American Psycho Ending Explained

[@felar939]

Impressive, Very nice, Now let's see Paul Allen's Ending Explained video

[@iamzeronothing]

Look at that subtle alternative explanation

[@findlayrankin9769]

The tasteful irony oh my god...

[@kabir1365]

It even has a background music

[@YuhYus_]

HAHAHAHAHAH

[@bigshmoke9653]

Oh my god, it's even monetized

[@Koxocw]

What's frustrating about this film is that no matter how deep you dig you still end up with the same two answers

[@Chrisalv]

What gave it away to me from seeing the film was when Jean opened up his desk and found him book with all the illustrations. That’s a major clue for me that it was all made up in his head

[@d-rabbitfor5398]

@@Chrisalv could be fantasies which he then turned into reality though. dont think that those are a clear explanation.

[@bmo14lax]

@@d-rabbitfor5398 I think he murdered some people and some were fantasies. Like maybe the unknown blood at the laundromat and maybe one more prostitute, but the rest is him slipping into delusion. Who knows. So many possibilities

[@sweeeetteeeeth]

that's why it's such a brilliant work of art

[@Screm]

There is a third one i read somewhere else in the comments - the conspiracy theory where his father knew his son was sick & what he was doing, but he paid to have it cleaned up to save his own self image as well as his families image He's only mentioned once in the movie as an off-comment why he's still working at the job if he hates it (I believe) It also makes sense when you think about it, he paid to cover up his sons actions but didn't think to get him the help he needs cause he wasn't thinking about his sons well being, just their images 2 main reasons this is supported, the real estate agent scene where she already knew who he was pretty much but didn't outright say it And the lawyer at the end, he raises his eyebrow when the camera is on Batement almost to sign "Stop talking"

[@hakimonn]

So basically;he actually killed all those people but,people around him are so obssesed with themselves they just don't care. One another good example is how the character Louis sees Patrick with him a suspicious bag, he only cares about where he got it from. The story is literally a satire. It just shows how self-centered the 80s yuppie culture and life-style is.

[@zanyaboutit]

"It just shows how self-centered the 80s yuppie culture and life-style is." Is it also a sarcasm? LOL. I laughed at that point. It is today's world that it reached its maximum pinnacle LOL.

[@Koxocw]

Why did the detective not arrest him? He was the last person seen with Paul Allen

[@mkn.567]

well there are also theories that his very wealthy and powerful father is paying people off to look the other way and clean up his mess. Think of the lady in Allen's apartment. But, yes, the bullet point is that people are so self centered and materialistic that a murder could be happening right in front of them and they'd only notice what you're wearing and the brand of your luggage

[@ravenmoore8234]

@@zanyaboutit it literally what the book was made to call out yuppie our generation isn't a self centered we just have been so desensitized that we anylazize everything and choose to ignore it because of the mass depression we have now days

[@mic9162]

That true but its not true the 80s is just like now too lol You know some thing too I just hate with how everyone has to be so fucking fake and annoying why can't they shut the fuck up and be themselves when I was little I was happy but now Ive had too adopt to these people with fake personalities i have too control myself and just play along like a game I know I didn't have too say this but it feels good to say

[@dailydoseofliterature3263]

The lawyer covers for him just like the real estate lady. The lawyer doesn't want a court case.

[@haiderzaidi6571]

it maybe different in the US but in my country lawyers are paid per case. If that is the case there aswell, the lawyer has all the motivation to want a court case.

[@Screm]

@@haiderzaidi6571 It could have also been a lawyer on retainer, even if it's case-by-case retainers i believe have a hefty upfront cost for retainers (Which they could have definitely paid off)

[@greenlamp9219]

idk if i can believe that. lawyers love court cases it would have been work for him and a good opportunity for self centered publicity. if he really did care about himself like the theory says then he would have gone through with it

[@polreamonn]

@@haiderzaidi6571 In-house lawyer. He's there to protect the business.

