User reviews

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

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.

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 *****

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. :-)

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.

...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

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"

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!

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.

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.

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.

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...

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

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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!

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.