|
Showing reviews from 1 to 50 (total: 68)
|
|
 |
One of the most well acted, intelligent, and brilliant movies ever made, Christian Bale give an outstanding performance in (What I would say) Is one of the best movies ever made, I was really impressed with the movies theme of apearances. Although the movie itself does require intelligence to enjoy, so I would not recommend it to everyone.
10/10
2.11.2009 -
thegodzillaking@ - age: 13-17
I really liked Bale in this movie. He is very convincing in his role as the killer. Go see it!
7/10
6.7.2008 -
bunnie1ca@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
I can see how people would be offended and disgusted by this film and character Patrick Bateman, but I was impressed by the fantastic performance by Christian Bale as this incredibly narcissistic vile person. The title is a bit misleading, as the movie is not another examination on serial killers, but more about poking fun at the materialistic upper class New York yuppies in the 1980's. An early sequence in the film involves comparing business cards as a status symbol and its so funny, you cant help but like Bateman and his incredibly self absorbed picture of himself. Then he walks outside and kills a beggar and his dog in the lane making you feel guilty about liking the character. Its a weird feeling to have in a movie and it is repeated several times. The director makes Bateman almost like a standup comedian in other scenes where he amusingly reviews music and then switches into a monster! I thought it was done with a lot of restraint. Most of the violence is left to the imagination however there are some gruesome moments. I have read excerpts from the book and it made me sick. Im glad they tried to emphasize the society of rich kids instead of all that. Another thing that was interesting was how he assumed other peoples identities in his social group until they wouldnt believe who he really was. It was sort of a clever metaphor for a world where everyone tries to be something they are not and then lose themselves in all the lies they tell. This movie will never win awards but I bet it will get a cult following. Check it out.
8/10
5.12.2004 -
emanmark666@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
Read the book and maybe some of you will get it! I wished this would have followed the books nightmare much more closely... I fear it would have been too much for some of you! Good film.
7/10
24.8.2004 -
xanemh@ - age: 26-35
Great movie!
8/10
3.8.2004 -
jellybean_226@ - age: 1-12
| | | | |
I read the book before, and the movie is very flat compared with that.
7/10
16.2.2004 -
blatantnonsense@ - age: 18-25
I thought this was a amazin film. Ive seen it about 10 times now and id watch it again. Maybe its becsause he reminds me so much of my self...
10/10
4.12.2003 -
lukey4u2003@ - age: 18-25
Truly superb film. Sophisticated satiric view of the society that has no goals than suits from Valentino or expensive appartments. Recommend to all who would like some thinking and analysing.
9/10
5.5.2003 -
olga@ - age: 26-35
I don't think I've seen a worse movie. Not only did it not make any sense, but the acting was so bad. I would never recommend anyone see this movie.
1/10
27.1.2003 -
tammyp_83@ - age: 18-25
Yes I saw this movie twice. It titilated the dark side of me. I always like a little wierd and off the wall type of action. It's worth watching if you like a little bit of sick humor.
6/10
9.12.2002 -
annabelle338@ - age: 36-49
Pretty funny in a black comedy kinda way.
7/10
19.11.2002 -
latimerloz@ - age: 36-49
A fantastic, brilliant and deadly funny black comedy, adapted perfectly for the big screen. Those who say it was to tame, do you think the movie would have got passed if it showed Patrick Bateman letting rats eat peoples internal organs? I think not. An absolute corker of a movie massivly under-rated.
10/10
3.9.2002 -
john_is_bond@ - age: 13-17
The movie is thankfully not as graphic as I had expected. I also hadn't expected to laugh as much as I did. It is a smart satire with excellent performances, particularly by Christian Bale.
8/10
26.5.2002 -
yoshinaka@ - age: 26-35
It was a great well done film, very unique and interesting.
9/10
11.5.2002 -
sxybytch73@ - age: 13-17
The movie was scary to me.
8/10
3.5.2002 -
dairywomen55@ - age: 1-12
Very weird movie, but interesting none the less.
10/10
28.2.2002 -
joem0973@ - age: 26-35
The feel good film of the year.
8/10
14.2.2002 -
larsenault@ - age: 36-49
This one was interesting! If you enjoy a good thriller, you will like this one. It definitely kept me on the edge of my seat & gave me a startle! Makes you realise just what's out there in this big world!
7/10
13.1.2002 -
mrsam@ - age: 26-35
Strange movie, and not too good.
3/10
2.12.2001 -
jmckeigan@ - age: 36-49
Good thriller, boy you just can't trust those handsome fellow's you know the nice dressed ones. Hmmm! Give's you something to think about?
9/10
11.11.2001 -
alongtallwomaninablackdress@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
Strange but a good movie - kept me at the edge of my seat.
