VALUTAZIONE IMDb
3,7/10
18.967
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Una ragazza di nome Rachael Newman ha sviluppato un gusto per l'omicidio e non si fermerà davanti a nulla pur di diventare assistente di un professore universitario.Una ragazza di nome Rachael Newman ha sviluppato un gusto per l'omicidio e non si fermerà davanti a nulla pur di diventare assistente di un professore universitario.Una ragazza di nome Rachael Newman ha sviluppato un gusto per l'omicidio e non si fermerà davanti a nulla pur di diventare assistente di un professore universitario.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Geraint Wyn Davies
- Daniels
- (as Geraint Wyn-Davies)
Recensioni in evidenza
For those that are huge fans of the Christian Bale masterpiece should whole heartily avoid this film at all costs. There is nothing, I repeat, nothing connecting these two films together outside of a title and a slight beginning reference to a man that never should have existed in the first place one elusive Patrick Bateman. From the beginning the story makes no sense, supposed serial killer Patrick Bateman kills again, leaving a small girl to finish what he started. From that point forward, she decides to do whatever it takes to kill/capture all the serial killers of the world thus becoming one in the process. Again, what should have just been in Bateman's mind destroys the concept that this film is balanced on so, all we are left with are views, images, goofy music, and acting that honestly came from a Cracker Jack box. Our lead this time is Mila Kunis, of "That 70s Show fame", jumping or should I say "bubbling" right out of her character on FOX to a nearly identical character for this film. Her goal for the film, become William Shatner's teaching assistant so that she can get into Quantico and thus fulfilling her dreams to capture serial killers. What actually happens in the film is that she kills everyone in her way (everyone else is oblivious to the pile of bodies) to get that respected position. Nobody is safe, and as we prepare for the ending, a twist so predictable is thrown our way that we could care less about her, the story, or the semi-terrifying ending. Our only hope is that they decide to end the series with this film. What could the story be next? Patrick Bateman's ghost returns for more non-existent killing?
From every angle of this film, I was disgraced. I was such an enormous fan of the original film (the insanity, the characters, the violence), that to be handed a stick of bubble gum after eating veal just felt insulting. There are those that actually enjoyed this film, which just boggles my mind. How could anyone, either a fan of the original or not, enjoy this cookie-cutter film? In the commentary, director Morgan J. Freeman even admits to being a "director-for-hire", which means the story was already in place all he needed to do was put that "direct-to-video" feel to it, and it was ready for packaging, sealing, and delivery to those unsuspecting viewers who were tied into just the title. Nothing worked in this film. The music took me away from the horrors that were happening, and made me feel that I was camping at a carnival. The selection made me want to shake my hips and chew some bubble gum (odd, this is transforming into a theme to this film). The cinematography was juvenile at best. Errors erupted with leaps and bounds, and again, during the commentary the director wasn't afraid to point them out. From these low points, the only place to go was further down with acting that somehow connected well to the carnival music. Shatner tried his best, but just couldn't pull off the womanizing teacher with connections to Quantico. The chemistry between him and the other ladies felt scripted and old. In just a short twenty days, one probably doesn't have the chance to get to know the rest of your cast, so just read your lines and pray for the best. For those wondering how Kunis did with this role, just listen to her in the commentary. Pathetic would be a good word, amateur would be another, and just to give you that third scoop, she was unbelievable at best. Freeman attempted to make her this convincing detail oriented killer, with a killer body, but the result was anything but scary in fact one could go so far to say that it was "killer funny". Can I say it one more time? Nothing in this film worked. I don't mean to be lacking detail, but from the initial scene it was obvious that we were on a downward path did Morgan J. Freeman even see the original?
I have no sympathy for this film. "American Psycho II: All American Girl" was a debauchery to the series, to the words that Bret Easton Ellis put on the page, and to cinema itself. I have no respect for those that say that this should not be paired with the original, but instead should just be watched on its own. The original "American Psycho" was well acted, nail-bitingly genre bending, and continually asks me to question the value of a male dominated workplace on Wall Street. In the original, the question became what happens to a man that has everything in the sequel, the question transforms into "What would a girl do to get everything?" The themes are even the same. This film is a prime example of Hollywood looking to capitalize on a cult film by merely selling the title. Oh, what a horrid experiment gone wrong.
If you wanted a cheap version of the original, I suggest this one. It contains no artistic value, no moral thought-provoking moments, and definitely nothing that could be called unique or creative. The word original was never in Morgan J. Freeman's dialog. Listen to the audio commentary if you don't believe me, these Freeman and Kunis give hope to the aspiring director (who doesn't mind selling out for a paycheck) as well as a disgraceful taste to the human race.
This was cheap with a capital C.
