American Psycho II: All American Girl (2002 Video) User Reviews

How Do Producers Get Away With This ?

[Theo Robertson · 3/10 · 22 April 2005]

You can just imagine the scene in some movie producers office :

" You know that movie set in the 1980s where Christian Bale kills his colleagues ? "

" Yeah vaguely "

" Well I just wrote the sequel "

" Is that the one where both Bale's character and Bale himself don't make an appearance , instead we have a teenage bimbo bumping off people she doesn't like ? "

" Yeah "

" Then why's your screenplay called TEENAGE BIMBO GOES ON KILLING SPREE ? Shouldn't either the words American or Psycho appear if it's a sequel ? "

" Hey I never thought of that "

"And it's probably illegal to call something a sequel if it has absolutely no connection with the original movie "

" Thanks for pointing that out boss . I'll rewrite the opening scene even if it contradicts the first movie . Let's do lunch "

I'm sort of guessing the producers had what's known in Britain as " A liquid lunch " or possibly they had something even stronger . As many people on this site have pointed out AP2:AAG not only hints that not only does it have nothing in common with the original movie it also seems to contradict AP . The story centres around Rachael Newman who would have been about four years old during the events of the first film . Why did anyone have to use the character of Patrick Bateman to set up the story here ? It's not even a plausible set up and it's not a plausible story in the first place . Perhaps the most ridiculous thing is how on earth Rachael would be physically able to commit these crimes because Mila Kunis doesn't look an inch taller than five foot , doesn't look an ounce heavier than ninety pounds and yet is able to commit acts of extreme violence with a sharp object . Realising this unlikely scenario the director wisely often cuts to a different scene when Rachael bumps off a victim . But this doesn't stop other massive plot holes like the police not checking for DNA when the victim of a car crash is found at the end of the movie

AP2:AAG is yet another cynical attempt to sell a stupid movie as a " Black comedy " but this is done in an even more cynical manner since it's a serial killer screenplay marketed as the sequel to a totally unrelated movie . It might have funny moments but these I'm sure are totally unintentional . If you saw the original you will hate this , if you haven't you will still hate this . Perhaps the motive behind it was to make the original appear much better than it actually was . If so then the producers have succeeded

Poor horror film that has nothing to do with the original, but Mila Kunis is seriously hot & I think I'm in love...

[poolandrews · 4/10 · 28 April 2005]

American Psycho II: All American Girl begins with a young 12 year old girl named Rachael Newman (Jenna Perry) killing Patrick Bateman (Micheal Kremko) when he tries to kill her babysitter Clara (Kate Kelton), an accompanying monologue from the now 18 year old Rachael (the gorgeous Mila Kunis) explains that since she put an end to Bateman's killing spree she has been fascinated by serial killers. Rachael goes on to say that she has vowed her life to stopping other psycho killers by becoming an FBI agent, Rachael now attends West Washington College & is taking a behavioural studies course run by ex-FBI hot shot Professor Robert 'Bobby' Starkman (William Shatner) who managed to solve every case he was given involving a serial killer. It turns out that Starkman's teaching assistant named Elizabeth McGuire (Kim Schraner) is leaving her post & he is looking for a replacement. Rachael senses an opportunity to further her prospects & earn a feather in her cap, Rachael decides to single out her biggest threats to the position & take steps to ensure that she gets the job. First up is the schools secretary Gertrude Fleck (Shosana Sperling) who refuses to accept her application form. Then Rachael senses that other students are perhaps above her as Starkman's preferred choice, rich kid Brian Leads (Robin Dunne), Starkman's bit on the side & Rachael's friend Cassandra Blaire (Lindy Booth) & smarty pants Keith Lawson (Charles Officer) all of whom must be dealt with in an appropriate way. Rachael starts to visit a therapist named Dr. Eric Daniels (Geraint Wyn Davies) who is a personal friend of Starkman's & contacts him about her saying that he thinks she might be dangerous, it turns out that Daniels is very right about Rachael whose devious & cold-blooded plans are beginning to take shape until some unexpected problems arise...