[@haiderzaidi6571]

@@polreamonn lmao thanks for making this very obvious observation, idk how I missed that 😭😭

[@neptunes_oeuvre]

When I first watched it my thought was that the lawyer kept saying that to keep him from going to prison

[@Jason-gb7tt]

Same

[@CubeBizz]

Bro same Now I feel so stupid after I watched many analyses of the film saying Paul Allen is alive And that the lawyer ordered the renovation to clean up the mess

[@neptunes_oeuvre]

@@CubeBizz dude.. what ?!?

[@owi7326]

@@CubeBizz did u even watch the video?

[@PeakDennisReynolds]

My interpretation is that he actually believes he had dinner with Paul but it was someone else. The movie puts a very strong emphasis on how much all these men are no different from eachother in clothing choices, haircuts or personality, hence why Paul thinks he's talking to Marcus Halberstram and not Patrick all that time. The lawyer was probably drunk at that dinner with multiple people in attendance, vaugely remembers hearing the name Paul Allen mentioned while there, and believes one of the people at that dinner was Paul when it wasn't.

[@UntitledKirk]

This is how I like movie explanations on YT: short and to the point. Good video.

[@avertismentguy62]

Very nice, let's see Paul Allen's analysis.

[@iamzeronothing]

Look at that subtle alternative explanation

[@croissantlover1]

imagine someone making a movie where the REAL Paul Allen figures out what happened and must take up the fight against this culture and slowly somehow succeds. "This has changed.. Everything."

[@-Siculus-Hort-]

FEED ME A STRAY CAT

[@davidjohnson5703]

I just got his theory. At dinner. The other night at Nobu. He agrees with ME!

[@shd_khan]

The clue is in bateman’s monologue - there is no real Bateman, he doesn’t exist as a separate person. The entire movie is a fiction within a fiction, an imagining of being a real person when in fact he is indistinguishable from his coworkers. It’s based on freud’s narcissism of small differences framework - the need to find and exaggerate differences in order to preserve a feeling of separateness and self. What drives the character’s rage is the inability to articulate a separate identity - his generic music taste, the same taste in clothes/business cards/hair styles/glasses, etc. that he can’t break out of no matter how hard he tries.

[@thomasgrabowski2202]

great analysis! I love this

[@sebagotds]

do you mean that patrick just wanted to be different??? or he wanted to just stand out from the rest of his coworkers???

[@shd_khan]

@@sebagotds it’s not just about being different or wanting to stand out; that may have been true at some early stage in the life of the character. By the time we meet him he doesn’t know who he is in any real sense and in all likelihood hates his true self. It’s an existential crisis on a personal level that has morphed into a full blown psychosis. It’s not clear if he is actually committing the murders or just imagining them. Of course, that is my interpretation, the reviewer that posted this video interprets the murders to be real.

[@sebagotds]

@@shd_khan i heard that some interviewer asked the creator of the book about that and she tells that, in fact, bateman killed all that ppl. I think is what you said before about the existential crisis. but at the same time the movie shows (to me) that bateman accepts what he is.....a yuppie.

[@shd_khan]

@@sebagotds please share the link to the interviewer if you have it. I would be interested in hearing about it. Thanks

[@humangarbage6559]

mostly because of the line "I guess I've killed 20 people, maybe 40" I like to think that Patrick definitely killed people he just couldn't distinguish between the people he actually killed or the ones he thought about/ hallucinated killing. and its up to interpretation who he really killed or didn't

[@RurouniStarchild]

I think he's regarded as an unreliable narrator.

[@felix4645]

1:16 the bit about the Lawyer’s reaction totally makes sense. I hadn’t connected it before.

[@eshaanbhat3732]

For me it's all in his head because of two scenes , the first one being the hooker getting away from him and yelling at other people's door and a fricking chainsaw in the hall not waking anyone up , the second is the feed me the cat scene , bateman till that point was never shown to have a gun but suddenly he got a gun and went on a Killing spree but in the next scene is shown performing his morning routine again

[@raintomato5245]

What if, maybe, its both????? The cat and the girl in the hall was fake, but he really committed the other murders. I also believe that the lawyer didnt really have dinner with paul, but he thought he did, evidenced by him thinking Bateman was someone else, which ties into the fact that the story was a satire about the yuppies of new york.

