American Psycho remake

Fishooks12

I really hope this is some kind of sick joke. If ever a film didn't need to be remade. It's only 11 years old ffs

From Total film

By Charlie Whately-Smith
In a move that could trigger the odd axe-murdering spree from fans of the cult original, Lionsgate has given the nod to Noble Jones to pen a remake of 2000’s American Psycho.
The tiny-budget reboot is only in the early stages of development, but we know that the film won’t be set to the backdrop of '80s Wall Street – instead, Jones intends to update the action to modern day New York City.
The original, itself based on Bret Easton Ellis’s 1991 novel, follows the story of Patrick Bateman, a wealthy banker whose slick exterior hides a deranged, monstrous killer, and offers a pitch-black satire on the yuppie milieu of the time.
It memorably starred a heavily Brylcreemed actor called Christian Bale, who is apparently set to star in a new film about fruitbats or somesuch.
Despite finding a huge cult following, American Psycho did relatively poor business at the box office, pulling in just $15 million in the U.S. A woeful straight-to-video sequel in 2002 was notable only for finally pairing up Mila Kunis and William Shatner.
Lionsgate thinks the time is right for a revamp, but with helmer Jones only having second-unit director credits for The Social Network under his belt, will he have the experience to do justice to the source material?

Mickeroo

It's pointless to remake it and even more pointless to not have it set in the 80s.

humanji

There was a sequel???

Immaculate Pasta

Ridiculous. I'm not a fan of remaking films. I only really advocate it if the original starts to looks dated ie. first King Kong. I actually watched this film again earlier this week and it's still not lost its appeal, it's only 11 years old like the OP said.

One of the main points of the film was an attack on 80s yuppie culture and their materialism. How they're going to convert that to modern day I'll never know. Also who would they change Huey Lewis to? Justin Bieber? :eek:

Do you like Justin Bieber? His early work was a little too teen pop for my taste, but when Under the Mistletoe* came out in 2011, I think he really came into his own, commercially and artistically. :rolleyes:

Can't see it working myself

*Had to look up a title of a Justin Bieber album before anyone accuses me of being well you know...

Sad Professor

I wouldn't mind a good remake of this. The original isn't great. Bale is brilliant, but Harron didn't get the book and is a mediocre director. Although it sounds like this will be worse.

Morlar

This is one video tape I won't be renting.

Brain Stroking

Morlar wrote: »

This is one video tape I won't be renting.

Or returning

Spacedog

What's with of all the remakes lately (maybe I'm just getting old). This remake is going to suck balls, as is the remakes of the Paul Verhoven movies in the pipeline (Robocop, Starship Troopers and Total Recall), as they will all present these classic movies ideas at face value, stripped of their context and subtext.

What next, a remake of the Wire where McNulty catches the bad guy at the end of each episode with a witty one liner?

And another thing, how come trailers have gone back to spoiling 100% of the movie, defeating the purpose of ever watching it in the first place. FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!

First off its not a remake but rather another adaptation. As good as the Bale version is there's a lot that they got wrong and allowing someone else to give their interpretation of the novel is quite acceptable. I doubt it's a film I'm going to eagerly anticipate or go out of my way to see but im curious to see what they do with the material.

paddy kerins

If they don't shut this fúcking remake, I will kill them.

Is Dorsia still around? Or does anyone go there anymore?

Mickeroo

Deleted User wrote: »

First off its not a remake but rather another adaptation. As good as the Bale version is there's a lot that they got wrong and allowing someone else to give their interpretation of the novel is quite acceptable. I doubt it's a film I'm going to eagerly anticipate or go out of my way to see but im curious to see what they do with the material.

I'm curious too, at least there's plenty scope to do it differently. Having said that when the makers go around saying "Oh its another adaptation of the book not a remake" its usually just to try and stop fans of the originals from getting up in arms. Remake/re-adaptation are all just buzz words for the same thing imho.

johnny_ultimate

You can always just ignore it. Tends to work for me!

(and this is nothing compared to the Akira remake)

Galvasean

If it's not set in the 80s it's not American psycho. That's the whole point.
Bret Easton Ellis must be spinning in his grave (I imagine he died of grief upon hearing this terrible huey lewis)

krudler

Galvasean wrote: »

If it's not set in the 80s it's not American psycho. That's the whole point.
Bret Easton Ellis must be spinning in his grave (I imagine he died of grief upon hearing this terrible huey lewis)

the entire novel is a pastiche of yuppie culture in the 80's, setting it in a modern day time (during a recession) makes NO sense. I love the Bale version, its a great adaptation of an unfilmable book.

MagicMarker

One of my favourite movies, if they don't do this then I promise to actually pay for movies in future.

tony1kenobi

It sounds marvelous.There is nothing to say.

Savman

Jesus, is nothing safe :eek:

Handsome Bob

Hey Noble....

candy-gal1

ah no way, that is ridiculous, seriously!
love the original sooo much, listening to the soundtrack as we speak
the sequel was a bit of a joke, even though mila kunis is hot in it yes , at least wait another 20 years if they really have to make a remakes, theres way too many these days anyway tbh










now, i have to return some videotapes

run_Forrest_run

this will not be a laugh riot, now I'm late for Dorsia.

Duke Leonal Felmet

Sad Professor wrote: »

I wouldn't mind a good remake of this. The original isn't great. Bale is brilliant, but Harron didn't get the book and is a mediocre director. Although it sounds like this will be worse.

I agree, she didn't do the book justice.

run_Forrest_run

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

I agree, she didn't do the book justice.

but can any movie adaption do the book justice? Would any director really put the book onto the silver screen, rodents n' all?:eek:

Duke Leonal Felmet

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

but can any movie adaption do the book justice? Would any director really put the book onto the silver screen, rodents n' all?:eek:

No, they couldn't make it as graphic, but the film was not graphic at all. I just found it rather tame, even when depicting the depravity of yuppie culture.

Bale was great, though.

Sad Professor

I disagree that the book was unfilmable. Some of the violent bits were and still are, but Harron took the easiest possible route by cutting them out entirely and turning the whole thing into a black comedy in which the audience safely laughs at Bateman from a distance. The book takes you inside his head and frightens you with what's in there, where as Harron just wants to emphasise the misogynistic aspects of his character.

Otis Driftwood

My own personal thoughts are that the first version of AP is pretty damn crappy anyway and was a very "safe" version of it.Yes,Bale is excellent in it but apart from his showing,there was nothing in it (for me anyway) to hold my attention.

Id be surprised though if another adaptation gets the green light for the foreseeable future.

Frank Black

Never really understood all the 'cult-love' the movie got.
The novel is one of the few books that I have laughed out loud when reading, during other parts I contemplated throwing out my apartment window in disgust.
The film never really proved anything like those emotions in me.

I never like when a novel is called 'un-filmable', but I think it would be difficult with American Psycho.

Duke Leonal Felmet

black francis wrote: »

Never really understood all the 'cult-love' the movie got.
The novel is one of the few books that I have laughed out loud when reading, during other parts I contemplated throwing out my apartment window in disgust.
The film never really proved anything like those emotions in me.

I never like when a novel is called 'un-filmable', but I think it would be difficult with American Psycho.

That is exactly my experience of the book. I felt sick sometimes reading it. Great book though. I don't think it is unfilmable, but it would be in the class of The Human Centipede or something.

TerrorFirmer

I like the Bale version, but it is an extremely diluted adaption of the book, it would be most interesting to see another take, however, I've a feeling it would loose a lot of meaning and end up being a hollow, empty vessel.....like American Psycho 2. Absolute drivel of the highest order....

Sir Gallagher

"I have to return some blu-rays"- Lame.

the whole year inn

Is there a link to this article?

Morlar

the whole year inn wrote: »

Is there a link to this article?

It's surrounded by copies of the style section over here:

http://www.totalfilm.com/news/american-psycho-set-for-remake

grames_bond

Galvasean wrote: »

If it's not set in the 80s it's not American psycho. That's the whole point.
Bret Easton Ellis must be spinning in his grave (I imagine he died of grief upon hearing this terrible huey lewis)

how did no one else point out this awesome nod/reference! nicely done man - kudos!!

As far as this remake goes i just know they will destroy it - I have a horrible feeling the ending of the remake will answer "the question" surrounding the whole movie! for example (spoilering as i am sort of talking about the ending to the bale movie too)

Paul Allen will just walk back in and sit down next to bateman - revealing that allof it was in his head the whole time

or some bullsh!t like that!!

Duke Leonal Felmet

grames_bond wrote: »

Galvasean wrote: »

If it's not set in the 80s it's not American psycho. That's the whole point.
Bret Easton Ellis must be spinning in his grave (I imagine he died of grief upon hearing this terrible huey lewis)

how did no one else point out this awesome nod/reference! nicely done man - kudos!!

As far as this remake goes i just know they will destroy it - I have a horrible feeling the ending of the remake will answer "the question" surrounding the whole movie! for example (spoilering as i am sort of talking about the ending to the bale movie too)

Paul Allen will just walk back in and sit down next to bateman - revealing that allof it was in his head the whole time

or some bullsh!t like that!!

What makes you think no one got it? Also, it does seem to me that you didn't get the end of the movie. Give the book a go.

pixelburp

I wonder would people be getting so uppity & outraged about this if it was another Jane Austin adaptation?

There should never be any sense of exclusivity when it comes to cinematic visions of novels; I like multiple adaptions because it gives lovers of the book something to think about & look forward to, different perspectives of their favorite novel. The Bale version will still be around for people to enjoy, just as the novel is still around for those who hated the first film adaptation.

Mickeroo

pixelburp wrote: »

I wonder would people be getting so uppity & outraged about this if it was another Jane Austin adaptation?

There should never be any sense of exclusivity when it comes to cinematic visions of novels; I like multiple adaptions because it gives lovers of the book something to think about & look forward to, different perspectives of their favorite novel. The Bale version will still be around for people to enjoy, just as the novel is still around for those who hated the first film adaptation.

Thats a very good point, but its the idea of not having this set in 80's that has me worried. At least with a Jane Austen novel you can take the characters and plot and set them in another time and place (take Emma adapted as Clueless for example) at it can work great since the new setting suits the original themes quite well.

The only way I could see this work in a more modern setting is if they set it before the economic down turn and have it during the boom. Now that I would actually be excited about, imagine if they got someone like David Fincher to do it in that context? I'm getting excited just thinking about it :pac:

JennyBurke101

Oh look a forum where I cannot be banned from talking about American Psycho....THE JOY!!!!!!!!!

pixelburp

Mickeroo wrote: »

Thats a very good point, but its the idea of not having this set in 80's that has me worried. At least with a Jane Austen novel you can take the characters and plot and set them in another time and place (take Emma adapted as Clueless for example) at it can work great since the new setting suits the original themes quite well.

The only way I could see this work in a more modern setting is if they set it before the economic down turn and have it during the boom. Now that I would actually be excited about, imagine if they got someone like David Fincher to do it in that context? I'm getting excited just thinking about it :pac:

To be fair, most adaptations of Austin, Bronte & the classics keep their original settings. You get the odd modernisation allright, but in the main they'd be 'accurate' adaptations

As for American Psycho, I'm coming from a position of having never read the novel, so I ask in ignorance if the period is that important to the movie? Seemed to me as much a critique of the excess, vulgarity and delusions of 'yuppies' (for want of a better term) as it was a pastiche of the 80s. Maybe.

Boom_Bap

Please.Do.Not.

Exceptional movie that shouldnt be revisited or glitzed up or modernised.
If they want to do something, they should look at some more of Ellis'exceptional work.

IMDB shows that Glamorama is slated fro 2014 and Lunar Park for 2013.

im invisible

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

"I have to return some blu-rays"- Lame.

they should bring it out on HD-DVD

Morlar

The original American Psycho is a modern classic in my opinion. This remake will be a money grubbing p.o.s.

Next up the remake of Full Metal Jacket as a vehicle for Robert Pattinson. With Kristen Stewart as the new character 'sweetheart back at home'.

Duke Leonal Felmet

I think the original film is rather tame. To those who read the book, but like the film, did you feel it did the book justice or was it just good in it's own way?

Mickeroo

pixelburp wrote: »

As for American Psycho, I'm coming from a position of having never read the novel, so I ask in ignorance if the period is that important to the movie? Seemed to me as much a critique of the excess, vulgarity and delusions of 'yuppies' (for want of a better term) as it was a pastiche of the 80s. Maybe.

It was pretty important, there's a very strong sense of time and place in the book but yea you are right about the yuppy thing. as I said I think it could translate well if set in the ecenomic boom of 00's which had its own fair share of excess and vulgarity imo

Landoflemon

One of the lasting memories of reading the book that I have is the intricate detail that was used to describe the food, if they make a new adaptation which is more closely based on Ellis's book the movie would come across as more of a fine cuisine documentary!

Our pasta this evening...

is squid ravioli in a lemon grass broth...

with goat cheese profiteroles, and I also have an arugula Caesar salad.

For entrees this evening, I have swordfish meatloaf with onion marmalade,

rare roasted partridge breast in raspberry coulis with a sorrel timbale.

...and grilled free-range rabbit with herbed french fries.


If the sequel comes to cinema's here I hope the tickets have a subtle off white colouring, and a tasteful thickness. Oh my god, it should even have a watermark!

Mickeroo

Landoflemon wrote: »

One of the lasting memories of reading the book that I have is the intricate detail that was used to describe the food, if they make a new adaptation which is more closely based on Ellis's book the movie would come across as more of a fine cuisine documentary!

Our pasta this evening...

is squid ravioli in a lemon grass broth...

with goat cheese profiteroles, and I also have an arugula Caesar salad.

For entrees this evening, I have swordfish meatloaf with onion marmalade,

rare roasted partridge breast in raspberry coulis with a sorrel timbale.

...and grilled free-range rabbit with herbed french fries.


If the sequel comes to cinema's here I hope the tickets have a subtle off white colouring, and a tasteful thickness. Oh my god, it should even have a watermark!

Obviously a fair bit of that would be jettisoned for a movie again, I remember the chapters about his appearance or Phil Collins and Whitney Houston more than the food:D

Brendog

There is zero reasons to remake this film its brilliant leave it alone.

Think I'll invite the director over to listen to the new Huey Lewis CD and convince him how the film will be axed in the reviews

Galvasean

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

I think the original film is rather tame. To those who read the book, but like the film, did you feel it did the book justice or was it just good in it's own way?

I'm a fan of both, but for different reasons. I did see the film before reading the book so maybe that has influenced me somewhat. I don't think the film is a faithful adaptation, but it is still one of my favourite films. By skimming over much of the gore the film goes about at playing up the dark comedy elements which makes for an enjoyable watch, albeit at the cost of being nowhere near as engrossing as the book (in terms of getting into the mind of a psychopath).
I'd view the film as more of a companion piece to the book than a full on adaptation.

Otis Driftwood

JennyBurke101 wrote: »

Oh look a forum where I cannot be banned from talking about American Psycho....THE JOY!!!!!!!!!

No,you were banned because you completely spammed a screening of American Psycho in multiple posts.You should consider yourself very that you weren't site banned outright to be honest.Many users have been for a helluva lot less.

speedboatchase

American Psycho remake?! I'm leaving. I've assessed the situation, and I'm going.

Mickeroo

speedboatchase wrote: »

American Psycho remake?! I'm leaving. I've assessed the situation, and I'm going.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35TbGjt-weA

pixelburp

Goddamnit! It's not a remake people!

Arrgh

grames_bond

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

What makes you think no one got it?

I didnt say no one got it - i said no one pointed it out!

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

Also, it does seem to me that you didn't get the end of the movie. Give the book a go.

I got the end of the movie AND i have read the book more times than i can count - B.E.E. is my favourite author! Stop with the condecending tone thanks!