Grade: * out of *****
From every angle of this film, I was disgraced. I was such an enormous fan of the original film (the insanity, the characters, the violence), that to be handed a stick of bubble gum after eating veal just felt insulting. There are those that actually enjoyed this film, which just boggles my mind. How could anyone, either a fan of the original or not, enjoy this cookie-cutter film? In the commentary, director Morgan J. Freeman even admits to being a "director-for-hire", which means the story was already in place all he needed to do was put that "direct-to-video" feel to it, and it was ready for packaging, sealing, and delivery to those unsuspecting viewers who were tied into just the title. Nothing worked in this film. The music took me away from the horrors that were happening, and made me feel that I was camping at a carnival. The selection made me want to shake my hips and chew some bubble gum (odd, this is transforming into a theme to this film). The cinematography was juvenile at best. Errors erupted with leaps and bounds, and again, during the commentary the director wasn't afraid to point them out. From these low points, the only place to go was further down with acting that somehow connected well to the carnival music. Shatner tried his best, but just couldn't pull off the womanizing teacher with connections to Quantico. The chemistry between him and the other ladies felt scripted and old. In just a short twenty days, one probably doesn't have the chance to get to know the rest of your cast, so just read your lines and pray for the best. For those wondering how Kunis did with this role, just listen to her in the commentary. Pathetic would be a good word, amateur would be another, and just to give you that third scoop, she was unbelievable at best. Freeman attempted to make her this convincing detail oriented killer, with a killer body, but the result was anything but scary in fact one could go so far to say that it was "killer funny". Can I say it one more time? Nothing in this film worked. I don't mean to be lacking detail, but from the initial scene it was obvious that we were on a downward path did Morgan J. Freeman even see the original?
I have no sympathy for this film. "American Psycho II: All American Girl" was a debauchery to the series, to the words that Bret Easton Ellis put on the page, and to cinema itself. I have no respect for those that say that this should not be paired with the original, but instead should just be watched on its own. The original "American Psycho" was well acted, nail-bitingly genre bending, and continually asks me to question the value of a male dominated workplace on Wall Street. In the original, the question became what happens to a man that has everything in the sequel, the question transforms into "What would a girl do to get everything?" The themes are even the same. This film is a prime example of Hollywood looking to capitalize on a cult film by merely selling the title. Oh, what a horrid experiment gone wrong.
If you wanted a cheap version of the original, I suggest this one. It contains no artistic value, no moral thought-provoking moments, and definitely nothing that could be called unique or creative. The word original was never in Morgan J. Freeman's dialog. Listen to the audio commentary if you don't believe me, these Freeman and Kunis give hope to the aspiring director (who doesn't mind selling out for a paycheck) as well as a disgraceful taste to the human race.
This was cheap with a capital C.
Grade: * out of *****
The makes of this film must not have needed BEE permission to make this sequel because I don't know how BEE could have let Hollywood trash the concept of his great book, American Psycho. This sequel was nothing but some B slasher movie with a bad story and really weak killings because no gore or blood is shown. It has nothing to do with the first film. To tie it in so they could use the title American Psycho, they make up the way Patrick Bateman died by saying a young girl was there and killed him as he killed her babysitter. Later on, some ridiculous story line ties the dead babysitter to one of the girl's college teachers, so we know why she is so obsessed with him. The only cool scene was when the girl gets this dead body out of her closet with flies all around after it has been there for months. Now that was gross!
FINAL VERDICT: Bad. Don't watch it.
FINAL VERDICT: Bad. Don't watch it.
Rumor has it that Lions Gate Films took an old, un-used script and tweaked it just a little bit to make it a sequel to Universal's 2000 controversial hit "American Psycho." It's easy to see why this went straight to video. Played off as more of a dark comedy than the first one, and severely lacking any gore, nudity or intensity, this is a very weak follow-up and leaves a lot to be desired. Mila Kunis, as gorgeous as she may be, was absolutely annoying during her narrations - I couldn't help but think of "Family Guy" the whole time! I seriously almost took the tape out of the VCR several times, I just got so frustrated. This movie is very low-quality and was obviously made with a shoe-string budget -- which isn't a bad thing, as long the filmmakers know what they are doing, but director Morgan J. Freeman (no, not the guy from "Shawshank Redemption") doesn't seem to take the material seriously enough to make it work (there's a lot of interviews out there of him trashing the first film and the people who made it). Overall, it plays more like a made-for-TV movie and a very cheesy, bad attempt at dark comedy. A few twists here and there might perk your interest, but other than that, this girl is D.O.A.
2/10
2/10
American Psycho II is a blatant attempt to rip off the reputation of American Psycho, which was a classic critique of the 1980s yuppie culture. It was also based on an actual book, by Brat Easton Ellis, which means that it was much better written than your average teen horror schlock.
I feel sorry for 19 year old (at the time) Mila Kunis. I'm sure she's a nice girl and has some kind of acting future ahead of her.