[@friedrichs.8004]

@@raintomato5245 i think the lawyer is producing an alabi for him. Maybe his very rich father is destroying the traces id his crimes

[@Screm]

When i first watched the scene with the girl running through the hall my assumption was that he rented all the apartments out knowing what he was going to do beforehand, could be wrong but also possible

[@gabriraul78]

@@Screm i like your ideea

[@idgit7825]

Everyone heard the chainsaw go off, it’s just that everyone is so obsessed into their own lives they don’t care about it and that’s the narrative of the movie

[@fakeone3443]

What I noticed watching the movie is that in the final scenes, he seems to have unlimited shoots in his gun...

[@dillanmatney9958]

That makes sense, thank you so much. Just git done watching it still fresh in my mind to know that Bateman did kill most of the people.

[@5persondude]

I kind of assumed that he killed the homeless guy and his dog at the beginning, then started imagining all of the other murders either out of bloodlust or subconscious guilt. I also thought that Kimball (William Dafoe) was just another figment of Patrick’s imagination/conscience, because him pulling out that Huey Lewis CD so casually seems way too far-fetched for anything other than his conscience, since only he knows that he played that song when he killed Paul Allen

[@aeronautisch]

It could be that Kimball was suspicious of their first meeting so he poked around his neighbors asking if they heard anything suspicious the night before and all they came up with was the loud huey lewis music. Then he got the album himself and tried to bait Batemans reaction.

[@zekun4741]

I think he did commit the murders but when he went on a rampage with the police, that whole sequence is just a hallucination or delusion. the ATM said "feed me a stray cat" that's about the only thing we can be certain of as being a hallucination. he shot more bullets than there are in a clip, and shooting at cars don't cause explosions in that manner. the police would be all over the place in a scenario like that and it would be on the news, which is why his lawyer thought it was a joke on the answering machine, it didn't happen.

[@PeakDennisReynolds]

​​@@zekun4741Totally agree, most logical explanation by far. Mary Harron even stated in an interview it's not all in his head. I personally believe the chainsaw sequence is also hallucination though, it's just too far fetched to believe he managed to not get caught there, and her banging on multiple apartment doors while screaming her head off to get not one single answer is ridiculous. He wouldn't of been able to get out of that one. Her body was lying in plain sight spilling a huge amount of blood in an apartment building and he was standing there naked screaming like a lunatic while wielding a damn chainsaw.

[@bba935]

The part that makes me think this was all in his head is the message on the ATM machine telling him to kill.

[@Swordbeam64]

I came to kind of a similar conclusion. Although I did have a third alternative: The Lawyer took the phone call seriously and covered up all the murders he did. And in the end when he gives him monologue it implies that he finally realised that everyone around him is as just the same, they probably killed some people as well, abused others, hell it’s Wall Street for crying out loud. But idk, might rewatch it at some point

[@SlamJamMusic]

this is exactly what i thought, and it works perfectly for the message of the movie. yuppie culture enables psychopathy and created an environment where horrible people can get away with horrible things because status and power are the only things that matter.

[@nataliab4417]

Ooh I like that So he was struggling to fit in with the people so much that the stress of it caused him to kill innocent bypassers - inevitably making him just like the group he desired to be part of So he got what he wanted Still, so many things to analyse!

[@kissumisha]

He killed someone mistakenly thinking it was Paul Allen.

[@kyoto8241]

No

[@NothingToPointOut24]

No he killed Paul Allen. But people around him mistake other people for Paul Allen, so Patrick will always get away with it. But Paul's last thought was that he was being killed by Marcus Halberstram.

[@majorsimmons2633]

I watched the movie first time last night and thought the lawyer was giving him an alibi like you did. Also in the movie he is very paranoid and also has hallucinations such as the feed me a stray cat thing before his big massacre. Now the massacre itself probably wasn’t real but the killings of Paul Allen, the girls head that was in the fridge, the homeless man, and probably a few others were real.

[@everardotortoledo2456]

Let’s see Paul Allen’s ending ...

[@Unkn0wnGuy]

Lol best comment ever 🤣

[@jackxiao9702]

The answer is both. It's why this film is so great, both answers would work with different themes in the movie (though the police car blowing up and afterwards are clearly hallucinations"

[@doomast3r]

The best explanation out there!!

