, masterful" plot is: kill, sex, kill.But with all the killing, I was left wondering: where is all this gore everyone is speaking of? How is this gory? Every single kill is off-screen. I've seen low-budget 60's horror movies that show more gore on screen. There isn't a single moment of brutality. There is less blood on screen than your average TV show. Did I mention this movie plays it all 100% safe? If everything I just mentioned wasn't bad enough, let me move on to the boring factor. The entire run time is a long, drawn-out talking scene. It goes from one conversation scene to another, with less action than your average drama. Maybe that's because, no matter what you want to believe, American Psycho is a drama. It isn't a horror movie—just the idea of typing that makes me laugh—and it isn't an action movie. It's just a cliché, dull drama.The only good I can manage to scrounger up: - Bale knows how to act. - The chainsaw scene was interesting.Now, back to the bad for my conclusion. American Psycho is a safe, boring, cliché drama and nothing more. It has some humor, but it's all humor you've heard before. There is no intellectual meaning, unlike what some seem to think, and it isn't entertaining. It's so forgettable the exact thing I thought when the credits came on screen was: "I need to order some pizza . . ." and didn't even remember I watched it until I sat down to write this review the next morning. There are countless movies out there exactly like this, and I sometimes wonder if I'm the only person alive who even gets that there actually ARE interesting, entertaining, original movies out there to watch. Why did I waste my time on American Psycho? 0/10

Hilarious sketch of an obsessive neat-freak banking executive

tt0144084

A hilarious sketch of an obsessive neat-freak banking executive (vice president of a bank?) who also loves killing.The chanting of lots of fashion technicalities was difficult to follow but so comical, you just see this kind of people everywhere. When they said how much they enjoyed the meals, musics or movies, it was simply soulless and heartless.I think it made a better choice to choose Christian Bale instead of Leonard DiCaprio as Patrick Bateman. Both actors are handsome, Leonardo DiCaprio could probably still made those fashion remarks with enough affectation and act elegantly, but Bale was somehow darker and more sinister, perhaps a real reflection of his life?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-935

ur8699728

title: Hilarious sketch of an obsessive neat-freak banking executive review: A hilarious sketch of an obsessive neat-freak banking executive (vice president of a bank?) who also loves killing.The chanting of lots of fashion technicalities was difficult to follow but so comical, you just see this kind of people everywhere. When they said how much they enjoyed the meals, musics or movies, it was simply soulless and heartless.I think it made a better choice to choose Christian Bale instead of Leonard DiCaprio as Patrick Bateman. Both actors are handsome, Leonardo DiCaprio could probably still made those fashion remarks with enough affectation and act elegantly, but Bale was somehow darker and more sinister, perhaps a real reflection of his life?

Brilliant Bale delivers in socially expectant drama

tt0144084

Patrick Bateman (Bale) lives and works on Wall Street, projecting an image of perfection in his busy schedule, but at night, he descends into his own experiments and fantasises.Christian Bale stars as Patrick Bateman in this Mary Hannon picture and with his sophisticated approach to the needy and greedy protagonist, do we viewers dive into a world where social class is everything to be successful.As the film gets under way we see the central character describe himself as an intelligent being, a man who knows what and who he likes and aims to keep it that way. Starting at a posh restaurant with his colleagues discussing the local works trends and social gossip do we get a picture of what working on Wall Street is like.American Psycho is adapted from Bret Easton Ellis's novel, and the author has clearly a colourful picture on the minds of the highly prestigious workmen in America. This screenplay is marvellous, owing to the fact that Bale's character is so well thought out; a protagonist to envy and to identify with. His work is tame; his colleagues are infuriating whilst his fiancée annoys the living daylights out of him. But he continues down the same path owing to the fact he must project an important image; an image of power and success. The attitude of Bateman is quite remarkable. His self loving success driven mindset is staggering, and the Dark Knight actor is frankly remarkable in this role Many films of course look at social class workings or stereotypes. From the significant upbringing and destiny surrounding Eddie Murphy in Trading Places to the way strangers and criminals look at Sidney Poitier's cop in In the Heat of the Night but with this 2000 release, you get a significant feeling that the way you walk and talk generally affects you persona and your presentation to others, which arguably decides the fate of this film.Bateman's constant conformity to the general high standards of Wall Street leave him wanting more and when he is at home watching porn, experimenting with face products or doing his exercise regimes, he descends into a world of madness, and this is where the film drives into exciting mystery.After Paul Allen shows him a business card and forgets his name once too often, Bateman introduces him to his axe, and after this arguably frightening sequence, the character base is set and the expectancy to see Bateman's next move is anticipation of the highest degree.Honestly even as the caped crusader Bale has never been more impressive. His depiction of this character is completely accurate and interesting. He derives from a standard of madness and makes it fascinating psychologically whilst oddly, surprisingly comic at various points. The character is a joy; a privilege to watch and observe and the madness may give Hamlet a run for his money. A must watch for the sheer brilliance of the character development and Bale's performance.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-974

ur11597946

title: Brilliant Bale delivers in socially expectant drama review: Patrick Bateman (Bale) lives and works on Wall Street, projecting an image of perfection in his busy schedule, but at night, he descends into his own experiments and fantasises.Christian Bale stars as Patrick Bateman in this Mary Hannon picture and with his sophisticated approach to the needy and greedy protagonist, do we viewers dive into a world where social class is everything to be successful.As the film gets under way we see the central character describe himself as an intelligent being, a man who knows what and who he likes and aims to keep it that way. Starting at a posh restaurant with his colleagues discussing the local works trends and social gossip do we get a picture of what working on Wall Street is like.American Psycho is adapted from Bret Easton Ellis's novel, and the author has clearly a colourful picture on the minds of the highly prestigious workmen in America. This screenplay is marvellous, owing to the fact that Bale's character is so well thought out; a protagonist to envy and to identify with. His work is tame; his colleagues are infuriating whilst his fiancée annoys the living daylights out of him. But he continues down the same path owing to the fact he must project an important image; an image of power and success. The attitude of Bateman is quite remarkable. His self loving success driven mindset is staggering, and the Dark Knight actor is frankly remarkable in this role Many films of course look at social class workings or stereotypes. From the significant upbringing and destiny surrounding Eddie Murphy in Trading Places to the way strangers and criminals look at Sidney Poitier's cop in In the Heat of the Night but with this 2000 release, you get a significant feeling that the way you walk and talk generally affects you persona and your presentation to others, which arguably decides the fate of this film.Bateman's constant conformity to the general high standards of Wall Street leave him wanting more and when he is at home watching porn, experimenting with face products or doing his exercise regimes, he descends into a world of madness, and this is where the film drives into exciting mystery.After Paul Allen shows him a business card and forgets his name once too often, Bateman introduces him to his axe, and after this arguably frightening sequence, the character base is set and the expectancy to see Bateman's next move is anticipation of the highest degree.Honestly even as the caped crusader Bale has never been more impressive. His depiction of this character is completely accurate and interesting. He derives from a standard of madness and makes it fascinating psychologically whilst oddly, surprisingly comic at various points. The character is a joy; a privilege to watch and observe and the madness may give Hamlet a run for his money. A must watch for the sheer brilliance of the character development and Bale's performance.

A Total Mess

tt0144084

This film does not know what it wants to be - a social satire on the greedy, yuppie Reagan era, a grand guignol bloodbath, a psychological study of a serial mass killer, or even soft porn distasteful misogonist exploitation? Frankly, none of it works, and hence the film is a mess and a total waste of time. There is some satire on the Wall Street arrogant yuppies, but they never do any work! Competing over business cards may have looked good on paper but fails to light up the screen. A bloodbath - some, but not full on to really work. Psychological study of Christian Bale as a mass murderer - no, Bale murders any real belief in the character. Soft porn - give me a break with a woman director she is more interested in not giving any teen boy the chance to abuse himself while he watches! Not a nipple in sight and the worst girl on girl action you are ever likely to see! What with a terrible voice over, shoddy script, poor acting, dreadful direction - sorry if an important novel is ruined. And, please, do not remake!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1107

ur15462983

title: A Total Mess review: This film does not know what it wants to be - a social satire on the greedy, yuppie Reagan era, a grand guignol bloodbath, a psychological study of a serial mass killer, or even soft porn distasteful misogonist exploitation? Frankly, none of it works, and hence the film is a mess and a total waste of time. There is some satire on the Wall Street arrogant yuppies, but they never do any work! Competing over business cards may have looked good on paper but fails to light up the screen. A bloodbath - some, but not full on to really work. Psychological study of Christian Bale as a mass murderer - no, Bale murders any real belief in the character. Soft porn - give me a break with a woman director she is more interested in not giving any teen boy the chance to abuse himself while he watches! Not a nipple in sight and the worst girl on girl action you are ever likely to see! What with a terrible voice over, shoddy script, poor acting, dreadful direction - sorry if an important novel is ruined. And, please, do not remake!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A deeply incisive and satisfying film

tt0144084

There's no need for another review of this film but I just had to write one to give it the praise it deserves. All the dark things bubbling beneath the Wall Street psyche, and the American upper class psyche in general, are raised to the surface with this film. It feels clear to me that all the executives shown in the film are very similar to Bateman, only their sociopathy is better hidden, obscured even to themselves. In Bateman the inner chaos battles for control with reality. He tells us that what's inside his head doesn't matter, but of course the inside and outside are blending together, driving his life out of control. What this film accomplishes is very rare. It approximates a message about the modern era without having to stick on some morality play or quest for political redemption (because, after all, on Wall Street today there is still no salvation). I was very happy to watch it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1031

ur4619619

title: A deeply incisive and satisfying film review: There's no need for another review of this film but I just had to write one to give it the praise it deserves. All the dark things bubbling beneath the Wall Street psyche, and the American upper class psyche in general, are raised to the surface with this film. It feels clear to me that all the executives shown in the film are very similar to Bateman, only their sociopathy is better hidden, obscured even to themselves. In Bateman the inner chaos battles for control with reality. He tells us that what's inside his head doesn't matter, but of course the inside and outside are blending together, driving his life out of control. What this film accomplishes is very rare. It approximates a message about the modern era without having to stick on some morality play or quest for political redemption (because, after all, on Wall Street today there is still no salvation). I was very happy to watch it.

Christian Bale's performance was outstanding...

tt0144084

Christian Bale makes a really good performance in "American Psycho" movie which is really outstanding. I could tell that this performance of him it could be one of his best, and one of those would make us expect even more from him."American Psycho" has to do with a wealthy New York businessman who brings to the surface an another person, a psychopathic. In this movie we can observe the differences between these two people (a wealthy businessman and a psychopathic) and compare these. We can also observe how they feel, how they think and what are the things that they want and like to do.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1103

ur33907744

title: Christian Bale's performance was outstanding... review: Christian Bale makes a really good performance in "American Psycho" movie which is really outstanding. I could tell that this performance of him it could be one of his best, and one of those would make us expect even more from him."American Psycho" has to do with a wealthy New York businessman who brings to the surface an another person, a psychopathic. In this movie we can observe the differences between these two people (a wealthy businessman and a psychopathic) and compare these. We can also observe how they feel, how they think and what are the things that they want and like to do.

I gotta return some videotapes, but definitely not this one!

tt0144084

So many movies that start with the word "American": "American Beauty"; "American History X"; "American Pie". All of them with their own message and version of America, and now this underrated classic not only shows a new vision of America but also of his craziest psychopath.... interesting no? "American Psycho" tells the beautiful, crazy, insane, fun, violent life of Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale). An eccentric American businessman working as an executive of a major bank in Wall Street. Patrick in work he seems the normal rich American worker, but Patrick has an extraordinary secret life ranging from a daily routine with certain quirks to keep things arranged in a certain order; food fads; crazes appearance at work; kill someone in cold blood every night since prostitutes coworkers that he just felt jealousy; and .... oh, wait a minute! As you see, the life of Patrick is one of a psychopathic killer who tries to hide appearances at work, but the film goes far beyond the expected. Director- writer Mary Harron to adapt the novel of Bret Easton Ellis at the same time she tries to be faithful, it goes much further exploring the mind of Patrick 's character more and more.The film with a story that it could had follow with a somber and a creepy tone of horror movie, but no. In the first few scenes of the film, Mary Harron presents us with a beautiful humor, that ranges from clever phrases to a humorous narrative, and 70% of comes from the mouth of Patrick makes us laugh, that make us feeling at certain times that we are facing a black comedy. Some may consider the humor stupid or unnecessary, but it serves mainly to make us relate to the character Patrick throughout the film, even in the darkest hours.And yes, the film doesn't escape to have dark and even scary moments, but those moments come through a superb narrative followed with great dialogs with many varied subjects ranging from women-philosophy to the characteristics of the perfect business cards. We even have a moment of dialog between Patrick with two lovers about the songs of Whitney Houston that end's up in the most violent and grim scene of the movie, making us feeling that we are now facing a violent and disturbing film. Such dialogs may be unnecessary for some or boring, but they are so well written and interesting, and serve once again to get into the mad mind of Patrick that at various points where we got to see the kind of person he is and the cause of his great hatred for human being and even the cause of his daily foibles, everything related.In the levels of performance, the entire cast does a good job, but as always Bale delivers an extravagant performance with its unforgettable character and superb acting deserved of at least a nomination.A film that goes from humorous to dark and sometimes mysterious, complete with a great script and good direction with an extravagant performance of Bale, makes us enter in the mind of a psychopath in this unforgettable and must-see classic.9/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1105

ur37892465

title: I gotta return some videotapes, but definitely not this one! review: So many movies that start with the word "American": "American Beauty"; "American History X"; "American Pie". All of them with their own message and version of America, and now this underrated classic not only shows a new vision of America but also of his craziest psychopath.... interesting no? "American Psycho" tells the beautiful, crazy, insane, fun, violent life of Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale). An eccentric American businessman working as an executive of a major bank in Wall Street. Patrick in work he seems the normal rich American worker, but Patrick has an extraordinary secret life ranging from a daily routine with certain quirks to keep things arranged in a certain order; food fads; crazes appearance at work; kill someone in cold blood every night since prostitutes coworkers that he just felt jealousy; and .... oh, wait a minute! As you see, the life of Patrick is one of a psychopathic killer who tries to hide appearances at work, but the film goes far beyond the expected. Director- writer Mary Harron to adapt the novel of Bret Easton Ellis at the same time she tries to be faithful, it goes much further exploring the mind of Patrick 's character more and more.The film with a story that it could had follow with a somber and a creepy tone of horror movie, but no. In the first few scenes of the film, Mary Harron presents us with a beautiful humor, that ranges from clever phrases to a humorous narrative, and 70% of comes from the mouth of Patrick makes us laugh, that make us feeling at certain times that we are facing a black comedy. Some may consider the humor stupid or unnecessary, but it serves mainly to make us relate to the character Patrick throughout the film, even in the darkest hours.And yes, the film doesn't escape to have dark and even scary moments, but those moments come through a superb narrative followed with great dialogs with many varied subjects ranging from women-philosophy to the characteristics of the perfect business cards. We even have a moment of dialog between Patrick with two lovers about the songs of Whitney Houston that end's up in the most violent and grim scene of the movie, making us feeling that we are now facing a violent and disturbing film. Such dialogs may be unnecessary for some or boring, but they are so well written and interesting, and serve once again to get into the mad mind of Patrick that at various points where we got to see the kind of person he is and the cause of his great hatred for human being and even the cause of his daily foibles, everything related.In the levels of performance, the entire cast does a good job, but as always Bale delivers an extravagant performance with its unforgettable character and superb acting deserved of at least a nomination.A film that goes from humorous to dark and sometimes mysterious, complete with a great script and good direction with an extravagant performance of Bale, makes us enter in the mind of a psychopath in this unforgettable and must-see classic.9/10

Excellence from Bale...

tt0144084

First off, Christian Bale is totally excellent in this part; because I've seen all the Batman films before seeing this, it came as a bit of a culture shock to see him in this particular role. But he carries it off brilliantly! I love the way his character's narration overlay's the images and the musical references are worked in so well. It's a really well made film too with a pretentious cuisine and big chunky telephones taking us back to the 80's. Having not read the book I did find some of it a little hard to follow, but I'll add it to the reading list and give this one another look afterwards. Definitely worth a look though, if just for Bale's performance.SteelMonster's verdict: RECOMMENDEDMy score: 8.1/10You can find an expanded version of this review on my blog: Thoughts of a SteelMonster.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1088

ur29798050

title: Excellence from Bale... review: First off, Christian Bale is totally excellent in this part; because I've seen all the Batman films before seeing this, it came as a bit of a culture shock to see him in this particular role. But he carries it off brilliantly! I love the way his character's narration overlay's the images and the musical references are worked in so well. It's a really well made film too with a pretentious cuisine and big chunky telephones taking us back to the 80's. Having not read the book I did find some of it a little hard to follow, but I'll add it to the reading list and give this one another look afterwards. Definitely worth a look though, if just for Bale's performance.SteelMonster's verdict: RECOMMENDEDMy score: 8.1/10You can find an expanded version of this review on my blog: Thoughts of a SteelMonster.

"I just had to kill a lot of people!" A+

tt0144084

My Gojira, see this movie!! It is by far the best performance of Christian Bale EVER. I, like most people I assume, did not become familiar with Christian Bale till he became the new Bruce Wayne back in 2005. I was aware of this movie for a while but avoided it because I thought the acting would be dry. However, I finally sat down to watch it and was blown away. Its strongest pillar is none other than Mr. Bale. Trust me; you've never seen him like this. His character is sadistic, redefines cruel and is a true sociopath, and yet you can't turn away. Bale also adds dabbles of what seem to be regret within it all and it leaves one wondering; what will Patrick Bateman's next move be?It also offers the great performances of William Dafoe, and others. Taking place during the 80s, one can't help but feel Bale's character was driven to this sick path due to some feeling of social isolation. The 80s here are depicted as an era of the "fast times'. A growing gap between the rich and poor (reminiscent of Oliver Stone's "Wall Street"), people's ever growing affinity with drugs and of course the music that was there but also wasn't. In his meticulous mind, he appears to be the only one who seems to actually be paying attention to what he's hearing. Strangely idealistic and yet without direction, it's one of the strangest characters you'll ever see on screen.Bold, sickening and just exhilarating, check out "American Psycho".

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1066

ur20916867

title: "I just had to kill a lot of people!" A+ review: My Gojira, see this movie!! It is by far the best performance of Christian Bale EVER. I, like most people I assume, did not become familiar with Christian Bale till he became the new Bruce Wayne back in 2005. I was aware of this movie for a while but avoided it because I thought the acting would be dry. However, I finally sat down to watch it and was blown away. Its strongest pillar is none other than Mr. Bale. Trust me; you've never seen him like this. His character is sadistic, redefines cruel and is a true sociopath, and yet you can't turn away. Bale also adds dabbles of what seem to be regret within it all and it leaves one wondering; what will Patrick Bateman's next move be?It also offers the great performances of William Dafoe, and others. Taking place during the 80s, one can't help but feel Bale's character was driven to this sick path due to some feeling of social isolation. The 80s here are depicted as an era of the "fast times'. A growing gap between the rich and poor (reminiscent of Oliver Stone's "Wall Street"), people's ever growing affinity with drugs and of course the music that was there but also wasn't. In his meticulous mind, he appears to be the only one who seems to actually be paying attention to what he's hearing. Strangely idealistic and yet without direction, it's one of the strangest characters you'll ever see on screen.Bold, sickening and just exhilarating, check out "American Psycho".

Good satire of yuppie life, bad movie about a psychopath

tt0144084

One of the major flaws in this film is that while the mocking of pretentious yuppies is satisfying, it fails to realize that the movie makers themselves are guilty of being one of those that deserve to be mocked. One of the characteristics of these yuppie types is the conceited misunderstanding that they (the yuppies) are the only ones sophisticated enough to understand art. While the movie ignores this characteristic and instead focuses on their misunderstandings of dinning, I find it ironic that only people who enjoy this movie boast the same conceited taste in films as the characters do in their choice of dinner. If these pompous characters that were in this movie have a video library at home, I would bet that American Psycho would be one of those movies.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-916

ur14595551

title: Good satire of yuppie life, bad movie about a psychopath review: One of the major flaws in this film is that while the mocking of pretentious yuppies is satisfying, it fails to realize that the movie makers themselves are guilty of being one of those that deserve to be mocked. One of the characteristics of these yuppie types is the conceited misunderstanding that they (the yuppies) are the only ones sophisticated enough to understand art. While the movie ignores this characteristic and instead focuses on their misunderstandings of dinning, I find it ironic that only people who enjoy this movie boast the same conceited taste in films as the characters do in their choice of dinner. If these pompous characters that were in this movie have a video library at home, I would bet that American Psycho would be one of those movies.

Cut Classic!

tt0144084

I am being serious or should I say serial when i say that `American Psycho' will be one of the best films of the year. Oh my christ! I almost forgot- It also has one of the best acting performances of the year from Christian Bale. This dark, but yet, brilliant film is about an 80's yuppie who moonlights as a disturbed serial killer. Bale's star-breaking performance should ring bells to oscar voters when they decide the best actor nominees. Director Mary Harron's unique style of craftsmanship was right-on. Also, you will not hear a more creative screenplay in a film this year – especially in the scenes when Bale's character is describing his version of 80's musicians societal insights as he is nonchalantly murdering and seducing his preys. The `hip to be square' scene is one of the best of the year- so spread the news. Hopefully, I have said enough to have `psyched' you up to go watch this flawless film. ***** Excellent

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-289

ur0489763

title: Cut Classic! review: I am being serious or should I say serial when i say that `American Psycho' will be one of the best films of the year. Oh my christ! I almost forgot- It also has one of the best acting performances of the year from Christian Bale. This dark, but yet, brilliant film is about an 80's yuppie who moonlights as a disturbed serial killer. Bale's star-breaking performance should ring bells to oscar voters when they decide the best actor nominees. Director Mary Harron's unique style of craftsmanship was right-on. Also, you will not hear a more creative screenplay in a film this year – especially in the scenes when Bale's character is describing his version of 80's musicians societal insights as he is nonchalantly murdering and seducing his preys. The `hip to be square' scene is one of the best of the year- so spread the news. Hopefully, I have said enough to have `psyched' you up to go watch this flawless film. ***** Excellent

brilliant film bale gives one of the best film performances ever

tt0144084

excellent film that is one of the best and in my view realistic horror films you could ever see all actors were very good Willem dafore as the detective very good and the other yuppies good as well but the performance of Christian bale was one of the best ever the guy is a superb actor who really prepares for his role and preforms them to the best he can and this simply was brilliant in my view Patrick batemen is the prefect killer because he is smart, attractive, covers his tracks, has powerful friends around and just doesn't look like he would kill people again like i said a brilliant film with one of the best film performances ever

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-911

ur16307220

title: brilliant film bale gives one of the best film performances ever review: excellent film that is one of the best and in my view realistic horror films you could ever see all actors were very good Willem dafore as the detective very good and the other yuppies good as well but the performance of Christian bale was one of the best ever the guy is a superb actor who really prepares for his role and preforms them to the best he can and this simply was brilliant in my view Patrick batemen is the prefect killer because he is smart, attractive, covers his tracks, has powerful friends around and just doesn't look like he would kill people again like i said a brilliant film with one of the best film performances ever

A face only a psycho could love.

tt0144084

It's what's on the inside that matters. Patrick gets up every morning and washes his face with like 20 different cleaners. He also does sit ups and goes to work on Wall Street. He gets jealous by the little things but this is all a lie. Patrick is really a homicidal maniac who kills those who stand in his way. Who would really know that considering that he's so clean cut and has a great job.I thought that the movie was sick but it was well done. I thought that was weird when he got blood all over his face and I thought that he was going to use many cleaners but he didn't right away. I was also confused by the ending but over all, it was a bloody good time. When Patrick starts talking about his music, run for your life.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-868

ur10123981

title: A face only a psycho could love. review: It's what's on the inside that matters. Patrick gets up every morning and washes his face with like 20 different cleaners. He also does sit ups and goes to work on Wall Street. He gets jealous by the little things but this is all a lie. Patrick is really a homicidal maniac who kills those who stand in his way. Who would really know that considering that he's so clean cut and has a great job.I thought that the movie was sick but it was well done. I thought that was weird when he got blood all over his face and I thought that he was going to use many cleaners but he didn't right away. I was also confused by the ending but over all, it was a bloody good time. When Patrick starts talking about his music, run for your life.

surprisingly .. funny!?

tt0144084

Tuned into this middle of the night and I'm not sure was is Bale got my attention or the look of the film - The cool tones and the "steelish" suits. I skip about here and there to other channels but still came back.*spoilers*.. the internal dialogue on the business card bit is exceedingly funny; and the gotta return my VHS tape line is just priceless.Never read the book but book and film are 2 very different media.. one is fairly time limited and imagines the visuals (and story choices) for you while the other basically runs on each readers' own imagination. And each author (writer vs director/actor..etc) has their own focus with the 'material'... so your'e not comparing apples to apples.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-941

ur2686853

title: surprisingly .. funny!? review: Tuned into this middle of the night and I'm not sure was is Bale got my attention or the look of the film - The cool tones and the "steelish" suits. I skip about here and there to other channels but still came back.*spoilers*.. the internal dialogue on the business card bit is exceedingly funny; and the gotta return my VHS tape line is just priceless.Never read the book but book and film are 2 very different media.. one is fairly time limited and imagines the visuals (and story choices) for you while the other basically runs on each readers' own imagination. And each author (writer vs director/actor..etc) has their own focus with the 'material'... so your'e not comparing apples to apples.