Directed by Morgan J. Freeman this is really a name only sequel to American Psycho (2000) whose links to which are tenuous to say the least. I'm split down the middle with it to be honest, on the one hand the film overall is generally quite poor & offers little in the way of entertainment but I couldn't take my eyes off it because of the totally gorgeous leading lady Mila Kunis. She is a real hottie & made American Psycho II: All American Girl very watchable for me as she's in just about every scene, which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately beyond the lovely Mila Kunis there isn't a whole lot by which I could recommend American Psycho II: All American Girl, the script by Alex Sanger & Karen Craig can't seem to decide what it wants to be. Whether it's horror, comedy, thriller, teenage drama or satire it doesn't really work as any of them & as a result will probably leave most viewers unsatisfied with an unsuccessful mis-mash of genres. The fact that Rachael is trying to become an FBI agent to stop serial killers even though she is one herself sounds like a fun & nicely ironic plot line, but it just falls flat & failed to interest or captivate me. One big problem I had with it is that most of the characters are mere bit parts there to further the limited story along, Rachael & Daniels are the only two characters with any real purpose or meaning & are developed throughout. I did like the ending as there some passable if not totally surprising twists as the story went on & the way things turned out for Rachael was good as I liked her, a lot. There's no violence or gore really, a few splashes of blood, a strangulation by condom & a few after the fact corpses including a decapitated head in a fridge. Oh, & there is a short scene where a cat gets put into a microwave if your squeamish or easily get upset about those sorts of things (the cat survives!). No nudity either, damn! Even though Mila Kunis is just so sexy it's untrue & the nudity wasn't a big issue as her, frankly quite beautiful, face is more than enough compensation! I thought her performance was quite good for what it is, but I did think that she was just far to cute & beautiful to convince me that she was a ruthless & cold-blooded serial killer who thought nothing of hanging her best friend. The directors fault I'm afraid, not the fine looking Mila Kunis's. William Shatner makes an appearance as well, this guy would sell his Mother for money! As usual he's fun to watch I suppose. American Psycho II: All American Girl is generally quite flat, it looks & feels a bit like a made for T.V. film. I also thought the overly comical music at times was inappropriate, distracting & didn't suit the film well at all. Overall I will give the film American Psycho II: All American Girl 1 star out of 10, but I will add a further 3 stars for the casting of the stunning Mila Kunis whose very presence means that there is a very good chance I'll be watching it again sometime soon...

I no longer have any will to live.

[Tuley · 1/10 · 22 June 2002]

This movie is the worst thing I have ever seen in my life. I want to die. I don't expect everyone to like, or even understand, the original American Psycho, but reading these comments has ruined my faith in humanity. It's drivel, pure and simple. The tagline alone, "Angrier. Deadlier. Sexier." is just terrible. The world would be a better place if this movie had never been made.

This is the film that made Patrick Bateman snap.

[film-critic · 1/10 · 4 April 2007]

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 *****

So bad, it could drive you to kill.

[BA_Harrison · 1/10 · 7 July 2010]

I'm a sucker for sequels to films that should never have had sequels in the first place: I'm well aware that they rarely live up to the original, but I like to check them out anyway just to see quite how bad they can get. Still, I wasn't adequately prepared for the complete travesty that is American Psycho: All American Girl.

With only the most tenuous of links to the Christian Bale movie (adapted from Bret Easton Ellis's controversial novel), American Psycho 2, from Morgan Freeman (NOT the actor), is a laugh-free, gore-free, and nudity-free piece of crap aimed at a teen audience, that never once attempts to push the boundaries, totally eschews the original's biting satire in favour of lame parody, has a dreadful soundtrack (consisting of a throughly annoying comedic score and a selection of crap pop/rock songs—as opposed to the retro-cool 80s hits of the original), and even features an ageing William Shatner (sans girdle) as the object of affection for two very hot teenage girls. Now that's pushing it!

Gorgeous star Mila Kunis is admittedly very easy on the eye, bringing to mind a genetic splice of Katie Holmes and Angelina Jolie, but she's dreadfully miscast as the psycho (for starters, she's way too tiny) and her oh-so-devious character is thoroughly irritating, providing a continuously grating voice-over as she goes about killing the people who might prevent her from achieving her ultimate goal: to become an FBI agent so that she can catch serial killers (oh, how ironic).

If you're a fan of the original film, either avoid this embarrassing follow-up like the plague, or be prepared for a massive disappointment.

Should be seen as its own movie.

[oldkingsol · 28 July 2011]

As a movie in its own right, I enjoyed this, but I can't say it felt anything like the first "American Psycho". If it weren't for the sporadic reference-by- name of Patrick Bateman, there would really be nothing to tie the two movies together. So if you're looking for a movie that seems to -deserve- the title "American Psycho II", don't bother with this one, it will be a disappointment.

Even so, while it's not what I'd call "juicy" or truly "great", it is watchable. Mild on gore, heavy on psychopathology - it maintains something of a dark, gritty "Lifetime Special Movie" feel throughout. I might call it a "high- end time-waster" type. :-)

Not Good

[thegreenarrow-28184 · 2/10 · 18 October 2021]

There is nothing good at all about this movie, its a shame to even call it American Psycho. Why does this movie even exist ? The first one was such a weird strange one of a kind movie, this is just utter trash. The ONLY thing that makes it watchable is mila kunis is just a beautiful as ever. Besides her i would not have even bothered to watch this "movie"

terrible sequels like this aren't "one in a million"...

[Jonny_Numb · 1/10 · 22 January 2003]

...they're a dime a dozen. "American Psycho 2" is a terrible desecration of Bret Easton Ellis's novel and the original film. I had my doubts about this even before it saw release, but my assumptions turned out correct--I masochistically sat through this idiotic mess, even though I felt compelled to turn it off at least once every five minutes. Humor, satire, and violence here exist on a very elementary level--the "plot" (college girl kills to become a teacher's assistant) has no link, in tone or character, to anything established in the first film or book. As a matter of fact, the budget's so obviously low that the filmmakers attempt to pass off the homicidal goings-on as flat-out 'comedy.' "American Psycho 2" is an incredible waste of celluloid, videotape, and DVD space. Rent this only if you're a vapid teenybopper who still thinks the "Scream" films are 'hip.'

Zero/10

All American World

[amerc-18 · 7/10 · 22 August 2022]

American Psycho II: All American Girl was a gripping epic focusing on Girl psychopathy. The plot revolves around Mila Kunis who plays Rachel Newman, her psychotherapist; Dr. Daniels and Dr Bobby Starkman played by Will Shatner. It was a good movie because of the realism of psychotic murders that are portrayed in the gritty follow up to American Psycho's bloody wake. Mila Kunis does definitely not hide in Christian Bale's shadow during the movie. I think she could've been more dramatic even in the role, although there were parts that were scary. Not just a remake, this movie glimpsed both perspective, the innerworks of a deranged person who sought help from professionals and the victim who was unknowingly menaced, but remained relatively innocent. All in all All American Girl received too poor of review imo and they rerelease a remake of the sequel aka the same movie again like next year sometime.

An unnecessary sequel

[asadkhan20 · 1/10 · 22 January 2004]

Why did movie have to be made? "American Psycho 2" is a terrible "film". It may be one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Mila Kunis should immediately fire her agent for even informing her of this script. Most of the murders were implausible. There is no way her character could have killed all those people. I advise you to avoid this film and check out the original "American Psycho" instead.

Very Entertaining Parody of Slasher Films

[theslick1 · 8/10 · 10 March 2003]

I decided to post a comment because there were so many negative ones and this movie really isn't that bad. In fact, it's pretty enjoyable for what it is. What it is not is a true "sequel" - except in name only - to the ultra-violent "American Psycho." In fact, aside from the fact that the main character is supposedly a survivor of Patrick Bateman, this could be a stand alone film. It probably should not have been set up as a sequel since I'm sure it ended up attracting (and disappointing) the audience who liked the first film and kept people away who would have liked it but who thought it might be another graphically violent film.