[@damianbyrne1664]

I recommend reading the book, it is quite extraordinary. Although the ending is ambiguous, like Tom, I believe that Bateman really did commit the murders, the clues are there. And it fits with the whole narrative of the book - as an indictment of modern Western capitalism, society and culture. In this world of self-obsession, narcissism, horror and porn - Bateman's murderess spree goes unnoticed, and even ignored. Interestingly, the book was written in 1990, but I feel its even more relevant today.

[@exstudent30]

Agreed. What the Author intended is somewhat more important than what the director intended.

[@oldi184]

What about the ATM machine displaying the message "feed me a stray cat". I don't get it. Was that his hallucination?

[@exstudent30]

@@oldi184 it seems to be so in the book. That whole section of the book is written like a film. (With the police shootout etc)

[@Krow621]

What you said made sense but how does the explain the old lady, 3-4 cops, receptionist, and janitor he killed all in one night with a gun? That just sounds hyper unrealistic that he was able to get way with those with little to no one looking into it.

[@vahrzawofficialtracks]

Plus he kills a kid at the zoo in broad daylight in the book.

[@ashwadhwani]

The movie cheats us of the truth in the ending. Why did he not ask his lawyer how much he wanted to bet that Paul Allen is not alive ???

[@awediomusic2137]

"This confession has meant nothing" because the stories of his heinous acts fell on deaf, self-centred ears. This is my new head canon.

[@lucasbachmann]

The bit of the interview I saw with the author she was saying she wanted it left more open ended and she was concerned that people were all in the "it's all in his head camp" and she said it is not. That really doesn't push it all the way to "it all happened." because then it is not open ended either. But I didn't watch the whole interview just a clip in some other video.

[@dungusglumbus9946]

Ok. I always wondered why the lawyer called him Davis. When I first saw the ending, my theory was that this entire time, Bateman had actually been Davis, and it’s just that he has schizophrenia and he’s confusing himself with someone else or something

[@leonmerluza6963]

I’m just happy he didn’t kill the cat

[@lucabrazi724]

This is one of my favourite movies first watched when I was 15 I'm 33 now and I still casually watch it over the years and I still don't understand the fkn movie which is probably why it draws me back such a masterpiece

[@KyleC11]

The lawyer was covering for him

[@tucosalamanca984]

I'm not sure if I can agree with this video. He was cornered by the police and helicopters, but somehow, he resumed his regular routine the next day as if nothing happened.

[@chrisgrieve1121]

I just watched this movie for the first time last night. What an amazing movie but the ending left me hanging. I think Bateman imagined all of the killings in his mind.

[@Lodestar.]

Same here

[@yiepeng97]

The investigator and all the traces he left the kill counts and blood shed can not ve hidden so easily by himself in such short time, police are much smarter than that, even if people get confused with who is who, there are ways to find out simply you realised he didnt clean up scenes and houses are almost all white, even if he get away with killing one person, he cant get away with killing police blowing up cars, helicopter searches, security guard, atm women, multi story apartment kill spree slaughter house with bodies, head in the fridge. The movie prove one thing is that he is psycho, all start with his imaginary, what he finally says, what he drew in the notebook. He hides it but he cant help to spill it out, drug abuse and its clearly social issue was the root and also ultimately his very own psychotic and psychpathic as he calls him self entity in a humanly body. Evil in a shell of a living body to try and fit in.

[@milton7763]

People who wonder whether he really killed the people or not have missed the whole concept of the book. Bret Easton Ellis’s works are almost all about upperclass privileged youths who struggle to find any meaning in their lives as they have built their entire persona around a superficial, materialistic image. American Psycho has the exact same theme, but takes very different approach. Instead of being a ‘realistic’ story, it is an _allegory_ where Easton Ellis takes his perspective to the extreme: showing a psychopath who can only see people as tools to his own perverted pleasures and drawing a parallel with a New York elite society that is impervious to even this horrible truth as they’d rather ignore it than upset their own interests. The book is a beautiful work of art subtly and not so subtly drawing these parallels while conjuring up very detailed imagery.

