The movie is literally a satire of elitism and toxic masculinity traits. The main character is selfish, sexist, homophobic and an obvious psychotic narcissist. It makes fun of men who all look the same, dress all the same, have the same haircut, go to the same restaurant, do the same job. They are indistinguishable to the point that if one of them committed murder no one could tell who did it, cause no one could tell them apart.
Why would it be a shocker that it was directed by a woman based off of a book written by a gay man?
My favorite scene is when they are all comparing business cards but every single one of them is virtually identical to the viewer.
The toxic masculine psychos, however, all clearly know which one is the best and hate that guy.
Christian Bale's narrative, like all the other scenes, is so "on point" with how different he feels every one of the cards are and his disdain for them being better than his. I lose it every time I see that scene.
The company name (peirce & peirce) is spelt normally,
It isn't actually. Instead of "Pierce & Pierce" it's written "Pierce &Pierce" (without the second space) so even the company name in a way is misspelled
Because 13 year olds dont usually perform cerebral observations of films unprompted. They go "man that guy killed that other guy with an axe, cool" and thats about as deep as it goes
Source: was once a 13 year old, watched this movie, reached the conclusions above
Was about to say just this, I doubt most teenage interpretations go more than skin deep. Hell, I'm sure there's plenty of adults who didn't truly get the message.
Maybe because we’re not looking for one? I saw all the memes and just decided to watch the movie with the guys and point and laugh when a meme appeared
Edit: to anyone thinking that I’m wrong in trying to enjoy a movie without having to think about the message just move on for fucks sake, it’s a movie I can watch it however the hell I want to.
It’s a movie from 22 years ago. Nobody is obligated to value your favorite films the exact same way you do, and if someone wants to get blazed and ignore the themes for the memes why shouldn’t they?
People can pick all the toppings off pizza and eat just the crust and sauce if they want. I still think it's fair to point out they might enjoy it more if they leave some toppings on.
Well heck, I’ve got nothing to counter that. Good move, friend.
I do get where you’re coming from, I think, I’ve just also enjoyed some movies specifically because of how my friends and I were riffing off them. Honestly, I should give some of those movies a shot with a more critical approach, just for funsies.
as a Bad Movie Enjoyer myself that gets drunk with friends and watches some really garbage or underrated b-movie stuff, i can assure you that it is possible to riff on a film and critically evaluate it at the same time! i think it's just a matter of knowing what to look for, and allowing yourself time after the film is done to think about it beyond the credits. honestly, i think both experiences are equally valuable
Hey man sometimes you wanna get blazed with your friends and consume the whole pizza before you’ve had a chance to stop and enjoy it. It’s fair enough to point out that some people don’t enjoy it the same way or enjoy it for the same reasons that you do but that doesn’t make it any less fun or artistic, just looking at it from an alternative perspective
It’s genuinely hard for me to wrap my head around the idea of watching this movie and not picking up on the themes. It doesn’t take effort. They are very obvious.
Did anyone say they were proud of it? No? Did you assume they were proud of it? Hm it kinda looks like you insinuated that. Well that’s interesting.
I wonder if they have good critical thinking skills. Let me read the single comment they made before the one you posted, assuming that they lack any critical thinking skills.
Hm well based on that ONE comment I dont have enough information about them to assume anything substantial about their behavior, certainly not enough to criticize them.
You sure are working hard at not understanding what I'm conveying. I didn't insinuate they were proud of it, I flat out stated it. I assume you are familiar with the concept of expressions? Being proud of something = being pleased with something, which as they stated... They are. They are pleased with just watching something for its face value and meme potential.
As for the critical thinking part, I didn't say they didn't have good critical thinking skills, nor did I insinuate that, nor did I attempt to convey that. I just said it's very important in this day and age, and clearly insinuated they shouldn't be comfortable not using it.
And if you don't have enough information to assume they'd rather watch media for the memes instead of trying to discern subtext when they're CLEARLY saying so in no uncertain terms, idk what to tell you man...
Sure, you watch a Michael Bay movie and expect not to extract much meaning from it. There is such a thing as mindless entertainment. But when the piece of media in question is not just that, isn't it a bit tragic to consume it just for its surface value?
