"Ribbed, for her pleasure." (American Psycho 2 (DVD))

Member Name: wiggglypufff

Product:	American Psycho 2 (DVD)
Date:	22/01/05 (212 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: A few laughs, New idea for condom use

Disadvantages: Horror/comedy doesn't work too well, No depth to the plot, Predictable & unbelievable

As a 12 yr old child, Rachel Newman witnesses the murder of Patrick Bateman’s last victim. She then murders him, ending his reign as the ‘American Psycho’. She isn’t implicated to or connected in any way with the murder, and on surface value it doesn’t appear to affect her life other than by giving her an interest in serial killers and a desire to join the FBI to catch other serial killers such as Bateman.

[Forward a few years]

As a young lady, Rachel knows exactly what she wants, and how she intends to achieve it. She has a plan, clearly drawn up in her head and so enrols at college on a criminal profiling course - her main aim there is to become her professor’s teaching assistant as that stands her in with a very good chance of getting a place in the FBI...

Oh dear!!! How can a sequel go so wrong? The film starts off well, but within 10 minutes or so it’s on a downhill slide to failure. Rachel comes across initially as a likeable and plausible young lady. She’s gutsy, determined, intelligent, and of course beautiful. BUT… as we follow her through college we realise she’s not entirely ‘normal’. Her desire to join the FBI is unnaturally fierce (obsessive), and her motto ‘Failure is not an option’ seems to forcibly fill her head hence ruling her life and actions. As Rachel encounters people that are or could be in her eyes jeopardising her future in the FBI we learn just one more thing: getting in her way equals ending up dead.

The film quickly becomes largely predictable and then sadly, causing only further detriment, somewhat unbelievable too. It’s easy enough to accept that Rachel’s childhood experiences have left her disturbed (it would probably be more likely than not), and it’s fair enough to accept her desire to be in the FBI (to prevent more ‘Bateman scenarios’) but we never see where the unhealthy drive to succeed at any cost comes from. The opportunities for in-depth character exploration and analysis are there in the scenes where Rachel sees a therapist. My initial thoughts were she’d reveal all to him and then bank on patient/therapist confidentiality to keep her secret (or add him to her ‘hit list’) but the conversations they have just run along the lines of the therapist asking what she’ll do if she can’t achieve her goals and her insistent replies that she can and will. It practically defeats the point of the film when the main character’s bizarre actions are simply played out but not ever seriously probed.

So, are there any redeeming features to the film? Other than the last 5 minutes, which are surprisingly clever in comparison to the rest of the plot, not really… just loads more missed opportunities.

The soundtrack can best be described as generic rock/pop, which doesn’t even attempt to build any kind of atmosphere/suspense/shock factor. It’s like, another song, another murder, so what? To add to the dull tunes, you get Rachel’s voice droning on as she narrates in parts. It’s another missed opportunity though, I mean her narration is just story telling of events that have either happened or are going to happen shortly. There was that chance again to be given an insight into a killer’s mind, to let us know what was really driving her and going on in her head, but no, nothing remotely like that.

The cast isn’t exactly an all singing all dancing ‘A list’ of celebrities either, unless you class a somewhat past it William Shatner as Rachel’s professor something to write home about. Mila Kunis in the lead role of Rachel does okay, but she certainly doesn’t make you think ‘wow that role was made for her’.

There are no special effects to talk of, and perhaps the best bit of camera work is one of the murders seen as a reflection as opposed to ‘in the flesh’. It was a shame though in some ways as it was undoubtedly the goriest murder of the film and it might have been better seen fully. On the subject of the murders, most aren’t even shown in the act so to speak, just inferred by other actions, re-caps and/or the resulting corpses.

(It’s also worth adding that the killing spree is leaving bodies littered all over the place, yet in most cases we hear little or no mention of missing persons and/or the discovery of said bodies and we see no police investigations till near the end of the film)

To add insult to injury, there’s some attempted humour carelessly thrown in to Rachel’s part during the murder scenes (amongst others) and in most cases it just leaves you thinking ‘I can’t believe she said that!’. Have to admit though I did like the line "Ribbed, for her pleasure." - and well, I’ve never done *that* with a condom, but you’ll have to watch the film (or see www.imdb.com) to find out what *that* was!

The premise was there, yet it never materialised. It’s a story that could have worked, but just didn’t. The horror wasn’t horrific enough, nor the comedy funny enough and that just left me feeling a bit empty and somewhat disappointed. I sighed rather than gasped, and grimaced rather than laughed – maybe because it was on the most part so damned predictable it just took the ‘wow factor’ away. Let’s face it, when half way through the film with Rachel mid killing spree you just know that when she says “Nice mop!” to the cleaner that has just witnessed one of her ‘sinister’ acts she’s not going to let him get away.

Whilst the action is as black and white as Rachel’s plan, the way the film itself comes across overall is very much grey (maybe a consequence of the 3 million pound budget and 20 day filming schedule?). I sat for a while after it in a state of disbelief, not being sure if I had taken the film too seriously or not seriously enough, or if it in fact would even have mattered.

As a stand-alone film (and with a bit more thought) it could have worked, and nicely too. The way it ended could possibly have spawned a sequel of its own, was it not already the poor relation. The only connection this sequel has to the original film (apart from the name and the odd mention of Bateman during the serial killer lectures) is using Rachel’s childhood experience with Bateman as a trigger to her adult life’s events. I’d imagine that any scenario involving witnessing and then committing murder would have some quite undesirable effects on a child, so there seems no need (or justification) to play on the ‘American Psycho’ title.

As it is, the thought of an American Psycho 3 is I’m sure far more scary then the film itself could ever be. Based on the ‘link’ between 1 and 2 you kind of wonder what half-baked nonsense might be used as a further sequel connection – a miraculously re-incarnated Patrick Bateman (The original American Psycho)? Or perhaps a love child of Rachel’s that we never knew she had… It really doesn’t bear thinking about.

So, do I recommend it? Hopefully you’ll have gathered that NO, I don’t. It may be worth a look if you’re a serious fan of either William Shatner or Mila Kunis, or if you enjoy purposely wasting your time. Otherwise, just don’t go there.


~ Extra info ~

MPAA: Rated R for violence and language.
Runtime: 88 min
UK Certification: 18

Summary: