[books] The Rules of Adaption — Brett Easton Ellis interviewed regarding the Rules of Attaction film

'What do I think? Rock and Roll.'

‘One of my only complaints about the movie was that it was so much colder and harsher than the book. It’s like Kubrick directing a college film. I really thought there was going to be much more of an emotional pull toward the end, and there wasn’t. This is not a movie to bring your Kleenex to. But I think Roger captured that lack of feeling among college kids as accurate. During that age, you’re becoming an adult, and in that process you realize, “Okay, the world works this way, and it’s hurtful,” and you pretend it doesn’t hurt you, and you pose a lot.’ [via Anglepoised]

Yet Another Rules of Attraction Link

This entry was posted on Monday, October 21st, 2002 at 9:06 am and is filed under Movies.

« »


You know, I read this book when I was 13 and once I’d finished I called my mother and said “I think I’ll go to university when I’m older.” Sadly, Exeter wasn’t much like Camden.

Is that James Van Der Beek of Dawson’s Creek fame?


Damn. And there I was thinking that I was being humorous.

my rules of attraction review :D


it’s like the opening sequence is cool, and then it’s slow, then the initial meet the drug dealer scene so painful, and then blah blah fred savage set piece awesome! blah blah incredibly edited european vacation, slow, eric stoltz set piece yay! and then it’s pretty much blah :D basically it’s MTV’s undressed as directed by roger avery, sometimes inspired but mostly tired :D
kenny • 10/23/02 03:10am

I agree with Kenny. I’d been following the obsessive posts on LinkMachineGo thinking there must be a reason to be excited about the movie. Then when I found myself avoiding rush hour at a megaplex theater and it was the next movie up I thought fate was telling me to watch it. Alas, no, not unless fate wanted me to waste 8 bucks. One thing that made it pointless was the near-complete lack of irony, especially as compared with a *good* multinarrative movie about the misadventures of improbably good looking young adults, namely “Go”. “Go” was funny. “Go” had intriguing characters. “Go” had surprising or whimsical plot twists. “Go” had relationships where you could see some believable chemistry even though both partners were jerks. “Rules of Attraction” had precious little of any of these things. (I did like the fast-frame travelogue and the camp dance number, though. And Shannyn Sossamon should get the door prize for best Winona Ryder impression.)

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.