American Psycho (2000) February 15, 2007
Posted by gproject in : Recently Viewed , trackbackDirected by: Mary Harron
Patrick Bateman is a sick man. Living in a plush apartment and working in the business centre of New York, he enjoys music, working out, fine dining… oh, and the odd brutal murder. As the indistinguishable faces of his business colleagues pass him by, Patrick is free to descend into a state of mental blurring, the output of which takes the form of a vicious psychopath.
As you can probably tell, it’s a bizarre movie, with a great amount of the discomfort brought on by the uneven tone. Some scenes are almost purely comedic, such as Bateman’s dissection of 80’s pop legends like Huey Lewis & The News or Phil Collins, while others are unashamedly graphic in their depictions of sex and violence. My favourite scene - the one in which Bateman sweats over how everyone else’s business card is better than his - displays the unravelling mind of a murderer, but is still laugh-out-loud funny.
Christian Bale plays a fantastically hollow central character, to the point where you almost believe that if his porcelain-perfect skin were to crack, there’d be nothing underneath. He’s both dangerous and utterly shallow in his portrayal of someone on the edge of sanity. There are also good supporting performances from the likes of Chloë Sevigny and Willem Dafoe, although their parts seem to be almost a side-note to the Bateman story.
The film is full of wonderful over-descriptions (such as the ‘daily routine’ at the opening), and moments of pure eighties divulgence adapted from Bret Easton Ellis’s original novel. This is all aided by a great soundtrack, which is as much a part of getting to know the central character, as it is keeping the movie in context. The actual violence itself, while often brutal, is never shown in an explicit way. I suppose it comes down to how easily you can show someone taking an axe to the face without having the censor tear your film to shreds. It’s nowhere near the most violent film out there though.
Both written and directed with skill by Mary Harron, the film manages to have an almost non-existent narrative arc (throughout the film Bateman moves from crazy, to crazier), and yet it crafts a world that’s so wonderfully involved, you want it to keep going. There’s very little in terms of a resolution (that we see anyway), and yet the ending is still a masterstroke.
I really like this film, although at times I find myself wondering why. It has a lot of elements that I might find annoying or distracting in other films (lack of narrative, constant over-explanation, unclear character motives), but for some reason they all work here. It’s a movie that can be considered very simple or very complex, depending on how far you are willing to analyse it. But I suggest you don’t pick it apart with too much vigour - you might not like what you find. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to return some videotapes.
Comments»
Um I’ve got to say it’s a very good film, like you said it’s quite rude but it’s really funny in some parts, worth seeing!
I personally absolutely love American Psycho, and have seen it quite a few times - there is so much beautiful layering to get your teeth into it seems like an adventure in abnormal psychological study every time I watch. As you quite rightly suggest, it can be taken as very simple (a serial killer on the loose) or very complex, depending on how deep you want to go.
One point that I’d contest however. While I think Mary Harron did a brilliant job I think it’s not quite fair to credit her as actually writing it: she wrote the screenplay but Bret Ellis wrote the book it was based on.
Thanks for your comments Paul,
It’s certainly a movie that I can return to and still enjoy during repeat viewings, although trying to explain what is so good about it to other people can often prove a challenge.
Also, you’re right, while I do mention that the story comes from Bret Easton Ellis’s original novel in the middle of the review, as you’ve pointed out I later use the words ‘written and directed’ to explain Mary Harron’s contribution, when maybe ‘adapted and directed’ would be a more accurate representation.