|
Directed by: Morgan J. Freeman (no relation) Starring: Mila Kunis & Captain Kirk modified from an old zine review I did American Psycho 2 stars young Mila Kunis (the brunette on That 70's Show) as a college freshman named Rachael Newman. Six years before the meat of the plot, Rachael's baby sitter takes her along on a date to Patrick Bateman's place. Bateman was the hero of the orignal movie, a satirical black comedy dripping with laffs based off a book I've never read but I hear is pretty good. Patrick, played by someone who looks nothing like the guy who played him in the first movie (he played Neo in Equilibrium), is cutting up the baby sitter's vag to serve to lil' Rachael when Rach breaks free and stabs him in the head with an ice pick. The baby-sitter dies from Lord know what. This brings me to my second problem with this film (the first obviously being that the movies doesn't center on Patrick Bateman). This whole flick could be shown on USA up all night with only about 10 seconds of movie removed. For a video that claims it includes elements of "horror", that is total bullshit. There are no scenes of intense-goofy-retard violence. No eyes popping like grapes... no fake plastic heads soaring through the air with the arc of a touchdown pass... nothing. Also, my keen eyes detected no titty. Not even one. Not even that side-of-the-boob poo poo they pulled in Tomb Raider and that John Cougar Mellencamp video. A horror movie that doesn't take advantage of a few young actresses has no place in my video collection. After escaping the clutches of Patrick Bateman and any connection to a much better movie, six years go by. So Rachael has growed all up, and she's a freshman at some school that is a stepping stone to getting into Quantico. Also worth noting: Rach is apparently only taking one class and has Captain Kirk as teacher. Getting Kirk's T.A. job makes your Epenis for getting into the FBI huge, so the competition is fierce. Remember that, because this retarded and insane plot point is beaten over your head just about ever 30 seconds for the next three days. The director will call you at all hours to remind you. That stated for the first of a million times, we meet the TA contenders... the stupid rich boy, the slut banging Kirk, the token black guy, and the chick from That 70s Show (even though she's a freshman and apparently only taking one class). The movie then (briefly) shifts into your classic teen horror movie with a mystery killer. There's some poo poo that's almost cool. Like someone sticks a cat in a microwave but then they loving ruin it by letting it out. Eventually the killer is revealed. I don't want to spoil it for you, but here is the movie's poster. http://www.deadmonkeycomics.com/images/hint.jpg In the big reveal That 70s girl chick strangles a guy with a loving condom. A condom. At this point Rach admits via narration that "Like yeah, I'm like a killer... but like a few have to die so I can stop others from totally killing lots more. You know what I mean?" gently caress me in the rear end. On top of how loving stupid that is, the only possibility of a sex scene in this bowl of lumpy poo poo was just destroyed by some marvelous unbreakable, unlubricated space condom. At this point my hatred for the film became unbearable, and I stopped taking my meticulous notes. I sat through the rest of this drek in hopes someone would get naked or kill Rachael. Hint: I still hate this movie. The narration by Kunis is enough to make you poo poo blood for days. If you see this movie in the video store, you must rent it and bite the disc in half right in front of the clerk. Eat it, Burn it, I do not care. Just send it back to God. I don't condone flying from Baltimore to LA to hunt, torture, and kill the fucks that made this fetid dog link, but I certainly would not lose any sleep. I can't emphasize enough that this movie is just bad. It isn't "so bad it's good". There is nothing in this film that would justify the suffering you would endure. I give this nasty genital scab of a movie 0 out of 5 stars.
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 04:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 15:00 |
|
|
You have to give it some credit for having Mila Kunis. She's adorable and fun to watch. Even though the movie sucked, I'd watch it again just to see some more Kunis.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 04:15
|
|
|
quote:Juanito came out of the closet to say: Mila Kunis is a pox on my ears. I'm not a fan of awful movies staring cute young actresses. "Wrong Turn" is a another example of this. I'd sooner rape my family than sit through this film again.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 04:46
|
|
|
quote:Vishass came out of the closet to say:
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 05:03
|
|
|
this movie was loving terrible and I hate it
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 05:34
|
|
|
I decided to watch this on HBO tonight, and it was incredibly terrible. It wasn't even the kind of bad horror where you can laugh at it, the writing sucked and the acting was worse. If I could vote this a 0 I would.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 10:20
|
|
|
This movie was so bad I wanted to cut off its arms and titfuck it. At least, that's what Patrick Bateman would have said ...
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 10:30
|
|
|
The first American Psycho was such a great loving movie. I can't see how they justified making another one, even if it did center on Patrick Bateman. Did anyone ever say "I got to return some video tapes" in this movie?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 15:13
|
|
|
The worst sequel to any movie, ever.
vector fucked around with this message at 16:14 on May 2, 2004 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 16:08
|
|
|
I agree that this movie sucked, a lot. To me the worst part was that the entire premise of the movie was that Bateman actually did kill all those people in the first movie/book. Seeing as the entire point of the first movie is the ambiguity of everything and the fact that he most likely did not kill anyone, it's just loving ridiculous. Bleh.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 17:06
|
|
|
quote:ogm came out of the closet to say: But ... yeah, probably not.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 17:39
|
|
|
I never thought there could be a movie worse than mission to mars until I saw this movie. What a waste of perfectly good celluloid that could have been used to make a full house movie or bestiality porn or something.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 18:21
|
|
|
The biggest problem with this movie is it ruined the premise of the first, in which you're left wondering Did Bateman kill those people, or was it all in his head? I watched it more out of morbid curiousity than anything, and I think I rather would have raped a porcupine. E: Er, yeah, beaten like a hooker invited to Patrick's apartment. E2: I noticed some people are voting 5 but they're not really explaining why, other than 'oh it had Mila in it!'. I'm really genuinely curious to see their reviews or why they thought it was worth a 5. 3 Action Economist fucked around with this message at 21:12 on May 2, 2004 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 20:57
|
|
|
This movie is the embodyment of an inferior sequel. 2/5
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 21:22
|
|
|
Say what you will, but I think it takes balls to make a sequel to a movie that sucked rear end to begin with because the material just doesn't translate well from book to film.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2004 04:22
|
|
|
quote:CovetousCreatur came out of the closet to say: I thought American Psycho was a fantastic movie, this movie on the other hand was the worst ever. 0/5
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2004 04:27
|
|
|
I tried to like the first one... even watched it 3 times, but I absolutely hated it. The book was great, but I just don't think it worked well as a movie.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2004 05:21
|
|
|
quote:CovetousCreatur came out of the closet to say: I saw the movie first, so maybe that's why I liked it more... the only thing that I think they did was get a little overboard with some of the things, and they basically ignored the premise of the book about how greedy Wall Street society was in the 80's. I also heard the book clears things up more than the movie, which it doesn't. That, hoever, is fine, because after reading the bok, it's obvious that it doesn't matter whether or not it happened - that wasn't the premise.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2004 06:41
|
|
|
I hated one and two. 1/5
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2004 06:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 15:00 |
|
|
I went in expecting nothing and I was not let down. 1.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2004 16:11
|
|