The very notion of replacing Patrick Bateman with a cutesy teenaged girl (in the movie) is in and of itself a betrayal of the hardhitting satire it was based on. Any attempt to try and connect with the original is both forced and pathetic.
Miss this one at all cost, and if you haven't already, see the original, with Christian Bale, Willem Dafoe and Jared Leto, among many others.
I feel sorry for 19 year old (at the time) Mila Kunis. I'm sure she's a nice girl and has some kind of acting future ahead of her.
The very notion of replacing Patrick Bateman with a cutesy teenaged girl (in the movie) is in and of itself a betrayal of the hardhitting satire it was based on. Any attempt to try and connect with the original is both forced and pathetic.
Miss this one at all cost, and if you haven't already, see the original, with Christian Bale, Willem Dafoe and Jared Leto, among many others.
American Psycho II (2002)
BOMB (out of 4)
In name only sequel to the cult film has Mila Kunis playing Rachel, a young woman who as a child killed the serial killer Patrick Bateman. Flash forward several years and Rachel is in college trying to become a FBI agent but her goal of becoming her professor's (William Shatner) assistant means that she will have to turn into a killer to knock off the competition. American PSYCHO II is just a poor cash-in on the cult success of the first film but I really don't knock it for that. As a fan of horror films I've come accustom to cheap knock-offs but the problem with this film is that it's just not nearly as clever as it thinks it is. The biggest problem for me is the entire tone of the picture, which seems to be wanting to wink at the viewer. Rachel is shown as just a sweet girl next door type and we get some of the worst narration that you're ever going to hear throughout the movie as we move from one killing to the next. This narration really was some of the worst that I've ever heard and it was quite annoying. Even worse is the music score, which also tries to wink at the viewer with its silly light touch. I'm really not sure what the producers were trying to do with this picture but it's certainly a complete failure from the opening scene to the last. Was this meant to be a spoof of horror pictures? Perhaps but it's certainly not funny and as I said before, the picture isn't nearly as clever as it thinks. Even worse is the fact that Kunis is just downright awful here and it's easy to see why she doesn't want anyone to bring the picture up. Everything from her line delivery to the way she shows any sort of emotion is just bad. Yes she's hot but that's certainly not enough to carry the picture. Shatner is pretty much just cashing a paycheck and adds very little to the picture. Even as a horror film this thing doesn't work as the death scenes are all forgettable and there's just not enough sleaze to make it entertaining.
BOMB (out of 4)
In name only sequel to the cult film has Mila Kunis playing Rachel, a young woman who as a child killed the serial killer Patrick Bateman. Flash forward several years and Rachel is in college trying to become a FBI agent but her goal of becoming her professor's (William Shatner) assistant means that she will have to turn into a killer to knock off the competition. American PSYCHO II is just a poor cash-in on the cult success of the first film but I really don't knock it for that. As a fan of horror films I've come accustom to cheap knock-offs but the problem with this film is that it's just not nearly as clever as it thinks it is. The biggest problem for me is the entire tone of the picture, which seems to be wanting to wink at the viewer. Rachel is shown as just a sweet girl next door type and we get some of the worst narration that you're ever going to hear throughout the movie as we move from one killing to the next. This narration really was some of the worst that I've ever heard and it was quite annoying. Even worse is the music score, which also tries to wink at the viewer with its silly light touch. I'm really not sure what the producers were trying to do with this picture but it's certainly a complete failure from the opening scene to the last. Was this meant to be a spoof of horror pictures? Perhaps but it's certainly not funny and as I said before, the picture isn't nearly as clever as it thinks. Even worse is the fact that Kunis is just downright awful here and it's easy to see why she doesn't want anyone to bring the picture up. Everything from her line delivery to the way she shows any sort of emotion is just bad. Yes she's hot but that's certainly not enough to carry the picture. Shatner is pretty much just cashing a paycheck and adds very little to the picture. Even as a horror film this thing doesn't work as the death scenes are all forgettable and there's just not enough sleaze to make it entertaining.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe film began production with no association to American Psycho (2000), and it wasn't decided to repurpose it until it had already started filming. Bret Easton Ellis, the author of the original novel, claims the studio wanted to include a serial killer subplot in Le regole dell'attrazione (2002) but the filmmakers objected to the idea, leading to this film.
- BlooperEven if the real Rachel burned up in the car with Robert the autopsy would conform the bodies were already dead making it impossible to conclude they died in the fire.
- Citazioni
Rachael Newman: [after strangling Brian with a condom] Ribbed, for her pleasure.
- ConnessioniEdited into American Psycho 2: Outtakes (2002)
- Colonne sonoreIn the Meantime
Performed by The Dirtmitts (as Dirtmitts)
Written by The Dirtmitts (as Dirtmitts)
Courtesy of Sonic Unyon Records
Published by Sonic Unyon Distribution
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 10.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 28 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti