American psycho

CyberGhost

hey,

I have question about this movie, i watched it about 2 weeks ago on network2, and I missed one part, the commercials started and I switched the channel when I switched back the movie had already begun,

anyways, I stopped at part when he blows up a police car, and kills bunch of people, then he calls his lawyer and leaves a message to him, telling him all his deeds. after that I switched, when I switched back, he was in the guy's(I don't remember his name, the one that he chopped with an axe) flat, which was all cleaned up, and then he meets his lawyer which thought the message was a joke.

how did he get away from the police? what happened to the detective(Willian Defou)? can someone please let me know?

Thanks.

Gilgamesh

I would recommend you read the boo, it was also much better than the film

CyberGhost

there is a book? cool, I might read it.

Gilgamesh

highly recommended, there is also a second book, but wasn't a s good as the first one, the book is much more intense than the film, explains some scenes in more 'detail'

spacemonkey

Gilgamesh wrote:

highly recommended, there is also a second book, but wasn't a s good as the first one, the book is much more intense than the film, explains some scenes in more 'detail'

I think the more detail part is a slight understatement! I only managed to read the first 50 or so pages (it wasnt my book I was lying on a mates sofa with a hangover and the book was on the floor) but as far as I remember a large part of that was taken up with his shaving preparations. I want to get it to read it all though.

rubadub

CyberGhost wrote:

he meets his lawyer which thought the message was a joke.

It seems that way first, then the lawyer says he can't have killed him since he had lunch with the dead guy in london a few days ago. The way I saw it was the lawyer knew he killed them and was providing a sort of alibi by claiming he had lunch with the guy.

what did happen to defoe though?

trajan

no, the whole thing was only going on in his head. That was the final cop-out twist. How can you blow up police cars on a main street and then no one mentions it? It was something he fantasised about in his mind and doodled it all into his notebook which his secretary finds as he discovers this himself in that bar.
I could, of course, be wrong, not hvaing read the book.

Agent Orange

CyberGhost wrote:

anyways, I stopped at part when he blows up a police car, and kills bunch of people, then he calls his lawyer and leaves a message to him, telling him all his deeds. after that I switched, when I switched back, he was in the guy's(I don't remember his name, the one that he chopped with an axe) flat, which was all cleaned up, and then he meets his lawyer which thought the message was a joke.

how did he get away from the police? what happened to the detective(Willian Defou)? can someone please let me know?

From here on in, the film deliberately suggests that what Bateman has been experiencing has all been a fantasy. It's pretty clear Bateman is a bit nutty when he goes to use the ATM and it displays 'FEED ME A CAT'.

When Bateman goes to the apartment, he finds it clean and empty. So what happened? Did Bateman imagine the murder? It would explain why the apartment is as good as new. But the apartment is being sold, and undoubtably has a substantial cash value - perhaps the realtors just covered-up the murder so as to not jeopardise the sale of the apartment? The realtor telling Bateman not to come back hints at this, but perhaps she just thinks he's a nut and wants him out of there. It is deliberately ambiguous.

When the lawyer tells Bateman that he saw Paul Allen after Bateman has supposedly murdered him, doesn't this mean Bateman imagined the whole thing? Then again, people are always mistaking each other for other people, so perhaps the lawyer just thought he saw Allen.

The point isn't whether Bateman did or didn't commit the crimes, it's that he can't tell. So to conclude - Bateman is gone nutty.

Incidentally, I wouldn't read the book unless you can handle chapter-long descriptions of torture, mutilation and murder in explicit detail.

ObeyGiant

Agent Orange wrote:

Incidentally, I wouldn't read the book unless you can handle chapter-long descriptions of torture, mutilation and murder in explicit detail.

And Genesis albums.

bobbyjoe

Agree with agent orange regarding the story.
Defo read the book if you have a strong stomach.
Brett Easton Ellis has some good other stuff too
Rules of Engagement, Less than Zero and Glamorama were good (and not as gory)

Cactus Col

Agent Orange wrote:

Incidentally, I wouldn't read the book unless you can handle chapter-long descriptions of torture, mutilation and murder in explicit detail.

or if you enjoy a good read (which this book isn't).

oxygen_old

Never understood that about the film either, did he do it or did he not. Its not really clear that he didn't, because as far as I remember there is no indisputable proof that he didnt,might be wrong its been a while since I seen it.

Anyways more importantly IMDB.com states that
"The events that Bateman mentions in the phone message to his lawyer are events that transpired in the book by Bret Easton Ellis, but not in the film"
so maybe its a clever movie/book tie in?

Gilgamesh

the funny thing about the book imo was that you could see it in two ways, the first would be that most of the stuff was happening in his head.
the other version I heard from ome people was that the other guys were making sure nothing happens to him, as they benefit from it, (by killing off others in the company)
haven't really pinned this view down though

pickarooney

torture, mutilation and murder I can handle, but the page long paeans to Phil Collins made me feel ill.

D-FENS

Gilgamesh wrote:

highly recommended, there is also a second book, but wasn't a s good as the first one, the book is much more intense than the film, explains some scenes in more 'detail'

I've never heard of a second book, was'nt written by Easton Ellis anyway.

If it's the screenplay of the movie sequel , with William Shatner , forget it.
That was beyond tripe

Gilgamesh

D-FENS wrote:

I've never heard of a second book, was'nt written by Easton Ellis anyway.

If it's the screenplay of the movie sequel , with William Shatner , forget it.
That was beyond tripe

sorry, my mistake, they only made a book of AP 2

peterk19

bobbyjoe wrote:

Agree with agent orange regarding the story.
Defo read the book if you have a strong stomach.
Brett Easton Ellis has some good other stuff too
Rules of Engagement, Less than Zero and Glamorama were good (and not as gory)

The rules of attraction i think you mean was also made into a movie its about his youger brother in college, also the informers is another one of his books thats good, i remember reading an interview with Brett Easton Ellis when asked what happened in the american psycho book he just said "if you dont get it then dont ask me about it" and promptly moved onto another subject
Pete

Half-Bicycle

A deeply, darkly comic and disturbing book. I like the fact that it showcased the sheer emptiness of the materialistic 80s. And as for corporate Wall St types being psychopaths?

Check out documentary - "The Corporation" which poses the question if corporations were people, what would they be like, psychologically?

The film is pretty good, I mean you could never get the entire book on screen, which is probably for the best! CB was ideal as Bateman, IMHO.

pickarooney

Half-Bicycle wrote:

CB was ideal as Bateman, IMHO.

Hope he's as good as Batman

Half-Bicycle

pickarooney wrote:

Hope he's as good as Batman

I imagine he will. This will hopefuly erase the horror of Batman & Robin :eek:

simu

pickarooney wrote:

torture, mutilation and murder I can handle, but the page long paeans to Phil Collins made me feel ill.

If you read them out loud in the voice of Bateman as in the film, they're quite hilarious!

Pigman II

I've read the book and seen the film a few times now and all I can take from is that Patrick Bateman was undeniably psychopathic but that he did not in fact ever act on those urges and all the scenes of crime/violence were purely fantasy or 'wishful thinking' on his part. The most 'real' his urges every got where the drawings on his daily-planner that Chloe Sevignys character ends up seeing at the end of the film.

The clue (as I see it) that nothing is real is all the strange goings on in the last 15mins of the film such as the cops scene you mention, the talking ATM machine and esp. the doorman that Bateman shoots (who might I add 1 min later is back sitting at his desk ... or at least its another fella who surely would have noticed his murdered colleague?).

Another train of thought wrt to this film is that PB did in fact kill those people but the echelon of society that he existed in were so shallow and self-absorbed that they didn't even notice. Personally I'd not like to think that this was what BretEastonEllis was trying to imply when he wrote the book .... but then again if you've ever read 'Less Than Zero' 9and seen the types of characters that populate that world) you'd definetly not discount it as a possiblility.

Perhaps the film is just Mary Harrons interpretation (and suitably mine too) of the book and if someone else had directed it could have been made 100% clear that 'all this was real' and then scenes like the cop car one you mention would never have been included.

BTW, sorry for after all that not directly answering your q!

CyberGhost

that's exactly what I thought too, that it was all in his mind, I don't know, I thought maybe I got it wrong.

I will defenatelly read the book, Thanks Guys!

D!ve^Bomb!

Pigman II wrote:

The clue (as I see it) that nothing is real is all the strange goings on in the last 15mins of the film such as the cops scene you mention, the talking ATM machine and esp. the doorman that Bateman shoots (who might I add 1 min later is back sitting at his desk ... or at least its another fella who surely would have noticed his murdered colleague?).

did he not just walk into the wrong building?

Does anyone know what the real truth is.. i remember seeing this in the cinema and hadn't got a clue.. i've seen ita couple of times since and it is still a mystery.. but it is all in his head tho.. without a doubt.. but somethings are unclear