Has good and bad points ...

tt0144084

I didn't read the book so I'm just reacting to the movie as I saw it. The beginning of the movie was pretty good, but as it wore on, the novelty of the interesting characters gave way to a story that wasn't quite as engaging.The movie is about a 27 year old wealthy investment banker. His life seems built on life's excesses and peer status - a typical upscale Manhattan yuppie in the 1980s. But he anything but typical: we learn he has a very dark side ... as a sadistic killer.What was really fascinating to watch was his (and his friends') petty "yuppie" mannerisms and lifestyle. Their superficiality was very well done. A scene involving "who has the better business card" was amazing to watch.However, the movie came up a little short in the second half. It is focused on his dark side. It was presented so as to be abrupt, sadistic, and shocking. However, it didn't quite come off as intense as intended. Maybe in 2000 it may have been more effective, but it wasn't too surprising to see a person with a normal side coexisting with a secret killer/crazy side.It seems that this movie appeals to people who have read the book - so if that's you, you'll probably want to see this. For everyone else, it's not really worth the 100+ minute investment.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-920

ur5146276

title: Has good and bad points ... review: I didn't read the book so I'm just reacting to the movie as I saw it. The beginning of the movie was pretty good, but as it wore on, the novelty of the interesting characters gave way to a story that wasn't quite as engaging.The movie is about a 27 year old wealthy investment banker. His life seems built on life's excesses and peer status - a typical upscale Manhattan yuppie in the 1980s. But he anything but typical: we learn he has a very dark side ... as a sadistic killer.What was really fascinating to watch was his (and his friends') petty "yuppie" mannerisms and lifestyle. Their superficiality was very well done. A scene involving "who has the better business card" was amazing to watch.However, the movie came up a little short in the second half. It is focused on his dark side. It was presented so as to be abrupt, sadistic, and shocking. However, it didn't quite come off as intense as intended. Maybe in 2000 it may have been more effective, but it wasn't too surprising to see a person with a normal side coexisting with a secret killer/crazy side.It seems that this movie appeals to people who have read the book - so if that's you, you'll probably want to see this. For everyone else, it's not really worth the 100+ minute investment.

Unique social comedy that mixed very well with a horror film.

tt0144084

Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) is a man, who has it all. He's working on Wall Street, which he has an good looking secretary (Chloe Sevigny). Which Bateman doesn't realized that his secretary has an crush on him. He's obsessed with success, status and style with a pretty fiancée (Reese Witherspoon) and an more attractive but drugged out woman (Samantha Mathis), which Bateman is having an affair with. But there is a darker side to his successful life, Bateman is also an disturbed killer. Who enjoys raping beautiful prostitutes, murders and dismembers both strangers and acquaintances without a purpose.Directed by Mary Harron (I Shot Andy Warhol, The Notorious Betty Page) made a clever social satire film mixed brilliantly with horror. One of the film's best assets that it is sets in the late 1980's. This film is loaded with dark humour, while Bale gives an dynamic performance. This film has an terrific supporting cast, including:Willem Dafoe, Jared Leto, Josh Lucas, Matt Ross, Bill Sage, Cara Seymour and Justin Theroux. This independent film has high production values, an fine music score by John Cale and good looking cinematography by Andrzej Sekula (Pulp Fiction).Since this DVD is the Killer Collector's Edition, which this DVD is also the original uncut version. DVD has an newly sharp remastered anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an strong-Dolby Digital 5.1 EX Surround Sound. DVD has two interesting and funny commentaries tracks, one by co-writer/director:Harron and co-writer/actress:Guinevere Turner (BloodRayne, The Notorious Betty Page). DVD also has Deleted Scenes with optional commentary, two documentaries-which one is about making the film with the filmmakers and critics-who loved the film, second is about the 1980's-the look, the music, the clubs, the fashion, the dark times and aids of that unforgettable era. DVD also has t.v. spots, trailers and four trailers of other movies from Lions Gate Films. The only flaw of this effective film is the last act of the film, where it's becomes increasingly disconnected. But still, there is plenty to enjoy in the movie. This film is Based on a Novel by Bret Easton Ellis (Less Than Zero, The Rules of Attraction). Co-Writer of the picture, Turner appears in an amusing cameo. Super 35. (**** ½/*****).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-756

ur5115203

title: Unique social comedy that mixed very well with a horror film. review: Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) is a man, who has it all. He's working on Wall Street, which he has an good looking secretary (Chloe Sevigny). Which Bateman doesn't realized that his secretary has an crush on him. He's obsessed with success, status and style with a pretty fiancée (Reese Witherspoon) and an more attractive but drugged out woman (Samantha Mathis), which Bateman is having an affair with. But there is a darker side to his successful life, Bateman is also an disturbed killer. Who enjoys raping beautiful prostitutes, murders and dismembers both strangers and acquaintances without a purpose.Directed by Mary Harron (I Shot Andy Warhol, The Notorious Betty Page) made a clever social satire film mixed brilliantly with horror. One of the film's best assets that it is sets in the late 1980's. This film is loaded with dark humour, while Bale gives an dynamic performance. This film has an terrific supporting cast, including:Willem Dafoe, Jared Leto, Josh Lucas, Matt Ross, Bill Sage, Cara Seymour and Justin Theroux. This independent film has high production values, an fine music score by John Cale and good looking cinematography by Andrzej Sekula (Pulp Fiction).Since this DVD is the Killer Collector's Edition, which this DVD is also the original uncut version. DVD has an newly sharp remastered anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an strong-Dolby Digital 5.1 EX Surround Sound. DVD has two interesting and funny commentaries tracks, one by co-writer/director:Harron and co-writer/actress:Guinevere Turner (BloodRayne, The Notorious Betty Page). DVD also has Deleted Scenes with optional commentary, two documentaries-which one is about making the film with the filmmakers and critics-who loved the film, second is about the 1980's-the look, the music, the clubs, the fashion, the dark times and aids of that unforgettable era. DVD also has t.v. spots, trailers and four trailers of other movies from Lions Gate Films. The only flaw of this effective film is the last act of the film, where it's becomes increasingly disconnected. But still, there is plenty to enjoy in the movie. This film is Based on a Novel by Bret Easton Ellis (Less Than Zero, The Rules of Attraction). Co-Writer of the picture, Turner appears in an amusing cameo. Super 35. (**** ½/*****).

great performance by Bale

tt0144084

When i first saw this movie, i didn't know what to expect, and after viewing it, i was confused and didn't know what to think. Was it a slasher movie? was a comedy? was it a horror movie? what did i just see. I read up on it some and found out that it was mostly a satire about the economic boom of the 80s rightly called "reagan-economics" and what one man goes through when he really can do anything he wants because he is so powerful and rich. It goes into things like respect of women and how men in the 80s cared more about what they wore, the way they looked and the music they listened to more than ever. Batemans rant about Phil Collins and his music right before he doubled up on a pair of hookers should go down in cinema history. Christian Bale gives a stellar performance here. Every time i see him in a movie now days, i just think back to American Psycho as his really star making performance. If you want to see someone put on an acting clinic, check out his performance. Fans of the book, should be happy, i haven't read it but i hear from people that have, say it is more like the book than not like other movies that are based on books. If you are a Bale fan you will be greatly pleased as this is the movie that he will probably be remembered for, also Batman Begins, but thats another story.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-762

ur2557524

title: great performance by Bale review: When i first saw this movie, i didn't know what to expect, and after viewing it, i was confused and didn't know what to think. Was it a slasher movie? was a comedy? was it a horror movie? what did i just see. I read up on it some and found out that it was mostly a satire about the economic boom of the 80s rightly called "reagan-economics" and what one man goes through when he really can do anything he wants because he is so powerful and rich. It goes into things like respect of women and how men in the 80s cared more about what they wore, the way they looked and the music they listened to more than ever. Batemans rant about Phil Collins and his music right before he doubled up on a pair of hookers should go down in cinema history. Christian Bale gives a stellar performance here. Every time i see him in a movie now days, i just think back to American Psycho as his really star making performance. If you want to see someone put on an acting clinic, check out his performance. Fans of the book, should be happy, i haven't read it but i hear from people that have, say it is more like the book than not like other movies that are based on books. If you are a Bale fan you will be greatly pleased as this is the movie that he will probably be remembered for, also Batman Begins, but thats another story.

Christian Bale is marvelous here. His best performance.

tt0144084

Christian Bale is one of the best actors of our time, and he really showed it back in 2000 with his underrated performance in American Psycho. American Psycho, in my opinion, is his best performance. With every film he does, he always tries very hard, and you can tell with his performance in this film.Bale plays Patrick Bateman, a wall street worker who cares too much about appearance and not really about anyone else. But secretly, he is a sociopath that murders a ton of people, including hookers and co-workers.Thats basically the movie. It may not sound like a lot, but oh yes it is. The scenes with the murder are the most engaging. American Psycho is non stop entertaining, and its Bale who holds out interest.Never before have I seen a more disturbed maniac than Patrick Bateman. Bale brings the life into this psycho, and you can't take your eyes off of him. Though he's such a horrible person, I liked him, and its hard to like a sociopath. But when Christian Bale is that sociopath, its hard not to.Bale is the heart and soul of American psycho. Besides him, you won't be able to take your eyes off of it, and there is some dark humor here that takes off. I have seen American psycho numerous times, and there are tons of scenes that I look forward to. As demented as this film is, its also brilliant.A

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1037

ur22881716

title: Christian Bale is marvelous here. His best performance. review: Christian Bale is one of the best actors of our time, and he really showed it back in 2000 with his underrated performance in American Psycho. American Psycho, in my opinion, is his best performance. With every film he does, he always tries very hard, and you can tell with his performance in this film.Bale plays Patrick Bateman, a wall street worker who cares too much about appearance and not really about anyone else. But secretly, he is a sociopath that murders a ton of people, including hookers and co-workers.Thats basically the movie. It may not sound like a lot, but oh yes it is. The scenes with the murder are the most engaging. American Psycho is non stop entertaining, and its Bale who holds out interest.Never before have I seen a more disturbed maniac than Patrick Bateman. Bale brings the life into this psycho, and you can't take your eyes off of him. Though he's such a horrible person, I liked him, and its hard to like a sociopath. But when Christian Bale is that sociopath, its hard not to.Bale is the heart and soul of American psycho. Besides him, you won't be able to take your eyes off of it, and there is some dark humor here that takes off. I have seen American psycho numerous times, and there are tons of scenes that I look forward to. As demented as this film is, its also brilliant.A

A violence, surreal film

tt0144084

American Psycho was based on a successful novel, which led to being a film with a cult following. It is the most successful film of Mary Harron's career, and Christian Bale's first lead role as an adult actor.Patrick Bateman (Christain Bale), is a very rich, successful 27-year-old man working for a major Wall Street investment company. He lives in a nice apartment in the Big Apple, physically very fit, hansom, has a organized routine, and is completely insane. He lives the high live of an executive, fancy restaurants, beautiful women, recreational drugs, etc... There is an even darker side to his world, involving affairs, prostitution and of course very violence murder. His blood lust starts to increase and can't content himself. He murders tramps and prostitutes, he suffers from extreme anger and envy. He murders Paul Allen (Jared Leto), another successful young man: his disappearance is investigated Detective Kimball (Willem Dafoe). Patrick's mind starts to decline.This film is more surreal then I expected. It reminded very much of A Clockwork Orange and Taxi Driver, both classics, but looking at the upper end of society, not the working class. It does show a man who mind does break down and his looking for an identity in a hollow world. It is a satire of the high-powered 80s New York. It has a strange dark humour in places that works.Of course this film has a great cast. This is the film that made Bale's adult career. He has a great performance as a psychopath and shows his talent. I particularly enjoyed the scene when he murders Paul Allen where he was like Jim Carrey. Jared Leto only has a small role but is good as he normally is. So was Cara Seymour as a prostitute who is brought into Patrick's corrupted world.Harron directs a very violence, but this isn't torture porn like Hostel or the Saw films. There is reason behind it, and she only shows what she has to. She shows that she has a competent hand behind the camera and a decent art-house director. She handles the mix between reality and fantasy, leaving the film to be very ambiguous.A decent watch.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-991

ur17571044

title: A violence, surreal film review: American Psycho was based on a successful novel, which led to being a film with a cult following. It is the most successful film of Mary Harron's career, and Christian Bale's first lead role as an adult actor.Patrick Bateman (Christain Bale), is a very rich, successful 27-year-old man working for a major Wall Street investment company. He lives in a nice apartment in the Big Apple, physically very fit, hansom, has a organized routine, and is completely insane. He lives the high live of an executive, fancy restaurants, beautiful women, recreational drugs, etc... There is an even darker side to his world, involving affairs, prostitution and of course very violence murder. His blood lust starts to increase and can't content himself. He murders tramps and prostitutes, he suffers from extreme anger and envy. He murders Paul Allen (Jared Leto), another successful young man: his disappearance is investigated Detective Kimball (Willem Dafoe). Patrick's mind starts to decline.This film is more surreal then I expected. It reminded very much of A Clockwork Orange and Taxi Driver, both classics, but looking at the upper end of society, not the working class. It does show a man who mind does break down and his looking for an identity in a hollow world. It is a satire of the high-powered 80s New York. It has a strange dark humour in places that works.Of course this film has a great cast. This is the film that made Bale's adult career. He has a great performance as a psychopath and shows his talent. I particularly enjoyed the scene when he murders Paul Allen where he was like Jim Carrey. Jared Leto only has a small role but is good as he normally is. So was Cara Seymour as a prostitute who is brought into Patrick's corrupted world.Harron directs a very violence, but this isn't torture porn like Hostel or the Saw films. There is reason behind it, and she only shows what she has to. She shows that she has a competent hand behind the camera and a decent art-house director. She handles the mix between reality and fantasy, leaving the film to be very ambiguous.A decent watch.

I was returning some videotapes…American Psycho

tt0144084

Oh, the 1980's, such happy times. Excess in full force, younger upstart yuppies making money that they could only imagine as children while doing as little work as possible. When did going to lunch, out to dinner at restaurants booked for months in advance, and vying for the biggest ego constitute an occupation worth six figures? Only in America. Bret Easton Ellis' novel was looked upon as very demeaning to women in its portrayal of these masochistic males using their girls as trophies and toys, so who better to adapt and direct a feature of American Psycho than a woman such as Mary Harron. Her film version is a satire on society's fall to materialism and conformity, showing how along with the money and power comes a way of life that is unavoidable. Our lead, Patrick Bateman at one point tells his girlfriend that he is trying to fit in. He is catering to the image of masculinity and success despite his urges to break free into his own lifestyle of gratuitous sex and violence. He says early on that Patrick Bateman doesn't exist, he is an empty face hiding the darkness underneath, the scheming and desire to live on the fringe of society and be able to get away with it amongst the self-absorbed snobs running around blind to anything but themselves.The story hinges on the devolution of humanity for Bateman as the vapid existence he lives becomes too much to handle. Everything in his world is superficial, from his girlfriend, to his lithium-using mistress, to his meaningless job and his need to look and live better than his peers. One of the best scenes comes from a comparison of business cards and whose is more subtly beautiful due to the whiteness of stock and uniqueness of font. Each card is identical to the layperson, but to these men, obsessed with appearances, they couldn't be more different and inferior. It is such a cookie-cutter lifestyle that no one even knows whom each other is. They will call "friends" by the wrong name and then proceed to talk about how much of a reject the person they are actually speaking to is, unknowing they are insulting them to their face. It is one thing to allow the mistakes to happen, it's another to revel in it and pretend to be that other person, because really, what is the difference? Both wear the same suits, have an affinity for the same glasses, and get their hair cut at the same salon.Because of this duality in identity, Bateman is given a carte blanche to live out his dark fantasies at night. If people think he is someone else when he is raping and murdering people, he is able to live without risk of being caught. Heck, he doesn't even need an alibi because his friends are 100% positive he was out with them the night he was committing heinous crimes. Between the drugs and carbon copy personas, no one knows who they are let alone who they are with. Therefore, Bateman can do whatever he wants, and does. He lives in his own world, waxing pontifically about asinine drivel before going in for the kill.I don't think anyone could have pulled this role off besides Christian Bale. His demeanor is so likable that no one would think twice about feeling safe with him. As a model he meets and later dispatches says, "there is something good about you." Even when in rage, he retains his smile and jovial attitude, praising Phil Collins' talent for bringing Genesis out of their arty funk and Whitney Houston for four of the greatest songs ever written on her album appropriately titled Whitney Houston. The way his delivery makes the most benign topics jump out at you is amazing and when the blood splatters onto his face, you can't help but laugh through the carnage. No other film will make you see the humor in serial killing for sport. All Bateman does is what we fantasize about everyday, breaking free from the monotony and acting on our impulses to punish the stupid and the weak. As he tells a homeless man before killing him, "why don't you get a job?" It's the man's negative attitude and laziness that prevents him from succeeding in life. This is a time of self-pride and preservation, albeit an excess of said pride, that allows everyone to look at themselves as God. Even a diatribe about the troubles in South Africa and the US with poverty comes off as staged and humorous. Not because Bateman feels these subject are more relevant than Sri Lanka, but because he really doesn't care about any of it.Shot beautifully with many static frames focusing on the person's face in action rather than the activity happening around them, American Psycho is gorgeous to behold. The stark sanitation of everything: clean apartments, pristine bodies, and impeccable dressing style counters lovely with the chaos that Bateman brings from his bloodlust.It is Leto's disappearance that lends to the fact of whether what we see actually happens. Did Bateman kill him and continue with his atrocities afterwards or did Leto really go to London, where people had lunch with him, and the murder was just imagination? No one can ever really know since no character ever knows whom it is they are talking to. Perhaps those who saw Leto really saw others who pretended to be him mistakenly, or maybe he was there still alive and breathing. This is the confusion with insanity and chaos, one can't tell the difference between truth and fiction; the line blurs to infinity. American Psycho could be a tale of the psyche or a story of murderous rage left unchecked, it's really up to you to decide.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-934

ur2020154

title: I was returning some videotapes…American Psycho review: Oh, the 1980's, such happy times. Excess in full force, younger upstart yuppies making money that they could only imagine as children while doing as little work as possible. When did going to lunch, out to dinner at restaurants booked for months in advance, and vying for the biggest ego constitute an occupation worth six figures? Only in America. Bret Easton Ellis' novel was looked upon as very demeaning to women in its portrayal of these masochistic males using their girls as trophies and toys, so who better to adapt and direct a feature of American Psycho than a woman such as Mary Harron. Her film version is a satire on society's fall to materialism and conformity, showing how along with the money and power comes a way of life that is unavoidable. Our lead, Patrick Bateman at one point tells his girlfriend that he is trying to fit in. He is catering to the image of masculinity and success despite his urges to break free into his own lifestyle of gratuitous sex and violence. He says early on that Patrick Bateman doesn't exist, he is an empty face hiding the darkness underneath, the scheming and desire to live on the fringe of society and be able to get away with it amongst the self-absorbed snobs running around blind to anything but themselves.The story hinges on the devolution of humanity for Bateman as the vapid existence he lives becomes too much to handle. Everything in his world is superficial, from his girlfriend, to his lithium-using mistress, to his meaningless job and his need to look and live better than his peers. One of the best scenes comes from a comparison of business cards and whose is more subtly beautiful due to the whiteness of stock and uniqueness of font. Each card is identical to the layperson, but to these men, obsessed with appearances, they couldn't be more different and inferior. It is such a cookie-cutter lifestyle that no one even knows whom each other is. They will call "friends" by the wrong name and then proceed to talk about how much of a reject the person they are actually speaking to is, unknowing they are insulting them to their face. It is one thing to allow the mistakes to happen, it's another to revel in it and pretend to be that other person, because really, what is the difference? Both wear the same suits, have an affinity for the same glasses, and get their hair cut at the same salon.Because of this duality in identity, Bateman is given a carte blanche to live out his dark fantasies at night. If people think he is someone else when he is raping and murdering people, he is able to live without risk of being caught. Heck, he doesn't even need an alibi because his friends are 100% positive he was out with them the night he was committing heinous crimes. Between the drugs and carbon copy personas, no one knows who they are let alone who they are with. Therefore, Bateman can do whatever he wants, and does. He lives in his own world, waxing pontifically about asinine drivel before going in for the kill.I don't think anyone could have pulled this role off besides Christian Bale. His demeanor is so likable that no one would think twice about feeling safe with him. As a model he meets and later dispatches says, "there is something good about you." Even when in rage, he retains his smile and jovial attitude, praising Phil Collins' talent for bringing Genesis out of their arty funk and Whitney Houston for four of the greatest songs ever written on her album appropriately titled Whitney Houston. The way his delivery makes the most benign topics jump out at you is amazing and when the blood splatters onto his face, you can't help but laugh through the carnage. No other film will make you see the humor in serial killing for sport. All Bateman does is what we fantasize about everyday, breaking free from the monotony and acting on our impulses to punish the stupid and the weak. As he tells a homeless man before killing him, "why don't you get a job?" It's the man's negative attitude and laziness that prevents him from succeeding in life. This is a time of self-pride and preservation, albeit an excess of said pride, that allows everyone to look at themselves as God. Even a diatribe about the troubles in South Africa and the US with poverty comes off as staged and humorous. Not because Bateman feels these subject are more relevant than Sri Lanka, but because he really doesn't care about any of it.Shot beautifully with many static frames focusing on the person's face in action rather than the activity happening around them, American Psycho is gorgeous to behold. The stark sanitation of everything: clean apartments, pristine bodies, and impeccable dressing style counters lovely with the chaos that Bateman brings from his bloodlust.It is Leto's disappearance that lends to the fact of whether what we see actually happens. Did Bateman kill him and continue with his atrocities afterwards or did Leto really go to London, where people had lunch with him, and the murder was just imagination? No one can ever really know since no character ever knows whom it is they are talking to. Perhaps those who saw Leto really saw others who pretended to be him mistakenly, or maybe he was there still alive and breathing. This is the confusion with insanity and chaos, one can't tell the difference between truth and fiction; the line blurs to infinity. American Psycho could be a tale of the psyche or a story of murderous rage left unchecked, it's really up to you to decide.

A cold, heartless grotesquely brilliant psychologically demanding film

tt0144084

American Psycho is a flaringly unique film that follows the mind warping story of Patrick Bateman. A psychologically troubled man that on the surface is a successful gentleman yet behind the scenes he has alarming temptations that involve blood and torture.I feel you would be underselling the film to call it a slasher, this is much better than a slasher. This is a psychological investigation of the mind of a deeply troubled individual. Sure there are scenes that nod towards slasher movies but there are also glimpses of inventive, artistic film-making that some how puts us onto the same level of this American Psycho. Empathy it produces? Perhaps. But thats not the point, this shuddering film presents temptation from the inside rather than the outside. This is where this film succeeds and gains its reputation as more than a slasher movie.Harron's direction is both stirring and comprehensive. Bale proves himself to be a very worthy actor with his adaptation of Ellis' disturbed character. Obsession is all his character is about. Ruthless obsession, taking over his life.American Psycho is a dynamically original gem of a film that is both coarse and thought provoking 8/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-938

ur9964186

title: A cold, heartless grotesquely brilliant psychologically demanding film review: American Psycho is a flaringly unique film that follows the mind warping story of Patrick Bateman. A psychologically troubled man that on the surface is a successful gentleman yet behind the scenes he has alarming temptations that involve blood and torture.I feel you would be underselling the film to call it a slasher, this is much better than a slasher. This is a psychological investigation of the mind of a deeply troubled individual. Sure there are scenes that nod towards slasher movies but there are also glimpses of inventive, artistic film-making that some how puts us onto the same level of this American Psycho. Empathy it produces? Perhaps. But thats not the point, this shuddering film presents temptation from the inside rather than the outside. This is where this film succeeds and gains its reputation as more than a slasher movie.Harron's direction is both stirring and comprehensive. Bale proves himself to be a very worthy actor with his adaptation of Ellis' disturbed character. Obsession is all his character is about. Ruthless obsession, taking over his life.American Psycho is a dynamically original gem of a film that is both coarse and thought provoking 8/10

A dark look at the subconscious mind of the typical American male.

tt0144084

American Psycho seems to be concerned with what it is that Americans really think about, and puts forth a rather disturbing assertion. This movie reminds me of an old video I saw of Jim Carrey back when he was a stand-up comedian. I think this was even before his Saturday Night Live days. He was talking about how we all have these weird, violent urges many times a day, but luckily we all have that voice of reason in our heads that tells us not to act on these urges (`Ah-ah-ah, turning the car into oncoming traffic – is counterproductive!!'). Christian Bale's Patrick Bateman is a guy who has those normal urges, just like any normal American, but lacks the voice of reason. He acts on his urges, and basically becomes what any of us would become if we did the same thing. Sure, I'm kind of going out on a limb to say that any normal American would turn into the murderous monster that Patrick Bateman is, but there is definitely an element of truth to that. If everyone acted on their urges, the world would be a nightmarish place. The movie starts out by introducing Bateman as a typical young businessman in the tradition of the guys in Boiler Room. Completely obsessed with money, superficiality, a dizzying array of skin creams and ointments, reservations at the trendiest restaurants in town, the goofy names for the colors of his business cards, etc. You know, things that normal people don't care about. But of course, Patrick Bateman is not a normal guy. These are all things that reflect the heavy undercurrent of sexual symbolism. This film is packed with references to the insecurity of the typical male about his sexuality, and Bateman acts all of these things out in every way from the kind of business card that he has to the kinds of people that he kills and how he kills them. Not a pretty idea, but the film definitely has something to say. This is not just some frivolous exercise in sex and violence and murder and rape, the movie has a message to deliver and it knows how to get some attention.American Beauty had a million things to say, not the least of which had to do with modern American society's obsession with superficiality and skin-deep beauty. American Psycho has some similar things to say, most of them much darker than anything in American Beauty (which had some pretty dark stuff in it!), but not delivered in quite the same stunningly skilled and complex package. American Psycho is a masculine film about American males and directed by a woman, which is just as well because a male director may have been a little insecure about portraying a deeper level of male consciousness in such a brutally accurate manner.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-558

ur0562732

title: A dark look at the subconscious mind of the typical American male. review: American Psycho seems to be concerned with what it is that Americans really think about, and puts forth a rather disturbing assertion. This movie reminds me of an old video I saw of Jim Carrey back when he was a stand-up comedian. I think this was even before his Saturday Night Live days. He was talking about how we all have these weird, violent urges many times a day, but luckily we all have that voice of reason in our heads that tells us not to act on these urges (`Ah-ah-ah, turning the car into oncoming traffic – is counterproductive!!'). Christian Bale's Patrick Bateman is a guy who has those normal urges, just like any normal American, but lacks the voice of reason. He acts on his urges, and basically becomes what any of us would become if we did the same thing. Sure, I'm kind of going out on a limb to say that any normal American would turn into the murderous monster that Patrick Bateman is, but there is definitely an element of truth to that. If everyone acted on their urges, the world would be a nightmarish place. The movie starts out by introducing Bateman as a typical young businessman in the tradition of the guys in Boiler Room. Completely obsessed with money, superficiality, a dizzying array of skin creams and ointments, reservations at the trendiest restaurants in town, the goofy names for the colors of his business cards, etc. You know, things that normal people don't care about. But of course, Patrick Bateman is not a normal guy. These are all things that reflect the heavy undercurrent of sexual symbolism. This film is packed with references to the insecurity of the typical male about his sexuality, and Bateman acts all of these things out in every way from the kind of business card that he has to the kinds of people that he kills and how he kills them. Not a pretty idea, but the film definitely has something to say. This is not just some frivolous exercise in sex and violence and murder and rape, the movie has a message to deliver and it knows how to get some attention.American Beauty had a million things to say, not the least of which had to do with modern American society's obsession with superficiality and skin-deep beauty. American Psycho has some similar things to say, most of them much darker than anything in American Beauty (which had some pretty dark stuff in it!), but not delivered in quite the same stunningly skilled and complex package. American Psycho is a masculine film about American males and directed by a woman, which is just as well because a male director may have been a little insecure about portraying a deeper level of male consciousness in such a brutally accurate manner.

A Joyride!

tt0144084

Based on Bret Easton Ellis's novel of the same name, 'American Psycho' is A Joyride! A one of its kind psychological thriller/dark comedy, that engages the viewer, despite the repulsive violence it depicts. 'American Psycho' Synopsis: A wealthy New York investment banking executive hides his alternate psychopathic ego from his co-workers and friends as he escalates deeper into his illogical, gratuitous fantasies.'American Psycho' works because the Screenplay Written by Mary Harron & Guinevere Turner, is sadistically engaging. Sure, its not a flawless film, but it still works largely, because the protagonist, Patrick Bateman, the psychopath, is an interesting character. His journey is full of blood & sadism, but he still appeals as a despicable leading man. Mary Harron's Direction is wild. Cinematography captures the violence as well as the madness, ably. Editing is good.Performance-Wise: Christian Bale as Patrick Bateman, the psychopath, is incredible. Bale has delivered amazing performances all through his impressive career, but his work in 'American Psycho' ranks amongst his finest. The Oscar-Winner is in complete form, yet again! In the supporting cast, Willem Dafoe & Jared Leto stand out.On the whole, 'American Psycho' is uninhibited & brutal. You need a strong stomach to absorb this one!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1099

ur8503729

title: A Joyride! review: Based on Bret Easton Ellis's novel of the same name, 'American Psycho' is A Joyride! A one of its kind psychological thriller/dark comedy, that engages the viewer, despite the repulsive violence it depicts. 'American Psycho' Synopsis: A wealthy New York investment banking executive hides his alternate psychopathic ego from his co-workers and friends as he escalates deeper into his illogical, gratuitous fantasies.'American Psycho' works because the Screenplay Written by Mary Harron & Guinevere Turner, is sadistically engaging. Sure, its not a flawless film, but it still works largely, because the protagonist, Patrick Bateman, the psychopath, is an interesting character. His journey is full of blood & sadism, but he still appeals as a despicable leading man. Mary Harron's Direction is wild. Cinematography captures the violence as well as the madness, ably. Editing is good.Performance-Wise: Christian Bale as Patrick Bateman, the psychopath, is incredible. Bale has delivered amazing performances all through his impressive career, but his work in 'American Psycho' ranks amongst his finest. The Oscar-Winner is in complete form, yet again! In the supporting cast, Willem Dafoe & Jared Leto stand out.On the whole, 'American Psycho' is uninhibited & brutal. You need a strong stomach to absorb this one!

Hilarious, Frightening, Smart

tt0144084

The thing about American Psycho is that there are many ways to react. In one regard, it is a horror/thrill movie. In another regard, it is hilarious to react and laugh at Christian Bales Character. Christian Bale did such an amazing job with his character that you can't help but laugh at some of his oddities. The script is so great that you can honestly pick out pages and pages of memorable lines. What people don't understand is that this isn't a movie that focuses on plot or story, it is merely about Christian Bale's character and how amazingly crazy he is. This movie gets a 10 for Bale's performance, the undeniably great lines, and the nice flow of the movie. American Psycho is a great movie and I recommend it!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-931

ur11211205

title: Hilarious, Frightening, Smart review: The thing about American Psycho is that there are many ways to react. In one regard, it is a horror/thrill movie. In another regard, it is hilarious to react and laugh at Christian Bales Character. Christian Bale did such an amazing job with his character that you can't help but laugh at some of his oddities. The script is so great that you can honestly pick out pages and pages of memorable lines. What people don't understand is that this isn't a movie that focuses on plot or story, it is merely about Christian Bale's character and how amazingly crazy he is. This movie gets a 10 for Bale's performance, the undeniably great lines, and the nice flow of the movie. American Psycho is a great movie and I recommend it!

A dense and bizarre psychological thriller

tt0144084

Welcome to the mind of Patrick Bateman: Wall Street broker, fine diner, playboy, oh and serial killer extroadinare. Bateman claims only part of himself is based in humanity and similarly, only part of this film is based on reason or sanity."American Psycho" is easily one of the top five most deranged films of all time. Those with a taste for the bizarre and an interest in the abstraction of realism will find it great, those who prefer movies grounded in, well, something, will at the very least be amused by the perverse nature of the plot and Bateman's psychotic character.Christian Bale does some pretty great work with Bateman, giving us a very dissociative identity look to the clearly insane killer, showing him as very cold and crafty while also emotional and irrational. His character jumps all over the place and Bale really has the look and skills to play all those kinds of characters.I have to say that while I like Mary Harron's visual choices with the film, overall I don't know if we got deep enough into the meddle that is this plot and the cavernous mind of Bateman. The thin line between reality/imagination, sanity/insanity is very clear, but the social commentary is sort of overshadowed by the film's taste for the absurd. I definitely think there's richness, but there is a lot of thickness too.I suppose if you come at this film with a more abstract perspective than a desire to sort things out and make sense of them, you'll find more things to enjoy about the film other than Bateman's philosophical conversations about sellout recording artists while he indulges in one fantasy or another. It's strange, and while strange is good, strange also needs to be handled a bit more thoughtfully than in "Psycho."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-942

ur2496397

title: A dense and bizarre psychological thriller review: Welcome to the mind of Patrick Bateman: Wall Street broker, fine diner, playboy, oh and serial killer extroadinare. Bateman claims only part of himself is based in humanity and similarly, only part of this film is based on reason or sanity."American Psycho" is easily one of the top five most deranged films of all time. Those with a taste for the bizarre and an interest in the abstraction of realism will find it great, those who prefer movies grounded in, well, something, will at the very least be amused by the perverse nature of the plot and Bateman's psychotic character.Christian Bale does some pretty great work with Bateman, giving us a very dissociative identity look to the clearly insane killer, showing him as very cold and crafty while also emotional and irrational. His character jumps all over the place and Bale really has the look and skills to play all those kinds of characters.I have to say that while I like Mary Harron's visual choices with the film, overall I don't know if we got deep enough into the meddle that is this plot and the cavernous mind of Bateman. The thin line between reality/imagination, sanity/insanity is very clear, but the social commentary is sort of overshadowed by the film's taste for the absurd. I definitely think there's richness, but there is a lot of thickness too.I suppose if you come at this film with a more abstract perspective than a desire to sort things out and make sense of them, you'll find more things to enjoy about the film other than Bateman's philosophical conversations about sellout recording artists while he indulges in one fantasy or another. It's strange, and while strange is good, strange also needs to be handled a bit more thoughtfully than in "Psycho."

boe_dye's slap happy review.

tt0144084

I saw this movie about 2 years ago from a friend who, in retrospect, to a certain degree patterned his life after patrick bateman.The title is certainly misleading to some who might think this is a horror/slasher flick. and while it may have a bit of blood, it is more on the order of a socio/psychological character study on what happens to an elitist nobody trying to fit in, and never quite fitting in.Now, i can't speak for the book that it is based on as i have not read it. however it does certainly stand on it's own two feet.The cast is absolutely remarkable remaking the 80's yuppie scene. the music, the clothes, the attitudes of the young urban professional trust fund babies is so well done, that it is too good to be a caricature.Movies like this that are so good rarely need to have long diatribes written about them as they will most certainly speak for themselves, so i will leave this review with two more points.Point one, this movie should be taken somewhat introspectively. don't just watch it and then put it away on the shelf or return it to your choice of rental establishment. think about it. think about what happened, why it happened. it is an intelligent film. somewhat artsy at times, but nothing that is so esoteric that you have to be an initiate to understand what happened.Point two. if you do enjoy this movie and you decide to learn more about it and the person who had written it, you will inevitably find out that he also wrote "rules of attraction" (in fact james van der beak played batemans younger brother in that movie, although it wasn't spoken about...). be forewarned that if you do enjoy this movie and go out of your way to see "rules of attraction", don't expect to see the same kind of depth. in fact, don't see it at all because it was a waste of time.Now if you will excuse me, i have to go and return some video tapes...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-895

ur15899300

title: boe_dye's slap happy review. review: I saw this movie about 2 years ago from a friend who, in retrospect, to a certain degree patterned his life after patrick bateman.The title is certainly misleading to some who might think this is a horror/slasher flick. and while it may have a bit of blood, it is more on the order of a socio/psychological character study on what happens to an elitist nobody trying to fit in, and never quite fitting in.Now, i can't speak for the book that it is based on as i have not read it. however it does certainly stand on it's own two feet.The cast is absolutely remarkable remaking the 80's yuppie scene. the music, the clothes, the attitudes of the young urban professional trust fund babies is so well done, that it is too good to be a caricature.Movies like this that are so good rarely need to have long diatribes written about them as they will most certainly speak for themselves, so i will leave this review with two more points.Point one, this movie should be taken somewhat introspectively. don't just watch it and then put it away on the shelf or return it to your choice of rental establishment. think about it. think about what happened, why it happened. it is an intelligent film. somewhat artsy at times, but nothing that is so esoteric that you have to be an initiate to understand what happened.Point two. if you do enjoy this movie and you decide to learn more about it and the person who had written it, you will inevitably find out that he also wrote "rules of attraction" (in fact james van der beak played batemans younger brother in that movie, although it wasn't spoken about...). be forewarned that if you do enjoy this movie and go out of your way to see "rules of attraction", don't expect to see the same kind of depth. in fact, don't see it at all because it was a waste of time.Now if you will excuse me, i have to go and return some video tapes...

Serial killers in business attire

tt0144084

"American Psycho" is a difficult film to review because one, it's never clear whether or not the events in the film are real, or are just a figment of Patrick Bateman's (Christian Bale) warped imagination. It's deliberately never stated and is something that is best left up to the viewer to decide. The Bret Easton Ellis novel from which this film is based, caused a stir upon its 1991 publishing, which satirized yuppie culture, Reaganomics-gone-amok, and crass materialism during the 1980s.As it would turn out, Bateman, a successful Wall Street investment banker, finally decides to give into an insatiable blood-lust that begins with the cold-blooded murder of a homeless man, followed by a colleague (Jared Leto), and an assortment of call girls and prostitutes. Why Bateman does these horrific things without provocation, purpose or explanation, is all part of the film's bizarre appeal and is not just for shock value.Billy Loomis (Skeet Ulrich in "Scream") rhetorically asked why did Hannibal Lecter eat people? Why did Jason Voorhees and Michael Myers slash up promiscuous teenagers in their respective film series? So why does Patrick Bateman butcher prostitutes in his apartment? Maybe because he's a pretty sick guy? Who knows. All this can be debated for hours on end in a criminal behavior class (for which I'm reviewing this as part of an assignment) about Bateman's motivations.Bateman does not fit the profile of any known serial murderer before him. He's educated, wealthy, respected by his co-workers, and has a well-preserved body to kill for (no pun intended). So why does he one night, out of the blue, decide to chop a guy's face in two with an ax? Nobody knows, but my theory is that he just does it for because he has an unquenchable blood-lust that he suddenly feels the impulse to give into. To the world at large, however, he retains his businessman persona. To his fiancée (Reese Witherspoon), he's an all right if not somewhat shallow guy to want to be engaged to. He's also very sensible: he's often the one to straighten out his colleagues when they make a**es of themselves in public by making racially insensitive remarks."American Psycho" takes a shockingly funny and horrific look at Bateman's twisted reality, all without the safety of a net. Director Mary Harron looks at the Wall Street world of male bravado, closet homosexuality, materialism, and masculinity without a single flinch. (Is there anything more blatantly homo-erotic than comparing the print on business cards?) When we look at this world, we wonder: Did the '80s really look like this? Did an insane Wall Street investment banker go on a naked rampage, chasing a hooker out of his apartment with a chainsaw?Perhaps they did (I was too young to remember), but Ellis certainly remembered, and caught considerable flak from it. That Bateman is able to wonder why his murder spree goes unpunished, why he can't inflict his inner pain onto an uncaring world and why a detective named Kimball (Willem Dafoe) doesn't think to ask him harder questions about his nocturnal activities, all escape him, and us. "American Psycho" is a confusing, funny, and oft-shocking expose of a world that is best forgotten in history, but will still be nonetheless fascinating to criminal justice and psychology majors until the end of time.10/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-851

ur0892646

title: Serial killers in business attire review: "American Psycho" is a difficult film to review because one, it's never clear whether or not the events in the film are real, or are just a figment of Patrick Bateman's (Christian Bale) warped imagination. It's deliberately never stated and is something that is best left up to the viewer to decide. The Bret Easton Ellis novel from which this film is based, caused a stir upon its 1991 publishing, which satirized yuppie culture, Reaganomics-gone-amok, and crass materialism during the 1980s.As it would turn out, Bateman, a successful Wall Street investment banker, finally decides to give into an insatiable blood-lust that begins with the cold-blooded murder of a homeless man, followed by a colleague (Jared Leto), and an assortment of call girls and prostitutes. Why Bateman does these horrific things without provocation, purpose or explanation, is all part of the film's bizarre appeal and is not just for shock value.Billy Loomis (Skeet Ulrich in "Scream") rhetorically asked why did Hannibal Lecter eat people? Why did Jason Voorhees and Michael Myers slash up promiscuous teenagers in their respective film series? So why does Patrick Bateman butcher prostitutes in his apartment? Maybe because he's a pretty sick guy? Who knows. All this can be debated for hours on end in a criminal behavior class (for which I'm reviewing this as part of an assignment) about Bateman's motivations.Bateman does not fit the profile of any known serial murderer before him. He's educated, wealthy, respected by his co-workers, and has a well-preserved body to kill for (no pun intended). So why does he one night, out of the blue, decide to chop a guy's face in two with an ax? Nobody knows, but my theory is that he just does it for because he has an unquenchable blood-lust that he suddenly feels the impulse to give into. To the world at large, however, he retains his businessman persona. To his fiancée (Reese Witherspoon), he's an all right if not somewhat shallow guy to want to be engaged to. He's also very sensible: he's often the one to straighten out his colleagues when they make a**es of themselves in public by making racially insensitive remarks."American Psycho" takes a shockingly funny and horrific look at Bateman's twisted reality, all without the safety of a net. Director Mary Harron looks at the Wall Street world of male bravado, closet homosexuality, materialism, and masculinity without a single flinch. (Is there anything more blatantly homo-erotic than comparing the print on business cards?) When we look at this world, we wonder: Did the '80s really look like this? Did an insane Wall Street investment banker go on a naked rampage, chasing a hooker out of his apartment with a chainsaw?Perhaps they did (I was too young to remember), but Ellis certainly remembered, and caught considerable flak from it. That Bateman is able to wonder why his murder spree goes unpunished, why he can't inflict his inner pain onto an uncaring world and why a detective named Kimball (Willem Dafoe) doesn't think to ask him harder questions about his nocturnal activities, all escape him, and us. "American Psycho" is a confusing, funny, and oft-shocking expose of a world that is best forgotten in history, but will still be nonetheless fascinating to criminal justice and psychology majors until the end of time.10/10

Psycho Groupie Cocaine Crazy

tt0144084

I have just crossed with this DVD; for me American Psycho was one of those films that you know about its existence and you know that probably will be for your taste but you never watch it. Of course now I'm glad I finally watched this film. Anyway, it has a character that goes to an extreme and that deliver amusing situations from a "world" where a presentation card is amazingly relevant for the satisfaction of a person. The film moves really fast so it is impossible not to be attached to it with its many unique situations: at a point is absolute unique and also hilarious to hear the words that Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) express about his favourite music with such seriousness. In this character Bale is simply terrific, probably his best work to date, and the support cast is full of familiar faces: Willem Dafoe, Jared Leto, Justin Theroux and Chloë Sevigny and all making great performances.In short, American Psycho is a very recommendable film and it is very easy to enjoy. It is all about the mind. 9.5 out of 10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-932

ur14207038

title: Psycho Groupie Cocaine Crazy review: I have just crossed with this DVD; for me American Psycho was one of those films that you know about its existence and you know that probably will be for your taste but you never watch it. Of course now I'm glad I finally watched this film. Anyway, it has a character that goes to an extreme and that deliver amusing situations from a "world" where a presentation card is amazingly relevant for the satisfaction of a person. The film moves really fast so it is impossible not to be attached to it with its many unique situations: at a point is absolute unique and also hilarious to hear the words that Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) express about his favourite music with such seriousness. In this character Bale is simply terrific, probably his best work to date, and the support cast is full of familiar faces: Willem Dafoe, Jared Leto, Justin Theroux and Chloë Sevigny and all making great performances.In short, American Psycho is a very recommendable film and it is very easy to enjoy. It is all about the mind. 9.5 out of 10

"Flawless"

tt0144084

Hello fellow readers, today I'll be talking about what I think is a great film. Christian Bale began his high roller career just a few years ago and this film started it all. In this film he acts as a serial killer who is literally worse than many real ones. This was also one of his best roles in a film, along with Batman and Dicky Eklund in "the fighter" (2010) The film has disturbing moments as well as funny moments like the confession part at the end. This is one film I really enjoy and like to watch, I recommend it to all, over 18 that is! I'd probably rate the film a 8.1 as it really does deserve it. This film is so nicely done that I'm really not sure if I like Alfred Hitchcock's original or this. And so that concludes my review and I'll be seeing you next time. Check out my previous reviews or follow my further ones.-AMERICAN PSYCHO

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1106

ur42577300

title: "Flawless" review: Hello fellow readers, today I'll be talking about what I think is a great film. Christian Bale began his high roller career just a few years ago and this film started it all. In this film he acts as a serial killer who is literally worse than many real ones. This was also one of his best roles in a film, along with Batman and Dicky Eklund in "the fighter" (2010) The film has disturbing moments as well as funny moments like the confession part at the end. This is one film I really enjoy and like to watch, I recommend it to all, over 18 that is! I'd probably rate the film a 8.1 as it really does deserve it. This film is so nicely done that I'm really not sure if I like Alfred Hitchcock's original or this. And so that concludes my review and I'll be seeing you next time. Check out my previous reviews or follow my further ones.-AMERICAN PSYCHO

Strangely odd

tt0144084

"American Psycho" isn't a clichéd thriller involving a serial killer as always-- at least. This film has a weird story about a man obsessed with his body who kills lots of people, getting away with murder very strangely. For instance, there are cops and cops in front of him shooting him but they miss all the shots, while he just shoots twice or three times and the police cars explode out of nowhere. His name is Patrick Bateman and he proves to be a very annoying man, talking and talking about the most irritating things on earth. And Christian Bale isn't that good in this character; when he cried, I thought it was the character acting to fool people, but actually, it's the actor himself acting lame. Not to mention the irritating conversations about restaurants and reservations.The good thing about this film is the fact that it's oddly very entertaining; aside that, it shows no originality, surprise or strong performances, but spending 102 minutes in this isn't a total waste of time.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1039

ur16558990

title: Strangely odd review: "American Psycho" isn't a clichéd thriller involving a serial killer as always-- at least. This film has a weird story about a man obsessed with his body who kills lots of people, getting away with murder very strangely. For instance, there are cops and cops in front of him shooting him but they miss all the shots, while he just shoots twice or three times and the police cars explode out of nowhere. His name is Patrick Bateman and he proves to be a very annoying man, talking and talking about the most irritating things on earth. And Christian Bale isn't that good in this character; when he cried, I thought it was the character acting to fool people, but actually, it's the actor himself acting lame. Not to mention the irritating conversations about restaurants and reservations.The good thing about this film is the fact that it's oddly very entertaining; aside that, it shows no originality, surprise or strong performances, but spending 102 minutes in this isn't a total waste of time.

The Best Satire Since Fight Club

tt0144084

I like the satire and thriller genres. American Psycho is a spoof of yuppie-culture in the 1980s. The movie is basically about how some people see material possessions as more important than human life, which Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) and his murders symbolize. The movie is based on the controversial bestselling novel by Brett Easton Ellis (Less Than Zero, The Rules of Attraction).Patrick Bateman has everything, a beautiful fiancé (Reese Witherspoon), wealth, a great job at Pierce & Pierce, a big circle of friends, nice clothes and most of all: an addiction to murder. Patrick Bateman descends further and further into insanity as his murder spree goes along. He murders and sometimes rapes colleagues or even strangers without hesitation. This great film also features a great supporting cast including Willem Dafoe as Detective Kimball and Chloe Sevigny as Bateman's secretary, Jean.American Psycho is a disturbing and intelligent trip into the life and exploits of a madman. This is probably Christian Bale's greatest performance, it shocks me that he didn't get an Academy Award nomination. But then again, it isn't that surprising considering that the Academy usually gives their happy movies the awards. Since when has Christian Bale been disappointing?Patrick Bateman is an interesting character. Who is likable at certain points but mostly downright despicable. Roger Ebert from the Chicago Sun-Times even praised Bale's performance as "heroic in the way he allows the character to leap joyfully into despicability; there is no instinct for self-preservation here, and that is one mark of a good actor". Indeed, he is right.The movie also has a lot of humor. Mainly the humor comes from the character's personalities. Each of these characters that Bateman hangs out with are total embodiments of the many stereotypes about yuppies. American Psycho has even spawned an LARGE cult-following. People on the IMDb message board even constantly quote the film, I have never seen that on any other board here. I guess that just shows how great the movie is. I hope that one day American Psycho earns a spot in the Top 250. I don't see how it hasn't made it yet.American Psycho is also not just about a man running around killing people, like another consumer satire, Chuck Palahnuik's Fight Club (I also recommend the film and the novel of that), American Psycho produces a good and true message about consumer culture and materialism. As I said, it is about how people sometimes see material possessions as even more important than human life.Here is a couple of notes about the fantastic book by Bret Easton Ellis and how it compares to the movie. The movie and the book are both great but the book, as usual, has so much more detail and you hear more of Bateman's sick thoughts. The movie is more like an examination of a sociopath's daily life while the book is basically a descent into Hell. It even starts with the lines from Dante's Inferno, "Abandon all hope ye who enter here."This movie almost did not get made. It had developed so much controversy from feminists and animal rights groups before and after it had been published due to its graphic violence. The filmmakers had to remove a lot of the graphic violence and disturbing acts that Patrick Bateman commits (including cannibalism, only mentioned in the movie and necrophilia, both are described in great detail). I wouldn't watch this movie without reading the book. Beware, if you don't have a strong stomach: do not read the book, I found it hard to read on some parts.10/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-973

ur12114282

title: The Best Satire Since Fight Club review: I like the satire and thriller genres. American Psycho is a spoof of yuppie-culture in the 1980s. The movie is basically about how some people see material possessions as more important than human life, which Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) and his murders symbolize. The movie is based on the controversial bestselling novel by Brett Easton Ellis (Less Than Zero, The Rules of Attraction).Patrick Bateman has everything, a beautiful fiancé (Reese Witherspoon), wealth, a great job at Pierce & Pierce, a big circle of friends, nice clothes and most of all: an addiction to murder. Patrick Bateman descends further and further into insanity as his murder spree goes along. He murders and sometimes rapes colleagues or even strangers without hesitation. This great film also features a great supporting cast including Willem Dafoe as Detective Kimball and Chloe Sevigny as Bateman's secretary, Jean.American Psycho is a disturbing and intelligent trip into the life and exploits of a madman. This is probably Christian Bale's greatest performance, it shocks me that he didn't get an Academy Award nomination. But then again, it isn't that surprising considering that the Academy usually gives their happy movies the awards. Since when has Christian Bale been disappointing?Patrick Bateman is an interesting character. Who is likable at certain points but mostly downright despicable. Roger Ebert from the Chicago Sun-Times even praised Bale's performance as "heroic in the way he allows the character to leap joyfully into despicability; there is no instinct for self-preservation here, and that is one mark of a good actor". Indeed, he is right.The movie also has a lot of humor. Mainly the humor comes from the character's personalities. Each of these characters that Bateman hangs out with are total embodiments of the many stereotypes about yuppies. American Psycho has even spawned an LARGE cult-following. People on the IMDb message board even constantly quote the film, I have never seen that on any other board here. I guess that just shows how great the movie is. I hope that one day American Psycho earns a spot in the Top 250. I don't see how it hasn't made it yet.American Psycho is also not just about a man running around killing people, like another consumer satire, Chuck Palahnuik's Fight Club (I also recommend the film and the novel of that), American Psycho produces a good and true message about consumer culture and materialism. As I said, it is about how people sometimes see material possessions as even more important than human life.Here is a couple of notes about the fantastic book by Bret Easton Ellis and how it compares to the movie. The movie and the book are both great but the book, as usual, has so much more detail and you hear more of Bateman's sick thoughts. The movie is more like an examination of a sociopath's daily life while the book is basically a descent into Hell. It even starts with the lines from Dante's Inferno, "Abandon all hope ye who enter here."This movie almost did not get made. It had developed so much controversy from feminists and animal rights groups before and after it had been published due to its graphic violence. The filmmakers had to remove a lot of the graphic violence and disturbing acts that Patrick Bateman commits (including cannibalism, only mentioned in the movie and necrophilia, both are described in great detail). I wouldn't watch this movie without reading the book. Beware, if you don't have a strong stomach: do not read the book, I found it hard to read on some parts.10/10

How The American Psycho Became The American Schmuckhole

tt0144084

My-oh-my! What a winning team! Feminist writer/director Mary Harron (who's F-N clueless about hardcore horror) and schlep-actor Christian Bale (who's F-N clueless. Period) Wow! What a winning team! By putting these 2 mental-midgets together for the making of American Psycho it resulted in a potentially promising horror movie getting reduced to its absolute candy-assed worst. (Well, hey, what the hell did I expect?) Some years ago I had actually read Ellis's novel (this film is based upon that story). And, I'm tellin' ya, even though the book wasn't much to rave about, at least it did deliver a substantially horrific punch.But, as expected, director Harron didn't do the book even the slightest bit of justice with it her snivelling screen-play, nor with her half-assed direction.With Ellis's book the total focus of the story was on the graphically-detailed descriptions of mutilation and dismemberment. And, believe me, his story was downright hideous in its detail.But, on the other hand, under Harron's direction, this F-N clueless bimbo completely sanitized the story's gore to the point of almost eliminating it right out of the story. And, this, in my opinion, was a big no-no.Harron literally reduced the ghastly-cruel American Psycho character to the level of being an disinfected American Namby-Pamby boy. And, this really sucked, big-time.This film didn't come anywhere near to generating the same gruesome horror that the book did. And, it should have been right on par with it.And, speaking about gross miscasting. It certainly didn't help matters, at all, that Christian Bale was the one chosen to play the title character, Patrick Bateman.Ha! What a pathetic joke Bale was in his part. His performance (as usual) was totally forgettable. He was nothing but a big, dreary bore who, under Harron's incompetent direction, came across as being some sort of a dimwit stand-up comic whose high-point in the story came about when he gave himself a facial.(Spare me!) On top of the terrible dialogue, the shallow characters, and the endless scenes involving expensive dinners in chic restaurants (ho-hum!), this picture (much to my annoyance) turned into one, long commercial, blatantly selling its 1980s, pop music soundtrack.A good part of American Psycho's story was dominated by one tired, old pop song after another. There were 30 songs in total. And, I swear that from this day onwards, I absolutely refuse to ever listen to the likes of Phil Collins, or Huey Lewis ever again.P.S.This is a perfect horror movie for people who want to see a horror movie that isn't a horror movie.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1136

ur27361979

title: How The American Psycho Became The American Schmuckhole review: My-oh-my! What a winning team! Feminist writer/director Mary Harron (who's F-N clueless about hardcore horror) and schlep-actor Christian Bale (who's F-N clueless. Period) Wow! What a winning team! By putting these 2 mental-midgets together for the making of American Psycho it resulted in a potentially promising horror movie getting reduced to its absolute candy-assed worst. (Well, hey, what the hell did I expect?) Some years ago I had actually read Ellis's novel (this film is based upon that story). And, I'm tellin' ya, even though the book wasn't much to rave about, at least it did deliver a substantially horrific punch.But, as expected, director Harron didn't do the book even the slightest bit of justice with it her snivelling screen-play, nor with her half-assed direction.With Ellis's book the total focus of the story was on the graphically-detailed descriptions of mutilation and dismemberment. And, believe me, his story was downright hideous in its detail.But, on the other hand, under Harron's direction, this F-N clueless bimbo completely sanitized the story's gore to the point of almost eliminating it right out of the story. And, this, in my opinion, was a big no-no.Harron literally reduced the ghastly-cruel American Psycho character to the level of being an disinfected American Namby-Pamby boy. And, this really sucked, big-time.This film didn't come anywhere near to generating the same gruesome horror that the book did. And, it should have been right on par with it.And, speaking about gross miscasting. It certainly didn't help matters, at all, that Christian Bale was the one chosen to play the title character, Patrick Bateman.Ha! What a pathetic joke Bale was in his part. His performance (as usual) was totally forgettable. He was nothing but a big, dreary bore who, under Harron's incompetent direction, came across as being some sort of a dimwit stand-up comic whose high-point in the story came about when he gave himself a facial.(Spare me!) On top of the terrible dialogue, the shallow characters, and the endless scenes involving expensive dinners in chic restaurants (ho-hum!), this picture (much to my annoyance) turned into one, long commercial, blatantly selling its 1980s, pop music soundtrack.A good part of American Psycho's story was dominated by one tired, old pop song after another. There were 30 songs in total. And, I swear that from this day onwards, I absolutely refuse to ever listen to the likes of Phil Collins, or Huey Lewis ever again.P.S.This is a perfect horror movie for people who want to see a horror movie that isn't a horror movie.

stellar adaptation of the misunderstood novel

tt0144084

"American Psycho," which was one of the most controversial novels published in the last decade, makes for one of the most stellar, elegant book-to-film translations in quite some time. An indictment of '80's excess, the focus is on a young, extremely wealthy Wall Street yuppie named Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale, who's excellent) whose lust for material status and conformity leaves him disgusted with his fellow man. He vents his frustration and boiling rage by murdering boastful coworkers and vacant, oblivious prostitutes in all manner of ghastly ways (although, to be fair, the film comes nowhere near the graphic detail of the book). Marry Harron and cowriter Guinevere Turner have done a commendable job of organizing the scattered passages of the novel into something of a coherent narrative, and the film is alive with bright, elegant cinematography and gallows of wickedly dark humor.8/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-584

ur1193248

title: stellar adaptation of the misunderstood novel review: "American Psycho," which was one of the most controversial novels published in the last decade, makes for one of the most stellar, elegant book-to-film translations in quite some time. An indictment of '80's excess, the focus is on a young, extremely wealthy Wall Street yuppie named Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale, who's excellent) whose lust for material status and conformity leaves him disgusted with his fellow man. He vents his frustration and boiling rage by murdering boastful coworkers and vacant, oblivious prostitutes in all manner of ghastly ways (although, to be fair, the film comes nowhere near the graphic detail of the book). Marry Harron and cowriter Guinevere Turner have done a commendable job of organizing the scattered passages of the novel into something of a coherent narrative, and the film is alive with bright, elegant cinematography and gallows of wickedly dark humor.8/10

A good satire of a modern day serial killer. Plus it captures the 1980's really well.

tt0144084

I for one am not really a big Christian Bale fan even though his performances are pretty good especially his "Batman" efforts. I must say though that this satire was pretty direct and his performance strong. With today's media culture obsessed with murder and serial killers this film "American Psycho" can give film fans a nice taste for their thirst. Set in 1980's New York City you have Bale as wall street and power hungry yuppie Patrick Bateman who's at the top of his game he has a nice apartment, nice clothes, and plenty of lady friends. And also he's a pop culture quoting champ of the current times and 80's music. Yet behind it all deep down he's a psychopath who murders, it doesn't matter if it's strangers or people he knows. This really showed a side of a Ted Bundy type a good outward appearance, but a demon on the inside. Plus this film really captured the 80's scene well by the way it showed the hairstyles, clubs, drugs, and it was well evidenced as it played some of the better hit songs from the 1980's. Overall good film with a good Bale performance it may not be everyone's cup of tea yet it explores the greatest decade well while showcasing the dark side of life proving even the best supposed outward appearance can be terrifying and chilling underneath and on the inside.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-960

ur9927546

title: A good satire of a modern day serial killer. Plus it captures the 1980's really well. review: I for one am not really a big Christian Bale fan even though his performances are pretty good especially his "Batman" efforts. I must say though that this satire was pretty direct and his performance strong. With today's media culture obsessed with murder and serial killers this film "American Psycho" can give film fans a nice taste for their thirst. Set in 1980's New York City you have Bale as wall street and power hungry yuppie Patrick Bateman who's at the top of his game he has a nice apartment, nice clothes, and plenty of lady friends. And also he's a pop culture quoting champ of the current times and 80's music. Yet behind it all deep down he's a psychopath who murders, it doesn't matter if it's strangers or people he knows. This really showed a side of a Ted Bundy type a good outward appearance, but a demon on the inside. Plus this film really captured the 80's scene well by the way it showed the hairstyles, clubs, drugs, and it was well evidenced as it played some of the better hit songs from the 1980's. Overall good film with a good Bale performance it may not be everyone's cup of tea yet it explores the greatest decade well while showcasing the dark side of life proving even the best supposed outward appearance can be terrifying and chilling underneath and on the inside.

American Psycho and movies based on novels.

tt0144084

I'm a movie guy, what can I say. I wish I were `well read', I'm just not a book guy. That's not to say I'm an illiterate boob. I enjoy a good novel every now and then. But usually I rely on the printed page for books of the non-fiction variety. I'm almost always irritated when I hear some snob complaining how the movie they just saw wasn't as good as the book. You know what I'm talking about. At one point in you life you have been on one side of one of those kinds of conversations. I'm usually on the side that says.'well I don't know about the book but the movie was swell' or `well I don't know about the book but the movie sucked' Either way I feel that a movie should be judged on its own merits. The two art forms, novels and films, are completely different. At least I that's how I felt before I read Bret Easton Ellis's novel `American Psycho'. I picked it up because I was in love with the film. I sorta went into the whole experience of reading the novel expecting it to be a sort of `un-cut' version of the film. This intrigued me a great deal. Needless to say upon reading this great novel I came away less a fan of the film and more a fan of the printed work. The novel sort of ruined the film for me. And I in subsequent conversations with my pals I ended up on the other side of that afore mentioned book to film comparison conversation. I remember viewing my DVD of American Psycho right after I completed the novel and being completely disappointed. It now seemed that so much of Patrick's character arc was just ignored. His relationship with Jean his secretary was entirely ignored. Characters names were seemingly arbitrarily changed. There wasn't enough narration, after the entire book was told almost completely from Patrick's narration. And that one scene in the film where Jean reads his journal and finds the macabre sketches seemed a complete betrayal of the story's first person nature. My problem at the time was that I was making all the comparisons that I think shouldn't be made when a film is adapted from a novel. The theatrical film medium is extremely limited in the narrative it is capable in bringing forth to the audience. Traditionally you get 2 to 3 hours and you have to rely on what is primarily a visual medium to adapt a written one. That is one thing most filmmakers and audiences forget. Filmmakers rarely utilize the picture tells a thousands words school of filmmaking and stoop to cheesy music and bad dialogue to get the point across. This is true for most films nowadays let alone those based on novels. And audiences foolishly expect a scene-by-scene adaptation of their favorite literary work. Once I re-examined my criticism I viewed the film sever times over. I came to the conclusion that it is indeed a good adaptation. It is brilliant how they incorporated the music review chapters. I also realized its not that the violence in the film is a watered down version from the book. It's more that those ultra-violent scenes are simply not in the film. When you think about its amazing how much of the book Marry Haron and Guinevere Turner managed to fit into their script. The answering scene confession stands out as one of the best scenes in recent memory. Bale deserved some recognition for this scene alone.So what we are left with is a good film with a verry Kubrick like feel. A film with amazing performances and witty dialogue, much of which was lifted strait from the novel. Though many of my complaints still stand, they don't ruin what is otherwise a worthwhile movie experience. One could do much worse when choosing a Friday night rental.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-676

ur2745165

title: American Psycho and movies based on novels. review: I'm a movie guy, what can I say. I wish I were `well read', I'm just not a book guy. That's not to say I'm an illiterate boob. I enjoy a good novel every now and then. But usually I rely on the printed page for books of the non-fiction variety. I'm almost always irritated when I hear some snob complaining how the movie they just saw wasn't as good as the book. You know what I'm talking about. At one point in you life you have been on one side of one of those kinds of conversations. I'm usually on the side that says.'well I don't know about the book but the movie was swell' or `well I don't know about the book but the movie sucked' Either way I feel that a movie should be judged on its own merits. The two art forms, novels and films, are completely different. At least I that's how I felt before I read Bret Easton Ellis's novel `American Psycho'. I picked it up because I was in love with the film. I sorta went into the whole experience of reading the novel expecting it to be a sort of `un-cut' version of the film. This intrigued me a great deal. Needless to say upon reading this great novel I came away less a fan of the film and more a fan of the printed work. The novel sort of ruined the film for me. And I in subsequent conversations with my pals I ended up on the other side of that afore mentioned book to film comparison conversation. I remember viewing my DVD of American Psycho right after I completed the novel and being completely disappointed. It now seemed that so much of Patrick's character arc was just ignored. His relationship with Jean his secretary was entirely ignored. Characters names were seemingly arbitrarily changed. There wasn't enough narration, after the entire book was told almost completely from Patrick's narration. And that one scene in the film where Jean reads his journal and finds the macabre sketches seemed a complete betrayal of the story's first person nature. My problem at the time was that I was making all the comparisons that I think shouldn't be made when a film is adapted from a novel. The theatrical film medium is extremely limited in the narrative it is capable in bringing forth to the audience. Traditionally you get 2 to 3 hours and you have to rely on what is primarily a visual medium to adapt a written one. That is one thing most filmmakers and audiences forget. Filmmakers rarely utilize the picture tells a thousands words school of filmmaking and stoop to cheesy music and bad dialogue to get the point across. This is true for most films nowadays let alone those based on novels. And audiences foolishly expect a scene-by-scene adaptation of their favorite literary work. Once I re-examined my criticism I viewed the film sever times over. I came to the conclusion that it is indeed a good adaptation. It is brilliant how they incorporated the music review chapters. I also realized its not that the violence in the film is a watered down version from the book. It's more that those ultra-violent scenes are simply not in the film. When you think about its amazing how much of the book Marry Haron and Guinevere Turner managed to fit into their script. The answering scene confession stands out as one of the best scenes in recent memory. Bale deserved some recognition for this scene alone.So what we are left with is a good film with a verry Kubrick like feel. A film with amazing performances and witty dialogue, much of which was lifted strait from the novel. Though many of my complaints still stand, they don't ruin what is otherwise a worthwhile movie experience. One could do much worse when choosing a Friday night rental.

Lets go to Zamboanga

tt0144084

Sometimes, reality is just not good enough. That is where movies, like this, come in to play. Where else would you see a young man lose control over simples things like business cards and start killing people, including co-workers, friends, and many prostitutes.This is, indeed, a dark psychological thriller. Things get really fun at the end. Numerous deaths, nudity, and leading double lives. But it all goes away with one one call. I guess if you are powerful, at least in this movie, you can get out of about any trouble.A really dark movie. Its strange, funny, and interesting all at the same time. Give it a try, it might be your taste. But then again, it might want you to take out the DVD and throw it away. "B"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-914

ur18271419

title: Lets go to Zamboanga review: Sometimes, reality is just not good enough. That is where movies, like this, come in to play. Where else would you see a young man lose control over simples things like business cards and start killing people, including co-workers, friends, and many prostitutes.This is, indeed, a dark psychological thriller. Things get really fun at the end. Numerous deaths, nudity, and leading double lives. But it all goes away with one one call. I guess if you are powerful, at least in this movie, you can get out of about any trouble.A really dark movie. Its strange, funny, and interesting all at the same time. Give it a try, it might be your taste. But then again, it might want you to take out the DVD and throw it away. "B"

Exotic Psychotic

tt0144084

About a yuppie serial killer who finds he is slowly going insane, not from killing people, but from the BOREDOM of doing so. This comedy is not just black - it's black with sprinkles on top and a human head on a spike.From the hilariously disturbing Bret Easton Ellis novel of the same name (screenstoried by Mary Harron and Guinevere Turner, directed by Harron), *American Psycho* defines a new angle on the internal world of serial killers. Our Hero is Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale, ripped like a suspension bridge cable), a VP of his company, a 1980's uber-executive, whom we never see do any actual office work, narrating his obsessive-compulsive behaviors; petulant, trivial, rich, ensconced in yuppie consumerism; in a loveless, close-to-tears-of-exasperation relationship with his empty-skulled girlfriend (Reese Witherspoon), who is oblivious to his ambivalence and neuroses. He's also a serial killer. Bateman's life is an endless succession of vapidity – exec friends who speak and never listen, women who speak only as prelude to bonking, fake parties, fake emotions, plastic girlfriends, all status and wardrobe and petty gossip. Every time he needs to exit an unsavory social situation, his excuse "I have to return some videotapes" is taken without question because no one is listening; when he is loading a body bag into the back of a taxi, a fellow exec catches him, only to marvel at the excellent "overnight bag"… It is no surprise that Bateman's only grasp on "reality" is the solid hack of his axe on someone's skull. When Bateman narrates an album review or describes pedantic rituals, his voice takes on the clinical detachment of an outside observer. And in that persona, his murders take place – observing himself as he is committing them. We feel the incongruous juxtaposition of personalities as he puts on a Whitney Houston CD and starts proselytizing on the philosophies of *The Greatest Love of All* as a prelude to killing two girls. And the black humor shines when he tells his secretary (Chloë Sevigny) during a date, "You'd better go or I might hurt you," she thinking that he refers to the discomfort of office relationships, while he means it LITERALLY. Surprisingly, the two FEMALE film-makers retain verbatim Ellis' misogynistic Truth about women with "good personalities," voiced at a Boys Sitdown by Josh Lucas: "There are no girls with great personalities. A good personality consists of a chick with a little hard-body, who'll satisfy all sexual demands without being too slutty about things and who will essentially keep her goddam mouth shut...."With all the *CSI*s and *Law and Order*s abounding on our inculcating airwaves, one gets the impression that most murders are eventually solved. But *American Psycho* leaves us with the reality that there must be thousands of unsolved murders perpetrated by people like Bateman – murders that we will never hear of because they are so graphic; that would never air on *Cops* for fear of making the steroid bull-stars of that show look as impotent as we know they are. Though a detective (Willem Dafoe) passively questions Bateman on suspected missing persons (that he has eighty-sixed), the reality is that if someone in Bateman's VP position WERE a serial killer, the kid gloves would stay on; were he indicted, the charges would be harder to stick; were he convicted, his sentence would be commuted. This is how a money-based society treats its moneyed criminals. It takes more brains, organization and creativity to be a serial killer than a cop. We are made privy to prosaic details when Bateman kills Paul Allen (Jared Leto); putting newspapers down to sop up the carnage when he chops him up, meticulously cleaning his fingerprints, packing a suitcase for the victim to make it look like he has gone on a trip, changing the message on the victim's answering machine, body bags, skulking skills, alibis, lying to the police so convincingly… it's quite a task, and we almost admire Bateman for these forward-thinking skills, but then, maybe it's that same skill set that *all* vice presidents possess. We've always known you need to be pretty morally bankrupt yet a decisive mover-shaker, to attain executive corner offices. With its plastic, pastel-tie soundtrack (featuring Phil Collins, Huey Lewis, Robert Palmer, et al), *American Psycho* captures the era when cellphones were the size of cereal boxes, also conveying the ultra-upper-class hedonism and juvenility of these spoiled-riche business-boys (Bateman is vexed when a colleague's eggshell-colored business card is better than his; simply devastated when another colleague's card has a watermark); and reminds us of the blasé sexism once accepted in the office ("Don't wear that outfit again - and wear high heels") – but the movie never quite captures the disturbing horror or unbridled carnage of the Ellis novel.Two reasons: Firstly, the book is the most violent story you will ever puke your guts out over - I especially remember the scene where Bateman grinds a circle saw into a woman's face and marvels at her teeth splattering outwards – and there's only so much disturbing gore the gutless, hypocritical MPAA will allow onto the screen at one sitting; secondly, the movie has been screenstoried and directed by women. Yes, it's a sexist comment – directly criticizing the fact that the female sex is trying to convey the male sex's point of view. And that can't be done – not by the most intelligent woman, not by transgenders, not even by Richard Simmons. Women cannot possibly fathom the sexual intent of *normal* red-blooded men, let alone the perverse sexual depravedness of a serial killer. How graphic, how "sexually realistic," how authentic can the movie possibly be with these two hampering aspects? The most extreme this movie gets is showing a naked Bateman, covered in blood, chasing a hooker through his apartment complex with a roaring chainsaw…and we've all done *that* before

