Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

Bret Easton Ellis Says 'American Psycho' Remake Will Be "Genuine"

News
by Kevin Jagernauth
December 15, 2011 3:42 PM
21 Comments
  • |

Of all the remakes to be announced in the last little while, Lionsgate's do-over of "American Psycho" has generated the most (outraged) chatter. Already deemed a contemporary classic starring a wickedly deranged Christian Bale and directed with finesse by Mary Harron, the film took the source novel's satircal edge to its logical ends. Anyway, the story is being updated to contemporary New York by commercials and music video director Noble Jones (who also helmed the Grammy nominated "10 Days Out: Blues From The Backroad"), and of all people, it's the author Bret Easton Ellis who has become a champion of sorts for the movie.

The Twitter-happy writer hit his account yesterday to declare, "Haters beware: I just had a long discussion with Noble Jones, the writer/director of the "new" American Psycho movie. His take is genuine..." He doesn't elaborate any further, but it seems the generally outspoken Ellis is pleased (at least so far) with the direction it's going in, so maybe we should be too? Still seems like a terrible idea, but if Jones does have another interesting perspective to the story, we suppose we'll have to give it a shot. We also guess that Ellis used the opportunity in meeting Jones to tell the director his casting perference for Patrick Bateman as either Miles Fisher or Scott Disick.

So yeah, it seems this thing is really happening and with Ellis on board, we presume Lionsgate will be pretty happy to have the author on their side. Guess we'll have to grit our teeth and bear it for now. Suddenly, we feel like listening to some Huey Lewis...

News
  • |

More: Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    

21 Comments

  • Dagur | July 3, 2012 7:51 PMReply

    NONONONO Christian Bale MUST BE PB!!!! Or Tom Cruise! Only ones that would fit for this role!

  • professorgreen | May 13, 2012 6:00 PMReply

    I think having read the book and watched the orginal american psycho there was still large chunks missing, obviously some parts couldnt be put in film being to violent but some of the 'irrevelant' parts may of tied the film together so much better. Having said that the film is amazing it captures the books vision correctly, the vision of the obscure 80's was brought correctly to screen. Bale can not be beaten by anybody who tries to play him. He seems to be 100% accurate to how bateman was in the book so he fits the visions and pictures in your head when your reading about him- bale captures the charm and violence bateman brings even though in the book hes a complete nut-job, great acting, filming, the music, the 80s makes the film a important adaption. so why bring it into modern day? Can't believe Ellis would think about jumping onto this cashcow...as he completely dismissed american pyscho 2 a complete and utter hash of his brilliant book, original film and protoganist-bateman. I think and hope this will fail...as well. It should be left well and truly alone now it cant get much better really.

  • erravan | December 28, 2011 1:56 PMReply

    I just watched the movie and plan to read the book. Without having read the book, I can say that the satire on consumerism, trends, and conformity that happen in the movie are definitely relevant today. Before having even watched this movie, I frequently found myself having these satirist dialogues with myself, under my breath in my mind, mocking reality TV, TV in general, iPhones, facebook, music, pop culture - consumerism, conformity, and trends are alive and strong, and just as grotesque, if not more grotesque than in the 80's. It's embarrassing. At least certain aspects of the 80's had substance, whereas now popular culture seems unanimously approaching glorification of the spectacle as pure image. There isn't even a Huey Lewis to mock the hipness of being square. I can't comment on how completely the novel was ported into the original movie, but it certainly needs to be communicated to audiences that issues the movie deals with don't exist safely in a time capsule 30 years ago, but today, in their own habits even.

  • Evan | December 25, 2011 10:44 PMReply

    The nostalgia of the original was fun but possibly distracted from the point that there are people that exist like that today. Maybe the purpose of the remake in today's NY is to connect the greed and superficiality of the 80s with present-day greed and superficiality? What do today's stock broker's look and act like? It'll be interesting to see how they incorporate digital technology and maybe even hipster culture into the new version.

  • Ryan | December 24, 2011 1:04 AMReply

    The story taking place in the 80s is a big part of the setting of the story. The book and the Christian Bale film really capture the importance of the time period to the story. I am really disappointed to hear the remake will be taking place in modern day. It makes me a lot less excited about this movie.