9/10
17.10.2001 -
blondes35@ - age: 36-49
Having read Ellis's book back in 1993 I never imagined that a film would or could be made based on this script. At the time, the book was banned in several bookstores for it's gruesome barbaric descriptions of torture and sexual sadism not to mention necrophilia. Nonetheless, from time to time as special effects developed to what they are today I often wondered how they could replicate some of the scenes from the book. Then, in 1998 I read that Leonardo de Caprio was offered the role. Lo and behold, someone in Hollywood was serious about producing this retro 80's flashback/nightmare. The movie is tame compared to the book but it does accurately the main character's bloodlust. Having read the book I can't look at the film objectively. But I did enjoy the mania and the look at the excesses of the 1980's.
7/10
5.8.2001 -
dewittagain@ - age: 26-35
A not so bad movie... but a bit morbid!
6/10
19.6.2001 -
larochelle,shanti@ - age: 18-25
Very good movie. Very smart. I think that it is a shame that people can't look a little deeper into things and think. But if there loss, I saw it, and loved it. I wish they would come out with more movies like this.
10/10
1.3.2001 -
turcotte_ryan@ - age: 18-25
Hilarious throughout with it's saturation of social satire. Juxtaposed with grotesque violent and sexual imagery, you'll giggle yourself sick.
7/10
6.1.2001 -
vollad@ - age: 26-35
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Money thrown out the window... The guy seems to have a trigger point that is activated when he sees rivals with better looking business cards than his. The only good part of the movie is the thin strand of sanity that still holds this guy to reality, and I named: MUSIC. His compulsive obsession with the history of music is typical of any compulsive obsession observed in sadistical mass murderers. I got totally turned down with this movie when I saw that the cop hunting this killer was as wacked as him, along with all of this maniac's colleagues. I expected to see a movie depicting the downfall of a sane man falling for an uncontrollable bloodlust, what I saw was a patchwork of loosely held up clichés depicting SOCIETY as beeing psychopatic and murder-hungry. THE WORLD OF CINEMA WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER OFF WITHOUT THIS MOVIE.
2/10
11.12.2000 -
waylan_karthan@ - age: 26-35
I can relate to this movie very much!
9/10
12.11.2000 -
antonio_dandrea@ - age: 18-25
Good but still, I was expecting a little more... But I loved every second of it and I hope you will too. It's funny, it's sexy and it has some philosophys in it. YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS MOVIE!!!
8/10
26.8.2000 -
flatounou@ - age: 13-17
Very good movie, but after Fight Club, not as good. However, I would give that guy an Oscar nomination. He was fantastic.
8/10
1.8.2000 -
biraj1@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
"American Psycho" may be slow-paced for the young crowd that expects a "Scream" or "Scary Movie" experience, but this film allows the viewers--the voyeurs, really--to balance upon the razor-edge line between imagination and reality along with Patrick Bateman. And that old debate of whether or not it was all in his head is not the point. Let's face it, the film turns the premise of "Bonfire Of The Vanities" on its head--look at the protagonists: they both work for Pierce and Pierce. There, a man kills one person accidentally and the city goes mad. Here, a man kills many (or would kill many) and no-one notices, cares, or believes him. So let that debate be silent. This is a slow film, true, but it is a careful film. It is an aesthetic and ascetic film, demonstrating a man who is the product of a consumer age. He is not "the opposite of civilization"; he has instead gone beyond civilization to the cannibalistic nazir that is the epitome of uncontrolled cosumerism and consumption. Plus, Christian Bale is absolutely...
8/10
10.7.2000 -
melanie_mortensen@ - age: 26-35
The movie sucked bad!!!... It was a waste of time and money... The producers are actually american psychos...
1/10
16.6.2000 -
caroliaho@ - age: 18-25
I agree that there were many satirical points made throughout the movie, but I think that they could have been made in a more tasteful way. I realize that being tasteful means selling less tickets to desensitized numbskulls, but I think it's a better way to go. And after all, if you're making an artistic 'film', you shouldn't be interested in profit anyway. I also think that if you want a horror, go see a horror. If you want a 'film', go appreciate a film. But, don't try and put them together... it just doesn't work.
2/10
5.6.2000 -
aj,muc@ - age: 18-25
A very interesting and thought provoking picture. Any movie that makes you think and ask questions at the end is worthy of praise. I despise the many movies that give you everything in a silver platter. This satirical psychological thriller had a great leading character, who simply living in a world of fantasy. In a harsh world where he wasn't bold enough to commit the acts physically, he did so mentally to sooth himself. We should all learn to open our eyes and accept the world for all it's beauty and folly. All subject matter, like this one should be encouraged to be shown in more movies, without shunning them.
8/10
23.5.2000 -
chamspishak@ - age: 18-25
I cannot believe how many people did not get the satire of this movie. Those of you that deplore the lack of onscreen violence just legitimize everything this film stands for. I felt this movie was edgy and quite funny at times. Let's actually TRY to think for a change as we are entertained. It really doesn't hurt that much.
8/10
12.5.2000 -
jeff,bergeron@ - age: 26-35
My favourite comment is by the idiot who commented on the effects. Nice one stupid! This film is for everyone and it is wonderful. I laughed my arse off. Very witty, very satirical, very good!
