Patrick Bateman - killer or daydream believer?

[the night watchman]

There are two ways to watch "American Psycho." It can be viewed literally, i.e. the on-screen action is an accurate depiction of events, and Patrick Bateman is a psychotic killer. Or, Bateman can be seen as an "unreliable narrator." In other words, we are viewing events through Bateman's eyes, and in reality he has killed no one, though he has convinced himself he has. We are, in short, living his delusions with him.

What say you?

[JoBlo]

** SPOILERS **

Great topic and awesome movie!

I think Patrick suffered from a major case of "delusions of grandeur", "low-self esteem" and "pent up rage" (sounds like many people that I know... /ubb/smile.gif. He seemed like a nerd who grew up as a spoiled rich kid, but was never able to adapt to society's phoniness. But try as he might he did, until the complete superficiality of his surroundings just obliterated his facade.

I believe that he never killed anyone in the film but thought about killing them all. That explains why nobody heard him running around that apartment building with the chainsaw. It explains him coming to the apartment the next day and finding everything cleaned up and it explains the cop's complete lack of detective skills, as Patrick played GUILTY every time that he was around (the cop didn't suspect him because he was going after the FACTS, and the facts showed that Patrick had nothing to do with any of the crimes).

Then again, a case can be made for Patrick having lived through those hooker moments and maybe even that scene with his secretary, in which he seriously thinks about drilling her head in. Not sure.

Anyone else?

[This message has been edited by JoBlo (edited 12-29-2000).]

[Brock Landers]

Having read the novel by Bret Easton Ellis years before seeing the film, I am of the "Reality" school of thought concerning the violence portrayed in the story...I will always believe that Patrick Bateman is and was intended to be a serial killer, not just some crackpot lunatic with delusional murder fantasies...

With that said, obviously the film wants us to believe otherwise...or should I say the co-screenwriter/director Mary Harron...In order to get the film accepted into mainstream theaters and to mainstream audiences, she had to highlight the comedic virtues of the story and make it all seem like it didn't happen...therby twisting Bret Easton Ellis' novel into something completely different...

That is, of course, my own personal opinion and in all reality, there is no way to prove one way or the other...but I have come up with this theory concerning book, movie, and the reality of the violence in both...

(Short Version)

Now, In order for the satire in the book/movie to work, the violence must be real. The reality of the heinous crimes that Bateman commits adds levity to the humorous take on the 80's yuppie and their obsessions with materialism, conservatism and how they are perceived...here are a couple of examples...

A) A cartoon character chops the head off of another cartoon character, then we laugh and realize it wasn't real and his head pops back on...

B) A man takes a steel axe and severes the neck of another man...tearing through bone, gristle, cartilage, etc...blood spurts out of the pulsing veins onto the assailants face and torso...the assailant grabs the decapitated head by the hair and holds it up as the body of the victim collapses with a dull thud into a bloody pool of steaming black bile and coagulating blood on the concrete floor...the assailant holds a zippo lighter up to the decapitated head's still-twitching eyes, boiling them within their sockets until they swell and burst, running down the face like runny egg-whites, while the empty sockets stare at the killer with no emotion...the killer than bites the lips, ears and nose off of the flesh covered skull before spitting out the flesh into a frying pan, where the skin begins to steam and sear, cooking in its own fat until the killer is ready to place them into the meat dehydrator so he will have something to snack on later...then the killer takes a pair of plyers and begins to tear the teeth from within the oral cavity, making a ripping sound as they come loose of the fleshy gums...(he is of course doing this, as we will see later, to make a sort of gruesome Jack-O-Lantern which he will use next Halloween)...etc, etc...

My point being that in order for the material (book/film) to "work", we have to explore the deepest, darkest parts of the story as well...now my above examples are not even nearly as gore-filled as the book, but I hope you catch my drift...

[the night watchman]

Joblo, Do you think Willam Dafoe's cop could be a part of Patrick's fantasy as well - a manifestation of his own conscience? I believe Bateman wants to get caught, at least until his final encounter with his lawyer.