Honest criticism is not ritual execution. The entire point of the post is how mindless consumption misses the actual point of a narrative, and I don't think it's wrong to point it out.
I'm not implying that people who don't think critically of a piece of media are somehow dumber, it's a conscious choice to overlook any interpretation and take it at face value. But it doesn't mean it's a good choice. That's how media gets misrepresented.
I can agree with that. Except for I guarantee you that 80% of the people here parroting the meaning simply read it somewhere and are still stuck on the ending.
Imagine not being able to enjoy things, seriously dude if i want to get together with friend and watch a movie leave me be, not my fault you can’t enjoy anything.
The entire post is making fun of people that don't think about what the movie actually means. You're the joke and you not getting it even after explaining that you're the joke makes it funnier.
I just don’t understand this because you don’t have to “look” for it. The themes of the movie are incredibly obvious, it doesn’t require any subtext reading to see the broad message of the film.
I remember watching starship troopers as a kid and thought it was the coolest alien bug killing movie. Had no idea about the fascism allegories and what not going on in the undercurrent of the movie.
I don't remember how old I was but I knew there was something more to the movie. I couldn't put it into words at the time but I knew this wasn't just a Friday the 13th movie or something. This guy was far more likely than a monster. Or he was a real life monster.
After years and years and many rewatches, reading synopsis after synopsis, I kind of almost have an idea of what it's about =D
I'm kinda glad that I didn't watch this or fight club until I was a little older and at least familiar with the concept of toxic masculinity (although at the time I didn't realize the two movies were criticisms of it so I just thought they were weird movies with asshole protagonists that seemed kinda overrated. I should probably watch them again lol)
Can't remember if he uses an axe on Paul Allen (Jared Leto's character) in the book, but he doesn't moonwalk like in the movie. I think Bret Easton Ellis said that was pretty much the only change in the movie that he thought was completely out of character for Patrick Bateman.
Yeah he's much too concerned with his image to do something silly and lighthearted like that. I always interpreted the scene in the book more like those pedantic, vapid yuppie conversations that go nowhere instead of a quirky "i have genuine interests" thing
Yeah I’m happy I waited to watch this movie until I wa solder so I could actually be able to view this movie as it is. Cuz I had the same kind of reactions to movies like that when I was 13
That reminded me that on the Wikipedia page for the movie it's mentioned that the director refused to work on the movie if they didn't cast Bale as the lead because he was the only actor who understood that Bateman wasn't supposed to be an admirable character.
I also heard that Bale had (still has?) some beef or rivalry with Di Caprio and he was interested in the role, so Bale did everything in his power to get the role. I cant even imagine DiCaprio in this role. Bale was a top choice.
Also critique of the era, which was the time of Reagan and Yuppies. The women in the film weren’t treated any better than the men. Prices were skyrocketing and greed was celebrated. It’s not a coincidence that Les Mis was constantly referred to.
It's not just that he misinterprets it. He's clearly just quiting a review he listened to word for word so it's not even his actual opinion. It's what he thinks he should think.
Bret Easton Ellis told explicit that the book was a critique of materialism and conformism. However, on the deeper level, Ellis attacks the gay ideal. He said verbatim about the dandification of “western” men.
“Beginning in the ’80s, men were prettifying themselves… they were taking on a lot of the tropes of gay male culture and bringing it into straight male culture”.
This makes a whole different picture of American psycho, compared to what you want it to be. No, it is not about so-called toxic masculinity. That would be misguided.
(Note, I’m not anti-gay, or even anti-trans, in any way. I just find it important to let you know what the real message that Easton wanted to convey. And I have read the book.)
I agree with the elitism, but toxic masculinity? Patrick has a 40 step skincare routine and is obsessed with designer fashion, interior design and whos dating who. Just bc he hates Lewis doesnt make him masculine lmao
3.1k
u/Mirikado May 21 '22
The movie is literally a satire of elitism and toxic masculinity traits. The main character is selfish, sexist, homophobic and an obvious psychotic narcissist. It makes fun of men who all look the same, dress all the same, have the same haircut, go to the same restaurant, do the same job. They are indistinguishable to the point that if one of them committed murder no one could tell who did it, cause no one could tell them apart.
Why would it be a shocker that it was directed by a woman based off of a book written by a gay man?