9/10
12.5.2000 -
beltone@ - age: 26-35
I don't usually buy into the pre-hype surrounding new films but I must admit I was really looking forward to seeing this one. That is probably why my expectations were high and why I thought it could have been a better movie. Despite clever casting, some stunning cinematography and the occasional thought provoking line, the story was obvious rather than suspensful and the meager twist at the end was a let down. I am not a famous director, editor or screenwriter but I know this book-to-movie story could have easily been an anxious, intelligent, phycho-thriller. See it if you must (I'm still glad I did) but don't expect it to turn your mind in circles or leave you as disgusted as the media claims it could.
6/10
11.5.2000 -
taraanza@ - age: 18-25
The book was better then the movie. It was hard to understand for others who did not read the novel.
5/10
10.5.2000 -
fawn@ - age: 18-25
| | | | |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
If you're expecting to see violence, blood and horror, you will be disappointed. The core scenes of the acts are actually "hidden" from the viewer - we just know they're happening. If you're expecting to see some sex scenes, the movie doesn't do a good job either. I think the real essence is the psychological process behind the acts. The movie shows a man who could even be pretty close to what you imagine as "perfect" from financial, social and physical points of view. Yet... something is terribly wrong with the person's emotions. This story definately tries to tell us something about human reality - something that could even be quite significant to consider. I must confess, that I fully didn't get it. Yes, I basically agree with some of the reviews given previously. It is a question of getting the point or not. I'd recommend you be the judge for yourself. It is quite difficult for me to judge this movie, but I'd say - a 7 could do...
7/10
7.5.2000 -
andrzej@ - age: 18-25
This movie sucks!!! The effects are so fake...
1/10
4.5.2000 -
funky_811@ - age: 50+
This movie was very disturbing and the main character had no redeeming qualities. I give it a five because it was not a mindless friday the 13th type of movie but it had its share of bloody moments. I found some of it entertaining and some of it repulsive. I guess that's what these filmmakers were shooting for.
5/10
3.5.2000 -
chance@ - age: 26-35
Well directed and excellent acting! Psycho Patrick is hilarious in his mechanical, yet enthused, text-book analysis of eighties pop music as he chops up his friends. "Is that a raincoat?" "Why yes, it is!"
7/10
2.5.2000 -
deep_boots@ - age: 18-25
I really loved this movie! I laughed, which you are supposed to do, and thought the lead actor was fantastic! The lead character was amazing... Go see this movie.
10/10
2.5.2000 -
sammyb101@ - age: 18-25
Was not sure if they had told us to smoke a joint before we saw the film, was way to strange for me. Especially the day after when I tried to make sense of it... there was no sense.
4/10
1.5.2000 -
ennazus@ - age: 36-49
Don't blink, and tag along a local psyco to relate the theme. Above average attention ability and IQ help one appreciate this hohum satire.
5/10
30.4.2000 -
mesweet3@ - age: 18-25
Excellent! Funny, disturbing: satire at it's best. Christian Bale was brilliant. Too bad that majority of viewers aren't bright enough to recognize the director's intentions.
10/10
26.4.2000 -
gisher99@ - age: 18-25
| | | | |
Ok, I read a lot of the other reviews and I think that the people reviewed this one pooly never read the book (which is worth it). I have read it, twice. Brent Easton Ellis, who also wrote Less Than Zero (also a movie), wrote this one to aggitate the reader. I was sickened by Brent's words, but that made me like the book so much more, even though it was dry at times. The movie did a good justice to the book, but lacked the true gore that horror movies provide. That is, it would have been better to see the strike, than just to see the blood. The parts where he talks about Huey Lewis and the News and Phil Collins, was very funny. The chapters in the book bugged me, but I see the point more in the book. The actor who played Patrick Bateman, did a great job...he's going somewhere. I say see the movie.
8/10
23.4.2000 -
kramh@ - age: 26-35
Very bad movie!!! It does have a story and it does not scare you enough! There are blood scenes for no reason at all and it did not really explain why the pscho acted the way he did. If they showed us why he chose the victims the way he did, it might have been a little better.
1/10
22.4.2000 -
blu_yoda@ - age: 18-25
At some points it's funny and at some points you just hope that you could push back the chairback and sleep... Too much blablas sometimes. It's a satire, yeah, but it could've to done better... a lot better.
5/10
22.4.2000 -
shell_li@ - age: 13-17
| | | | |
Usually when you go see a movie after you've read the book...you're disapointed but I wasn't for this movie. For those of you who thought this movie was "violent" and "riched blooded" have no idea what you're talking about. The book is far more violent and bloody than the movie. Mary Harron shows a true adaptation of the book, showing the necessary execution scenes without exagerating it. "For me, everybody's selfish and self-centered. They claim to be innocent but they're all guilty in a way" You should know there's a Pat Bateman in all of you, who's waiting to errupt... how much this world works exactly like Antonio Montana said, "In America, first you get the money, then you get the power, then you the women..."
10/10
22.4.2000 -
yuri06@
Great character movie for those looking for more than gore or easy to follow plot.
9/10
22.4.2000 -
jazz_man_mike@ - age: 18-25
| 