[@idgit7825]

People who wonder whether he really killed people or not understand the concept of the book they just want to figure out the true ending

[@milton7763]

@@idgit7825 Zooooooooofff!! That was the concept of the book flying right over your head…even after being spelled out to you…

[@guccifer7874]

@@milton7763 ok

[@GabrielBear]

No that’s incorrect he killed those people lol his lawyer covering for him the detective was looking for Paul Allen’s killer the room was cleaned by the lady to also cover up the killings

[@RonPaulOrDie]

There's a big clue at 0:39 seconds into this video. Subliminally you are told the lawyer's head is "in the clouds."

[@mihajlobisenic8456]

Good eye

[@RonPaulOrDie]

@@mihajlobisenic8456 I noticed the technique in 2016, almost all Ben Carson interviews no matter which network used this.

[@LironBerisha]

What I love about the movies fans culture is that the creater can literally tell you the response and everybody will ignore . And that's very cool , it gives the work another life.

[@markomarkovski9323]

Or, it's how the people at Wall Street and generally the top 1% can get away with basically anything, maybe?!

[@richardabanganjr.1669]

Here's my take: everything in the movie was not a pigment of Bateman's imagination. He committed those heinous crimes. However, after he confessed with his lawyer those crimes he committed, the lawyer tried to cover up his messed by doing the following: 1. He lied to the detective or authority that he had dinner twice with Paul in London; 2. He asked assistance with Bateman's father, considering that the latter owns the company. The father probably hid the dead bodies and cleaned Paul's apartment. Perhaps, the owner of Paul's apartment did indeed cleaned it; and 3. The lawyer pretended to mistake Bateman with Davis, so that they will not talk anymore for fear to be killed by a psycho. And then, he lied that he had dinner twice with Paul Allen in London; and There is also a chance that Bateman's friends know that he has mental illmess but they could not do anything about it because Bateman's father has influced on them. They might be fired, or otherwise.

[@nicelydone9776]

I think it would be better if none of the killings happened but in his mind, and he was just losing it.

[@kang7084]

he murdered the people and his lawyer had to cover it up to save his own ass because of the voicemail. GOSH!! that's why the real estate agent said "never come back". super good film, but everyone is making it too complicated.

[@Lewis-ki1ub]

It think both of your theories are somehow right. It shows how the people are too self focused and everyone ignores Bateman and him talking about liking to kill people (except for his secretary, the only person in this movie that does not seem focused on herself), but on the other hand, Bateman is mentally ill, which you can see at the pills he takes. He doesnt know what realy happend and what not (ending scene) and the magic of the movie is to put us in the same perspective which makes us feel like him a bit

[@perfumepixie2237]

Spot on! I don't think this is black and white at all. Some murders happened. Some didnt. Everyone is superficial. Bateman is mentally ill. The whole thing is a head fuck. Cleverly written, black comedy. The book lurches from shocking vile murderous dark humour , to boring page after page monologue of batemans head . Genuis.

[@thomasgrabowski2202]

creepy af. But some of these scenes are just fucking hilarously magestic.

[@TomTheCurator]

Finally it’s here.

[@DaLoganFrost]

Agree. The realtor is the selling point for me. Thanks.

[@theXops9]

laws does not apply to the elite. Point of the movie.

[@abbemartensson3850]

Uuuh... These guys were not 'elite' at all.

[@jamies6147]

@@abbemartensson3850 He was the CEO of a wall street firm i think he’s pretty elite

[@enriquecomas933]

@@abbemartensson3850 They are 'elite'. The book insinuates that Bateman's father is an extremely rich and powerful person. Some theorize the massive law firm that protects his son here at the end. 27 year old 'VP' at a brokerage firm? Where do you see that today lol? Morgan Stanley brokers (now considered more like analysts) are around 32+ with small to medium accounts. Still young, but they are no VPs haha.

[@abbemartensson3850]

@@enriquecomas933 Hahahahaha. You think the elites work? Live in New york city? Get a reality check. LOL

[@jamesevans2507]

not even remotely the point

[@paulawaters6142]

I believe he killed them because of the drama in the laundry at the beginning of the movie about cleaning the blood from the sheets.

[@FREECASHPRIZES]

I think it was all in his mind, he killed people just on paper as shown in his drawings in the end. He didn't killed anyone and the director in her interview was lying to create confusion to keep it open ended

[@greevar]

It's not really an "ending explained", but rather an interpretation.

