this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
670 points (97.6% liked)

memes

14737 readers
3243 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world
The_Picard_Maneuver@startrek.website
670
It works too well (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 day ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.world
40 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sinceasdf@lemmy.world 77 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (7 children)

The wild thing to me about anyone idolizing the character in American Psycho is that it's all but outright stated outright that the guy lives in wonderland and hallucinated all of his wild power fantasies except maybe being rich. He's outright called a dweeb by his lawyer at the end once he has a complete mental breakdown. It's like someone idolizing Nicholas Cage's character in Vampire's Kiss.

[–] neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I don't think that was the takeaway from the American Psycho book. There's a lot of unknowns that the author leaves up to the reader, but at no point did I get the impression the whole thing was a hallucination. It can go a lot of ways from an interpretation standpoint, but there is no definitive ending in either the book or the movie (I believe the movie is even made more ambiguous on purpose).

There's just as good of a chance that he killed everyone and got away with it because he's rich and powerful (a satirical characteristic of 80's "power" businessmen the book was trying to expose).

Most assume he killed at least the prostitutes, because there are callbacks and some police records indicating that in the background. It's only very slightly questionable if he killed his peers/business associates.

Here's an article that breaks it down from the movie standpoint

I'll call out an excerpt from the end:

A popular theory is that Patrick did in fact kill everyone he copped to in his phone call to Harold, including all the ones we saw with our own eyes — that is, except for Paul Allen. This theory is most likely the closest to the truth when we take into account Paul Allen's vacant apartment, with no signs of Patrick's murderous rampage to be found. This theory would also explain Harold's claim that he just had lunch with Paul Allen, so there is no way Bateman could have killed him.

On the flip side, another theory is that Patrick killed everyone, including Paul Allen. We do know that Patrick has a vendetta against Paul Allen, yet another pretentious yuppie with a superior business card. It is also possible that Harold had lunch with someone he thought was Paul Allen — we know how common it is for Bateman's superficial crowd to mistake each other for someone else.

Both primary competing theories on the movie are that he killed almost everyone, or everyone. In the books it's similar, even less ambiguous that he killed at least several people.

I would say the less popular and less supported version of the story is that he hallucinated everything. It's kind of one of those theories that makes sense, but the "facts" in the story don't add up and force a break of character. It also fights against the narrative of the author who was intending it to be a satire of the power-mad, power-hungry, grab-them-by-the-pussy businessmen of the 80's, and what they could get away with.

I know everyone's exhausted by politics, but truthfully, people like trump, the playboy "billionaire" tycoons of the 80's was who Patrick was supposed to be emulating.

And we all know trump could shoot someone on 5th ave and get away with it at this point.

Looks like the author knew their stuff.

[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

In the book, it's fairly clear that he did kill everyone but only got away with it because 1) nobody can tell anybody else apart because everyone looks the same and 2) everybody is so self-centered that even if they did know a murder took place, they didn't bother to report it.

It's very heavily implied in the book that the landlady covered up Paul Allen's (and multiple other prostitutes') murder, presumably to maintain the property value of the apartment. Unfortunately, a lot of the clues don't translate well into a movie:

  1. The apartment only recently became available to rent
  2. Bateman notes that the paint on the walls is still fresh, barely dried
  3. Bateman notes that there's a lot of potpourri laid out, as though to cover up a smell
  4. Iirc the furniture was also brand new
  5. The landlady immediately knew who Bateman was and asked him to leave
[–] neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yup, I agree with your points. It's where I landed too. I always just try to see it from the perspective of people who like the hallucination theory.

It's like the Ferris Bueler was in the head of his friend and wasn't real theory. At first glance, kinda explains a lot. But it's absolutely not true, and the are breaks in the movie that would happen if it were, additionally the director said that wasn't true straight up.

But people still believe it. I try not to antagonize, but to show how unlikely that theory is to hold up.

load more comments (4 replies)