Further, if all the murders took place in his head, do you think that at the end of the movie he has become convinced he will never be punished for his deeds, and hence go out and actually start killing for real?


[This message has been edited by the night watchman (edited 12-29-2000).]

[the night watchman]

Brock,

I think Harron has a perfectly valid interpretation of Ellis' novel. The events in the film are ambiguous, and not clearly fantasy. I have never heard Ellis comment about the book himself, but I suspect he meant the reality of the events to be just as suspect as they are in the movie. Remember, first words of the book are "Abandon All Hope Ye Who Enter Here," and the final words are "This Is Not An Exit." I believe Patrick is "Entering" a fantasy world as the novel begins; and at the end he is on the cusp of making his fantasies a reality (he hasn't learned anything … he hasn't "Exited" his fantasies). Harron, I believe, picked up on this and brought the ambiguity of the novel to the surface when she co-wrote the script. It simply makes for a much more interesting movie, and I totally disagree that it was done simply to water down the subject matter for mainstream audiences.

The fact of the matter is, Patrick Bateman is a dork, killer or not. He's absolutely pathetic, and even pitiable to a certain degree, because wholesale torture and slaughter are the best fantasies he can come up with. Serial killers are a dime a dozen in film. Such being the case, I disagree that the movie would be "darker" only if the events portrayed are real. They are real for Patrick, they are obsessions he can neither escape, control, or understand. That's pretty disturbing to me.

[Brock Landers]

Like I said before, there is no conclusive evidence either way...that is why I explained that it was only my opinion that the killing and torture were real...in the book. The film's intentions are definitely to make Bateman out to be a hallucinating dweeb.

I agree that Harron's interpretation of the book was "valid", but that is only because I liked the film so much. Don't misunderstand me please, the book and the film are two completely separate entities based on the same story...

That is your interpretation that he is entering a fantasy world, while I believe we, as the reader, are entering the mind of a yuppie serial killer who is not nearly as much a dork as the film makes him to be...he is "perfect", women want him, men want to be him, or so he would like to think...and even with his flawless looks, tons o' money, etc...he is still struggling to fit in, but like Ted Bundy (another looker), he never will. The whole eighties satire thing is just something the author (Bret Easton Ellis..."Less Than Zero" is another book to film translation, except LTZ flick went awry) used to starkly contrast the mind of a killer... Bateman will never fit in because he is a sociopathic madman who feels no remorse or regret for the violence he doles out onto others...even children and animals...as the book explains...

I never said the film would be "darker" if they portrayed the violence to be real or were more gratuitous with it, I only wanted to explain that they book and movie are often confused as the same thing, as is so often done with controversial material...I mean, the only reason there was any controversy about the book and the making of the film in the first place, was because people assumed the violence was real and didn't even read the book which, in my mind, would have confirmed it for them...

[the night watchman]

Fair enough. I still think the movie was a little closer to Ellis' intentions than you think it was. But I also read the book after I'd seen the movie, so I had prior opinions and expectations about the story.

Anyway, this is why I think "American Psycho" is so great; it enables conversations like this. /ubb/smile.gif

[Brock Landers]

You're right, debate and conjecture rule...

I have read some interesting transcripts of Bret Easton Ellis' appearances at certain Ivy League schools...where he would read excerpts from the book and discuss them for audiences of college students...there is also a great website, or at least it used to be good back around February 2000 called "This Is Not An Exit: The Bret Easton Ellis something-or-other", (Oh yeah, "This Is Not An Endorsement" just a site I stopped at a few (hundred) times, and man, you wanna talk about some bad language and some sick bastards)...I used to go there a bunch and the reality topic was beat into the ground by many fans of "American Psycho"...and in the end, nothing was proven...there are no set-in-stone facts to prove either way about the violence, although it's still fun to speculate...

...well, I'm off for now...got a gallon o' Captain Morgan (spiced rum) calling my name... and you dudes don't want to see me sauced-up... I mean, then I will REALLY rant...you ain't seen nothin' yet...there ain't nothin' worse than a drunken film enthusiast...sayonara...