  • charley | December 21, 2011 6:26 PMReply

    Wow, so much not getting it up in here. Leaving the audience wondering and debating was precisely the poing, KDH; that's part of what made AP so perfect. A well-done ambiguous ending follows you out of the theater, deepens your experience of a film because it engages you in discussion and debate. Exactly how is that a bad thing? I hope this planned remake sucks enough to send people back to re-watch a real modern classic.

  • charley | December 21, 2011 6:29 PM

    Poing? Really? Geez.

    Point.

  • Mae | December 19, 2011 11:45 PMReply

    It's funny, as HKDUBS had said, a Less Than Zero remake is probably more necessary - even though it's a guilty pleasure of mine, that movie. However, it's true, will Ellis behind it, I may have to see this to have a real opinion just yet. I don't get why it needs to be remade, Harron's take was her own and, yeah ok, not genuine, but really...that book is harsh. It's hard to make it to screen without the censors ALL OVER YOU. That's why I'd like to see how far they'll let Ellis be apart of it. I love the man, I love his books (LTZ being my favorite too), but he'll want every piece of gore and cringe-worthy moment in that film. Let's see what happens. I'm intrigued. I'm guessing that's what they all want, no?

  • Jeremy Walker | December 19, 2011 7:29 PMReply

    As John Waters has asked, why don't they remake the movies that need to be remade, the shitty ones?

  • HKdubs | December 16, 2011 8:06 PMReply

    I really feel like a "Less Than Zero" remake is more necessary

  • KDH | December 16, 2011 4:21 PMReply

    While I generally despise remakes, I think an American Psycho remake is not only a good idea, it is necessary. First let me say Christian Bale did a good job, whatever you think about him personally, he nailed this role. That said, American Psycho the movie failed to do justice to the book in many ways. It changed names where it didn’t need to, had questionable to weak casting and left the audience asking themselves, even debating, if the whole movie actually took place or if it happened in Bateman’s head. I read the book as saying that America of the 80s is so perception driven that we can’t see monster sitting next to us, because monster’s don’t eat at Dorsia, they don’t wear Oliver People glasses and they don’t catalogue Whitney Houston and Huey Lewis. It said it all with style. I left the movie thinking this Bateman has an active imagination. This movie really missed the point and anyone who hasn’t read the book shouldn’t weigh on this debate because you can’t understand how good a film it could be. Don’t be mad at BEE he just wants it done right. I would.

  • Mae | December 19, 2011 11:54 PM

    I'm pretty with you on this. Again, I love BEE. If I were the author of some book and saw it only done half way or with half potential, I'd try to make it done the right way, too. But again, Harron's way was her way. I still enjoyed it. And, yes, I've read AP before the film was shot. It's rough. I'd really love to see how it unfolds and how everyone involved will let it. But....I do not agree with the new setting. The 80's and early 90's are what made Ellis' earlier books. They are just as much the characters as the Bateman's, the Julians and Clays, even the Victors. So, again, it'll be an interesting transition to watch.

  • Comment removed to to violation of SOPA | December 16, 2011 10:44 PM

    You know the setting of the movie is going to be in the present day NY right? And not the 80's NY.

  • Mike | December 16, 2011 4:06 PMReply

    "I am a huge fan of the novel and all his works. Even though Christian Bale was a perfect Patrick Bateman, I wasn't completely satisfied with Mary Herrons take on the film. I'd be interested to see this new directors vision"

    Agreed. Way too much was left out of the first take on the film.

  • shawna | December 16, 2011 3:07 PMReply

    scott is a want to be bateman its sad.....

  • Bill | December 16, 2011 2:38 PMReply

    Because the Informers did so well...

  • T. Boone Pickens | December 16, 2011 2:10 PMReply

    I would much rather see them make Glamorama into a movie before remaking AP.

  • Clark | December 17, 2011 3:56 PM

    i hear roger avery is moving forward with his take on Glamorama

  • LARRY | December 16, 2011 1:50 PMReply

    Seems like Easton Ellis will praise and promote anything that will make him a couple extra bucks. God knows his most recent books aren't selling these days.

  • Andrea | December 15, 2011 9:40 PMReply

    I am a huge fan of the novel and all his works. Even though Christian Bale was a perfect Patrick Bateman, I wasn't completely satisfied with Mary Herrons take on the film. I'd be interested to see this new directors vision

  • caro | December 15, 2011 4:41 PMReply

    Bret Easton Ellis was OK with the studio for Leo Dicaprio as Bateman when the studio wanted another actor than Bale (Dicaprio looked like a tiny teen at this time)

Email Updates