This one features Mila Kunis (Jackie of "That 70s Show") as a girl who wants to become the teaching assistant of a professor who teaches a course on crime (specifically, serial killers). The professor is played by William Shatner, so you know the tone of the film isn't going to be too heavy handed. Kunis proceeds to kill off her competitors for the job, and although the body count builds up over the course of the film about 99% of the violence is off screen. Nothing too graphic here. Kunis is actually likeable, much more so than her victims, including Shatner, who is having an affair with one of his students.

If you approach this as a parody and not as graphic violence, you may just find it to be as fun as I did. If you're looking for more of what the original "American Psycho" offered, look elsewhere.

I actually really like this!!!

[The_Wicker_Man · 7/10 · 3 November 2003]

Hey man i think this movie gets bad press when its actually quite a clever follow on to one of my favourite horror/thrillers. I am biased because long before the films were about i was a huge fan of Easten-Ellis' book and so probably saw the first movie through rose-tinted glasses.

however, i found the lead in this curiously cute/deadly (did anyone else think she looked a lot like ex-Sunset Beach babe Susan Ward??) and well cast. The plot was easy enough to follow but held my attention and climaxed in a clever and twisting finale.

Not as good as the first i have to say, but interesting, enjoyable and much better than expected it to be!

This is legitimately the worst movie I have seen in my life.

[ShadowPigeon · 1/10 · 27 March 2012]

It's fascinating. I never thought I would actually find a movie so blatantly terrible that I cannot stand even a single scene of it.

Firstly: I am a big fan of the original American Psycho - an aspect that makes just how bad this movie is even worse, like a good sequel should of course.

It is clear this movie has no idea what it is trying to be.

Within the first 2 minutes it manages to portrays a complete disregard for the very point of the previous film - denouncing the psychological concept entirely and opting out of the yuppie satire for poorly exaggerated college melodrama alongside of course a charismatic, mysteriously nonsensical protagonist for an infuriatingly nonsensical protagonist.

Attempting to disassociate this film in order to see how it stands alone from the prior would at the very best result in being deemed hilariously bad - or perhaps a very bad attempt at being quirky.

I don't mean to overuse the word 'infuriating'; however it is the first things that comes to my mind when considering every aspect of this film.

Now unless the characters of this film are failed attempts at satire, they make no sense whatsoever. Especially the protagonist who is so blind that all her motivations and goals seem completely unbelievable and impossible.

And the music... by god the music... Where the first film had catchy upbeat tunes to contrast the dark imagery and portray a sense of black humour. The music in American Psycho 2 seems to do the Teen dramedy thing in which it blatantly portrays the characters feelings - in this case however much like the characters, script and direction makes no sense whatsoever.

I cannot think of any constructive criticism whatsoever aside from renaming it to not tarnish the name of the original.

For those of you who have seen the film: - Imagine the perpetual inner monologue/narrations was cut out entirely. The film would make no sense whatsoever.

If I could I would give this film half 0.5/10. The half a point is for Shatner. Poor Shatner...

Skip

[Alex-372 · 28 October 2004]

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.

American Psycho 2: All American Girl Review

[Spideyfan-963-246215 · 1/10 · 9 September 2016]

American Psycho 2: All American Girl(2002) Starring: Mila Kunis, William Shatner, Geraint Wyn Davies, Robin Dunne, Lindy Booth, Kim Poirier, Kim Schraner, Kate Keleton, Charles Officer, Kay Hawtrey, Boyd Banks, Neil Crone, and Lynne Deragon Written By: Bret Easton Ellis Directed By: Morgan J. Freeman Review ANGRIER. DEADLIER. SEXIER. Hello Kiddies your pal the Crypt Critic here with the most boring slasher which happens to be a sequel to one of the best. That's very freaking sad! Rachel is a criminology student hoping to land a position as a teacher's assistant for professor Robert Starkman. She's sure this position will pave the way to an FBI career, and she's willing to do anything to obtain it -- including killing her classmates. The school psychiatrist, Dr. Daniels, becomes aware that Rachel is insane, but Rachel is skilled at her dangerous game of death and identity theft. The film feels like a TV show and a horrible one at that. Everything that went down was stupid and boring. The acting in the film is very lame from pretty much all the actors they all look very bored to be here just as we as an audience get bored from this movie. American Psycho 2 is not scary at all and is no where near as crazy or fun like it's predecessor, I'm giving American Psycho 2 a half out of five.

