Unter Null

They tried to make Less than zero into a movie, but they had to censor some parts, probably too hard for the movie. But the success of the novel was the traumatizing things that happened to Clay and his friends, and if you censorship that in order to make a 'watchable' movie, you are going to fail.

Let's remember that in the novel there are the rape of a twelve year old, a pimp injecting heroin into Julian's arm, and a dead boy of an overdose in an alley. You lose all that in the movie by censuring it. And I'm not defending the horrible things that happened in the book, I'm just saying that Less than zero was kinda of a morbid reading.

Another thing they ignored (and it couldn't be because of censorship) was the ad that said 'DISSAPPEAR HERE', that constantly followed Clay through the city.

I lived in L.A. in the Eighties and remember the club scene with a chill. From Eddie Nash's joint on Hollywood Blvd[The Seven Seas] to Club Lingerie to the small venues in Long Beach and Orange County, this movie catches the ennui like a manic firefly in a jar. From the 'powder' in the ladies' room to casual sex, it shows it as it was--callow and shallow and a line/hit away from degradation and death.

It's heart-breaking to watch Robert Downey Jr.'s character surrender his dignity to a free base pipe. Other posts complain about the James Spader's performance, but he was dead on. Pushers are not nice people. This is an early cinematic example of truth about the nature of drug addiction. Are you frightened? NOT FRIGHTENED ENOUGH!

Scare yourself straight tonight. Watch 'Drugstore Cowboy', 'Less than Zero', and 'Rush'.

Here's hoping that Robert Downey Jr.'s talent will not be eclipsed by his addiction. He's an amazing actor. ['Chaplin' & 'Restoration' alone earned him a place in cinematic history.]

This movie should be considered a "Cult" classic. The movie captures the plight of a young teen's soul while in the drug world and the loyalty of friendship. The riveting performance of Robert Downey, Jr, who coincidentally won an Oscar nomination for his portrayal of Charlie Chaplin, was convincing as a spoiled rich kid gone bad.. why does that sound familiar ?!? James Spader was almost as intriguing as the pimp/drug dealer who was as cold as dry ice ! Andrew McCarthy however, seemed to be drowned by his supporting cast but has proved to be a beloved actor in his roles in "Pretty in Pink & St. Elmo's Fire ! Overall, I think that this movie started fans to really look at these fine actors as serious player's in the 1990's. I highly recommend having this in your collection !

Anyone who wants to revisit the excesses of the 80's should definitely head straight for this movie. Every element of it is strikingly evocative of its era. It has all the obvious things like the absurd fashions, the brick-sized mobile phones, the casting (only in the 80's could a cast be assembled so wimpy that James Spader can convince as a tough guy!), and of course the drugs. But it also has the little touches that generate shocks of recognition, from the pink and blue lighting, to the opening Bangles track, to the huge banks of TV screens masquerading as interior design it will rekindle memories you never knew you had.

Like the central characters whom it both satirises and glorifies, this movie is beautiful to look at and obsessed with surface and appearance. "You don't look happy", comments Clay (McCarthy) to Blair (Gertz) at one point, "But do I look good?" is her rejoinder. This film, while not a happy one, definitely looks good. Some scenes, notably one of McCarthy swimming and one of a swarm of motorcycles driving past him, seem to have no other purpose in the film beyond being aesthetically pleasing. The film's visual imagery is indeed so striking that when the makers of The Simpsons wanted to include a parody musical "Kickin' It - A Musical Journey Through the Betty Ford Clinic" they drew the leading man (playing a celebrity busted for drug offences) dressed in the distinctive black and white suit worn by Robert Downey Jnr during the first party scene, presumably confident that it would be recognised.

But despite its emphasis on visual style, Less Than Zero does have some substance underneath, most of it concentrated in Robert Downey Jnr's acute portrayal of the spoilt, self-destructive anti-hero Julian. It is easy to say with hindsight that playing a drug-addled and desperate man was never going to be a huge stretch for Downey, and plenty of critics have done so. However, regardless of the reasons behind it's proficiency, his performance has a depth and range that gives it an air of authenticity rare in a genre of character which traditionally leads actors into either an excess of hamminess or a glazed vacancy. Downey's Julian swings between easy-going charm, raw vulnerability, spoilt petulance and an aggressive unpredictability in a way which allows the audience to sympathise both with his family's angry hand-washing and his friend's reluctant love for him and determination to save him from himself.

The role is a difficult juggling act and luckily Downey has the perfect foil in Spader's subtle turn as the cynically manipulative dealer, Rip. The film really comes alive in the exchanges between the two, Julian puppy-ishly optimistic that he can sort his problems out and Rip cruelly cutting through his confidence to the reveal the self-deception at its heart, chipping away at Julian's fragile self-esteem in order to control him.

Unfortunately, the film rather lets itself down with a closing few minutes that seem to drag on for at least an hour. It's lazy, contrived and unlikely ending is more of a get out clause than a culmination and appears to have been written purely as a way of ending the film rather than as its logical conclusion. Despite this fairly major flaw Less Than Zero is entertaining, with enough snappy dialogue, varied music and amusingly dressed extras to counteract its deficiencies.

This film is very mixed. Robert Downey Jr. is beyond fabulous. Having watched someone very close to me go through addiction, I can say that Downey's Julian is the most accurate addict I've ever seen portrayed on film. His hopeless optimism, random outburst of rage, and constant sweating all ring true. But everyone knows RDJ is brilliant. Andrew McCarthy does well with the character created by the screenwriters, but that character lacks depth. If you've read Bret Easton Ellis's novel of the same name and are expecting the apathetic, drug-addled, jerk narrator, step back 'cause you won't be getting it here. It's no surprise the author was only happy with RDJ and James Spader, their characters are the only ones who even vaguely resemble those of the novel. The novel is shocking to the point of being nauseating and down right disturbing. The film is not. It's a beautiful, vapid montage of 80s that sometimes drags. The soundtrack is killer, especially LLCoolJ's Going' Back to Cali and the Bangles cover of Hazy Shade of Winter. But back to the acting- a few times in the film, Jamie Gertz hits on something real and heart-wrenching, but it's fleeting and before you can sigh with relief, it's gone. Much of her performance is pretty wooden and her performance in the last scene is positively painful. The sex scenes are very realistic, though. Probably the best acting Gertz and McCarthy do in this film. If you're into costumes, check this film out- they're pure 80s perfection.