list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around The Rules of Attraction on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/The_Rules_of_Attraction/210777/default.aspx Title: The Rules of Attraction
Year: 2002
Director: Roger Avary
Plot: Bret Easton Ellis' controversial novel about the sexual, emotional, and chemical interactions of a group of wealthy and amoral college students is brought to the screen in this adaptation from writer and director Roger Avery. Sean Bateman (James Van Der Beek) is a student at Camden College, a well-respected private school on the East Coast. Sean is attracted to Lauren Hynde (Shannyn Sossamon), a high minded and seemingly unapproachable coed, while Lauren is infatuated with Victor (Kip Pardue), a handsome but self-centered ladies' man. Lauren's empty-headed roommate, Lara (Jessica Biel), is also attracted to Victor, while he has no qualms about being involved with both. Lauren used to date affected snob Paul Denton (Ian Somerhalder), but Paul, a bisexual, currently lusts after Sean. Meanwhile, friendly campus drug dealer Rupert (Clifton Collins Jr.) finds a ready market for cocaine among his classmates; Sean, a steady customer, finds himself financially embarrassed and begins dealing drugs to help pay off his debts, while leading Paul on for his ready supply of marijuana. The Rules of Attraction also features Eric Stoltz as Mr. Lance Lawson, Faye Dunaway and Swoosie Kurtz as semi-concerned parents, and Fred Savage as one of Sean's customers. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 41
Number of Lists: 39
Number of blog posts: 6
Number of discussion threads: 6
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 20:01:12 GMTThe Rules of Attraction2002Roger AvaryBret Easton Ellis' controversial novel about the sexual, emotional, and chemical interactions of a group of wealthy and amoral college students is brought to the screen in this adaptation from writer and director Roger Avery. Sean Bateman (<a href="/players/P___200937/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>James Van Der Beek</a>) is a student at Camden College, a well-respected private school on the East Coast. Sean is attracted to Lauren Hynde (<a href="/players/P___286262/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Shannyn Sossamon</a>), a high minded and seemingly unapproachable coed, while Lauren is infatuated with Victor (<a href="/players/P___277110/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Kip Pardue</a>), a handsome but self-centered ladies' man. Lauren's empty-headed roommate, Lara (<a href="/players/P___222949/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jessica Biel</a>), is also attracted to Victor, while he has no qualms about being involved with both. Lauren used to date affected snob Paul Denton (<a href="/players/P___297010/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ian Somerhalder</a>), but Paul, a bisexual, currently lusts after Sean. Meanwhile, friendly campus drug dealer Rupert (Clifton Collins Jr.) finds a ready market for cocaine among his classmates; Sean, a steady customer, finds himself financially embarrassed and begins dealing drugs to help pay off his debts, while leading Paul on for his ready supply of marijuana. The Rules of Attraction also features <a href="/players/P____68432/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Eric Stoltz</a> as Mr. Lance Lawson, <a href="/players/P____20518/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Faye Dunaway</a> and <a href="/players/P____39635/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Swoosie Kurtz</a> as semi-concerned parents, and <a href="/players/P____63323/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Fred Savage</a> as one of Sean's customers. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide41Tag Target (>10)39663http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t28139afizj.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Rules_of_Attraction/210777/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/1/29/40057.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/29/2009 11:01:21 AM
Body: There is a good reason Hollywood continually makes Animal House wannabes and avoids producing films that actually focus on academia. Kids prefer their college movies to be about the fun stuff. And so a movie like Old School grossed $75 million while another Luke Wilson comedy called Tenure currently lacks a distributor. The latter film may also be hilarious, as a satire of the tenure process, but if it doesn’t concentrate more on beer bongs and naked co-eds, it won’t attract as big an audience. And according to some scholars, it may not even resonate with them, because it couldn’t possibly be what the process is really like. Film blogger and associate professor Chuck Tryon was quoted about the film last year as saying, “my ongoing pursuit of tenure typically involves me sitting in front of my laptop until 1 a.m., I don’t know how interesting that would be to watch.” And evident by the scathing reviews from Sundance of John Krasinski’s Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, it appears another film about academia has failed to make a strong case for the subject matter. Too bad for the late David Foster Wallace, whose stories were adapted for the film, that Gus Van Sant wasn’t at the helm. A decade ago, in an interview with Van Sant, Wallace pretty much gushed that Good Will Hunting is the most accurate film about academia ever made. Do we agree with him? Let’s just say there’s not a whole lot of competition for such an honor. But in our attempt to recognize the ten best films about academia, Good Will Hunting doesn’t quite make the top spot. 9. (tie) Elegy (2005) and The Human Stain (2003) Neither of these films is especially great, but it would be criminal for us not to recognize the work of Philip Roth, an author who depicts the academic world perfectly in his novels, particularly The Dying Animal (which is the basis for Elegy) and The Human Stain. The adaptations of these two books fail to capture much of what’s on the page, but each film has its own merit. Elegy, which primarily deals with an affair between a professor (Ben Kingsley) and a student (Penelope Cruz), is worth seeing for the more interesting relationship between that professor and his Pulitzer Prize-winning friend (Dennis Hopper). Rarely is fraternity between two members of the academic intelligentsia portrayed so enjoyably. As for The Human Stain, which also involves a professor (Anthony Hopkins) and his affair with a younger woman (Nicole Kidman), the film deals primarily with the issue of political correctness within academia. The topic is addressed nowhere near as well as it is in Roth’s novel, but it is at least a starting point for discussion, and it’s also worth seeing for an example in how not to cast a movie. 8. Soul Man (1986) If we are to include The Human Stain, it’s just as well we acknowledge this earlier comedy, which also involves ironic situations regarding race and academia. Hardly a brilliant movie, Soul Man is at least as humorous in its examination of racism as the Harold and Kumar movies. Yet it is far less esteemed. And the whole black face thing can no longer be looked down upon now that Robert Downey Jr. has that Oscar nomination for Tropic Thunder. The movie is a worthy lampoon of the politics of affirmative action and their affect on college admissions (as well as an obvious and general look at racism within the student population), but it’s especially entertaining for James Earl Jones as a professor who refuses to favor the masquerading protagonist (C. Thomas Howell) just because he’s black. 