[@cutekanjii]

Maybe it's even more ambiguous than did he or didn't he do the murders? Perhaps he actually did some of them and others were fantasies and its up to us to figure out which were real and which were in his head

[@ToaRanen7]

That's what I think, that some were real some weren't. And I think the larger point is that it doesn't matter which ones were real, him and all his colleagues are psychopaths that won't get punished.

[@yiepeng97]

He is a sick man, everything that has happened was all in his head. The actual occurance of the event does not align with his memories simply start with the story is narrated in first person point of view. It demonstrated drug use and dosage, materialism, the point was to showcase the inner demon which is what he described as his true self while his body as a shell. There are clues in almost all the scenes where the killings are made. The fantasy of him blowing up police cars, killing security guards with helicopter searching, whole building occupied with bodies, video tapes, targeted by the investigator and right after he gets back to usual routine is giving enough hints more and so forth. The note book that his secretary gone through is the only real part of him being expressed on paper, goresome and those were the imaginary picture he live in, on the flip side he is hiding all these energy within him waiting to escape and finally release his inner evil, kill spree of everyone around him. Highlight of the scene where ge took pills on the phone while speaking to his secretary shows that he certainly was relying on it to keep himself in controll, he is a psycho, american psycho marking the social issue of the time and revealing a true evil.

[@satwinderdhariwal]

i definitely agree with you people seem to miss the pills are in several scenes such as the bathroom, in his office draw also as hes taking them at the phone box. He mentions to the secretary that she needs to go or he thinks he will hurt her. He is imagining these thoughts and telling people but they wont listen. Hes trying to put out that hes got some psychotic behavior. There is also the scene where he runs through the building shoots the office receptionist who calls him Mr Smith which didn't really happen because during these times no one in wall street remembers each others name but then we cut back to another scene where he actually runs back in the to sign in for the receptionist who doesn't actually know his name which is more real. He is imagining all this stuff in his head its not real. Hes running away from his own demons. The girl sees all the imaginations going through hi head in his dairy he hasn't actually committed those crimes yet but no one seems to notice his behavior is messed up. That's why the doctor prescribed him medication he obviously forgot to take them hence the hallucinations. He losses it after the business card comparisons and not being able to get reservations at restaurants.

[@louisp.3332]

Geez....so wrong

[@TN-ju4ro]

@@satwinderdhariwal thank you for noticing the pills, i swear no one else seemed to notice them

[@bilalmalik4140]

@@satwinderdhariwal and one more thing to notice that, when Patrick was dragging the bag with Paul's body so some of blood was flowing on floor but security guard didn't notice, even though the blood was really more visible, that's means all things are just In his imagination.

[@justincholos.balisang6884]

For me, it seems to have some Orwellian aspect in it. You know, a dystopian age where people are so wealthy they only care about themselves and not other people

[@joshualyons2854]

This film is a shining example of how to convey paranoia and hallucination into a character. Books can do this very easily but to actually show it on screen is different ball game, bravo

[@qndj6449]

The real estate lady never blinks. She recognizes Bateman as her own kind.

[@JonnyBetz]

Guys like this actually exist too. You hear the stories about guys that work a 9 to 5 and all their friends say he was perfectly normal and never thought he would do such a thing. Meanwhile he has 3 people in his basement

[@sapphyrus]

To be honest it's Occam's Razor that he was totally mad and enacting in his mind rather than ALL the other people in the movie colluding with him unintentionally. Multiple times we are given evidence that he's totally bonkers while we're given no evidence that other people covered for his crimes. It's like Total Recall. Yeah sure you can take it for the social commentary but you can also take it for a mad ride of total delusion.

[@djdannydan1203]

How you explained the lawyer scene gave me a light bulb moment thanks a lot for the new perspective!

[@IowaMan]

it's psychosis, you're experiencing batemens madness, and then his own confusion and fear when he snaps back into reality. He doesn't understand what's going on when the murders committed seemingly didn't happen just as much as you don't.