All American Girl, sigh

[johnnyhbtvs27 · 2/10 · 5 October 2021]

Mila Kunis killed Patrick Bateman.

Mila Kunis killed William Shatner.

A ridiculously jaunty score for a slasher.

Death by condom strangulation.

These are just some examples of why this is one of the worst sequels ever made. Mila Kunis is horribly miscast in the role of serial killer, her voiceovers thudding terribly as she tries to read from an abomination of a script, while the score makes it play like a merry comedy. Even the title of the movie All American Girl is cheesy and has no right to be mentioned in the same breath as Bret Easton Ellis' American Psycho.

Not Really

[ahmedm0ustafa · 3/10 · 9 July 2022]

Not as good as the first part really. The story was written in a good way but has some gaps which made me not have fun as much as I did watching the first part.

Not a match for the original, but still watchable

[cdtidy · 3/10 · 22 April 2005]

This movie is a teen slasher flick along the lines of "Scream" and "I Know What You Did Last Summer". It bears no resemblance to Mary Harron's dramatic 2000 film. Having (through some strange, unexplained sequence of events) killed Patrick Bateman from the original film, a teenage girl (Mila Kunis) makes it her life's ambition to track serial killers and bring them to justice. Then she arrives at college and starts to kill fellow students in an attempt to eliminate her competition and land a top job with the FBI. The killing becomes increasingly frantic and comic as the film progresses. Although the plot is shallow and ridiculous, the film is amusing in parts with some witty one-liners and a fair performance from Geraint Wyn Davies as the killer's psychiatrist.

One to watch on TV to pass the time, but not worth paying to see.

First movie fake

[olcayozfirat · 3/10 · 12 October 2022]

Horror movie from 2002. It's a movie that has nothing to do with the first movie. In her childhood, her babysitter's lover is a serial killer, and while this man kills her babysitter in front of her, the girl escapes and kills the man. Then, when he grows up, he takes killing as a profession. But it's so unreasonable. The only similarity with the first movie is that they both met with a psychiatrist. The music of the movie also added a comedy air. I definitely do not recommend the movie. First movie fake.

The only good thing in the movie is the female lead.

There are no nudity or sexually explicit scenes in the movie.

Entertaining black comedy

[rob-236 · 6/10 · 7 August 2002]

Not being a great fan of the first film, I watched this one with no expectation, and to my surprise found it wickedly good fun. Unlike the first film, this one goes for black humour all the way though, although it does have some quite gruesome moments. The very sexy Mila Kunis gives a brilliant performance as the very unbalanced Rachel Newman – the girl who will do anything to get to the top and lets nobody stand in her way!

One black mark though, I couldn't help but feel that this film was somewhat tacked onto the original when it really didn't need to be, it could have – and maybe should have- stood on its own two feet without the `American psycho' label.

About as good as you'd think

[bronty · 1/10 · 20 July 2004]