7. Back to School (1986) While Soul Man deals with the benefit of being a minority when it comes to getting into college, this film from the same year deals with the benefit of being rich. The idea that anyone with enough money can get into the school of his or her choice is depicted comically in a two-scene setup. In the first scene, a university dean (Ned Beatty) asks millionaire entrepreneur Thornton Mellon (Rodney Dangerfield) how he could possibly admit him as a student when he has no high school degree, no transcripts and no SAT scores. The movie then cuts to the punch-line scene, in which the dean and Mellon are celebrating the groundbreaking of a new business school for the university, named after Mellon, of course. Another favorite jab at academia is with the famous cameo by Kurt Vonnegut Jr., who is hired by Mellon to write a paper about his own work. The paper earns a failing grade. 6. Wet Hot American Summer (2001) You’re probably wondering how a comedy set at a summer camp could possibly be about academia. Well, it’s not specifically about academia, but it does feature a subplot involving a science professor (David Hyde Pierce) that does poke fun of the concept of tenure. This was pointed out by Elaine Showalter, an English professor at Princeton and author of the book Faculty Towers: The Academic Novel and Its Discontents, so you have to accept that it fits the list. Sure, she’s the mother of WHAS star and screenwriter Michael Showalter, but that shouldn’t take away from her observation. 5. The Paper Chase (1973) This film features a plot that could very well lend itself to the other kind of college film, but it focuses its attention on the classroom and the relationship between student and professor rather than the dorm room and social affairs. Of course, the student protagonist (Timothy Bottoms) is getting some action, but it is with the daughter (Lindsay Wagner) of the professorial antagonist (John Houseman, who won an Oscar for the performance), and so even the sex stuff is part of the politics of academia. The best scene is at the end, when Bottoms’ character gives the finger to higher education by not even bothering to look at his final grades. If only the audience was also left unaware of his marks, as the original novel leaves that revelation out. 4. Good Will Hunting (1997) David Foster Wallace may have considered this film to be the best film about academia when he discussed it with Gus Van Sant in 1998, but since that time there have been two more poignant films to deal with the subject. Plus, it never was the best film on academia to begin with. So, as much as he’s right to celebrate the film and in particular the portrayal of Stellan Skarsgard’s character and the issue of professors wanting their students to be brilliant, but not too brilliant, there are three more titles to go. 3. Wonder Boys (2000) Based on Michael Chabon’s novel of the same name, Curstin Hanson’s film cinematically captures the atmosphere of academia as well as Philip Roth does on the page (perhaps Hanson should adapt Roth?). However, one issue with this atmosphere may be that the relationships and characters, though written and portrayed wonderfully, are rather common for such a story. Also, why not change things a bit and have the main character be a film teacher rather than a creative writing teacher, which an overused profession in these kinds of movies. The switch would be more appropriate for the medium, too. Aside from these minor criticisms, though, we can barely take a red pen to this film. It’s terrific. 2. The Rules of Attraction (2002) Probably the most cynical look at higher education ever filmed, Roger Avary’s highly underrated adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis’ novel shows us just enough of the classroom and professors (i.e. canceled classes and a single professor who accepts sexual bribes) to let us understand that the joke is in how little of that side of academia is actually necessary to a film like this. In that way it kind of does for college what Heathers does for high school. Neither film is a teen sex comedy in the fashion of most high school and college movies. And neither is a satire of education institutions in the way most of the other films on this list are. Rather, they’re mockeries of the whole education system, but only in that they each consider their respective system to be already a mockery of itself. 1. Horse Feathers (1932) Nobody mocks and satirizes better than the Marx Brothers, and in this film they bring their anarchic shenanigans and brilliant puns to the world of academia. At its core is the basic college sports story, but it’s also one of the first films (if not the first film) to deal with the concept of buying students/players. In addition to lampooning that practice, Horse Feathers makes fun of intellectual gatherings and talk, the influence of trustees and nearly every other aspect of scholarship and higher education you can think of, all in the opening scene. After more than 75 years, it’s still the funniest college movie and the greatest film about academia there is. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:01:21 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/29/2009 11:01:21 AMThere is a good reason Hollywood continually makes Animal House wannabes and avoids producing films that actually focus on academia. Kids prefer their college movies to be about the fun stuff. And so a movie like Old School grossed $75 million while another Luke Wilson comedy called Tenure currently lacks a distributor. The latter film may also be hilarious, as a satire of the tenure process, but if it doesn’t concentrate more on beer bongs and naked co-eds, it won’t attract as big an audience. And according to some scholars, it may not even resonate with them, because it couldn’t possibly be what the process is really like. Film blogger and associate professor Chuck Tryon was quoted about the film last year as saying, “my ongoing pursuit of tenure typically involves me sitting in front of my laptop until 1 a.m., I don’t know how interesting that would be to watch.” And evident by the scathing reviews from Sundance of John Krasinski’s Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, it appears another film about academia has failed to make a strong case for the subject matter. Too bad for the late David Foster Wallace, whose stories were adapted for the film, that Gus Van Sant wasn’t at the helm. A decade ago, in an interview with Van Sant, Wallace pretty much gushed that Good Will Hunting is the most accurate film about academia ever made. Do we agree with him? Let’s just say there’s not a whole lot of competition for such an honor. But in our attempt to recognize the ten best films about academia, Good Will Hunting doesn’t quite make the top spot. 9. (tie) Elegy (2005) and The Human Stain (2003) Neither of these films is especially great, but it would be criminal for us not to recognize the work of Philip Roth, an author who depicts the academic world perfectly in his novels, particularly The Dying Animal (which is the basis for Elegy) and The Human Stain. The adaptations of these two books fail to capture much of what’s on the page, but each film has its own merit. Elegy, which primarily deals with an affair between a professor (Ben Kingsley) and a student (Penelope Cruz), is worth seeing for the more interesting relationship between that professor and his Pulitzer Prize-winning friend (Dennis Hopper). Rarely is fraternity between two members of the academic intelligentsia portrayed so enjoyably. As for The Human Stain, which also involves a professor (Anthony Hopkins) and his affair with a younger woman (Nicole Kidman), the film deals primarily with the issue of political correctness within academia. The topic is addressed nowhere near as well as it is in Roth’s novel, but it is at least a starting point for discussion, and it’s also worth seeing for an example in how not to cast a movie. 8. Soul Man (1986) If we are to include The Human Stain, it’s just as well we acknowledge this earlier comedy, which also involves ironic situations regarding race and academia. Hardly a brilliant movie, Soul Man is at least as humorous in its examination of racism as the Harold and Kumar movies. Yet it is far less esteemed. And the whole black face thing can no longer be looked down upon now that Robert Downey Jr. has that Oscar nomination for Tropic Thunder. The movie is a worthy lampoon of the politics of affirmative action and their affect on college admissions (as well as an obvious and general look at racism within the student population), but it’s especially entertaining for James Earl Jones as a professor who refuses to favor the masquerading protagonist (C. Thomas Howell) just because he’s black. 7. Back to School (1986) While Soul Man deals with the benefit of being a minority when it comes to getting into college, this film from the same year deals with the benefit of being rich. The idea that anyone with enough money can get into the school of his or her choice is depicted comically in a two-scene setup. In the first scene, a university dean (Ned Beatty) asks millionaire entrepreneur Thornton Mellon (Rodney Dangerfield) how he could possibly admit him as a student when he has no high school degree, no transcripts and no SAT scores. The movie then cuts to the punch-line scene, in which the dean and Mellon are celebrating the groundbreaking of a new business school for the university, named after Mellon, of course. Another favorite jab at academia is with the famous cameo by Kurt Vonnegut Jr., who is hired by Mellon to write a paper about his own work. The paper earns a failing grade. 6. Wet Hot American Summer (2001) You’re probably wondering how a comedy set at a summer camp could possibly be about academia. Well, it’s not specifically about academia, but it does feature a subplot involving a science professor (David Hyde Pierce) that does poke fun of the concept of tenure. This was pointed out by Elaine Showalter, an English professor at Princeton and author of the book Faculty Towers: The Academic Novel and Its Discontents, so you have to accept that it fits the list. Sure, she’s the mother of WHAS star and screenwriter Michael Showalter, but that shouldn’t take away from her observation. 5. The Paper Chase (1973) This film features a plot that could very well lend itself to the other kind of college film, but it focuses its attention on the classroom and the relationship between student and professor rather than the dorm room and social affairs. Of course, the student protagonist (Timothy Bottoms) is getting some action, but it is with the daughter (Lindsay Wagner) of the professorial antagonist (John Houseman, who won an Oscar for the performance), and so even the sex stuff is part of the politics of academia. The best scene is at the end, when Bottoms’ character gives the finger to higher education by not even bothering to look at his final grades. If only the audience was also left unaware of his marks, as the original novel leaves that revelation out. 4. Good Will Hunting (1997) David Foster Wallace may have considered this film to be the best film about academia when he discussed it with Gus Van Sant in 1998, but since that time there have been two more poignant films to deal with the subject. Plus, it never was the best film on academia to begin with. So, as much as he’s right to celebrate the film and in particular the portrayal of Stellan Skarsgard’s character and the issue of professors wanting their students to be brilliant, but not too brilliant, there are three more titles to go. 3. Wonder Boys (2000) Based on Michael Chabon’s novel of the same name, Curstin Hanson’s film cinematically captures the atmosphere of academia as well as Philip Roth does on the page (perhaps Hanson should adapt Roth?). However, one issue with this atmosphere may be that the relationships and characters, though written and portrayed wonderfully, are rather common for such a story. Also, why not change things a bit and have the main character be a film teacher rather than a creative writing teacher, which an overused profession in these kinds of movies. The switch would be more appropriate for the medium, too. Aside from these minor criticisms, though, we can barely take a red pen to this film. It’s terrific. 2. The Rules of Attraction (2002) Probably the most cynical look at higher education ever filmed, Roger Avary’s highly underrated adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis’ novel shows us just enough of the classroom and professors (i.e. canceled classes and a single professor who accepts sexual bribes) to let us understand that the joke is in how little of that side of academia is actually necessary to a film like this. In that way it kind of does for college what Heathers does for high school. Neither film is a teen sex comedy in the fashion of most high school and college movies. And neither is a satire of education institutions in the way most of the other films on this list are. Rather, they’re mockeries of the whole education system, but only in that they each consider their respective system to be already a mockery of itself. 1. Horse Feathers (1932) Nobody mocks and satirizes better than the Marx Brothers, and in this film they bring their anarchic shenanigans and brilliant puns to the world of academia. At its core is the basic college sports story, but it’s also one of the first films (if not the first film) to deal with the concept of buying students/players. In addition to lampooning that practice, Horse Feathers makes fun of intellectual gatherings and talk, the influence of trustees and nearly every other aspect of scholarship and higher education you can think of, all in the opening scene. After more than 75 years, it’s still the funniest college movie and the greatest film about academia there is. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Community_Recommendations/Re_Mercurial_Yet_Not_Entirely_Unrefined/643/35847/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: Community Recommendations
Post Date: 10/2/2008 8:17:01 PM
Body: [quote user="SkyPilot"] What are some good dark romantic comedies? [/quote] Harold and Maude - Undoubtedly the most lauded dark romantic comedy. Arsenic and Old Lace - One of the earliest dark romantic comedies. Sweethearts - If you're not a fan of Janeane Garafalo then probably avoid this. The Living End - About two men, so if that freaks you out then not for you. And very light on the comedy, but nonetheless an interesting view. The House of Yes - About incest, but if Parker Posey was your sister . . . The Rules of Attraction - Bret Easton Ellis. Romantic. Scary. Funny. Welcome to the Dollhouse - The most endearing Todd Solondz film. Natural Born Killers - True love mixed with spastic humor and homicide. Secretary - I thought it was funny, but others might just get weirded out. American Beauty - No explanation needed. Lost in Translation - Again, fairly mainstream. So my definition of romantic comedy is a little skewed, but I am more than willing to argue why these films fit the bill.
]]>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:17:01 GMTmercurialCommunity Recommendations10/2/2008 8:17:01 PM[quote user="SkyPilot"] What are some good dark romantic comedies? [/quote] Harold and Maude - Undoubtedly the most lauded dark romantic comedy. Arsenic and Old Lace - One of the earliest dark romantic comedies. Sweethearts - If you're not a fan of Janeane Garafalo then probably avoid this. The Living End - About two men, so if that freaks you out then not for you. And very light on the comedy, but nonetheless an interesting view. The House of Yes - About incest, but if Parker Posey was your sister . . . The Rules of Attraction - Bret Easton Ellis. Romantic. Scary. Funny. Welcome to the Dollhouse - The most endearing Todd Solondz film. Natural Born Killers - True love mixed with spastic humor and homicide. Secretary - I thought it was funny, but others might just get weirded out. American Beauty - No explanation needed. Lost in Translation - Again, fairly mainstream. So my definition of romantic comedy is a little skewed, but I am more than willing to argue why these films fit the bill. http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Weekly_Theme_for_September_29_Gimme_Some_Drugs_Ma/625/35747/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 9/30/2008 10:30:15 PM
Body: Upon viewing Requiem for a Dream before entering my freshman year of college, I found myself a strict adherent to the law and only indulged in those drugs (nicotine, caffeine and alcohol) deemed legal by the government. That's my story and I'm sticking to it! This week we shall discuss those films depicting drugs (legal and not so much) which will of course spiral into a violent argument about the legalization of said drugs. Other films that have helped me stay away from chasing the dragon and toking the ganga are: Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas Trainspotting Traffic The Rules of Attraction The Walll 28 Days On the other hand, there have been those films that make it seem like so much fun that you find yourself asking, "I'm strong, I won't get addicted if I try it just once . . . right?" Dazed and Confused London Go Smiley Face Nowhere So relax, turn on some Marley, break out the black lights and reminisce about those addicting drug flicks.
]]>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 02:30:15 GMTmercurialWeekly Theme9/30/2008 10:30:15 PMUpon viewing Requiem for a Dream before entering my freshman year of college, I found myself a strict adherent to the law and only indulged in those drugs (nicotine, caffeine and alcohol) deemed legal by the government. That's my story and I'm sticking to it! This week we shall discuss those films depicting drugs (legal and not so much) which will of course spiral into a violent argument about the legalization of said drugs. Other films that have helped me stay away from chasing the dragon and toking the ganga are: Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas Trainspotting Traffic The Rules of Attraction The Walll 28 Days On the other hand, there have been those films that make it seem like so much fun that you find yourself asking, "I'm strong, I won't get addicted if I try it just once . . . right?" Dazed and Confused London Go Smiley Face Nowhere So relax, turn on some Marley, break out the black lights and reminisce about those addicting drug flicks. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/8/7/33708.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 8/7/2008 4:01:14 PM
Body: I can’t explain what attracts me so much to the highly unlikable characters of Bret Easton Ellis’ fiction — or, in my case, since I’ve never actually read his books, of movies based on Bret Easton Ellis’ fiction — but I absolutely love Less Than Zero, American Psycho, and especially The Rules of Attraction. However, I have to give more credit to the filmmakers behind each of these films, because all three adaptations have their own appreciable style that helps me to enjoy the stories of these horrible people. The Informers may look like it fits in with the rest of the filmed versions of Ellis, but I’m skeptical. I was quite bored with director Gregor Jordan’s war satire Buffalo Soldiers, and I fear that he’s going to fail again at holding my attention here. I am eager to watch Brad Renfro in his final, posthumous role (maybe it’s Oscar-worthy!). I am anxious to see if Winona Ryder can regain my favor (she’s fallen pretty far in my mind since her days as my celebrity crush in the early ’90s). And I’m interested to see an Ellis film that the author actually co-adapted. Yet I’m maintaining low expectations after watching the new trailer, because it just looks like a dark movie about vacuous people without anything extra like the era-defining production design, the iconic performance by Christian Bale and the clever post-production tricks featured respectively in Less Than Zero, American Psycho and The Rules of Attraction. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 20:01:14 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com8/7/2008 4:01:14 PM I can’t explain what attracts me so much to the highly unlikable characters of Bret Easton Ellis’ fiction — or, in my case, since I’ve never actually read his books, of movies based on Bret Easton Ellis’ fiction — but I absolutely love Less Than Zero, American Psycho, and especially The Rules of Attraction. However, I have to give more credit to the filmmakers behind each of these films, because all three adaptations have their own appreciable style that helps me to enjoy the stories of these horrible people. The Informers may look like it fits in with the rest of the filmed versions of Ellis, but I’m skeptical. I was quite bored with director Gregor Jordan’s war satire Buffalo Soldiers, and I fear that he’s going to fail again at holding my attention here. I am eager to watch Brad Renfro in his final, posthumous role (maybe it’s Oscar-worthy!). I am anxious to see if Winona Ryder can regain my favor (she’s fallen pretty far in my mind since her days as my celebrity crush in the early ’90s). And I’m interested to see an Ellis film that the author actually co-adapted. Yet I’m maintaining low expectations after watching the new trailer, because it just looks like a dark movie about vacuous people without anything extra like the era-defining production design, the iconic performance by Christian Bale and the clever post-production tricks featured respectively in Less Than Zero, American Psycho and The Rules of Attraction. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Weekly_Theme_for_August_4_Let_s_Talk_About_Sex/625/33586/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 8/5/2008 6:02:41 PM
Body: Without going into the pornographic, let's get down and dirty and discuss all those films that explore what goes on behind closed doors. I will admit that I do like American Pie and it's gross out portrayal of a group of high schoolers making a pact to lose their virginity before they graduate high school. Equally, I'm willing to also admit that I found myself liking The Sweetest Thing and it's portrayal of sexually liberated (without any negative connotations) woman being stupid and having fun with their sexual experiences. Venturing to the more dismal views of sex, The Rules of Attraction will make any incoming college freshman fear leaving the comfort of their parents homes and begin seeing nothing but rapists, STD's and psychopaths around every turn. Y Tu Mamá También is incredible with it's twisted threesome road trip sexual free-for-all. Catherine Breillat has made countless interesting films about women and sex: Fat Girl being a pubescent girl becoming curious about her body and sex; Anatomy of Hell about an older woman tired of the typical and her journey into some pretty insane depths of sexual experience. Lastly, my favorite two films with S-E-X as the primary theme are Shortbus and A Dirty Shame. Warning for those that might be tempted to see Shortbus: it is extremely graphic. EXTREMELY. From John Cameron Mitchell, Shortbus is one of the few movies about sex that keeps nothing hidden (literally) and attempts to deconstruct various aspects of the act and what compels us in our various ways. A Dirty Shame is just stupid fun from that master of stupid fun John Waters and centers around a group of sexual liberated fetishists trying to uncover a new unheard of sex act. So without further ado and double entendres, let's talk about sex!
]]>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 22:02:41 GMTmercurialWeekly Theme8/5/2008 6:02:41 PMWithout going into the pornographic, let's get down and dirty and discuss all those films that explore what goes on behind closed doors. I will admit that I do like American Pie and it's gross out portrayal of a group of high schoolers making a pact to lose their virginity before they graduate high school. Equally, I'm willing to also admit that I found myself liking The Sweetest Thing and it's portrayal of sexually liberated (without any negative connotations) woman being stupid and having fun with their sexual experiences. Venturing to the more dismal views of sex, The Rules of Attraction will make any incoming college freshman fear leaving the comfort of their parents homes and begin seeing nothing but rapists, STD's and psychopaths around every turn. Y Tu Mam&aacute; Tambi&eacute;n is incredible with it's twisted threesome road trip sexual free-for-all. Catherine Breillat has made countless interesting films about women and sex: Fat Girl being a pubescent girl becoming curious about her body and sex; Anatomy of Hell about an older woman tired of the typical and her journey into some pretty insane depths of sexual experience. Lastly, my favorite two films with S-E-X as the primary theme are Shortbus and A Dirty Shame. Warning for those that might be tempted to see Shortbus: it is extremely graphic. EXTREMELY. From John Cameron Mitchell, Shortbus is one of the few movies about sex that keeps nothing hidden (literally) and attempts to deconstruct various aspects of the act and what compels us in our various ways. A Dirty Shame is just stupid fun from that master of stupid fun John Waters and centers around a group of sexual liberated fetishists trying to uncover a new unheard of sex act. So without further ado and double entendres, let's talk about sex! http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_Uses_of_Split_Screen/190/28349/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: leeroy711
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 5/8/2008 2:40:45 AM
Body: [quote user="mercurial"] When done right, a scene that utilizes split screen techniques can become unforgettable. Done wrong, and, well . . . %$*@! 5.) Jackie Brown - Adds that extra something during the latter half of the film. I could switch this with Kill Bill, but I personally like the use of it here a little more. 4.) Requiem For A Dream - Used throughout the film to emphasize the effects of the various drugs consumed by the characters. I'd say it worked. 3.) When Harry Met Sally - The bedroom scene in which Harry and Sally are watching television from their own separate bedrooms but split screen to appear they are in the same bed. Amazing dialogue and just plain fun. 2.) Timecode - Four interweaving stories occurring simultaneously, each a single continuous shot. Wow. 1.) The Rules of Attractions - reinventing how a split screen shot can be made; two separate stationary to tracking shots were combined in post-production to give the illusion that they merge into a single widescreen shot. Amazing. [/quote] What's next, top 5 uses of star wipes??.... I'm stumped.
]]>Thu, 08 May 2008 06:40:45 GMTleeroy711Top 55/8/2008 2:40:45 AM[quote user="mercurial"] When done right, a scene that utilizes split screen techniques can become unforgettable. Done wrong, and, well . . . %$*@! 5.) Jackie Brown - Adds that extra something during the latter half of the film. I could switch this with Kill Bill, but I personally like the use of it here a little more. 4.) Requiem For A Dream - Used throughout the film to emphasize the effects of the various drugs consumed by the characters. I'd say it worked. 3.) When Harry Met Sally - The bedroom scene in which Harry and Sally are watching television from their own separate bedrooms but split screen to appear they are in the same bed. Amazing dialogue and just plain fun. 2.) Timecode - Four interweaving stories occurring simultaneously, each a single continuous shot. Wow. 1.) The Rules of Attractions - reinventing how a split screen shot can be made; two separate stationary to tracking shots were combined in post-production to give the illusion that they merge into a single widescreen shot. Amazing. [/quote] What's next, top 5 uses of star wipes??.... I'm stumped. http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Top_5_Uses_of_Split_Screen/190/28347/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 5/8/2008 2:20:38 AM
Body: When done right, a scene that utilizes split screen techniques can become unforgettable. Done wrong, and, well . . . %$*@! 5.) Jackie Brown - Adds that extra something during the latter half of the film. I could switch this with Kill Bill, but I personally like the use of it here a little more. 4.) Requiem For A Dream - Used throughout the film to emphasize the effects of the various drugs consumed by the characters. I'd say it worked. 3.) When Harry Met Sally - The bedroom scene in which Harry and Sally are watching television from their own separate bedrooms but split screen to appear they are in the same bed. Amazing dialogue and just plain fun. 2.) Timecode - Four interweaving stories occurring simultaneously, each a single continuous shot. Wow. 1.) The Rules of Attractions - reinventing how a split screen shot can be made; two separate stationary to tracking shots were combined in post-production to give the illusion that they merge into a single widescreen shot. Amazing.
]]>Thu, 08 May 2008 06:20:38 GMTmercurialTop 55/8/2008 2:20:38 AMWhen done right, a scene that utilizes split screen techniques can become unforgettable. Done wrong, and, well . . . %$*@! 5.) Jackie Brown - Adds that extra something during the latter half of the film. I could switch this with Kill Bill, but I personally like the use of it here a little more. 4.) Requiem For A Dream - Used throughout the film to emphasize the effects of the various drugs consumed by the characters. I'd say it worked. 3.) When Harry Met Sally - The bedroom scene in which Harry and Sally are watching television from their own separate bedrooms but split screen to appear they are in the same bed. Amazing dialogue and just plain fun. 2.) Timecode - Four interweaving stories occurring simultaneously, each a single continuous shot. Wow. 1.) The Rules of Attractions - reinventing how a split screen shot can be made; two separate stationary to tracking shots were combined in post-production to give the illusion that they merge into a single widescreen shot. Amazing. http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/3/24/26563.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 3/24/2008 2:01:43 PM
Body: With an almost completely dead, holiday hungover RSS, I spent the morning leisurely slogging through this LA Times profile of 80s it-boy novelist Bret Easton Ellis. Much of the story’s 3,000 words are devoted to defenses of Ellis’ literary reputation, most notably for our purposes from New York Times film critic A.O. Scott, who praises Ellis as “a much more radical writer than he seems.” The rest of it details the oft-adapted novelist’s own attempts to break into screenwriting. Ellis’ published work has so far formed the basis of three released films: the gloriously trashy Less Than Zero, in which Robert Downey Jr. essentially plays a future version of himself; Mary Harron’s American Psycho, which broke with Ellis’ trademark moral passivity in order to turn the material into obvious satire; and Roger Avery’s Rules of Attraction, which seemed to be kind of more about Roger Avery learning how to use Final Cut Pro than anything else. Somewhere along the way, Ellis apparently “realized he’s not very good at script doctoring” and started concentrating on crafting scripts from scratch. The first of these efforts to see the light of day will be the upcoming The Informers, for which Ellis adapted his own shot story collection in collaboration with Nicholas Jarecki. But to say that Ellis’ outlook on his new career is less than rosy would be an understatement. After the jump, an excerpt from the end of the article, in which Ellis semi-bitterly acknowledges that he’s in a “lost period.” (more…) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » karina
]]>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:01:43 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog3/24/2008 2:01:43 PMWith an almost completely dead, holiday hungover RSS, I spent the morning leisurely slogging through this LA Times profile of 80s it-boy novelist Bret Easton Ellis. Much of the story’s 3,000 words are devoted to defenses of Ellis’ literary reputation, most notably for our purposes from New York Times film critic A.O. Scott, who praises Ellis as “a much more radical writer than he seems.” The rest of it details the oft-adapted novelist’s own attempts to break into screenwriting. Ellis’ published work has so far formed the basis of three released films: the gloriously trashy Less Than Zero, in which Robert Downey Jr. essentially plays a future version of himself; Mary Harron’s American Psycho, which broke with Ellis’ trademark moral passivity in order to turn the material into obvious satire; and Roger Avery’s Rules of Attraction, which seemed to be kind of more about Roger Avery learning how to use Final Cut Pro than anything else. Somewhere along the way, Ellis apparently “realized he’s not very good at script doctoring” and started concentrating on crafting scripts from scratch. The first of these efforts to see the light of day will be the upcoming The Informers, for which Ellis adapted his own shot story collection in collaboration with Nicholas Jarecki. But to say that Ellis’ outlook on his new career is less than rosy would be an understatement. After the jump, an excerpt from the end of the article, in which Ellis semi-bitterly acknowledges that he’s in a “lost period.” (more…) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » karina http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/3/24/26562.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/24/2008 2:01:33 PM
Body: With an almost completely dead, holiday hungover RSS, I spent the morning leisurely slogging through this LA Times profile of 80s it-boy novelist Bret Easton Ellis. Much of the story’s 3,000 words are devoted to defenses of Ellis’ literary reputation, most notably for our purposes from New York Times film critic A.O. Scott, who praises Ellis as “a much more radical writer than he seems.” The rest of it details the oft-adapted novelist’s own attempts to break into screenwriting. Ellis’ published work has so far formed the basis of three released films: the gloriously trashy Less Than Zero, in which Robert Downey Jr. essentially plays a future version of himself; Mary Harron’s American Psycho, which broke with Ellis’ trademark moral passivity in order to turn the material into obvious satire; and Roger Avery’s Rules of Attraction, which seemed to be kind of more about Roger Avery learning how to use Final Cut Pro than anything else. Somewhere along the way, Ellis apparently “realized he’s not very good at script doctoring” and started concentrating on crafting scripts from scratch. The first of these efforts to see the light of day will be the upcoming The Informers, for which Ellis adapted his own shot story collection in collaboration with Nicholas Jarecki. But to say that Ellis’ outlook on his new career is less than rosy would be an understatement. After the jump, an excerpt from the end of the article, in which Ellis semi-bitterly acknowledges that he’s in a “lost period.” (more…) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:01:33 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/24/2008 2:01:33 PMWith an almost completely dead, holiday hungover RSS, I spent the morning leisurely slogging through this LA Times profile of 80s it-boy novelist Bret Easton Ellis. Much of the story’s 3,000 words are devoted to defenses of Ellis’ literary reputation, most notably for our purposes from New York Times film critic A.O. Scott, who praises Ellis as “a much more radical writer than he seems.” The rest of it details the oft-adapted novelist’s own attempts to break into screenwriting. Ellis’ published work has so far formed the basis of three released films: the gloriously trashy Less Than Zero, in which Robert Downey Jr. essentially plays a future version of himself; Mary Harron’s American Psycho, which broke with Ellis’ trademark moral passivity in order to turn the material into obvious satire; and Roger Avery’s Rules of Attraction, which seemed to be kind of more about Roger Avery learning how to use Final Cut Pro than anything else. Somewhere along the way, Ellis apparently “realized he’s not very good at script doctoring” and started concentrating on crafting scripts from scratch. The first of these efforts to see the light of day will be the upcoming The Informers, for which Ellis adapted his own shot story collection in collaboration with Nicholas Jarecki. But to say that Ellis’ outlook on his new career is less than rosy would be an understatement. After the jump, an excerpt from the end of the article, in which Ellis semi-bitterly acknowledges that he’s in a “lost period.” (more…) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/madman0211/archive/2007/8/31/19183.aspx Post By: madman0211
Post To: go blog yourself...
Post Date: 8/31/2007 3:32:00 AM
Body: The Rules of Attraction, Roger Avary’s adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis’ second novel, is a clever look at the lives of several selfish, morally corrupt college students. Sean Bateman (James Van Der Beek) is a drug dealing anti-hero who wants to relate to the sensitive, pot-smoking virgin, Lauren Hynde (portrayed by Shannyn Sossamon) because he believes that she has been writing him love letters. Meanwhile, Paul Denton (Ian Somerhalder), Lauren’s bisexual ex-boyfriend, is pursuing Sean for his own romantic needs. When this film was originally released, it was marketed as being a typical teen sex comedy that nudged the volume up to eleven. No wonder The Rules of Attraction became such a notorious flop at the box office, it was made to be something it was not. For the record I am a big fan of this movie, and I have been since my first viewing four years ago. What I have discovered, however is that very few people find this film as pleasing as I do (which is a pity, in my opinion). It has taken me a few years, but I think I have finally figured it out. Many people find this film unbearable for one primary reason; it represents a complete disconnection from the typical prepackaged Hollywood movies we have all come to expect. This lack of familiarity can be very uncomfortable for some people, but personally I believe that this is what makes the film so interesting. This film is disorienting and it has a very dangerous vibe. Nothing at all seems to connect; the narrative structure of the film begins and ends mid-sentence during a monologue, time shifts backward and forward (sometimes without viewers even taking notice), the tone goes from light and hilarious to dark and disturbing, and there is a four minute montage in the third act of the film that completely deters viewers from ever thinking that Roger Avary will eventually let on to a pattern. Even the characters cannot seem to connect with each other. Virtually every conversation depicted in this film is superficial and misconceived. In this case it is not indicative of bad writing or directing, instead it reinforces the notion that these sex-crazed, alcohol-soaked twenty-somethings will never truly “know” each other (whether they want to or not). In fact, the only scene in which Sean and Lauren almost connect with each other shows both characters in a split screen, completely cutting off one from the other (this scene also involved some impressive camera work and very long takes, which just go to show how talented the cast and crew were on this feature). The Rules of Attraction is brimming with moments that make viewers feel extremely uncomfortable. As we invest more cognitive thought into these characters and the situations we find them in, we sometimes feel as though we are intruding upon something that is very personal. For instance, the sex scenes in this film are terribly raw, they are not glorified or romanticized in any way. Viewers are even forced to look at nothing but Sean’s face as he aggressively indulges in his one-night-stands. Avary also depicts the most emotional and yet the most visceral suicide I have ever seen in a film. Although tastefully done, this scene captures the complete contemptuous nature of suicide to a degree that I find hard to match. In my honest opinion, any film that can make me feel so voyeuristic, as if I should not be watching at all, has done it’s job depicting a gritty reality, which I find very admirable. Do not let it depress you, this film also has some hilarious moments, and the soundtrack (created by tomandandy) keeps the mood very light and whimsical for the bulk of the movie. Much of The Rules of Attraction will have you laughing, the actors have a great sense of comedic timing, but keep in mind that Ellis’ characters are not meant to be looked up to, they are one dimensional, egoistic caricatures of college life, they are not to be trusted. I commend Van Der Beek and Sossamon for their subtle yet charismatic performances. Clifton Collins Jr., Russell Sams, and Fred Savage (of all people) also make very pleasing additions with their smaller roles. Sadly, no matter how many times I attempt to convince everyone to see this movie, there will always be those who don’t think it is worth their time. To those people, I would like to say that if you refuse to see this movie because it is “different”, then instead see it because it is interesting.
]]>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 07:32:00 GMTmadman0211go blog yourself...8/31/2007 3:32:00 AM The Rules of Attraction, Roger Avary&rsquo;s adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis&rsquo; second novel, is a clever look at the lives of several selfish, morally corrupt college students. Sean Bateman (James Van Der Beek) is a drug dealing anti-hero who wants to relate to the sensitive, pot-smoking virgin, Lauren Hynde (portrayed by Shannyn Sossamon) because he believes that she has been writing him love letters. Meanwhile, Paul Denton (Ian Somerhalder), Lauren&rsquo;s bisexual ex-boyfriend, is pursuing Sean for his own romantic needs. When this film was originally released, it was marketed as being a typical teen sex comedy that nudged the volume up to eleven. No wonder The Rules of Attraction became such a notorious flop at the box office, it was made to be something it was not. For the record I am a big fan of this movie, and I have been since my first viewing four years ago. What I have discovered, however is that very few people find this film as pleasing as I do (which is a pity, in my opinion). It has taken me a few years, but I think I have finally figured it out. Many people find this film unbearable for one primary reason; it represents a complete disconnection from the typical prepackaged Hollywood movies we have all come to expect. This lack of familiarity can be very uncomfortable for some people, but personally I believe that this is what makes the film so interesting. This film is disorienting and it has a very dangerous vibe. Nothing at all seems to connect; the narrative structure of the film begins and ends mid-sentence during a monologue, time shifts backward and forward (sometimes without viewers even taking notice), the tone goes from light and hilarious to dark and disturbing, and there is a four minute montage in the third act of the film that completely deters viewers from ever thinking that Roger Avary will eventually let on to a pattern. Even the characters cannot seem to connect with each other. Virtually every conversation depicted in this film is superficial and misconceived. In this case it is not indicative of bad writing or directing, instead it reinforces the notion that these sex-crazed, alcohol-soaked twenty-somethings will never truly &ldquo;know&rdquo; each other (whether they want to or not). In fact, the only scene in which Sean and Lauren almost connect with each other shows both characters in a split screen, completely cutting off one from the other (this scene also involved some impressive camera work and very long takes, which just go to show how talented the cast and crew were on this feature). The Rules of Attraction is brimming with moments that make viewers feel extremely uncomfortable. As we invest more cognitive thought into these characters and the situations we find them in, we sometimes feel as though we are intruding upon something that is very personal. For instance, the sex scenes in this film are terribly raw, they are not glorified or romanticized in any way. Viewers are even forced to look at nothing but Sean&rsquo;s face as he aggressively indulges in his one-night-stands. Avary also depicts the most emotional and yet the most visceral suicide I have ever seen in a film. Although tastefully done, this scene captures the complete contemptuous nature of suicide to a degree that I find hard to match. In my honest opinion, any film that can make me feel so voyeuristic, as if I should not be watching at all, has done it&rsquo;s job depicting a gritty reality, which I find very admirable. Do not let it depress you, this film also has some hilarious moments, and the soundtrack (created by tomandandy) keeps the mood very light and whimsical for the bulk of the movie. Much of The Rules of Attraction will have you laughing, the actors have a great sense of comedic timing, but keep in mind that Ellis&rsquo; characters are not meant to be looked up to, they are one dimensional, egoistic caricatures of college life, they are not to be trusted. I commend Van Der Beek and Sossamon for their subtle yet charismatic performances. Clifton Collins Jr., Russell Sams, and Fred Savage (of all people) also make very pleasing additions with their smaller roles. Sadly, no matter how many times I attempt to convince everyone to see this movie, there will always be those who don&rsquo;t think it is worth their time. To those people, I would like to say that if you refuse to see this movie because it is &ldquo;different&rdquo;, then instead see it because it is interesting. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12478

Number of people who tagged: 338

Number of times used: 1480

]]>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:29 GMT124783381480Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dark/MemberTagFilms.aspxdark
Number of films tagged: 223

Number of people who tagged: 137

Number of times used: 390

]]>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:40:47 GMT223137390Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/drugs/MemberTagFilms.aspxdrugs
Number of films tagged: 1643

Number of people who tagged: 130

Number of times used: 488

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:36:00 GMT1643130488Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sex/MemberTagFilms.aspxsex
Number of films tagged: 2414

Number of people who tagged: 126

Number of times used: 548

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:42 GMT2414126548Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/suicide/MemberTagFilms.aspxsuicide
Number of films tagged: 1828

Number of people who tagged: 80

Number of times used: 185

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:40:50 GMT182880185Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/obsession/MemberTagFilms.aspxobsession
Number of films tagged: 1134

Number of people who tagged: 64

Number of times used: 136

]]>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:00:49 GMT113464136Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/college/MemberTagFilms.aspxcollege
Number of films tagged: 854

Number of people who tagged: 48

Number of times used: 187

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:40:05 GMT85448187Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/terrible/MemberTagFilms.aspxterrible
Number of films tagged: 59

Number of people who tagged: 47

Number of times used: 64

]]>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 21:51:39 GMT594764Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/horrible/MemberTagFilms.aspxhorrible
Number of films tagged: 72

Number of people who tagged: 42

Number of times used: 73

]]>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:19:31 GMT724273Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/lovetriangle/MemberTagFilms.aspxlovetriangle
Number of films tagged: 2902

Number of people who tagged: 38

Number of times used: 75

]]>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:12:01 GMT29023875Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cocaine/MemberTagFilms.aspxcocaine
Number of films tagged: 146

Number of people who tagged: 29

Number of times used: 91

]]>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 20:35:41 GMT1462991Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/lust/MemberTagFilms.aspxlust
Number of films tagged: 188

Number of people who tagged: 22

Number of times used: 53

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:40 GMT1882253Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/education/MemberTagFilms.aspxeducation
Number of films tagged: 500

Number of people who tagged: 19

Number of times used: 34

]]>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:49:18 GMT5001934Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/alcohol/MemberTagFilms.aspxalcohol
Number of films tagged: 114

Number of people who tagged: 16

Number of times used: 55

]]>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:36:35 GMT1141655Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/drunk/MemberTagFilms.aspxdrunk
Number of films tagged: 122

Number of people who tagged: 16

Number of times used: 23

]]>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:09:25 GMT1221623Tag