God help, I'm thinking of going to see 'The Rules of Attraction' this weekend.

(nb: i agree with mel.)

Shannyn Sossamon is in this? Now I have to see it. Great. (I've never read the book, but I love the line about it in that big Salon book about modern writers - "It was not as bad as everyone said it was, for the simple reason that it is physically impossible for a book to be that bad.")

I imagine the movie wld be better [i've not yet seen it], if only because it confines an overly repetitive [she was wearing blah de blah de BLAH ad nauseum] book to a digestable length.

OTM.

(not really, but i had to make that pun)

I've seen worse movies this year, and I'll see worse movies this year.

Andrew McCarthy < James Van Der Beek < Christian Bale, although Van Der Beek came the closest to seeming like a real human being of the three.

Jessica Biel is the median between sorority girl and porn star.

The soundtrack wasn't bad, and had a neat effect of throwing the 'timing' (historically, um) off. Clearly set in the present, but several eighties touches, like, when was the last time an American college student listened to post-Second Edition PiL? ("Rise" in this case, which I hadn't heard in forever and which I greeted like a guy I knew in high school suddenly popping up in a movie)

All of the techinical tricks were superfluous, and only the European Vacation part was a real kick.

It was also a kick to think 'so that's Patrick Bateman's little brother'.

Fred Savage should have been left on the cutting room floor.

Every review I've seen of this, even the positive ones, have noted that the characters are completely unsympathetic and repulsive, so does it make me a repulsive person to sympathize with these characters?

Better than Sunshine State!

That is so OTM.

The European vacation scene was interesting, but it felt so anachronistic - people still talk about hanging out with Paul Fucking Oakenfold (even when this movie was new)

----
Just saw this today. Absolutely loved it. I have to wonder now (and I believe this was briefly touched upon in a Kill Bill thread), how much of Quentin Tarantino's perceived talent was actually Roger Avary?

BTW, I believe it's now official that Avary has the rights to Glamorama.

I watched this film with some friends and I think they were a bit weirded out when I insisted that I identified with Van Der Beek's character the most.

that "ooh look i just stopped writing trick" is a bit much these days, maybe just coz i'm bored with it and the shock value seems to exceed the technical effect.

Everyone agreed the other dude was really cute, and yeah he was but his character was the most nutso to me. The backwards stuff was rubbed in a bit too much early on, and that whole "people like us" line that was the real ending was such a groaner.

The suicide scene was pretty well done, and the way it held on the flickering lights so you got the real tension when the girl stumbles into the bathroom and you KNOW that there's going to be the body there when she turns around.

So yeah, continuity-wise it was real strong.

the scene with him at the dinner table with his mother was k-classic.

(haha i thought it was just affecting enough and at the end it was TOO affecting)

someone told me that someone's making a movie based on the 3-minute travel bit.

PS - the movie is Glitterati, and is being edited from the European rough footage by Avary himself, for use as a bridge-story between RoA and Glamorama.

I'm not big on the Euro-travel thing.

I re-read the book again, and I don't think Paul was any less (un)likeable than he was in the book. His hang-ups about Sean and his family are pretty irritating to get through (but then, everybody had hang-ups about Sean. Except Victor, Deirdre and, for a good while, Suicide Girl).

Glamorama is gonna be crazy hard to pull off as is.

haha, i was gonna say 'that's eurotrip' but now i see what you mean. that montage is amazing.

It was disagreeable, dislikeable, annoying, even disturbing - yes. But why? That is the question I had to ask myself.

-- the pinefox (pinefo...), October 5th, 2006.

I may have the answer, though it may not be the one you're looking for. You found it disturbing because it dredged up post-secondary memories of when you, yes, even you, had your back vomited on while victim of SURPRISE! BUTTSECKS!

"cause it's essnetially true to Easton Ellis's book and he's not so much a confessional writer as a show-off. There were some quite pats to this movie, however; the sleazy Euro travel-log was quite genius I thought.

If 'essnetially' didn't give away the fact that I had no business attempting to type this morning...

Best thing about the movie: the technically stunning backwards tracking shots to simulate temporal simultaneity. Unfortunately, this is only the first 10 minutes of the film (and a little at the end). (Also n/a OTM about the "SUCKS COCK" line.)

- the shots following dawson and shanosassmym which join
- the eurotrip montage sequence

even if the rest of this movie was awful, it would be saved by that late shot of wasted Jessica Biel heading into a dorm room with the entire offensive line

http://www.movieline.com/2010/05/bret-easton-ellis-on-rules-of-attraction-and-its-sexy-illicit-spinoff-youll-never-see.php?page=all

this is crazy

I love this poster. My friend has one hanging in his editing suite.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3291/3129340465_8b9fcd8bdd.jpg

Great interview in 'Movieline'.

'Informers' book SPOILER:

BEE says in the interview something like "a guy who *thinks* he's a vampire". I thought that, maybe because of the end, that they were really vampires?

as noted upthread, I really enjoyed this movie when I originally saw it. Tried to watch it again recently and I didn't even make it twenty minutes in. Ugh.

i enjoyed this film, i'm slightly ashamed to say.

― Henry Miller, Tuesday, February 15, 2005 5:03 AM (5 years ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

This but I love the book too. What everyone said regarding the Eurotrip montage being awesome is OTM. I haven't seen this since it came out so no clue if I'd like it now. Saw it in the theater with a friend and his mom. That was . . . awkward.

I might rewatch it because I finished Imperial Bedrooms last night.

it's been a while since i read the informers, but yeah, wasn't there a part where they literally change into bats?

also having a hard time believing this:
"the carrot top commentary was very very funny"

have been eying imperial bedrooms warily - verdict?

it's short! even if you are disappointed, it won't have taken much time.
I'm not sure if it's a proper sequel -- it takes place in a universe where someone who isn't
Bret wrote Less than Zero, and nu-Clay spends the first chapter responding to that book, and
the movie that was made of it.
So, not quite a reboot, but not in the same universe either.

should have been set in the 80s, imo.

there's a lot of cel phones and texting in it, if that's a dealbreaker.

i suppose the book might have been more interesting if he turned journalist and caught up with the actual terrible people 'Less than Zero' was based on, but they're probably all semi-powerful Hollywood execs now.

have been eying imperial bedrooms warily - verdict?

The first seventy pages chronicle his usual anomic tour through an L.A. wasteland, with a couple of moments of creepiness that reminded me of Lynch's Lost Highway. Once it becomes clear where the thing is going, it's a wheeze. The last twenty pages are gruesome and pathetic.

sorry, meant RoA movie should have been set in the 80s.

Thought Rules of Attraction was the name of some rubbish I watched on a bus journey once with Pierce Brosnon and Julianne Moore. What's that one called?

Ah, that's Laws of Attraction. Carry on.

Well what do we have here? Should be funnier, but a few laughs...
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/4310ae6f7f/bret-easton-ellis-presents-all-that-glitters?playlist=featured_videos

Ebert's review of this movie cracked me up:

"The parties are a lapse of credibility. I cannot believe, for example, that large numbers of co-eds would engage in topless lesbian breastplay at a campus event, except in the inflamed imaginations of horny undergraduates. But assuming that they would: Is it plausible that the horny undergraduates wouldn't even look at them? Are today's undergraduate men so (choose one) blase, Politically Correct or emasculated that, surrounded by the enthusiastic foreplay of countless half-naked women, they would blandly carry on their conversations?"

'All That Glitters' is better on second viewing.

Ebert hearts byoobs

It was disagreeable, dislikeable, annoying, even disturbing - yes. But why? That is the question I had to ask myself.
-- the pinefox (pinefo...), October 5th, 2006.

I may have the answer, though it may not be the one you're looking for. You found it disturbing because it dredged up post-secondary memories of when you, yes, even you, had your back vomited on while victim of SURPRISE! BUTTSECKS!

― LeCoq (LeCoq), Thursday, October 5, 2006 7:43 AM (3 years ago) Bookmark

this film is way more relevant than 'lost in translation' #noughtiesnostalgist

still need to rewatch this

surprising amount of love for this on here. still holds up!

Teresa from Warpaint played the girl who killed herself. I haven't seen it since it first came out.

“We shot all of the hotel room scenes at the Ritz Carlton in Marina del Rey and we had finished our day early. Ian was in make up, and I was looking at Russell Sams, who plays Dick, wearing his aviator glasses, and I said you look like George Michael.” “…I thought what the hell, let’s shoot something fun to watch in dailies tomorrow. Our sound man, Felipe Borrero, to quickly find a CD of George Michael’s Faith, which he happened to have in his car. I then told Russell, who was always game for anything, ‘okay, this is your first film, and as an initiation, I want you to do a striptease dance for the crew to Faith’. Russell stared at me for a second, in slight disbelief, and then said, ‘okay, sure’.” “It was improv, and we only had time for one take, so I planted the camera with a wide lens at the foot of the bed, played Faith full blast, and let him loose…Midway through, I looked over and saw Ian Somerhalder in the hallway…looking into the room incredulously. I made a quick motion for him to ‘go for it’ and the next thing I knew he jumped into the shot, right on the beat.” “It was, honestly, a completely spontaneous, magic moment, and it was such a funny scene that I simply had to include it in the movie. The only problem was that there was no way we could afford the music licensing rights to Faith, so I wrote a letter to George Michael, and sent him the scene, begging him to let me use it. George, being one of the coolest guys in the universe, gave us the song for a dime, and I will forever be grateful because it’s one of my favorite scenes in the movie.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kur5Inh7Keg&feature=youtu.be

cool story!

i bet this is really bad but id still love 2 see it -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glitterati_(film)