I'm just wondering WHO, as the credits rolled at the end of "American Psycho", thought, "Gee, I can't WAIT for the sequel!"? I'd bet cold, hard cash there wasn't, but, as everyone knows, that's never stopped the movie business, which is why films like this are made. With just the BAREST of threads (a girl 'admires' the work of the first film's anti-hero), the creators of this straight-to-video shlockfest felt justified in calling this a sequel; those seeking something similar to the original are going to be in for a rude awakening: "American Psycho" was NOT a particularly well-made movie but it DID have one saving grace: the performance of Christian Bale, who easily displayed his character's sexiness, determination, fear and desperation. Unfortunately, this film is saddled with Mila Kunis, most popular for her voice work on the adult 'toon, "Family Guy", as well as "That 70's Show", on which she is a supporting player. She is an attractive young actress, indeed, but AMAZINGLY miscast, something that becomes apparent as soon as she opens her mouth, for Kunis is either blessed or cursed, depending on your viewpoint, with a distinctive voice that is unmistakably nasal and comical on its own; worse still, she simply isn't right for a role in which she is, at the very least, supposed to inspire even the slightest sense of fear (she IS, after all, portraying a character who is willing to kill all those who get in her way), and despite what other reviews would have you believe, while the makers of this mess may have had their tongues planted firmly in cheek, whatever humorous elements there are (and there aren't many, believe me) are strictly unintentional mostly due to Mila's wretched miscasting (her narration is instantly annoying) and truly, deeply rotten writing that NO amount of talent could overcome. Not that there's any talent visible, either behind OR in front of the cameras, as evidenced by the ubiquitous William Shatner, who these days seems to be competing with Dan Hedaya and Luis Guzman for "Most-Seen Actor In A Supporting Role". As expected, Shatner doesn't even bother to give a performance and whores himself - AGAIN! - for the sake of a paycheck. I am all for the wry self-knowledge of today's horror flicks ("Scream" and its sequels are perhaps the finest examples) but within mere moments one can instantly understand why this bypassed theatres and went straight to video and cable. What I find hard to believe is that there are, apparently, more than a few who actually ENJOYED this on its own terms and not as poorly-played camp! Then again, the action and horror crowd are - how can I put this kindly? - a 'forgiving' bunch and can watch and enjoy films that display nothing in the way of acting, writing, direction, style, taste, or all-around talent. Using those standards, then, one can say this movie is a big, BIG success. For the rest of the world, however, one can only come to the conclusion that this movie SUCKS.

Killer Cute!

[dethimages · 9/10 · 13 August 2003]

I continue to be surprised at how poorly this film has been received. I absolutely LOVE IT! I was a big fan of the first one, and was very nervous when I heard there were plans for a sequel. It just didn't make any sense. But once I saw it I was very pleased with it... the key is to ignore the link they try to establish between the first film and this film... it's obvioulsy NOT POSSIBLE to anyone who saw and understood the first one. So just ignore it... it seems to me that someone had a great movie idea but was only able to pitch it as a sequel to something else, so they called it American Psycho II and tweaked the exposition. Taken as a movie on it's own, and NOT as a sequel, it is absolutely adorable. William Shatner still has it! (And based on most of the other performances, I'd say "it" is catching.) The movie does not take itself seriously, even for a second, and that is the key... that's what makes it great instead of stupid. It KNOWS it's ridiculous, and it is HAPPY that way. But to work, the viewers also have to not take it (or themselves) seriously... so relax and enjoy!

Well worth the effort.

[misterkraig · 7/10 · 22 April 2002]

I must admit I had heard bad things about this movie. Straight to video, no Christian Bale, no involvement from the original film's creators and most importantly it's not based on any of Bret Easton Ellis' other works. Give it a chance I said to myself and my god, was I surprised.

First of all the movie starts with Patrick Bateman (face unseen) doing what he does best but is then finished off by a little girl. Years later that little girl is at college studying serial killers.

At this point, I was worried, signs were showing it was going to be a Urban Legends/Scream rip off. College scenes, dudes hanging out etc. All the usual cliches, but I was wrong.

The cast features the great William Shatner playing a serial killer expert in the way only William Shatner knows how. Geraint Wyn Davies plays a confused shrink and the real find is Mila Kunis who plays Rachael, the new American Psycho.

Kunis is not only enjoying her role with relish, but manages to be incredibly sexy as well. So the part's not Shakespeare, but she chomps up the dialogue and spits it out like a seasoned pro. She is definately a young actress to watch. The scene where is confronts Shaner is already in my opinion a real classic. Funny in a kind of twisted way and that dress she's wearing - WOW!!

If there is a downside, it's not quite as violent as the original as most of the killings are seen off screen and also it's quite short at only 85 minutes. However, it's an enjoyable 85 minutes and I look forward to a part 3. ******SPOILER ALERT****** The ending leaves it right open for a sequel.

All in all, give it a go. I bought it and don't regret it at all.

Immensely disappointing

[brand_nu_sim · 1/10 · 1 July 2003]

Recall American Psycho - highly original, well-acted, carefully directed, and containing some of the darkest black humour ever committed to film - so for most of us, it was laugh-out-loud funny. Whether you liked it or not, it was also gruesome.

The "exciting and much anticipated sequel" is none of the above. Why was it never in theatres? Because it's horrible.