[PackBacker]

Mmmm Captain Morgans...

Sorry back to American Psycho.. I haven't read the book. In the film I think the actual killings were all imagined for the reasons JoBlo pointed out. I think we were seeing the development of a serial killer and the scene where he contemplated drilling/nailing the secretary was real. I think in the end, though, all he did was make his heinous sketches and thrive in a world of make-believe.

[Patrick Bateman]

Nice topic! http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif

I certainly didnt mind digging this one up, and now i'll give my personal views on this subject.

My personal opinion is that he in no way commited ANY of the murders depicted in the book, or the film itself. Patrick Bateman is just that, a "daydreamer" and in reality, would never have the guts to actually commit a murder, that is..maybe untill the conclusion of the original film!?

Although the book itself is a brilliant statement on the reagan-80's, the yuppie era, and the overall excess of the decade which was the 1980's, it was also a very humours book in which I found myself laughing outloud numerous times.

Getting back to the point, "American Psycho" is about a dreamer, a spoiled rich brat who wants to stand out, but possess's nothing in order to do so. His father probably dropped him on the steps of Harvard covered in only a few million dollars.

Patrick Bateman is without a doubt an "American Psycho". His only concerns is anything having to do with Vanity, and materialistic needs. Bateman does not care what is the overall better product hes about to purchase, his concerns lies in which is 'Top of the Line' and more expensive. Patrick believes hes more important than any of his colleages, but "Does not want to talk about it" on exactly how he was able to be such a success at an early age. He seeks to be recognized as one of the elite, but in the book, and the film itself, Patrick is constantly mistaken for other people.

Paul Allen/Owen in my opinion is the exact opposite of Bateman in my observation. Paul, like Bateman, possess's all the extravagant indulgence a human being could want, but the main difference between the two, is that Paul 'stands out'. Everyone knows who Paul Allen/Owen is, while Patrick is mistaken for other people all the time. Paul is 'important' enough to get reservation's at Dorcia, Patrick is not. Everyone is impressed, as well as jealous of Paul in the AP universe, Patrick Bateman is neutral, as far as everyone is concerned. Paul in essence, is the person Patrick only wishes he could be.

Patrick Bateman is exactly the type of person who would dream of murdering a more successful, richer colleage, then envisioning every detail afterwards (i.e. donald kimbal). Patrick wants to be someone, he wants to get caught, he wants to be famous, in essence, he wants to be known. But the problem is, Bateman cannot accept his own limitations and accept that hes no different, in the publics eyes than any other yuppie that inhabited 1980's New York.

Patrick's constant 'hints' are totally IGNORED by his work colleages also, cause like the lawyer said, "Bateman is such a lightweight." This statement is unfortunately true, in which Bateman cannot 'deal with it'. One of the re-occurring themes in "American Psycho" is that even if Bateman DID actually commit the murders, his so-called friends would be too self consumed to even notice. To Patrick, and his colleages, it was all about being self-obsessed, shutting the other person out, and presenting yourself. Such as was the case with Bateman's numerous 'hints'.

The giveaway that he did not commit the murders, is infact the very last line in the film.

"This confession has meant nothing."

Patrick's confessions has meant exactly that, nothing. He wants his pain to be inflicted on others, but will not act on it. He longs for attention, which he will not recieve. Patrick Bateman is a nobody who wants to be a somebody.

To me, "American Psycho" is basically a diary of a very sick man who wishes he was more than he is. A man who will dream of murderous rampages, then analyze the aftermath to its finest detail. A man who prides himself on being important, when actually, its very clear just how un-important he really is. "American Psycho"'s Patrick Bateman, is a dreamer who will daydream murders, and doodle them to make himself somehow feel more powerful and important.

"This is not an Exit" to me, conjures up the notion that Bateman cannot hide in his dreamworld forever. Bateman will someday, have to face reality, and accept that he really doesnt 'fit in', and hes not as important as he would like to think. His disturbing thoughts will not save him from the harsh, cold reality of being just like everyone else.

Despite his flaws, I love the guy! http://www.joblo.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

I have to return some Videotapes....