[@GabrielGomes-di1ex]

Never forget bateman Fired more than 20 shots with a glock without reloading

[@SlamJamMusic]

i honestly think that he really did commit all the murders and his lawyer is really just that fucking good that he used all the information patrick gave him to make an elaborate coverup.

[@Roy-ck9mb]

When the lawyer said that he saw Paul in London for dinner, I understood right there that the lawyer was just hinting Bateman that he knows about the murder, and that he won't tell anyone the truth.

[@ryanhamley4161]

Quick and to the point I like your perspective

[@supersupersteve3]

I thought the lawyer talked to daddy and he took care of everything.

[@kawasakiwhiptwo5821]

It's 1. You don't have to be an actual psychotic murderer to think about acting out as one. Mabey this is what Patrick thinks about when he's fed up,angry,stressed out or just bored. Think about it...think of the darkest most violent thoughts you've ever had. Now imagine them being brought to life in a movie. Presto... American Psycho. Unless you live in another country.

[@harmlesscreationsofthegree1248]

I missed the ending. Had to return some video tapes 😢

[@GeorgeFloydinski]

This makes a lot of sense thank you, great video

[@21paraflyer]

As the legendary lawman Bernard Fife once quipped, “ He’s a nut!”

[@johnnyofthesticks7260]

The meaning of a work of art is not univocal (i.e. what the director attempted), that is why it is a work of art. Its a relationship between the piece and the espectator, consumer, etc, beyond intentions in its origins, in the development. Sometimes the hegemonic meaning is clear, others not. Creativity is playing in both poles.

[@hlzion]

I think what the movie meant at least for me is that the higher ups can always easily get away even with the worst of sins. Showing the president in the end in the TV, sending orders for killing, wars, stealing. Because these men have power, in the end they can still live their normal lives like they don't have a huge body count behind them. For example, Putin.

[@geethaanjalik9823]

the fact an movie which came twenty years back is now trending is because the scenario of the movie just fits today's situation so well . like how people just think their only purpose of their life is to be more sucessfull than others and even go as far to measure their happiness with it...God the irony..

[@tenkin5105]

In his latest book 'White', Bret Easton Ellis says that he doesn't want to give a definitive answer to whether Bateman actually did what he did or whether it is an hallucination. He does specify that Bateman is an unreliable narrator, but then again how absurd would it be for him to write a book if it's all an hallucination. Personally, I came up with a similar answer to the one of this video. It's more about representing the people in the 1980s as disconnected from reality to a point where a serial killer may run loose but nobody cares or takes it seriously.

[@irsmohsen4833]

this is the best explanation out there

[@kylesmith6141]

In my opinion, I think you are mostly correct but there is one line that isn't addressed. Something like 'your dad basically owns the company' was said by Bateman's fiancée. I think that his family used money to cover these murders up as well. This explains the weird interaction at the condo and with the lawyer.

[@Timicutie]

You definitely got it bro.

[@N6K6M]

I remember when "my friend" was psychotic he truly believed he killed people. Which wasn't the case at all they just went missing.

[@milton7763]

You could have resolved your doubts much quicker: read the book

[@tucolucious7128]

Watching this movie drunk af is confusing. The ending made me question everything even more

[@mackychloe]

watch it high

[@badrsalihi1624]

Personally I think that's not anything in the movie actually happened cuz you can't just say that Patrick killed them all and on another hand there's some scenes( police cars, chainsaw scene) prove the opposite so the film is actually open-ended .

[@Yusa25]

Bateman has a rich father who is always backing him up. Lawyer, job on wallstreet the apartmens. Corruption and so on. His father is so protective thst he is not even present but his power reaches everywhere to the point that patrick dont know what he is doing anymore.

[@SirinGuera]

but in the first interview with kimbel a medication apears front of bateman idk and the questions were so strange indicate he allucinating

[@bigred913]

I feel like when he made the call at the ending the lawyer did everything to cover it all up, which explains why the apartment was cleaned the next day

[@KeyserTheRedBeard]

fabulous upload Tom The Critic. I broke the thumbs up on your video. Keep on up the exceptional work.