Mila Kunis is college student Rachael Newman. At the very beginning of the movie we learn that Rachael killed Patrick Bateman (the original psycho) as he was killing Rachael's babysitter. WHAT?! Part of what made the original film so effective was that it left us wondering whether all of the murders had really taken place - it made us uncertain, and then it abruptly ended. Now we're told that yes, it all really happened, and the ever-meticulous Patrick

was killed by a frightened little girl - who, by the way, completely got away with killing him. Preposterous! I wanted to turn the film off right there. Purist that I am, however, I suffered on...

Rachael goes to college, studying criminology under a professor who for 25 years was the FBI's greatest hunter of serial killers. Apparently, when the FBI couldn't figure out who killed Patrick Bateman, their top agent left to pursue a career in teaching. Who decided to cast William Shatner for this role? He teams up with Bad Script to make this character lack any of the coldness, ruthlessness, professionalism, quirkiness, or insight that you'd expect from such a legendary FBI-type.

Rachael wants to become the next great FBI agent so she can make a living catching serial killers. (Naturally, she has harboured an immense hatred of them ever since Patrick Bateman killed her babysitter.) In taking Captain Kirk's class this year, Rachael can apply to become his new Teaching Assistant next year - and 9 out of his 10 Teaching Assistants to date have been selected to study with the FBI.

Naturally, Rachael proceeds to wipe out her competitors for that coveted TA position.

You'd have to be heavily drugged to stop from being offended by how unrealistic this film is. For example, nobody questions Rachael when the boy she went out for dinner with and who later was shouting drunkenly in the hall of her dorm disappears. Nobody notices one character fall out a window. No police question Rachael, and the school is not panicked, even though one student was brutally murdered in the middle of the day in the library. A girl is missing for a few days before anyone notices she's hanging from a noose in her room (there's also, magically, no signs of struggle).

And let's face it, Mila Kunis isn't exactly Schwarzenegger. How the heck does she kill a security guard and a janitor without getting injured herself? Speaking of which, all of the murders in the movie are essentially off-camera - you see one person's legs twitch as he is strangled, you see Rachael's arms rise up to deal the killing blow, but that's it. The only gore is on already-dead bodies: the guard has a knife through his hand. OK. But the janitor has his mop rammed through his mouth and out the back of his skull. Is this Mila Kunis or Jason Voorhees?! How strong and over-the-top is this little woman?

Also ludicrous is the psychiatrist (Geraint Wyn Davies) who, after his first session with Rachael, immediately breaks the law by calling her professor and warning him that one of his students is a textbook psychotic. Both psychiatrist and professor proceed to do absolutely nothing about this. At the end of the film, the psychiatrist seems surprised that Rachael committed all of these murders. He then writes a bestselling book about how Rachael was such an ingenious serial killer.

Midway through the movie there's a laughably pathetic attempt to compare Rachael to Ted Bundy, and to further suggest that she is something unique: intelligent and methodical, yet utterly psychopathic and murdering in a downward spiral of increasing rashness and depravity. Whatever - the writers of this film wouldn't know good plot and character development if The Godfather hit them over the head.

There's also a 'twist' ending that confuses more than it explains, and scores high on the lame and unbelievable factors.

Did I mention that Mila also teams up with Bad Script to create a character who never, not for one single fleeting instant, seems obsessive or manic enough to kill people who stand in her way? She's too casual and composed, even when the script suggests she should start to lose control.

In closing, don't waste your time. Yes, she's crazy. Yes, she kills a bunch of people. Yes, this film manages to ruin itself, AND to try to ruin American Psycho by destroying its catch ending. Yes, it's pretty sad that they couldn't get Christian Bale to return to play Patrick in the brief scene at the beginning. No, you really won't care about the fates of any of the characters - even Rachael. No, no role in this film is sexy, or funny, or interesting, or believable, or has any good lines to deliver. Oh, and a couple of the classroom scenes were shot at the same time, then used for different days - how many times have you seen every student in a class come back the next day wearing the EXACT SAME CLOTHES?

So bad it's...well, it's bad.

[Incubus_Reborn · 22 April 2004]

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