American Psycho 2 (2002)

[Max B 2]

Schatner!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MLhS1XznGw&feature=related

[JoeMoore_103835 0]

American psycho 2 is the most enjoyable bad movie I have ever seen. It's even better if you watch it first as the original and then watch American psycho as an original story.

 

 

 

 

[IvyKila_122097 1]

yep this could be a great episode, i have'nt seen it since it came out if it was chosen for an episode it would be a great time to rewatch this, the condom kill is something to see

[Kream15 11]

Yes! Please! This movie checks all the boxes for failed sequel. And this cast Mila Kunis and Montreal's finest William Shatner. But it does imply the murders were real from the first movie.

Tagline: "Angrier, Deadlier, Sexier"

[CaptainAmazing 127]

From seeing this turd around 2003, here's what I remember/reconstructed from later, but not recent, readings:

-Having to watch the DVD menu screen for ages before we could start, and thinking "This movie had better be REALLY good." It wasn't.

-A metric fuckton of college parties that had no relevance to the plot.

-Not much happens for much of the movie. The only even mildly interesting thing in the first half is a scene where another girl seems to be spying on the main character in the library before running away, which turns out to be a red herring that is never brought up again.

-The main girl meets a lot of guys and then never talks to them again. I think we're supposed to wonder if she's murdered them or something.

-This "mystery" is anticlimactically solved at a random moment more than halfway through when we just suddenly see her "going to work on one of her victims."

-Finally seeing the original movie years later and learning that this movie didn't even start out as a sequel to it, which made a LOT of sense. It's like the writer had only just barely heard of the first movie.

-One review of it said "When the best part of this movie is William Shatner's acting, you know it has problems."

[Greg T 48]

On 11/25/2019 at 2:16 PM, CaptainAmazing said:

From seeing this turd around 2003, here's what I remember/reconstructed from later, but not recent, readings:

-Having to watch the DVD menu screen for ages before we could start, and thinking "This movie had better be REALLY good." It wasn't.

-A metric fuckton of college parties that had no relevance to the plot.

-Not much happens for much of the movie. The only even mildly interesting thing in the first half is a scene where another girl seems to be spying on the main character in the library before running away, which turns out to be a red herring that is never brought up again.

-The main girl meets a lot of guys and then never talks to them again. I think we're supposed to wonder if she's murdered them or something.

-This "mystery" is anticlimactically solved at a random moment more than halfway through when we just suddenly see her "going to work on one of her victims."

-Finally seeing the original movie years later and learning that this movie didn't even start out as a sequel to it, which made a LOT of sense. It's like the writer had only just barely heard of the first movie.

-One review of it said "When the best part of this movie is William Shatner's acting, you know it has problems."

My understanding is that this didn't start out as a sequel to American Psycho at all.  The scenes at the beginning of the film were added into the script when the studio decided to tie the two films together.

[AdrianFlynn 68]

Can u believe little mila could kill batman