[@thehandsomeguyinthefront]

The is also a theory that Bateman does not exist and only consists of feelings of every secondary character and how they want to be

[@chrisbilling]

I agree because the central theme of the film is the blurring of individuality so if someone dies nobody would really even notice

[@illaudatus]

i always had this conclusion that the company is covering his madness... regardless if he is imagining or not they all play along with his schizophrenia or psychopathy.

[@TubbyIsaacs23]

Bateman didn't fit in so mimicked those around him he also despised. His own self loathing and anxiety of being exposed could only be discharged through killing. He literally was only able to experience relief when his joy was released through rage. Every time he killed he was killing a part of himself. He could not stand the emergence of vulnerable self and the tension between his ego and true self drove him insane.

[@mpix00]

His father knew he killed all those people. His father had the lawyer hire the lady to clean the murder scene in the apartment.

[@horseohmother4621]

I think the hallucinations are a representation of intrusive thoughts. Like if you pick up something fragile and important to you there’s the thought of just eating it despite it being made out of ceramic or just smashing it even though doing so would make you and your family upset

[@perfumepixie2237]

Harm ocd thoughts are wild , so yeah. It would fit

[@derekpugh5457]

When I read the book I got the impression that the characters were so trying to stand out and be an individual ….but all had the same style suits, haircuts and work that they all blended into one type of person …and that’s why Bateman got so jealous of the business cards, it’s what them so different but the same.

[@MirzaKhalid]

He was hallucinating the whole time. Everything was in his mind like the Joker that's why kept it in his diary which his assistant found out later

[@felipet.lamaison2177]

I think you got a point, since you quote the director herself, approving your theory. Nevertheless, I think knowing if he killed those people or not, isn't really important to understand the message of the film, which is what you say by the end of your video : Bateman stays as mesirable, normal and confused as he was before all the events (occured, or not). Bateman thought that by "realizing" those crime he would finally realize him self in a sense he would be a singularity, a real person, and more than just a human cage. For me, this is one of the most important conclusion in the film. In the beginning he clearly says he "simply not there" . His lack of empathy, his incappacity to "fit in", with his environment being only composed by self-entitled people, filled with superficiality, over inflated egos, and no empathy. They, as you say,only exist for the money, they also lost any contact with humanity (whether those murders occured or not, they "are simply no there" neither). The film may be also a strong critique on capitalism, and the kind of society it cultivated : hyper materialistic, depersonalized, futile and unempathic. Considering all this, maybe Patrick Bateman wasn't the most fool of all : he might be the one who realized his environment is a disaster, just like him, and that there was no escape for him. As he says by the end, during that Reagan tv speech : in the end, what happens on the inside of every man, doesn't matter. Just keep a big smile, and everything is gonna be fine

[@kapitankapital6580]

Yeah that's basically the way I read it, although I think the film is made in such a way that either interpretation is legitimate.

[@wvarley]

'this is not an exit'

[@lastpme]

I think it was in his mind he killed all those people. For me it was when the ATM told him to feed the cat to it and he did…that was the clue all this was happening in his mind and he was losing his sense of reality.

[@1iwudipq1pe]

Nice explaination, short and well done

[@Zeemas]

I actually initially thought what the lawyer said about Paul Allen was true. It could be either two things, he maybe could've met "Paul Allen" in London because in this world everyone's the same anyway so he probably misidentified him everyone else does, or he's brushing it off as an alibi because he's benefiting from these people as a lawyer.

[@deanmackin1850]

But considering he was pathetically murdered by a child in the ‘sequel’, it wasn’t in his head

[@stevenclark5168]

We dont talk about that movie

[@kanieraliapeng724]

@@stevenclark5168 😭😭

[@littleprince12]

I wanna believe that he imagined the murders because I feel bad for the victims

[@jasonlast7091]

I like the idea that it’s all in his head but if you think about it, that would be a complete subversion to so many of the other aspects of the film including probably it’s contention. Although I definitely believe some of what we saw were Patrick’s hallucinations.

[@uhoh7541]

Great video. Unfortunately it has been too long since i read the book for me to be more specific- but i remember always thinking the film ending was supposed to be the same as the book- just the ending worked out better in writing and was more difficult to properly convey in film.

[@alfonsosolano2089]

Even if all those people around him don’t care or notice, the police cares. So that’s where it gets even more confusing. Lol