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-921

ur2446936

title: Exotic Psychotic review: About a yuppie serial killer who finds he is slowly going insane, not from killing people, but from the BOREDOM of doing so. This comedy is not just black - it's black with sprinkles on top and a human head on a spike.From the hilariously disturbing Bret Easton Ellis novel of the same name (screenstoried by Mary Harron and Guinevere Turner, directed by Harron), *American Psycho* defines a new angle on the internal world of serial killers. Our Hero is Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale, ripped like a suspension bridge cable), a VP of his company, a 1980's uber-executive, whom we never see do any actual office work, narrating his obsessive-compulsive behaviors; petulant, trivial, rich, ensconced in yuppie consumerism; in a loveless, close-to-tears-of-exasperation relationship with his empty-skulled girlfriend (Reese Witherspoon), who is oblivious to his ambivalence and neuroses. He's also a serial killer. Bateman's life is an endless succession of vapidity – exec friends who speak and never listen, women who speak only as prelude to bonking, fake parties, fake emotions, plastic girlfriends, all status and wardrobe and petty gossip. Every time he needs to exit an unsavory social situation, his excuse "I have to return some videotapes" is taken without question because no one is listening; when he is loading a body bag into the back of a taxi, a fellow exec catches him, only to marvel at the excellent "overnight bag"… It is no surprise that Bateman's only grasp on "reality" is the solid hack of his axe on someone's skull. When Bateman narrates an album review or describes pedantic rituals, his voice takes on the clinical detachment of an outside observer. And in that persona, his murders take place – observing himself as he is committing them. We feel the incongruous juxtaposition of personalities as he puts on a Whitney Houston CD and starts proselytizing on the philosophies of *The Greatest Love of All* as a prelude to killing two girls. And the black humor shines when he tells his secretary (Chloë Sevigny) during a date, "You'd better go or I might hurt you," she thinking that he refers to the discomfort of office relationships, while he means it LITERALLY. Surprisingly, the two FEMALE film-makers retain verbatim Ellis' misogynistic Truth about women with "good personalities," voiced at a Boys Sitdown by Josh Lucas: "There are no girls with great personalities. A good personality consists of a chick with a little hard-body, who'll satisfy all sexual demands without being too slutty about things and who will essentially keep her goddam mouth shut...."With all the *CSI*s and *Law and Order*s abounding on our inculcating airwaves, one gets the impression that most murders are eventually solved. But *American Psycho* leaves us with the reality that there must be thousands of unsolved murders perpetrated by people like Bateman – murders that we will never hear of because they are so graphic; that would never air on *Cops* for fear of making the steroid bull-stars of that show look as impotent as we know they are. Though a detective (Willem Dafoe) passively questions Bateman on suspected missing persons (that he has eighty-sixed), the reality is that if someone in Bateman's VP position WERE a serial killer, the kid gloves would stay on; were he indicted, the charges would be harder to stick; were he convicted, his sentence would be commuted. This is how a money-based society treats its moneyed criminals. It takes more brains, organization and creativity to be a serial killer than a cop. We are made privy to prosaic details when Bateman kills Paul Allen (Jared Leto); putting newspapers down to sop up the carnage when he chops him up, meticulously cleaning his fingerprints, packing a suitcase for the victim to make it look like he has gone on a trip, changing the message on the victim's answering machine, body bags, skulking skills, alibis, lying to the police so convincingly… it's quite a task, and we almost admire Bateman for these forward-thinking skills, but then, maybe it's that same skill set that *all* vice presidents possess. We've always known you need to be pretty morally bankrupt yet a decisive mover-shaker, to attain executive corner offices. With its plastic, pastel-tie soundtrack (featuring Phil Collins, Huey Lewis, Robert Palmer, et al), *American Psycho* captures the era when cellphones were the size of cereal boxes, also conveying the ultra-upper-class hedonism and juvenility of these spoiled-riche business-boys (Bateman is vexed when a colleague's eggshell-colored business card is better than his; simply devastated when another colleague's card has a watermark); and reminds us of the blasé sexism once accepted in the office ("Don't wear that outfit again - and wear high heels") – but the movie never quite captures the disturbing horror or unbridled carnage of the Ellis novel.Two reasons: Firstly, the book is the most violent story you will ever puke your guts out over - I especially remember the scene where Bateman grinds a circle saw into a woman's face and marvels at her teeth splattering outwards – and there's only so much disturbing gore the gutless, hypocritical MPAA will allow onto the screen at one sitting; secondly, the movie has been screenstoried and directed by women. Yes, it's a sexist comment – directly criticizing the fact that the female sex is trying to convey the male sex's point of view. And that can't be done – not by the most intelligent woman, not by transgenders, not even by Richard Simmons. Women cannot possibly fathom the sexual intent of *normal* red-blooded men, let alone the perverse sexual depravedness of a serial killer. How graphic, how "sexually realistic," how authentic can the movie possibly be with these two hampering aspects? The most extreme this movie gets is showing a naked Bateman, covered in blood, chasing a hooker through his apartment complex with a roaring chainsaw…and we've all done *that* before

Good Film, Phenomenal Book

tt0144084

First, I have to say that I really did enjoy the film very much. I also read the book AFTER seeing the film, which I think gives me a unique perspective as opposed to those who read the book, then saw the film as a disappointment.With that having been said, I was amazed with the excruciating detail that the novel's Patrick Bateman went into when describing his life and routine. Bret Easton Ellis is a truly remarkable author, and the novel is really a masterpiece of 1980's satire. I honestly can't say enough good things about it. Every page was amazing to me, and I felt that a portrait of a madman had really been painted for us in a way that nobody has done before.The film lacked a lot of this detail, but it was only noticeable after reading the book. I can see how someone who read the book first, then saw the film could have been disappointed, but seeing the film before the book really made me appreciate both much more than I may have otherwise. For someone who has no experience with either the film or the book, I would recommend the movie first, then followed up with the novel. The movie is very enjoyable and interesting on it's own, and the novel adds a tremendous dimension and back-story to the characters and their motivations.Also, one of the criticisms that I read in a previous review had to do with the locations not being believable due to the limited budget of the production. However, as a lifelong resident of Manhattan, the sets and locations ring very true. Pat Bateman's apartment in the movie is a really accurate representation of what a multi-million dollar Manhattan apartment actually looks like. Money does not go very far in this town, and it actually states in the book that Timothy Price made approximately $190,000/year, so it can be presumed that Bateman earned a similar amount. A hefty sum for the time, but not quite billionaire status. The restaurants and offices are also quite realistic and believable, especially since I have actually been to most of the places that are mentioned in the book.Finally, after the film and novel, I have to say that I actually found Pat Bateman someone who I could really relate to on some level, scary though that may sound. The obsession with material possessions; having everything in your life arranged perfectly; the drive to have the best (clothes, apartment, dinner reservations, women, etc), is something that still permeates the culture here in NYC to such a degree that I found many of his obsessions (compulsions?) and mannerisms extremely familiar. Disconcerting as it is, I can easily see where Brett Ellis' mind was when he fleshed out the Bateman character. From this point of view, it's almost easy to see how such behavior can mutate into insanity without even the blink of an eye. It's certainly made me look at my own life in a different light.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-792

ur7854942

title: Good Film, Phenomenal Book review: First, I have to say that I really did enjoy the film very much. I also read the book AFTER seeing the film, which I think gives me a unique perspective as opposed to those who read the book, then saw the film as a disappointment.With that having been said, I was amazed with the excruciating detail that the novel's Patrick Bateman went into when describing his life and routine. Bret Easton Ellis is a truly remarkable author, and the novel is really a masterpiece of 1980's satire. I honestly can't say enough good things about it. Every page was amazing to me, and I felt that a portrait of a madman had really been painted for us in a way that nobody has done before.The film lacked a lot of this detail, but it was only noticeable after reading the book. I can see how someone who read the book first, then saw the film could have been disappointed, but seeing the film before the book really made me appreciate both much more than I may have otherwise. For someone who has no experience with either the film or the book, I would recommend the movie first, then followed up with the novel. The movie is very enjoyable and interesting on it's own, and the novel adds a tremendous dimension and back-story to the characters and their motivations.Also, one of the criticisms that I read in a previous review had to do with the locations not being believable due to the limited budget of the production. However, as a lifelong resident of Manhattan, the sets and locations ring very true. Pat Bateman's apartment in the movie is a really accurate representation of what a multi-million dollar Manhattan apartment actually looks like. Money does not go very far in this town, and it actually states in the book that Timothy Price made approximately $190,000/year, so it can be presumed that Bateman earned a similar amount. A hefty sum for the time, but not quite billionaire status. The restaurants and offices are also quite realistic and believable, especially since I have actually been to most of the places that are mentioned in the book.Finally, after the film and novel, I have to say that I actually found Pat Bateman someone who I could really relate to on some level, scary though that may sound. The obsession with material possessions; having everything in your life arranged perfectly; the drive to have the best (clothes, apartment, dinner reservations, women, etc), is something that still permeates the culture here in NYC to such a degree that I found many of his obsessions (compulsions?) and mannerisms extremely familiar. Disconcerting as it is, I can easily see where Brett Ellis' mind was when he fleshed out the Bateman character. From this point of view, it's almost easy to see how such behavior can mutate into insanity without even the blink of an eye. It's certainly made me look at my own life in a different light.

To the point

tt0144084

Patrick Bateman has everything: money, good looks, health, nice apartment, and an easy going high paying job. Beneath this business school success story, however, lies a dark man who knows and even acknowledges that he has everything, but wants more...Since this is an adaptation you can see this movie as too different things: as an adaptation of the novel, or as just a movie if you haven't read the novel. As a movie it is well done, especially with Bale's frightening performance as the callous Bateman, and it is that with the general ambition that went into the project that overshadows the film's obvious limitations. And there are quite a few of them. I have never read the book, but have heard about it enough to see that the film is aesthetically way below the scope of the novel. The locations and sets simply just barely manage to cut it. However the film is a success due its tone.The themes, metaphors, and idea of the book presented in such a way that you get the feeling that yes, the filmmakers know the source material, like the source material and put in an honest effort to get it translated to the screen. After all, it is the themes and ideas that matter more than the actual physical look of the film. "Apocalypse Now" looks nothing like Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" - different time period, different locations, etc... - but the fundamental themes of the novel (the stuff that matters most) are there and it is a great movie based off of a great book. With "American Psycho" fans can delight in the adaptation as also being faithful in the aesthetic sense.However, fans should also be ready to forgive. Think about it, would any major studio release a movie with a seriously f***ed up lead character like Bateman? Author Bret Easton Ellis was himself shot down by publishers before he got his book out, so this isn't mainstream thought and metaphor here. It is un-PC, hard to swallow, but daring in it's ambitions and that is what makes the film good. --- 8/10Rated R for strong violent content and sex

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-833

ur2214855

title: To the point review: Patrick Bateman has everything: money, good looks, health, nice apartment, and an easy going high paying job. Beneath this business school success story, however, lies a dark man who knows and even acknowledges that he has everything, but wants more...Since this is an adaptation you can see this movie as too different things: as an adaptation of the novel, or as just a movie if you haven't read the novel. As a movie it is well done, especially with Bale's frightening performance as the callous Bateman, and it is that with the general ambition that went into the project that overshadows the film's obvious limitations. And there are quite a few of them. I have never read the book, but have heard about it enough to see that the film is aesthetically way below the scope of the novel. The locations and sets simply just barely manage to cut it. However the film is a success due its tone.The themes, metaphors, and idea of the book presented in such a way that you get the feeling that yes, the filmmakers know the source material, like the source material and put in an honest effort to get it translated to the screen. After all, it is the themes and ideas that matter more than the actual physical look of the film. "Apocalypse Now" looks nothing like Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" - different time period, different locations, etc... - but the fundamental themes of the novel (the stuff that matters most) are there and it is a great movie based off of a great book. With "American Psycho" fans can delight in the adaptation as also being faithful in the aesthetic sense.However, fans should also be ready to forgive. Think about it, would any major studio release a movie with a seriously f***ed up lead character like Bateman? Author Bret Easton Ellis was himself shot down by publishers before he got his book out, so this isn't mainstream thought and metaphor here. It is un-PC, hard to swallow, but daring in it's ambitions and that is what makes the film good. --- 8/10Rated R for strong violent content and sex

Unrated Cut Review

tt0144084

Patrick Bateman is handsome, well educated and intelligent. He is twenty-seven and living his own American dream. He works by day on Wall Street, earning a fortune to complement the one he was born with. At night he descends into madness, as he experiments with fear and violence.I was really in a "not wanting to watch this movie" mood, before watching this movie. I really was worried because I didn't know what to expect. Will it be really bloody and has a lot of violence? Well, surprisingly, the film is more or a dark comedy than a horror.The kills were not squeamish. Yeah, they were kind of violent, but not in a crude way. They were played like a satire so you really do not feel mad or disgusted by any content of this movie (expect maybe for some random sex scenes).What I didn't like about this film was the uneven pacing. Sometimes the movie passes really fast and sometimes it halts for a slow scene. It wasn't a huge deal, though. Christian Bale's performance is really different from what I've seen from other films of his. It may be in a good or bad way. I don't know. It was just plain weird.I'm a bit iffy with this film. It was decent and sometimes just plain horror fun. It wasn't anything spectacular and the pacing was uneven. Still, I'm going to recommend this film just for having a good sense of humor.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-886

ur8334868

title: Unrated Cut Review review: Patrick Bateman is handsome, well educated and intelligent. He is twenty-seven and living his own American dream. He works by day on Wall Street, earning a fortune to complement the one he was born with. At night he descends into madness, as he experiments with fear and violence.I was really in a "not wanting to watch this movie" mood, before watching this movie. I really was worried because I didn't know what to expect. Will it be really bloody and has a lot of violence? Well, surprisingly, the film is more or a dark comedy than a horror.The kills were not squeamish. Yeah, they were kind of violent, but not in a crude way. They were played like a satire so you really do not feel mad or disgusted by any content of this movie (expect maybe for some random sex scenes).What I didn't like about this film was the uneven pacing. Sometimes the movie passes really fast and sometimes it halts for a slow scene. It wasn't a huge deal, though. Christian Bale's performance is really different from what I've seen from other films of his. It may be in a good or bad way. I don't know. It was just plain weird.I'm a bit iffy with this film. It was decent and sometimes just plain horror fun. It wasn't anything spectacular and the pacing was uneven. Still, I'm going to recommend this film just for having a good sense of humor.

Complex Portrayal of a Disturbed Man!

tt0144084

I never knew what to think of American Psycho because I have not see it until now. I knew it was a complex, disturbing movie just from talking to other people. But, it also a well-made thriller with a wonderful lead performance by Christian Bale and the way the movie told the story is very mesmerizing. I heard the film is different than the book. but I love the way the movie painted the black-and-white picture of Patrick Bateman.Mary Harmon's movie is about a modern, iconic screen character named Patrick Bateman. By day, Bateman is just your normal guy who works and has friends. But, by night he is a cold-blooded killer with a lust for blood.Christian Bale is perfect for the role. Not only I see him as Batman, now I see him as Patrick Bateman. He has the charisma for the role and I just love the way he talks about his music. He's very enlightening and.....scary.Overall, this is a well-made, violent thriller about a guy who is mentally damaged. Some scenes are very graphic but this movie paints a picture that you'll remember for a very long time. I rate this film 9/10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1095

ur17646017

title: Complex Portrayal of a Disturbed Man! review: I never knew what to think of American Psycho because I have not see it until now. I knew it was a complex, disturbing movie just from talking to other people. But, it also a well-made thriller with a wonderful lead performance by Christian Bale and the way the movie told the story is very mesmerizing. I heard the film is different than the book. but I love the way the movie painted the black-and-white picture of Patrick Bateman.Mary Harmon's movie is about a modern, iconic screen character named Patrick Bateman. By day, Bateman is just your normal guy who works and has friends. But, by night he is a cold-blooded killer with a lust for blood.Christian Bale is perfect for the role. Not only I see him as Batman, now I see him as Patrick Bateman. He has the charisma for the role and I just love the way he talks about his music. He's very enlightening and.....scary.Overall, this is a well-made, violent thriller about a guy who is mentally damaged. Some scenes are very graphic but this movie paints a picture that you'll remember for a very long time. I rate this film 9/10.

Very good

tt0144084

In 1991, Bret Easton Ellis' controversial novel "American Psycho" took the world by storm – women accused it of being misogynist, sexist filth and others were understandably shaken by its brutal and graphic depictions of unprovoked violence and torture.Set in the 1980s, the book follows the story of a 27-year-old Harvard graduate named Patrick Bateman, who goes on a killing spree and murders "twenty, maybe forty people." It was originally slated for circulation in 1990, but Random House pulled out of distribution, fearing backlash. It was later released as part of a Vintage Series, and quickly sold over 250,000 copies, becoming one of the most popular (and, to some, important) literary works of our time.In the movie, Welsh actor Christian Bale portrays Bateman gleefully tongue-in-cheek, whether it's confessing to manslaughter over the phone ("…I just had to kill a lot of people!") or dancing to Huey Lewis and the News' "Fore" album before hitting an associate over the head with an axe.Patrick is a troubled guy. On the surface, he appears to be normal – he's a Wall Street broker with a secretary, an expensive apartment suite, his own limo and a fancy business card. But on the inside, he's a monster – complete with an insatiable blood lust and lack of empathy for fellow human beings. (If he can indeed be classified as one.) As a film and a novel, "American Psycho" is an attack on the absurdities of the '80s yuppie era – sometimes the satire isn't very subtle, in fact it's often made very clear, but I liked it. Because the movie is so eccentric and over-the-top, and Bale is so loony and maniacal, the satire needs to be equally strong – and it is. Whether it's business men drooling over each other's fetishistic business cards or Patrick discussing the nuances of modern pop music before killing more victims, "American Psycho" hits strong and hard – this is a great, overwhelming cinematic and visual experience. It cannot be condemned for being unsubtle – it never was.The performances are wonderful. Bale is superb as Bateman, totally embodying the character. As a man bewildered by his environment, and wanting only desperately to fit in, Bateman listens to Genesis and "Hip to Be Square"; finally we have proof that too much Phil Collins and Huey Lewis will turn you into the next Ed Gein.Perhaps some fans of the novel will dislike Bale's performance (at times, it almost seems comical, such as when he murders his coworker Paul Allen, played by Jared Leto). But I thought it was the perfect mix of introspection, self-hatred, outer-loathing, lust, conformity and schizophrenia. Bale manages to capture all of this perfectly, and by the end of the film, I could not imagine anyone else in the role.Willem Dafoe, Chloe Sevigny and Reese Witherspoon all have co-starring roles, but at the end of the day it is Bale who really drives this film home – he's the reason it's worth seeing, and in part the reason it exceeds beyond the typical restraints of its genre.Since its release, many critics have accused "American Psycho" of being a watered-down version of the book, being both "politically correct" and "lacking satire." However, I don't recall the last time I saw a man beat a dog to death with the heel of his shoe in a mainstream motion picture. Or chase after a prostitute completely naked, wielding a bloodied chainsaw. Or hold a gun to a cat's head and threaten to feed it to an ATM machine.In fact, when "American Psycho" was previewed before the Motion Picture Association of America, they gave it an NC-17 rating – not for its violence, as one might expect, but rather for its threesome scene between Patrick and two prostitutes.Director Mary Harron cut footage from the film and finally managed to achieve an R-rating, but on a new "Uncut Killer Collector's Edition" DVD, you can see the film as it was intended to be seen – and it's a real fine treat. Now excuse me, I have to go return some videotapes.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-735

ur1173088

title: Very good review: In 1991, Bret Easton Ellis' controversial novel "American Psycho" took the world by storm – women accused it of being misogynist, sexist filth and others were understandably shaken by its brutal and graphic depictions of unprovoked violence and torture.Set in the 1980s, the book follows the story of a 27-year-old Harvard graduate named Patrick Bateman, who goes on a killing spree and murders "twenty, maybe forty people." It was originally slated for circulation in 1990, but Random House pulled out of distribution, fearing backlash. It was later released as part of a Vintage Series, and quickly sold over 250,000 copies, becoming one of the most popular (and, to some, important) literary works of our time.In the movie, Welsh actor Christian Bale portrays Bateman gleefully tongue-in-cheek, whether it's confessing to manslaughter over the phone ("…I just had to kill a lot of people!") or dancing to Huey Lewis and the News' "Fore" album before hitting an associate over the head with an axe.Patrick is a troubled guy. On the surface, he appears to be normal – he's a Wall Street broker with a secretary, an expensive apartment suite, his own limo and a fancy business card. But on the inside, he's a monster – complete with an insatiable blood lust and lack of empathy for fellow human beings. (If he can indeed be classified as one.) As a film and a novel, "American Psycho" is an attack on the absurdities of the '80s yuppie era – sometimes the satire isn't very subtle, in fact it's often made very clear, but I liked it. Because the movie is so eccentric and over-the-top, and Bale is so loony and maniacal, the satire needs to be equally strong – and it is. Whether it's business men drooling over each other's fetishistic business cards or Patrick discussing the nuances of modern pop music before killing more victims, "American Psycho" hits strong and hard – this is a great, overwhelming cinematic and visual experience. It cannot be condemned for being unsubtle – it never was.The performances are wonderful. Bale is superb as Bateman, totally embodying the character. As a man bewildered by his environment, and wanting only desperately to fit in, Bateman listens to Genesis and "Hip to Be Square"; finally we have proof that too much Phil Collins and Huey Lewis will turn you into the next Ed Gein.Perhaps some fans of the novel will dislike Bale's performance (at times, it almost seems comical, such as when he murders his coworker Paul Allen, played by Jared Leto). But I thought it was the perfect mix of introspection, self-hatred, outer-loathing, lust, conformity and schizophrenia. Bale manages to capture all of this perfectly, and by the end of the film, I could not imagine anyone else in the role.Willem Dafoe, Chloe Sevigny and Reese Witherspoon all have co-starring roles, but at the end of the day it is Bale who really drives this film home – he's the reason it's worth seeing, and in part the reason it exceeds beyond the typical restraints of its genre.Since its release, many critics have accused "American Psycho" of being a watered-down version of the book, being both "politically correct" and "lacking satire." However, I don't recall the last time I saw a man beat a dog to death with the heel of his shoe in a mainstream motion picture. Or chase after a prostitute completely naked, wielding a bloodied chainsaw. Or hold a gun to a cat's head and threaten to feed it to an ATM machine.In fact, when "American Psycho" was previewed before the Motion Picture Association of America, they gave it an NC-17 rating – not for its violence, as one might expect, but rather for its threesome scene between Patrick and two prostitutes.Director Mary Harron cut footage from the film and finally managed to achieve an R-rating, but on a new "Uncut Killer Collector's Edition" DVD, you can see the film as it was intended to be seen – and it's a real fine treat. Now excuse me, I have to go return some videotapes.

Fascinating, Ambiguous Film Echoes Hitchcock and Lynch

tt0144084

In a world where appearances are everything and a man's status is determined by the typography, watermark, and paper quality of his business cards, lurks an empty shell of man, who is either falling deeper into madness or satisfying his intense blood lust through a series of brutal murders. Such is the ambiguity of this fascinating film that it easily stands up to repeated viewing if only to explore what is real and what is illusion. Patrick Bateman, who is a distant relative of Norman Bates in more than name, is a loner surrounded by people with whom he never relates. Although he does not hide from the world like Norman did, Patrick's icy facade, which has been conditioned and pomaded into a mask of normality, shields him from the world as effectively as the remote motel hid Norman. With his mask in place, Patrick Bateman intermingles in a world of interchangeable people, who vie with each other for social position through table reservations at trendy restaurants, the quality of a hair cut, or the fabric of a custom-tailored suit. Money flows from toil-less occupations in a New York milieu, where, as Gordon Gecko in "Wall Street" so aptly summed up, "greed is good." The Reagan era on steroids, although Bateman's peers comment negatively on the president as they watch him try to explain away the Iran-Contra scandal during a televised speech. The young men's remarks about lying are ironic, when their own lives of sham and deceit are considered.But, under the glistening surfaces, like the depths explored by David Lynch in "Blue Velvet," the being who is known as Patrick Bateman lives another life, possibly in his deteriorating mind or possibly in dark back alleys and designer apartments or possibly in both simultaneously. Simply put, Patrick does not like women, and he does not like rivals, and he is eager to dispense with both through his adept use of gleaming stainless-steel axes or state-of-the-art nail shooters. While Norman Bates had deep-seated problems with sex and evidently did not have physical relations with women, Patrick does have sex with women, who are often paid. Patrick's women become debased objects that he abuses, while he admires his own physique in the mirror. Even in the most intimate act of sex, Patrick does not relate with anyone other than himself. However, unlike Norman Bates, Patrick Bateman does not have a mother complex, in fact, he does not seem to have a mother or any family at all. He is a being with no past, no relationships, and no soul. The role is difficult, and Christian Bale as Bateman is outstanding. The perfection of his looks and physique make him physically ideal for the part. But his performance is more than surface sheen, and Bale disarms the viewer as he slowly escalates from a cool emotionless young professional into a psychotic as the character descends further into his own perverted delusions or manic blood lust. Bale's is a performance as ambiguous as the film.The direction by Mary Harron is excellent as well. Harron wisely focuses on the satire inherent in the screenplay and downplays the violence, which is more often suggested than illustrated. Apparently, she has studied Hitchcock and knows that what the audience imagines can be far more powerful than what they actually see. "American Psycho" is a stimulating work that can provide fuel for heated discussion about what actually does or does not occur. Does the violence exist only in the pornographically violent doodles in Patrick's office agenda or did an unseen protector clean up the evidence of his series of murders? Or both? Like Hitchcock's "Psycho," the film swirls downward like dark water into a drain as Bateman is sucked further into madness, which eventually consumes his entire world and draws the viewer in with him.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-751

ur0738625

title: Fascinating, Ambiguous Film Echoes Hitchcock and Lynch review: In a world where appearances are everything and a man's status is determined by the typography, watermark, and paper quality of his business cards, lurks an empty shell of man, who is either falling deeper into madness or satisfying his intense blood lust through a series of brutal murders. Such is the ambiguity of this fascinating film that it easily stands up to repeated viewing if only to explore what is real and what is illusion. Patrick Bateman, who is a distant relative of Norman Bates in more than name, is a loner surrounded by people with whom he never relates. Although he does not hide from the world like Norman did, Patrick's icy facade, which has been conditioned and pomaded into a mask of normality, shields him from the world as effectively as the remote motel hid Norman. With his mask in place, Patrick Bateman intermingles in a world of interchangeable people, who vie with each other for social position through table reservations at trendy restaurants, the quality of a hair cut, or the fabric of a custom-tailored suit. Money flows from toil-less occupations in a New York milieu, where, as Gordon Gecko in "Wall Street" so aptly summed up, "greed is good." The Reagan era on steroids, although Bateman's peers comment negatively on the president as they watch him try to explain away the Iran-Contra scandal during a televised speech. The young men's remarks about lying are ironic, when their own lives of sham and deceit are considered.But, under the glistening surfaces, like the depths explored by David Lynch in "Blue Velvet," the being who is known as Patrick Bateman lives another life, possibly in his deteriorating mind or possibly in dark back alleys and designer apartments or possibly in both simultaneously. Simply put, Patrick does not like women, and he does not like rivals, and he is eager to dispense with both through his adept use of gleaming stainless-steel axes or state-of-the-art nail shooters. While Norman Bates had deep-seated problems with sex and evidently did not have physical relations with women, Patrick does have sex with women, who are often paid. Patrick's women become debased objects that he abuses, while he admires his own physique in the mirror. Even in the most intimate act of sex, Patrick does not relate with anyone other than himself. However, unlike Norman Bates, Patrick Bateman does not have a mother complex, in fact, he does not seem to have a mother or any family at all. He is a being with no past, no relationships, and no soul. The role is difficult, and Christian Bale as Bateman is outstanding. The perfection of his looks and physique make him physically ideal for the part. But his performance is more than surface sheen, and Bale disarms the viewer as he slowly escalates from a cool emotionless young professional into a psychotic as the character descends further into his own perverted delusions or manic blood lust. Bale's is a performance as ambiguous as the film.The direction by Mary Harron is excellent as well. Harron wisely focuses on the satire inherent in the screenplay and downplays the violence, which is more often suggested than illustrated. Apparently, she has studied Hitchcock and knows that what the audience imagines can be far more powerful than what they actually see. "American Psycho" is a stimulating work that can provide fuel for heated discussion about what actually does or does not occur. Does the violence exist only in the pornographically violent doodles in Patrick's office agenda or did an unseen protector clean up the evidence of his series of murders? Or both? Like Hitchcock's "Psycho," the film swirls downward like dark water into a drain as Bateman is sucked further into madness, which eventually consumes his entire world and draws the viewer in with him.

Fortunately not as horrific as the novel extract I read

tt0144084

Many years ago I read an extract in The Age newspaper of Bret Easton-Ellis' novel "American psycho". Didn't even manage to real all of it-I found it so absolutely vile I stopped reading it and knew that I would never read that book (the extract was the literary equivalent of coming across those photos from SBS TV autopsy shows in The Age-God knows why The Age feels that a TV guide needs shots of actual autopsies-again and again). The book then and now, presumably, requires it to be wrapped in a plain brown paper bag for taking away after purchase (as it's rated R).Anyway, the other night a commercial network here in Australia screened this movie around midnight. I PVR'd it and watched it soon afterwards. I'm assuming that it wasn't different to the cinema release.The plot: Christian Baile plays Patrick Bateman, a corporate high-flyer in the 1980's (with a touch of the Jim Carreys about him)- a time of corporate piracy and excess. He's about to get married, or so his girlfriend thinks and the petty jealousies at work fill him with such rage that he becomes quite the nasty psycho killer (Quest que cest?). This is the kind of slasher movie which has more in common with Hitchcock's "Psycho" than Carpenter's "Halloween"-i.e. you get a fleshed out portrait of the murderer and not some automotan killing machine. As in those movies, it isn't really a gore-fest, though one or two scenes in it are not very pleasant-to do with dismemberment.Apparently the novel was a biting satire of the excess of the times.That does come across in this movie, though I wonder if the book itself says more about the rivalry between artists (Easton Ellis) and the corporate world he seems to despise-in other words, perhaps the sickness of the novel says more about artists as a class than supposedly bad corporate raiders.There are a couple of telling scenes in this movie where others precisely pigeon-hole Bateman and you know they've nailed his character.Bateman is a very odd character-stylised and amusing at times.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-926

ur4025773

title: Fortunately not as horrific as the novel extract I read review: Many years ago I read an extract in The Age newspaper of Bret Easton-Ellis' novel "American psycho". Didn't even manage to real all of it-I found it so absolutely vile I stopped reading it and knew that I would never read that book (the extract was the literary equivalent of coming across those photos from SBS TV autopsy shows in The Age-God knows why The Age feels that a TV guide needs shots of actual autopsies-again and again). The book then and now, presumably, requires it to be wrapped in a plain brown paper bag for taking away after purchase (as it's rated R).Anyway, the other night a commercial network here in Australia screened this movie around midnight. I PVR'd it and watched it soon afterwards. I'm assuming that it wasn't different to the cinema release.The plot: Christian Baile plays Patrick Bateman, a corporate high-flyer in the 1980's (with a touch of the Jim Carreys about him)- a time of corporate piracy and excess. He's about to get married, or so his girlfriend thinks and the petty jealousies at work fill him with such rage that he becomes quite the nasty psycho killer (Quest que cest?). This is the kind of slasher movie which has more in common with Hitchcock's "Psycho" than Carpenter's "Halloween"-i.e. you get a fleshed out portrait of the murderer and not some automotan killing machine. As in those movies, it isn't really a gore-fest, though one or two scenes in it are not very pleasant-to do with dismemberment.Apparently the novel was a biting satire of the excess of the times.That does come across in this movie, though I wonder if the book itself says more about the rivalry between artists (Easton Ellis) and the corporate world he seems to despise-in other words, perhaps the sickness of the novel says more about artists as a class than supposedly bad corporate raiders.There are a couple of telling scenes in this movie where others precisely pigeon-hole Bateman and you know they've nailed his character.Bateman is a very odd character-stylised and amusing at times.

Black

tt0144084

AP is more "black satire" than "black comedy". It creates a Manhattan yuppie world where no one does any work therefore appearance is all, symbolized best in a competition for who has the best looking business card. However beneath one man's overlay is a Jack the Ripper character who kills and carves at will. The violence isn't as graphic as in some Peckinpah films but the lead actor does a fine job celebrating his character's bloody hidden personality. That inside killer blends with his "real" persona toward the end till reality and fantasy merge-or were they always merged? Apparently so, as the ending makes it clear the only crimes committed were in his mind, the ultimate satire of a society concerned only with appearances. I can't say I recommend the movie to everyone but it did keep my attention for the most part. There are some clunky moments, especially with the investigator, whose last conversation with the lead probably should have been placed closer to the end of the film. The final clue to the truth of his madness was given by someone who carried no threat, therefore the impact of the message softened. However all the actors did a fine job IMO, production values were fine, there were no clanging goofs, and that world was fun to look at.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-902

ur13709892

title: Black review: AP is more "black satire" than "black comedy". It creates a Manhattan yuppie world where no one does any work therefore appearance is all, symbolized best in a competition for who has the best looking business card. However beneath one man's overlay is a Jack the Ripper character who kills and carves at will. The violence isn't as graphic as in some Peckinpah films but the lead actor does a fine job celebrating his character's bloody hidden personality. That inside killer blends with his "real" persona toward the end till reality and fantasy merge-or were they always merged? Apparently so, as the ending makes it clear the only crimes committed were in his mind, the ultimate satire of a society concerned only with appearances. I can't say I recommend the movie to everyone but it did keep my attention for the most part. There are some clunky moments, especially with the investigator, whose last conversation with the lead probably should have been placed closer to the end of the film. The final clue to the truth of his madness was given by someone who carried no threat, therefore the impact of the message softened. However all the actors did a fine job IMO, production values were fine, there were no clanging goofs, and that world was fun to look at.

I loved it...you might not.

tt0144084

This film shows you exactly what it's like to be a yuppie during the 1980's in New York. In that time you were considered a nobody unless you had a great job, great clothes and lots of money. Patrick Bateman gets rather bored of it all and embarks on nights of murder and ultra violence in order to brighten up his dull little life. I found this film very entertaining and was surprised and full of joy by discovering the shocking truth at the end. If you like films like that (Fight Club, Vanilla Sky or Phonebooth) then I would really recommend this film to you. It's not exactly been getting rave reviews everywhere, but I think it's very underrated and deserves more credit. Christian Bale plays the role to perfection. ****/5

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-683

ur1200038

title: I loved it...you might not. review: This film shows you exactly what it's like to be a yuppie during the 1980's in New York. In that time you were considered a nobody unless you had a great job, great clothes and lots of money. Patrick Bateman gets rather bored of it all and embarks on nights of murder and ultra violence in order to brighten up his dull little life. I found this film very entertaining and was surprised and full of joy by discovering the shocking truth at the end. If you like films like that (Fight Club, Vanilla Sky or Phonebooth) then I would really recommend this film to you. It's not exactly been getting rave reviews everywhere, but I think it's very underrated and deserves more credit. Christian Bale plays the role to perfection. ****/5

The fabulous, insane Patrick Bateman.

tt0144084

This is one very well done movie, that got greatly directed and acted out by its impressive cast.It's not really a movie that follows a clear main story but it instead gives us a view in the head of a young, successful and handsome guy, who seemingly has it all but behind his human mask actually is being an emotionless, murderous psychopath, who starts executing his weird fantasies during the nights. He more and more starts loosing it and looses both his grip on reality and the ability to keep himself and his urges under control. In all honesty, the best serial killer movies are all like this and instead of picking a real storyline it focuses more on the madness and its main character.It's a pleasantly directed movie, that picks a more light approach, rather than an heavy serious one and it takes us into the insane world and mind of the main character. The movie doesn't ever really become an odd or eccentric one but it still does a very good job at capturing the right mood and atmosphere.But it's also really definitely true that the movie and its characters work out due to the acting. Christian Bale is really perfect and quite amazing that this guy still hasn't been nominated for an Oscar, considering all of the great roles he has played over the last couple of years, this movie of course included. He's perfectly obsessive, cocky and charming and he was for a huge part responsible for me liking this movie as much as i did. But the movie also really has an impressive supporting cast list. It aren't really the names that are know by the big audience but it are names that are always respected and liked by the experts. Not to sound nit-picky but I wasn't as pleased with the casting of some of the female roles. Not because they're not great actors but more because of their very plain looks. The character of Bateman is supposed to be surrounded, admired and chased after by the most beautiful women and I'm sorry but most women in this movie just aren't that impressive looking. Perhaps it's due to the fact that this is a movie that got directed by a female, so she might not have had such an eye for it as a man would had. But this is about really the only thing that slightly bothered me about this movie, which should tell you something about how great it is.It's really a movie that I liked watching because of how beautifully insane it all got done.9/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1014

ur1416505

title: The fabulous, insane Patrick Bateman. review: This is one very well done movie, that got greatly directed and acted out by its impressive cast.It's not really a movie that follows a clear main story but it instead gives us a view in the head of a young, successful and handsome guy, who seemingly has it all but behind his human mask actually is being an emotionless, murderous psychopath, who starts executing his weird fantasies during the nights. He more and more starts loosing it and looses both his grip on reality and the ability to keep himself and his urges under control. In all honesty, the best serial killer movies are all like this and instead of picking a real storyline it focuses more on the madness and its main character.It's a pleasantly directed movie, that picks a more light approach, rather than an heavy serious one and it takes us into the insane world and mind of the main character. The movie doesn't ever really become an odd or eccentric one but it still does a very good job at capturing the right mood and atmosphere.But it's also really definitely true that the movie and its characters work out due to the acting. Christian Bale is really perfect and quite amazing that this guy still hasn't been nominated for an Oscar, considering all of the great roles he has played over the last couple of years, this movie of course included. He's perfectly obsessive, cocky and charming and he was for a huge part responsible for me liking this movie as much as i did. But the movie also really has an impressive supporting cast list. It aren't really the names that are know by the big audience but it are names that are always respected and liked by the experts. Not to sound nit-picky but I wasn't as pleased with the casting of some of the female roles. Not because they're not great actors but more because of their very plain looks. The character of Bateman is supposed to be surrounded, admired and chased after by the most beautiful women and I'm sorry but most women in this movie just aren't that impressive looking. Perhaps it's due to the fact that this is a movie that got directed by a female, so she might not have had such an eye for it as a man would had. But this is about really the only thing that slightly bothered me about this movie, which should tell you something about how great it is.It's really a movie that I liked watching because of how beautifully insane it all got done.9/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

"I think my mask of sanity is about to slip."

tt0144084

I've been letting my thoughts for this film percolate now for about twenty four hours, so before any more time goes by I'll try to get it all down here. I thought there was something up with the picture when Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) and his cronies were comparing business cards for the first time. I got the impression that it was all a sham, that none of them were actually Vice Presidents of Pierce and Pierce, and that they were actually role playing the position of executives in anticipation of an eventual promotion. Bateman himself never seemed to do any work, other than having his secretary line up his appointments to meet associates or clients so he could spend additional time not working some more.The bigger tip off that this was possibly all just an imaginary story was the 'Feed me a stray cat' scene. By this time it was pretty well established that Bateman was unhinged, but the question is, to what degree. Did he really engage in those prior killing sprees or did he just imagine it? Or a third possibility, was he envisioning what it would be like to go completely berserk if all bets were off and he could completely get away with it. By the time the story's over, I think you'd have to be open to all these various interpretations, because in the 'real' world, you wouldn't have a realtor showing an apartment where bodies hung in the closet just days before.Going in, I had some trepidation when the DVD opened to a menu screen suggesting a splatter flick, and if I'm not mistaken, an image of a chain saw somewhere along the way. I've seen a couple of slasher/gore films in my time, and though I'm not that squeamish (any more), that kind of stuff does nothing for me. So anticipating a chain saw scene, I could only groan at the impossibility of the physics involved in poor Jean (Chloe Sevigny) taking a direct bull's eye hit like that at the bottom of the staircase. Just one more suggestion that this wasn't really happening.And what of Donald Kimball (Willem Dafoe)? What happened to him? Was this Bateman's guilt becoming manifest, either because of an actual murder or because of his own malicious thoughts? Generally I get really upset about movies like this because they tamper with one's ability to follow a coherent story and come to a reliable conclusion about what happened in it. But then again, it's got the word 'Psycho' in the title, so I guess all bets are off. Personally, twenty five dollars for a couple of drinks at a trendy New York City night club is about as psycho as I'll ever get.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1074

ur2707735

title: "I think my mask of sanity is about to slip." review: I've been letting my thoughts for this film percolate now for about twenty four hours, so before any more time goes by I'll try to get it all down here. I thought there was something up with the picture when Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) and his cronies were comparing business cards for the first time. I got the impression that it was all a sham, that none of them were actually Vice Presidents of Pierce and Pierce, and that they were actually role playing the position of executives in anticipation of an eventual promotion. Bateman himself never seemed to do any work, other than having his secretary line up his appointments to meet associates or clients so he could spend additional time not working some more.The bigger tip off that this was possibly all just an imaginary story was the 'Feed me a stray cat' scene. By this time it was pretty well established that Bateman was unhinged, but the question is, to what degree. Did he really engage in those prior killing sprees or did he just imagine it? Or a third possibility, was he envisioning what it would be like to go completely berserk if all bets were off and he could completely get away with it. By the time the story's over, I think you'd have to be open to all these various interpretations, because in the 'real' world, you wouldn't have a realtor showing an apartment where bodies hung in the closet just days before.Going in, I had some trepidation when the DVD opened to a menu screen suggesting a splatter flick, and if I'm not mistaken, an image of a chain saw somewhere along the way. I've seen a couple of slasher/gore films in my time, and though I'm not that squeamish (any more), that kind of stuff does nothing for me. So anticipating a chain saw scene, I could only groan at the impossibility of the physics involved in poor Jean (Chloe Sevigny) taking a direct bull's eye hit like that at the bottom of the staircase. Just one more suggestion that this wasn't really happening.And what of Donald Kimball (Willem Dafoe)? What happened to him? Was this Bateman's guilt becoming manifest, either because of an actual murder or because of his own malicious thoughts? Generally I get really upset about movies like this because they tamper with one's ability to follow a coherent story and come to a reliable conclusion about what happened in it. But then again, it's got the word 'Psycho' in the title, so I guess all bets are off. Personally, twenty five dollars for a couple of drinks at a trendy New York City night club is about as psycho as I'll ever get.

Book was better but the movie is alright as well

tt0144084

MPAA Rating:Rated R for Language,Sexual Content,Drug Use and Some Strong Violence. Quebec Rating:16+(should be 13+) Canadian Home Video Rating:18AI read the book American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis recently and loved it.It was a great book about a businessman who was a serial killer by night.While it did have some graphic scenes it was a very well written book which was sort of like a black comedy.Ever since I read the book I wanted to see the movie.I finally saw the movie today.The movie was pretty good but I expected more.The movie was a tad bit boring in my opinion.If you watch this movie, don't expect a slasher film.There are some violent bloody scenes in the film but most of the film shows the man's lifestyle and the lifestyles of his friends.They sometimes mistake each other for other people because they all basically do the same things.Most of the movie and the book as well shows people who are obsessed with materialism and outer-conformity.The main character Patrick Bateman is played by Christian Bale and Bale plays a very good role in the movie.I guess I was a tad bit disappointed with the movie because I thought there could have been more violence like in the book.Then again that's probably the mind of a teenager talking.American Psycho is still a pretty good film.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-874

ur11358734

title: Book was better but the movie is alright as well review: MPAA Rating:Rated R for Language,Sexual Content,Drug Use and Some Strong Violence. Quebec Rating:16+(should be 13+) Canadian Home Video Rating:18AI read the book American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis recently and loved it.It was a great book about a businessman who was a serial killer by night.While it did have some graphic scenes it was a very well written book which was sort of like a black comedy.Ever since I read the book I wanted to see the movie.I finally saw the movie today.The movie was pretty good but I expected more.The movie was a tad bit boring in my opinion.If you watch this movie, don't expect a slasher film.There are some violent bloody scenes in the film but most of the film shows the man's lifestyle and the lifestyles of his friends.They sometimes mistake each other for other people because they all basically do the same things.Most of the movie and the book as well shows people who are obsessed with materialism and outer-conformity.The main character Patrick Bateman is played by Christian Bale and Bale plays a very good role in the movie.I guess I was a tad bit disappointed with the movie because I thought there could have been more violence like in the book.Then again that's probably the mind of a teenager talking.American Psycho is still a pretty good film.

American Psycho A Twisted Well Made Thriller

tt0144084

American Psycho is a twisted very well made thriller with a knock out performance by Christian Bale from Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Prestige, and most recently Terminator Salvation. The rest of the cast including William Dafoe, Jared Leto, Chloe Sevigny, Josh Lucas, Samantha Mathis, and Reese Witherspoon in a small role turn in good performances but it's Bale who stands out amongst them. I won't say anything about the movie for anyone who hasn't seen it yet except that American Psycho is a thriller with some touches of dark humor powered by a great performance by Christian Bale as a wealthy New York banking executive with a taste for homicidal activities. The movie is definitely weird and different but in a good way. Director Mary Harron does a good job of bringing this film to the big screen and doing justice to the book. Well done. The film does contain strong violence, some graphic sex scenes, drug use, and strong language so parents should be warned before watching this with their kids. Overall American Psycho was much better that expected and most of that is because of the fantastic performance by Christian Bale who continues to show Hollywood why he's one of Hollywoods best actors. If you're in the mood to watch a good movie that's entertaining, different, and with some dark humor you can't go wrong with American Psycho. It's one movie among many that will not disappoint.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-962

ur19956219

title: American Psycho A Twisted Well Made Thriller review: American Psycho is a twisted very well made thriller with a knock out performance by Christian Bale from Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Prestige, and most recently Terminator Salvation. The rest of the cast including William Dafoe, Jared Leto, Chloe Sevigny, Josh Lucas, Samantha Mathis, and Reese Witherspoon in a small role turn in good performances but it's Bale who stands out amongst them. I won't say anything about the movie for anyone who hasn't seen it yet except that American Psycho is a thriller with some touches of dark humor powered by a great performance by Christian Bale as a wealthy New York banking executive with a taste for homicidal activities. The movie is definitely weird and different but in a good way. Director Mary Harron does a good job of bringing this film to the big screen and doing justice to the book. Well done. The film does contain strong violence, some graphic sex scenes, drug use, and strong language so parents should be warned before watching this with their kids. Overall American Psycho was much better that expected and most of that is because of the fantastic performance by Christian Bale who continues to show Hollywood why he's one of Hollywoods best actors. If you're in the mood to watch a good movie that's entertaining, different, and with some dark humor you can't go wrong with American Psycho. It's one movie among many that will not disappoint.

Dark and Creepy,You Won't Be Able To Look Away,

tt0144084

American Psycho is a terrific movie with an extremely well developed storyline that is kept interesting and exciting all the way through and a really inspired performance from Christian Bale.I found it much more frightening to follow the psychopath rather than following a character who is going to be killed,it is much more frightening the go into the characters messed up mind and learn about the small and stupid things that make him want to kill people.Patrick Bateman is a great character,he was extremely unlikeable and it annoyed how he was getting away with all these murders,but thats how they wanted you to feel,and they did it very well.I would highly recommend American Psycho to all fans of thrillers and horror.By day,slick banker Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) lives a life of excess and style,but by night,lets his murderous alter ego out to play.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-1102

ur23055365

title: Dark and Creepy,You Won't Be Able To Look Away, review: American Psycho is a terrific movie with an extremely well developed storyline that is kept interesting and exciting all the way through and a really inspired performance from Christian Bale.I found it much more frightening to follow the psychopath rather than following a character who is going to be killed,it is much more frightening the go into the characters messed up mind and learn about the small and stupid things that make him want to kill people.Patrick Bateman is a great character,he was extremely unlikeable and it annoyed how he was getting away with all these murders,but thats how they wanted you to feel,and they did it very well.I would highly recommend American Psycho to all fans of thrillers and horror.By day,slick banker Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) lives a life of excess and style,but by night,lets his murderous alter ego out to play.

a satiric black comedy

tt0144084

Now this is a film that will make you laugh & smile all the way throughA very good & thoroughly enjoyable Black comedy about a self absorbed egotist who even imagines himself to be a serial killer I enjoyed this much more than last years American Beauty which was a well made & well acted mess. I found nothing funny in American Beauty, I sure did hereonly quibble it could have been a little bit shorterthanksjay harris

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-340

ur0495697

title: a satiric black comedy review: Now this is a film that will make you laugh & smile all the way throughA very good & thoroughly enjoyable Black comedy about a self absorbed egotist who even imagines himself to be a serial killer I enjoyed this much more than last years American Beauty which was a well made & well acted mess. I found nothing funny in American Beauty, I sure did hereonly quibble it could have been a little bit shorterthanksjay harris

Great, except for the end

tt0144084

For most of this film's run, I was in agreement with those who have named this one of the films of the decade. It's just exuberant, hilarious, gripping and spot-on. I'm very vocal in my dislike of Christian Bale's acting style - it feels way too old fashioned to me (if he had been acting in the '50s and '60s, he'd definitely be among the best actors of his time, but nowadays, it just comes off as ridiculously methody), but American Psycho is pitched as a cartoon, and he fits in well. Most of the set-pieces are tremendous, most notably his axe murder set to Huey Lewis' "Hip to Be Square". I love every time he goes into the super-long descriptions of the music and artists he's listening to. The problem is, after the climactic sequence, the film takes the kind of twist that was all too prominent between the late '90s and today. Suffice it to say, it's not much more interesting than, "It was all just a dream". It flops to the floor like a dead fish and then ends. Definitely disappointing in that way, but I can totally dig the bulk of the movie.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/reviews-986

ur0391152

title: Great, except for the end review: For most of this film's run, I was in agreement with those who have named this one of the films of the decade. It's just exuberant, hilarious, gripping and spot-on. I'm very vocal in my dislike of Christian Bale's acting style - it feels way too old fashioned to me (if he had been acting in the '50s and '60s, he'd definitely be among the best actors of his time, but nowadays, it just comes off as ridiculously methody), but American Psycho is pitched as a cartoon, and he fits in well. Most of the set-pieces are tremendous, most notably his axe murder set to Huey Lewis' "Hip to Be Square". I love every time he goes into the super-long descriptions of the music and artists he's listening to. The problem is, after the climactic sequence, the film takes the kind of twist that was all too prominent between the late '90s and today. Suffice it to say, it's not much more interesting than, "It was all just a dream". It flops to the floor like a dead fish and then ends. Definitely disappointing in that way, but I can totally dig the bulk of the movie.

Woeful

tt0251160

Evidently, the script writer, possibly the director and cast too, has a big gripe with HMOs - canvassing an aspect that has been done to death: inadequacy of coverage. But in case you didn't know, this is nothing unique to HMOs. Virtually all private health insurance companies around the world offer policies where certain procedures or specialist consultations are excluded or the cost of coverage is capped in certain instances. In the rest of the world, all the important stipulations of the policy, such as this, are explained before the policy is taken out and is also provided to you in writing. By contrast, it seems that in the US, people never realise how much and what type of coverage they have with their HMO until a problem arises and they make a claim -which actually happens in this film. We see that Denzel "amazed" and "infuriated" when he finds out that he doesn't have enough coverage for a $250,000 operation. The old advice: "Keep yourself informed of your own affairs" undermines the point that these scene was trying to make, but oh well!! However, I'm not that cold hearted. I see that the film overall is trying to make a reasonably good point: when it comes to saving a child's life, why should our insurers/HMOs be quibbling over costs? And the best way to drill home this point is to show that it could (AND DOES) happen to anyone: perhaps a low level corporate employee on $45,000 - someone we would expect the HMOs to cover fully in such a situation. That would be a real "wake-up" call to everyone.But I felt that the lefties who bashed up this script couldn't help themselves and had to throw in all the old clichés and class warfare elements: Denzel's financially battling, we see his car get repossessed and his hours at work have been cut back to part time...and his health cover has been downgraded... blah blah blah. But he's a purely loving and caring father. In other words, the set up of Denzel's character is all a bit too-leftist-perfect for me to stomach. Further, all these clichés didn't really augment the major point of the film. In point of fact, it gave us an early glimpse of the political persuasion of the writers and as a result, you know how every supposed "twist" and "turn" will resolve itself! It's "predictable by political extension." Worse still, the film fails to deliver anyway and gets sillier and sillier. When John Q takes the ER hostage, you can see that the doctor, the hospital administrators, the policemen and the hostages were always going to wind up sympathising with John Q and in a loud Hollywood voice pronounce that "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH when it comes to these nasty mean HMOs." It's simply overcooked and the ending is more or less predictable. I suppose that holding up an ER and forcing it to shut down and turn away emergency patients is a very poignant and responsible way of getting things done. Of course, the film attempts to reel it's moral diversion back into line by acknowledging that Denzel will go to jail for this, but when you see his son smiling and thanking him at the end of the film, you sense that the writers don't really disapprove of his actions whatsoever. That is a bit troubling!Interestingly, though, there seems to be a major problem with the argument that they are trying to run throughout the film: there is a complete absence of any substantial criticism of the doctors, who refuse to even consider operating on the terminally ill child if his parents can't come up with $250,000 for a six hour procedure. For all that is said about lawyers, many (even good ones) will work pro bono or on contingent arrangements when a rare case arises. But when it comes to doctors, no sir-eee. It seems that they will refuse to lift a finger without being paid ridiculous fees in advance, even if an "innocent child's" life is on the line. Furthermore, this is one of those 1 in a 1000 operations, so you expect doctors to be "warm-hearted" enough to make some sort of exception or arrangement in the circumstances. But as this film shows, the doctors refuse and and they nonetheless escape a good deal of criticism. Instead, the writers heap it all on the HMOs and hospital admin; and even the hospital admin (led by Anne Heche) seems to come out of this mess smelling like a rose. Doctors are gods i suppose.As for the acting, Denzel did a reasonable job, but most other characters in the film were relatively wooden. I had no idea what the purpose of Ray Liotta's character was to this film, nor the tensions between him and Robert Duvall. It seemed to be very out of place or downright unnecessary. Heche and Woods were wooden. The hostages in the ER were the stereotypical gaggle of hostages and were rather unamuzing, uninteresting and ultimately unnecessary. And by the way, I understand the metaphor about the heart. ie... the HMOs and hospital admin are heartless, Denzel and his charitable community are warm-hearted and.... his son need a "heart" transplant. Any chance of being a bit more subtle with the use of symbolism and metaphor or are the writers so inherently patronising that they need to treat the audience like idiots and literally spell it out for them? Towards the end of the film, Denzel holds a gun to his head and is about to kill himself so that the doctors can take out his heart and put it in his son. By this stage, I wished that Denzel simply shot all the pathetic supporting cast, the director, the screenplay writer and anyone else remotely connected with this film before putting himself and this dismal film out of its misery.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-354

ur5347756

title: Woeful review: Evidently, the script writer, possibly the director and cast too, has a big gripe with HMOs - canvassing an aspect that has been done to death: inadequacy of coverage. But in case you didn't know, this is nothing unique to HMOs. Virtually all private health insurance companies around the world offer policies where certain procedures or specialist consultations are excluded or the cost of coverage is capped in certain instances. In the rest of the world, all the important stipulations of the policy, such as this, are explained before the policy is taken out and is also provided to you in writing. By contrast, it seems that in the US, people never realise how much and what type of coverage they have with their HMO until a problem arises and they make a claim -which actually happens in this film. We see that Denzel "amazed" and "infuriated" when he finds out that he doesn't have enough coverage for a $250,000 operation. The old advice: "Keep yourself informed of your own affairs" undermines the point that these scene was trying to make, but oh well!! However, I'm not that cold hearted. I see that the film overall is trying to make a reasonably good point: when it comes to saving a child's life, why should our insurers/HMOs be quibbling over costs? And the best way to drill home this point is to show that it could (AND DOES) happen to anyone: perhaps a low level corporate employee on $45,000 - someone we would expect the HMOs to cover fully in such a situation. That would be a real "wake-up" call to everyone.But I felt that the lefties who bashed up this script couldn't help themselves and had to throw in all the old clichés and class warfare elements: Denzel's financially battling, we see his car get repossessed and his hours at work have been cut back to part time...and his health cover has been downgraded... blah blah blah. But he's a purely loving and caring father. In other words, the set up of Denzel's character is all a bit too-leftist-perfect for me to stomach. Further, all these clichés didn't really augment the major point of the film. In point of fact, it gave us an early glimpse of the political persuasion of the writers and as a result, you know how every supposed "twist" and "turn" will resolve itself! It's "predictable by political extension." Worse still, the film fails to deliver anyway and gets sillier and sillier. When John Q takes the ER hostage, you can see that the doctor, the hospital administrators, the policemen and the hostages were always going to wind up sympathising with John Q and in a loud Hollywood voice pronounce that "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH when it comes to these nasty mean HMOs." It's simply overcooked and the ending is more or less predictable. I suppose that holding up an ER and forcing it to shut down and turn away emergency patients is a very poignant and responsible way of getting things done. Of course, the film attempts to reel it's moral diversion back into line by acknowledging that Denzel will go to jail for this, but when you see his son smiling and thanking him at the end of the film, you sense that the writers don't really disapprove of his actions whatsoever. That is a bit troubling!Interestingly, though, there seems to be a major problem with the argument that they are trying to run throughout the film: there is a complete absence of any substantial criticism of the doctors, who refuse to even consider operating on the terminally ill child if his parents can't come up with $250,000 for a six hour procedure. For all that is said about lawyers, many (even good ones) will work pro bono or on contingent arrangements when a rare case arises. But when it comes to doctors, no sir-eee. It seems that they will refuse to lift a finger without being paid ridiculous fees in advance, even if an "innocent child's" life is on the line. Furthermore, this is one of those 1 in a 1000 operations, so you expect doctors to be "warm-hearted" enough to make some sort of exception or arrangement in the circumstances. But as this film shows, the doctors refuse and and they nonetheless escape a good deal of criticism. Instead, the writers heap it all on the HMOs and hospital admin; and even the hospital admin (led by Anne Heche) seems to come out of this mess smelling like a rose. Doctors are gods i suppose.As for the acting, Denzel did a reasonable job, but most other characters in the film were relatively wooden. I had no idea what the purpose of Ray Liotta's character was to this film, nor the tensions between him and Robert Duvall. It seemed to be very out of place or downright unnecessary. Heche and Woods were wooden. The hostages in the ER were the stereotypical gaggle of hostages and were rather unamuzing, uninteresting and ultimately unnecessary. And by the way, I understand the metaphor about the heart. ie... the HMOs and hospital admin are heartless, Denzel and his charitable community are warm-hearted and.... his son need a "heart" transplant. Any chance of being a bit more subtle with the use of symbolism and metaphor or are the writers so inherently patronising that they need to treat the audience like idiots and literally spell it out for them? Towards the end of the film, Denzel holds a gun to his head and is about to kill himself so that the doctors can take out his heart and put it in his son. By this stage, I wished that Denzel simply shot all the pathetic supporting cast, the director, the screenplay writer and anyone else remotely connected with this film before putting himself and this dismal film out of its misery.

Good As A Drama, But The Thriller Is Forced And Clichéd

tt0251160

Sure the epic battle between good and evil has been done a million times, but you ask yourself, what happens when the good takes on a another rivalry that's also good. this is the case in the 2002 Denzel Washington vehicle "John Q.". This movie focuses on the confrontation against the health care system, but at times the film tends to drift away from the exciting main plot and quickly drifts away into something more surreal and implausible. In this movie, Washington takes on the role of John Quincy Archibald, a financially inept factory worker who gets bad news upon hearing that his son Mike collapses during a baseball game. John and his wife rush the boy to the emergency room where the doctor reports to them that their son's heart is very large and a heart replacement is greatly needed. the situation takes a turn for the worse when the cardiologist and administrator (James Woods and Anne Heche who look cold and calculated) hands a $75,000 down payment in order for the procedure to commence. John doesn't have a lot of money, as he tries to squeeze out of his workman's insurance as much as he could get out of it, but word comes out that the company switched carriers and the most they have to offer him was $20,000. John goes as far as sell off all of his prized possessions, however that does him justice because he's still short of cash. This leaves John with no other choice to take matters into his own hands. He goes so far as to take the hospital hostage unless his son is placed on the donor's list. John's demands are taken into consideration by the police lead by hostage negotiator, Frank Grimes (Robert Duvall) and Police Chief Monroe (Ray Liotta), who's in the wings for reelection and asks to have John removed from the building in an efficient way. The hostages consist of a diverse group of unfortunate victims such as street thugs, a pregnant lady, another lady who might be or pretending to be a dingy broad, and a foreign woman who can't speak a word of English. Sure the victims are recycled clichés from other films from the past, but when it symbolizes the how health care functions in the United States, it transpires into the most implausible and reprehensible outlooks one could ever encounter. It's even more appalling when they're speaking with a gun near their heads. It takes a turn for the bad as it goes from a tearful drama to a severely cringing thriller with badly caricatured hostages. I'm sure this angle could've had a two-sided perspective to it, but its concentration sticks to this one-sided agenda. It might be due to the limitations of filming or to avoid any further complications so that the audience won't scratch their heads in confusion, or to avoid this movie from looking like a made for TV drama. But this painful ordeal to watch which makes you groan in disbelief.Washington has made some remarkable films over the years, but in "John Q", his credibility goes down a notch, being that he's been in much better roles than this one. Nonetheless, he still manages successfully to provide one of the most selfless characters on celluloid. Here's a poor working class man going out of way to find the money to pay for his son's surgery and the drama that he possesses is carried out to near perfection. The other standouts come from strong support from Kimberly Elise and Robert Duvall. As for the rest of the ensemble, they're reduced to just nothing more than badly drawn, one-dimensional caricatures. "John Q." overall was a well executed film and would have been better if it stuck to being a medical drama centering on a man going out of his way to save his son's life. It sadly falters due to the forceful suspense with cardboard characters, a lopsided script and a manipulative and predictable nature to it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-405

ur12327230

title: Good As A Drama, But The Thriller Is Forced And Clichéd review: Sure the epic battle between good and evil has been done a million times, but you ask yourself, what happens when the good takes on a another rivalry that's also good. this is the case in the 2002 Denzel Washington vehicle "John Q.". This movie focuses on the confrontation against the health care system, but at times the film tends to drift away from the exciting main plot and quickly drifts away into something more surreal and implausible. In this movie, Washington takes on the role of John Quincy Archibald, a financially inept factory worker who gets bad news upon hearing that his son Mike collapses during a baseball game. John and his wife rush the boy to the emergency room where the doctor reports to them that their son's heart is very large and a heart replacement is greatly needed. the situation takes a turn for the worse when the cardiologist and administrator (James Woods and Anne Heche who look cold and calculated) hands a $75,000 down payment in order for the procedure to commence. John doesn't have a lot of money, as he tries to squeeze out of his workman's insurance as much as he could get out of it, but word comes out that the company switched carriers and the most they have to offer him was $20,000. John goes as far as sell off all of his prized possessions, however that does him justice because he's still short of cash. This leaves John with no other choice to take matters into his own hands. He goes so far as to take the hospital hostage unless his son is placed on the donor's list. John's demands are taken into consideration by the police lead by hostage negotiator, Frank Grimes (Robert Duvall) and Police Chief Monroe (Ray Liotta), who's in the wings for reelection and asks to have John removed from the building in an efficient way. The hostages consist of a diverse group of unfortunate victims such as street thugs, a pregnant lady, another lady who might be or pretending to be a dingy broad, and a foreign woman who can't speak a word of English. Sure the victims are recycled clichés from other films from the past, but when it symbolizes the how health care functions in the United States, it transpires into the most implausible and reprehensible outlooks one could ever encounter. It's even more appalling when they're speaking with a gun near their heads. It takes a turn for the bad as it goes from a tearful drama to a severely cringing thriller with badly caricatured hostages. I'm sure this angle could've had a two-sided perspective to it, but its concentration sticks to this one-sided agenda. It might be due to the limitations of filming or to avoid any further complications so that the audience won't scratch their heads in confusion, or to avoid this movie from looking like a made for TV drama. But this painful ordeal to watch which makes you groan in disbelief.Washington has made some remarkable films over the years, but in "John Q", his credibility goes down a notch, being that he's been in much better roles than this one. Nonetheless, he still manages successfully to provide one of the most selfless characters on celluloid. Here's a poor working class man going out of way to find the money to pay for his son's surgery and the drama that he possesses is carried out to near perfection. The other standouts come from strong support from Kimberly Elise and Robert Duvall. As for the rest of the ensemble, they're reduced to just nothing more than badly drawn, one-dimensional caricatures. "John Q." overall was a well executed film and would have been better if it stuck to being a medical drama centering on a man going out of his way to save his son's life. It sadly falters due to the forceful suspense with cardboard characters, a lopsided script and a manipulative and predictable nature to it.

6.4 my ass

tt0251160

i don't understand why people don't like this movie, this movie is one of my favorites with a phenomenal performance from denzel washington as usual, but oh my god, the great thing about this movie is the fact that its true what they say about the health care system, the corruption and unjustness, and the measures a father would go or his son, when i have a son, i would do the same thing, i would do something drastic, i would do what john q did and hold the hostpital hostage, and my second choice would be to give my life for my son, just as john q was about to do, and this movie had one of the most intense sequences i've seen in a movie, so for those of you reading this and haven't seen the movie, f*ck the rating, watch this movie, its good trust me

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-375

ur16449444

title: 6.4 my ass review: i don't understand why people don't like this movie, this movie is one of my favorites with a phenomenal performance from denzel washington as usual, but oh my god, the great thing about this movie is the fact that its true what they say about the health care system, the corruption and unjustness, and the measures a father would go or his son, when i have a son, i would do the same thing, i would do something drastic, i would do what john q did and hold the hostpital hostage, and my second choice would be to give my life for my son, just as john q was about to do, and this movie had one of the most intense sequences i've seen in a movie, so for those of you reading this and haven't seen the movie, f*ck the rating, watch this movie, its good trust me

Denzel Washington Rocks!

tt0251160

Denzel Wasington Rocks! And this fact, is once again proved, with his terrific act in 'John Q'. Though a decent film, it's flaws come up evidently, but Denzel manages to hold you till the end.Denzel stars as John Quincy Archibald, a father and husband whose son is diagnosed with an enlarged heart and then finds out he cannot receive a transplant because HMO insurance will not cover it. Therefore, he decides to take a hospital full of patients hostage until the hospital puts his son's name on the recipient's list.The Idea is interesting & challenging. The film begins with a class, as the writing holds you. But, in the second hour, especially, the writing gets lose and even the culmination isn't as good as one expects it to be. Nick Cassavetes directs this emotional story, with patience. Cinematography & Editing are fine. Acting-Wise: As mentioned right from the beginning, Denzel rules the show. A performance so well-done, that it holds you, even when the writing falters. In the supporting cast, Bobby Duvall, James Woods & Kimberly Elise are efficient. Anne Heche & Ray Liotta are passable. Others lend support. On the whole, 'John Q' is interesting in parts, but what really stands tall in this film, is it's lead-star's performance.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-403

ur8503729

title: Denzel Washington Rocks! review: Denzel Wasington Rocks! And this fact, is once again proved, with his terrific act in 'John Q'. Though a decent film, it's flaws come up evidently, but Denzel manages to hold you till the end.Denzel stars as John Quincy Archibald, a father and husband whose son is diagnosed with an enlarged heart and then finds out he cannot receive a transplant because HMO insurance will not cover it. Therefore, he decides to take a hospital full of patients hostage until the hospital puts his son's name on the recipient's list.The Idea is interesting & challenging. The film begins with a class, as the writing holds you. But, in the second hour, especially, the writing gets lose and even the culmination isn't as good as one expects it to be. Nick Cassavetes directs this emotional story, with patience. Cinematography & Editing are fine. Acting-Wise: As mentioned right from the beginning, Denzel rules the show. A performance so well-done, that it holds you, even when the writing falters. In the supporting cast, Bobby Duvall, James Woods & Kimberly Elise are efficient. Anne Heche & Ray Liotta are passable. Others lend support. On the whole, 'John Q' is interesting in parts, but what really stands tall in this film, is it's lead-star's performance.

Health coverage in the US is really sick

tt0251160

This film is the pioneer and precursor of Michael More's documentary Sicko recently released, but this one is based on a fictional situation. What is a father ready to do to enable his son to get a heart transplant? And what is the system able to do to prevent him from getting it because he does not have enough insurance coverage? The second question is easy to answer: nothing and the system will let the child die. No insurance coverage, no treatment. The first question is a lot more difficult to answer; the film goes very far in the fiction and yet it is absolutely believable. Yes a father is able to kidnap innocent people and medical personnel to impose a positive solution. Then the rest is pure luck, haphazard chance, good effective media, a lot of human feeling, a mistake done by the shoot-first-ask-questions-second chief of police in his four star uniform, and of course a lot of sympathy from the public which is perfectly understandable when you know 46 millions Americans have no health coverage at all and probably twenty more millions have a partial coverage, i.e. not full coverage or full coverage not all the time. The film is of course very effective emotionally, and it uses some short sequences from the news programs of the 1990s when Hillary Clinton was trying in the name of her husband to convince Congress to pass legislation on the subject and failed. I think even to kill yourself to provide your own son with a heart is an option that could be considered by some fathers. Of course the film did not emphasize the real negative sides of the problem, the greediness of some doctors, the total indifference of most administrative personnel, the brutality of the police in such cases who would consider a forceful solution before a peaceful one. But there must be some dream even when dealing with such a subject.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine & University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-374

ur3836774

title: Health coverage in the US is really sick review: This film is the pioneer and precursor of Michael More's documentary Sicko recently released, but this one is based on a fictional situation. What is a father ready to do to enable his son to get a heart transplant? And what is the system able to do to prevent him from getting it because he does not have enough insurance coverage? The second question is easy to answer: nothing and the system will let the child die. No insurance coverage, no treatment. The first question is a lot more difficult to answer; the film goes very far in the fiction and yet it is absolutely believable. Yes a father is able to kidnap innocent people and medical personnel to impose a positive solution. Then the rest is pure luck, haphazard chance, good effective media, a lot of human feeling, a mistake done by the shoot-first-ask-questions-second chief of police in his four star uniform, and of course a lot of sympathy from the public which is perfectly understandable when you know 46 millions Americans have no health coverage at all and probably twenty more millions have a partial coverage, i.e. not full coverage or full coverage not all the time. The film is of course very effective emotionally, and it uses some short sequences from the news programs of the 1990s when Hillary Clinton was trying in the name of her husband to convince Congress to pass legislation on the subject and failed. I think even to kill yourself to provide your own son with a heart is an option that could be considered by some fathers. Of course the film did not emphasize the real negative sides of the problem, the greediness of some doctors, the total indifference of most administrative personnel, the brutality of the police in such cases who would consider a forceful solution before a peaceful one. But there must be some dream even when dealing with such a subject.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine & University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne

A very good film that touches up on highly debatable subject matter

tt0251160

"John Q" stars Denzel Washington in the title role as a desperate father who takes a hospital emergency room hostage when he discovers that he can't pay for his son's heart transplant. You see John's situation is a lot more complicated than that. First off, the creditors have re-possessed one of his cars, he himself is unable to make ends meet with his family, and to make matters worse, the insurance company refuses to pay for the transplant. So what is John Q. going to do? Anything he can, even if it means putting his own life on the line.This is a truly memorable film that is definitely Oscar-worthy. Denzel Washington gives another performance worthy of an Oscar. The supporting cast which includes Robert Duvall, James Woods, Anne Heche, Kimberly Elise, and Ray Liotta, is good as well. I really like the villain here, which is not Denzel's character nor James' character, but our own health care system, which says that if you don't have any money, then we can't help you. Where does it say in our constitution that a price could ever be put on a human life? The answer: no where in it, as far as I can see. 10/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-167

ur0892646

title: A very good film that touches up on highly debatable subject matter review: "John Q" stars Denzel Washington in the title role as a desperate father who takes a hospital emergency room hostage when he discovers that he can't pay for his son's heart transplant. You see John's situation is a lot more complicated than that. First off, the creditors have re-possessed one of his cars, he himself is unable to make ends meet with his family, and to make matters worse, the insurance company refuses to pay for the transplant. So what is John Q. going to do? Anything he can, even if it means putting his own life on the line.This is a truly memorable film that is definitely Oscar-worthy. Denzel Washington gives another performance worthy of an Oscar. The supporting cast which includes Robert Duvall, James Woods, Anne Heche, Kimberly Elise, and Ray Liotta, is good as well. I really like the villain here, which is not Denzel's character nor James' character, but our own health care system, which says that if you don't have any money, then we can't help you. Where does it say in our constitution that a price could ever be put on a human life? The answer: no where in it, as far as I can see. 10/10

too melodramatic and so much yelling

tt0251160

In Chicago, John Quincy Archibald (Denzel Washington) and wife Denise (Kimberly Elise) are struggling financially. Their son Mike collapses at the baseball game. Rebecca Payne (Anne Heche) is the hospital president and Dr. Raymond Turner (James Woods) is their cardiac surgeon. Mike needs a heart transplant but the HMO won't cover the minimum $250k. They can't get any help no matter how hard they try. In desperation, an armed John takes over the emergency room. Police Lt. Frank Grimes (Robert Duvall) negotiates with him.It's an over-the-edge melodrama. The problem is that everything is pushed to the edge. Denzel is crying in the first 15 minutes. I appreciate the message but it's lost in the montage of frustration. Denzel is pushing so hard to be hyper angry that it's difficult to root for him. If Denzel and Kimberly could calm down early on, the audience could embrace them. In fact, everybody seems to be yelling in this movie. It's a hard movie to like.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-424

ur2898520

title: too melodramatic and so much yelling review: In Chicago, John Quincy Archibald (Denzel Washington) and wife Denise (Kimberly Elise) are struggling financially. Their son Mike collapses at the baseball game. Rebecca Payne (Anne Heche) is the hospital president and Dr. Raymond Turner (James Woods) is their cardiac surgeon. Mike needs a heart transplant but the HMO won't cover the minimum $250k. They can't get any help no matter how hard they try. In desperation, an armed John takes over the emergency room. Police Lt. Frank Grimes (Robert Duvall) negotiates with him.It's an over-the-edge melodrama. The problem is that everything is pushed to the edge. Denzel is crying in the first 15 minutes. I appreciate the message but it's lost in the montage of frustration. Denzel is pushing so hard to be hyper angry that it's difficult to root for him. If Denzel and Kimberly could calm down early on, the audience could embrace them. In fact, everybody seems to be yelling in this movie. It's a hard movie to like.

Dramatic Story - Worth Seeing

tt0251160

I hesitated to buy it because I read in the critics that it wouldn´t be a realistic movie. Well at part it is true but only what concerns the operation conditions and some incredible scenes in the hospital. For the rest the story is worth seeing. Denzel Washington did a fine job and his wife in the movie too. This films critics in a very sharp way the real problem in the health organization and that everything works only with money. I hope the authorities will learn something. The movie had for me many twists and turns and sometimes I had tears in my eyes. That´s not an action movie but it's dramatic enough to have suspense time. After long time I found with JOHN Q a new DVD for my collection. 8/10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-294

ur1634796

title: Dramatic Story - Worth Seeing review: I hesitated to buy it because I read in the critics that it wouldn´t be a realistic movie. Well at part it is true but only what concerns the operation conditions and some incredible scenes in the hospital. For the rest the story is worth seeing. Denzel Washington did a fine job and his wife in the movie too. This films critics in a very sharp way the real problem in the health organization and that everything works only with money. I hope the authorities will learn something. The movie had for me many twists and turns and sometimes I had tears in my eyes. That´s not an action movie but it's dramatic enough to have suspense time. After long time I found with JOHN Q a new DVD for my collection. 8/10.

Really Good!

tt0251160

Starring: Denzel Washington and Robert DuvallGenre: Drama/CrimeRated PG-13 for Violence, Language and Intense Thematic ElementsStar Rating: ****1/2 out of 5This was one of my favorite Denzel Washington movies ever! This movie is about a man named John.Q who had a great life until his son's heart stopped working and they had to rush him down to the Chicago Hospital. The insurance didn't cover his son's transplant, so in order for his son's recovery John (Denzel Washington) holds the Emergency Room hostage until the doctors agree to get the transplant successful! I thought Denzel Washington made another good performance in this movie even though it was nominated for any Academy Awards like the movie he did before this one, Training Day with him and Ethan Hawke. I thought that kid was cute especially when he was doing impressions of wrestlers.BOTTOM LINE: GOOD MOVIE AND VERY POWERFUL!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-298

ur1966301

title: Really Good! review: Starring: Denzel Washington and Robert DuvallGenre: Drama/CrimeRated PG-13 for Violence, Language and Intense Thematic ElementsStar Rating: ****1/2 out of 5This was one of my favorite Denzel Washington movies ever! This movie is about a man named John.Q who had a great life until his son's heart stopped working and they had to rush him down to the Chicago Hospital. The insurance didn't cover his son's transplant, so in order for his son's recovery John (Denzel Washington) holds the Emergency Room hostage until the doctors agree to get the transplant successful! I thought Denzel Washington made another good performance in this movie even though it was nominated for any Academy Awards like the movie he did before this one, Training Day with him and Ethan Hawke. I thought that kid was cute especially when he was doing impressions of wrestlers.BOTTOM LINE: GOOD MOVIE AND VERY POWERFUL!

Wonderful

tt0251160

This movie shows how it is really wonderful to live in a capitalist country mainly if you have a serious illness. If this is not true the fault is the director's not mine because this movie proves it thoroughly. But the movie has a positive side because it shows also that mankind is not so bad after all. As a matter of fact we can witness a solidarity chain formed among the friends, neighbors and fellow-workers to help the father of the child who needs an urgent heart transplant and we can also witness the sympathy felt in the end by hostages held by him in a desperate attempt to overcome obstacles to that transplant that arise from the fact that he is a black worker who has no money to pay for it and the insurance company refuses to cover the necessary cost. This seems to confirm the statement according to which men are good and it's society which makes them bad. The story is told with very efficient images and plans and the atmosphere of tension reaches some unbearable stages sometimes. There r no untrue moments in it and everything is very realistic. It's one of the best movies of the year undoubtedly.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-117

ur1046460

title: Wonderful review: This movie shows how it is really wonderful to live in a capitalist country mainly if you have a serious illness. If this is not true the fault is the director's not mine because this movie proves it thoroughly. But the movie has a positive side because it shows also that mankind is not so bad after all. As a matter of fact we can witness a solidarity chain formed among the friends, neighbors and fellow-workers to help the father of the child who needs an urgent heart transplant and we can also witness the sympathy felt in the end by hostages held by him in a desperate attempt to overcome obstacles to that transplant that arise from the fact that he is a black worker who has no money to pay for it and the insurance company refuses to cover the necessary cost. This seems to confirm the statement according to which men are good and it's society which makes them bad. The story is told with very efficient images and plans and the atmosphere of tension reaches some unbearable stages sometimes. There r no untrue moments in it and everything is very realistic. It's one of the best movies of the year undoubtedly.

Hmmm

tt0251160

Originally I thought that the movie was good. After thinking about it, the cops can't possibly be that inept. A heart transplant doesn't just happen with a doctor who has been held hostage for hours with a minimal surgical team. Anne Heche doesn't look like an administrator of a hospital that grosses hundreds of millions every year, and her wardrobe? Yuck! Denzel does a super job as usual, and some of the supporting cast is good, but most roles are shallow. I was most disappointed with Robert Duvall's role. Such a waste of dialogue for a talented actor. One or two good scenes and Washington's performance make this predictable tale worth seeing once.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-73

ur1591197

title: Hmmm review: Originally I thought that the movie was good. After thinking about it, the cops can't possibly be that inept. A heart transplant doesn't just happen with a doctor who has been held hostage for hours with a minimal surgical team. Anne Heche doesn't look like an administrator of a hospital that grosses hundreds of millions every year, and her wardrobe? Yuck! Denzel does a super job as usual, and some of the supporting cast is good, but most roles are shallow. I was most disappointed with Robert Duvall's role. Such a waste of dialogue for a talented actor. One or two good scenes and Washington's performance make this predictable tale worth seeing once.

Denzel Washintong plays as John Q... and that was all the motivation I needed to see it

tt0251160

Denzel Washington plays as John Q. a man who has come to very desperate moment in his life when his son suffers from a heart attack and after placing him in the hospital he finds out the hard way that he has no insurance to pay for a heart transplant, you know what they say "desperate times call for desperate measures." Denzel's acting in this film is predictable... and by that I mean that it is typical Denzel Washinton, superb, overwhelming and beautiful. He really knows how get into the characters he plays, James Woods is not a bad addition to this either, those two actors in this one film and with such a touching and dramatic story that will most- likely have everyone in the audience weeping with such emotion that this film provokes. A father with no other choice, original and totally a possible these days. This film is a must see film and great way to spend your movie money on, after watching this movie you will have no regrets and you will want to watch it more than 8 times.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251160/reviews-386

ur20327087

title: Denzel Washintong plays as John Q... and that was all the motivation I needed to see it review: Denzel Washington plays as John Q. a man who has come to very desperate moment in his life when his son suffers from a heart attack and after placing him in the hospital he finds out the hard way that he has no insurance to pay for a heart transplant, you know what they say "desperate times call for desperate measures." Denzel's acting in this film is predictable... and by that I mean that it is typical Denzel Washinton, superb, overwhelming and beautiful. He really knows how get into the characters he plays, James Woods is not a bad addition to this either, those two actors in this one film and with such a touching and dramatic story that will most- likely have everyone in the audience weeping with such emotion that this film provokes. A father with no other choice, original and totally a possible these days. This film is a must see film and great way to spend your movie money on, after watching this movie you will have no regrets and you will want to watch it more than 8 times.

Tommy Wiseau used me and I am the fool

tt0368226

Oh, wow, um, where do I even begin with this movie? I suppose I could tell you how I heard of it, like most people I heard about this movie from an internet reviewer(the Nostalgia Critic). I honestly would've never heard of this film either, probably would have never seen it. But after the clips I saw, I HAD to see this movie, I went on Amazon.com immediately afterwards and ordered it. Now I knew this movie was going to be bad, but I HAD NO IDEA! I think it's one of those movies that had to be handled in clips because I cannot tell you all the safety precautions you should take before watching this movie. My boyfriend tried to commit suicide while I just wanted to find Tommy Wiseau and do some things that even the Dark One would look at me and say "geez, take it easy on the guy". I cannot even describe how this movie is bad. The acting is like the actors are literally reading the script for the first time. Tommy Wiseau's acting, I don't know if there's a word for how bad it is so we'll just say it's "aguwaba", also it seems his voice was dubbed over. Now I thought this was because maybe he only speaks one language that isn't English, but he speaks with this stupid indefinable accent all the time, so why is his dubbing the same way? Where is he from? Brazil, Romania, France…? I have no idea.Lisa has become inexplicably dissatisfied with her fiancé Johnny, confiding to her best friend Michelle and her mother Claudette that she finds him boring. Lisa seduces Johnny's best friend Mark, and they begin an affair that continues throughout the film, even as Mark more than once tries to break it off. As the wedding date approaches and Johnny's clout at his bank slips, Lisa gets closer to leaving Johnny for Mark. When Lisa throws Johnny a surprise birthday party, she flaunts her affair in front of Johnny, and Johnny and Mark get into two altercations. Johnny has also attached a tape recorder to the telephone, recording an intimate call between his future wife and Mark. Now that Johnny is "fed up with this world", feeling like he cannot trust anyone, he pulls the ultimate punishment in self loathing to himself but a true gift to the audience.This movie is just incredible that it was made, I didn't think it was possible to make a film so bad. It's like it's a new genre, just a bad movie. Sub plots get brought up out of no where in this movie and never get brought up again. Characters get brought up and again never mentioned. The script, story, characters, editing, setting, everything was just wrong with this movie. Also Tommy Wiseau's name is mentioned 6 times before the film even begins and his character is of course "perfect" that everyone should just love him. Lisa, who is very odd looking, is constantly called "sexy" which either has a new definition or is ironic. Mark is a doof ball that probably thinks that penguins are fish, because he's just that stupid. Denny is a perverted 15 year old who wants to watch Johnny and Lisa make love and constantly says how in love with Lisa he is and how he loves Johnny. Also there is so many pointless love scenes, football scenes, gift giving scenes, lines, if there was a drinking game on the pointless scenes for this film, you'd die of alcohol poisoning by the end of this movie. I don't know, it is one of those films you have to see to believe, but I can tell you one thing for sure, if Tommy Wiseau thinks we're laughing with him, he should check that we're actually laughing at him.1/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368226/reviews-99

ur1293485

title: Tommy Wiseau used me and I am the fool review: Oh, wow, um, where do I even begin with this movie? I suppose I could tell you how I heard of it, like most people I heard about this movie from an internet reviewer(the Nostalgia Critic). I honestly would've never heard of this film either, probably would have never seen it. But after the clips I saw, I HAD to see this movie, I went on Amazon.com immediately afterwards and ordered it. Now I knew this movie was going to be bad, but I HAD NO IDEA! I think it's one of those movies that had to be handled in clips because I cannot tell you all the safety precautions you should take before watching this movie. My boyfriend tried to commit suicide while I just wanted to find Tommy Wiseau and do some things that even the Dark One would look at me and say "geez, take it easy on the guy". I cannot even describe how this movie is bad. The acting is like the actors are literally reading the script for the first time. Tommy Wiseau's acting, I don't know if there's a word for how bad it is so we'll just say it's "aguwaba", also it seems his voice was dubbed over. Now I thought this was because maybe he only speaks one language that isn't English, but he speaks with this stupid indefinable accent all the time, so why is his dubbing the same way? Where is he from? Brazil, Romania, France…? I have no idea.Lisa has become inexplicably dissatisfied with her fiancé Johnny, confiding to her best friend Michelle and her mother Claudette that she finds him boring. Lisa seduces Johnny's best friend Mark, and they begin an affair that continues throughout the film, even as Mark more than once tries to break it off. As the wedding date approaches and Johnny's clout at his bank slips, Lisa gets closer to leaving Johnny for Mark. When Lisa throws Johnny a surprise birthday party, she flaunts her affair in front of Johnny, and Johnny and Mark get into two altercations. Johnny has also attached a tape recorder to the telephone, recording an intimate call between his future wife and Mark. Now that Johnny is "fed up with this world", feeling like he cannot trust anyone, he pulls the ultimate punishment in self loathing to himself but a true gift to the audience.This movie is just incredible that it was made, I didn't think it was possible to make a film so bad. It's like it's a new genre, just a bad movie. Sub plots get brought up out of no where in this movie and never get brought up again. Characters get brought up and again never mentioned. The script, story, characters, editing, setting, everything was just wrong with this movie. Also Tommy Wiseau's name is mentioned 6 times before the film even begins and his character is of course "perfect" that everyone should just love him. Lisa, who is very odd looking, is constantly called "sexy" which either has a new definition or is ironic. Mark is a doof ball that probably thinks that penguins are fish, because he's just that stupid. Denny is a perverted 15 year old who wants to watch Johnny and Lisa make love and constantly says how in love with Lisa he is and how he loves Johnny. Also there is so many pointless love scenes, football scenes, gift giving scenes, lines, if there was a drinking game on the pointless scenes for this film, you'd die of alcohol poisoning by the end of this movie. I don't know, it is one of those films you have to see to believe, but I can tell you one thing for sure, if Tommy Wiseau thinks we're laughing with him, he should check that we're actually laughing at him.1/10

Tommy Wiseau should've made this in his native language

tt0368226

Tommy Wiseau, while that name won't mean much to your average person in the street, it will to bad movie buffs. Wiseau wanted to make a Tragedy/Drama film in 2003, because he is not fluent in English the result is something that is considered by many as unintentionally hilarious.Wiseau obviously thought that if he made it in English that he would get a larger fan base for the movie and make it successful. In that sense he was right but it was for all the wrong reasons.The dialogue in this movie is some of the worst dialogue I have heard in my life (if a banker's clients is more confidential than somebody's sex life then there are too many things wrong with the world). There is the occasional 'How can people take this seriously' moments.As far as plot goes this had plots appearing and then there is no mention of them so we naturally have to guess what happened to the guy who Danny owes money, we have to guess what happened to Lisa's mother with breast cancer (which is only mentioned once).The idea of Wiseau making this in his native language would have improved the dialogue dramatically and who knows, it might have been decent if Wiseau tied up all the subplots' loose ends. Although Wiseau's acting is even worse than his writing, anybody who has seen this film will agree and also say that it was saying a lot. Wiseau's directing is actually decent in comparison to his writing and acting."YOUR TEARING ME APART LISAAAAAAAA".sorry I just HAD to do that.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368226/reviews-193

ur20815663

title: Tommy Wiseau should've made this in his native language review: Tommy Wiseau, while that name won't mean much to your average person in the street, it will to bad movie buffs. Wiseau wanted to make a Tragedy/Drama film in 2003, because he is not fluent in English the result is something that is considered by many as unintentionally hilarious.Wiseau obviously thought that if he made it in English that he would get a larger fan base for the movie and make it successful. In that sense he was right but it was for all the wrong reasons.The dialogue in this movie is some of the worst dialogue I have heard in my life (if a banker's clients is more confidential than somebody's sex life then there are too many things wrong with the world). There is the occasional 'How can people take this seriously' moments.As far as plot goes this had plots appearing and then there is no mention of them so we naturally have to guess what happened to the guy who Danny owes money, we have to guess what happened to Lisa's mother with breast cancer (which is only mentioned once).The idea of Wiseau making this in his native language would have improved the dialogue dramatically and who knows, it might have been decent if Wiseau tied up all the subplots' loose ends. Although Wiseau's acting is even worse than his writing, anybody who has seen this film will agree and also say that it was saying a lot. Wiseau's directing is actually decent in comparison to his writing and acting."YOUR TEARING ME APART LISAAAAAAAA".sorry I just HAD to do that.

Terrible movie, but funny as hell

tt0368226

This movie is the prime example of "so bad it's good" movie. It fails in every possible level so badly, that it becomes incredibly funny. This movie is bad, bad, bad, bad, bad. So bad, that it becomes a gigantic joke. And Mr. Wiseau is riding in the top of it.The plot? (spoiler alert) a cyborg called Johnny works in a bank, but his girlfriend, Lisa, cheats on him with his "best friend" Mark. Why?, because "Lisa is so beautiful", and "she doesn't love Johnny anymore". Yep, those are all the reasons we got. In fact the lines "Lisa is so beautiful", "Johnny/Mark is my best friend" and "I don't love Johnny anymore" are repeated over and over again. I think Mr. Wiseau was worried with viewers forgetting those important plot points. So, at the end, Johnny finds out everything in his birthday party, and he kills himself after destroying a room. Yep, pretty lame.But, from this lame plot as the seed, a mighty tree of awfulness grows. The dialog is stupid beyond belief: repetitive, with scenes thrown at random and other scenes almost duplicated point by point. The acting is awful, and subplots and characters are introduced and then dropped immediately. And, the cherry of the cake are Tommy Wiseau's "acting" skills... which are so hilariously bad, it's incredible, a must-see.So, as a movie, this thing is a failure of epic proportions. As a piece of unintentional entertainment, is the best thing ever made.1/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368226/reviews-140

ur25340948

title: Terrible movie, but funny as hell review: This movie is the prime example of "so bad it's good" movie. It fails in every possible level so badly, that it becomes incredibly funny. This movie is bad, bad, bad, bad, bad. So bad, that it becomes a gigantic joke. And Mr. Wiseau is riding in the top of it.The plot? (spoiler alert) a cyborg called Johnny works in a bank, but his girlfriend, Lisa, cheats on him with his "best friend" Mark. Why?, because "Lisa is so beautiful", and "she doesn't love Johnny anymore". Yep, those are all the reasons we got. In fact the lines "Lisa is so beautiful", "Johnny/Mark is my best friend" and "I don't love Johnny anymore" are repeated over and over again. I think Mr. Wiseau was worried with viewers forgetting those important plot points. So, at the end, Johnny finds out everything in his birthday party, and he kills himself after destroying a room. Yep, pretty lame.But, from this lame plot as the seed, a mighty tree of awfulness grows. The dialog is stupid beyond belief: repetitive, with scenes thrown at random and other scenes almost duplicated point by point. The acting is awful, and subplots and characters are introduced and then dropped immediately. And, the cherry of the cake are Tommy Wiseau's "acting" skills... which are so hilariously bad, it's incredible, a must-see.So, as a movie, this thing is a failure of epic proportions. As a piece of unintentional entertainment, is the best thing ever made.1/10

Pathetic piece of "cinema"

tt0368226

Once again, this is one of those times when I wish I could give a movie a 0 or, even better, a negative number. But I guess I'll have to settle for a 1.People are honestly comparing this to other cult movie classics? How dare they? Even comparing it to Plan 9 From Outer Space isn't fair to Ed Wood. At least there were good parts and laughable parts in Plan 9. There's absolutely nothing redeeming about this movie and certainly no humor in it whatsoever. It's not a black comedy. It's something entirely different and all awful.The acting is forced and tired. The lines are pathetically written, if they were actually written, and delivered by people trying to act. This movie appeared to have a large budget. My question is where did it all go? That brings me to the plot, or lack thereof. Woman unhappy so she goes and has sex with other men seemingly every other scene? Makes up lies about him hitting her? It's just horrible. It's like a bad scene from a high school or a college brought sadly to life on a movie screen.The actors are just... terrible. Trying so hard to act and making the failure of the movie even worse. When a director has to get cryptic and "deep" about the meaning of a movie, that just means that he knows that he's failed and has realized it so he has to hide behind a shroud of mystery to try to save it. Sorry, but it didn't work.The constant laughing of the characters is annoying. The football scenes don't make any sense. And for as much as they supposedly love it, no one knows how to throw one.In conclusion, this is just awful. These actors should be ashamed of themselves and do us all a favor by never performing in another movie ever again.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368226/reviews-145

ur2436068

title: Pathetic piece of "cinema" review: Once again, this is one of those times when I wish I could give a movie a 0 or, even better, a negative number. But I guess I'll have to settle for a 1.People are honestly comparing this to other cult movie classics? How dare they? Even comparing it to Plan 9 From Outer Space isn't fair to Ed Wood. At least there were good parts and laughable parts in Plan 9. There's absolutely nothing redeeming about this movie and certainly no humor in it whatsoever. It's not a black comedy. It's something entirely different and all awful.The acting is forced and tired. The lines are pathetically written, if they were actually written, and delivered by people trying to act. This movie appeared to have a large budget. My question is where did it all go? That brings me to the plot, or lack thereof. Woman unhappy so she goes and has sex with other men seemingly every other scene? Makes up lies about him hitting her? It's just horrible. It's like a bad scene from a high school or a college brought sadly to life on a movie screen.The actors are just... terrible. Trying so hard to act and making the failure of the movie even worse. When a director has to get cryptic and "deep" about the meaning of a movie, that just means that he knows that he's failed and has realized it so he has to hide behind a shroud of mystery to try to save it. Sorry, but it didn't work.The constant laughing of the characters is annoying. The football scenes don't make any sense. And for as much as they supposedly love it, no one knows how to throw one.In conclusion, this is just awful. These actors should be ashamed of themselves and do us all a favor by never performing in another movie ever again.