XIXAX Film Forum

Non-Film Discussion => Other Media => Topic started by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 08:59:29 AM

Title: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 08:59:29 AM
There've been some hints here and there that there are some fans around (most recently, Jokerspath's signature), so I thought I'd start a thread...

I've only read American Psycho, Rules of Attraction and Glamorama - Glamorama being one of my favourite books of all time (anyone who loves movies should read that book).

I think he's a brilliant postmodern writer: I love how he's so casually symbolic, the way that things don't necessarily have specific meanings, or reasons for happening, but they just come together and feel so right in the end - he reminds me a little of Lynch in that way, though not quite as abstract.

Thought we could discuss the movies too. I thought American Psycho was a very fun, interesting version of the book: completely different, but that's okay - made it into much more of a comic satire rather than a vicious one, and - importantly - kept it all very uncool. Rules Of Attraction was okay for what it was, but was just far too high on itself to actually grasp the philosophy behind Ellis' writing. (Worryingly, Glamorama is presently in production with Roger Avary directing again. If he makes a shitty movie out of that wonderful book I'm going to be really pissed of: that book has the potential to make an INCREDIBLE film, what with all the fun the writer and director could have playing round with filmic conventions, etc...) Haven't seen Less Than Zero yet - want to wait till I've read the book.

So anyway - what does anyone think of the guy?
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Cecil on June 17, 2003, 09:26:32 AM
im a fan. less than zero is a great book, the movie is completely different, but i enjoy it for what it is.

and rules of attraction is a great, great film. an excessive film about the excess of college. and everyone who thinks otherwise is a fool  :twisted:
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 10:04:24 AM
I don't know - I thought Rules was too cool by half. It felt like it could have been made by a talented film student at that college, rather than someone who had seen that life then grown up and away from it and was judging it with distance from the outside (as Ellis was)... It felt a little superficial, and not in a way that commented on the lives of these kids, but in a way that made itself into a movie that these kids might watch and love. I enjoyed it, but for very different reasons than the book.

But I don't want this to be another Rules of Attraction thread - what did you think of Glamorama, Cecil? Apparently the sped-up Europe bit with Victor in Rules was pre-production footage for Glamorama. Considering that part was my absolute favourite bit of the movie (which I felt captured Ellis' prose style and outlook pretty damn well), maybe it'll be good after all...
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jokerspath on June 17, 2003, 10:19:29 AM
Quote from: children with angels
It felt like it could have been made by a talented film student at that college, rather than someone who had seen that life then grown up and away from it and was judging it with distance from the outside (as Ellis was)


If I'm not mistaken, Mr. Ellis was only about 23 when Rules Of Attraction was published, which doesn't seem like too much of a distance, especially if you take in to fact how long it may have taken to get the book published...

I enjoyed the hell out of Less Than Zero (never seen the movie version).  

American Psycho took me a second time to fully appreciate it, having expected a gory, twisted read.  Instead, I got, after trying a second time, a gory, twisted, incredibly sharp, whip-smart, satirical, and hysterically funny (at times) novel.  Then the movie came out.  It took me a few times to fully enjoy that, but I do love what Harron/Turner did with the film, which is to present as much of all the angles of the original work as they could, complete w/ a terrific cast and some nice camera work.  

I'd like to read everything (Informers, Glamorama, the random story about cocaine in some anthology) to get the full overview.  I definitely enjoy his work.  I like 'em detached...

aw
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Sigur Rós on June 17, 2003, 10:26:52 AM
Quote from: cecil b. demented
and rules of attraction is a great, great film. an excessive film about the excess of college. and everyone who thinks otherwise is a fool  :twisted:


Well slap me in my ass and call me a fool! I didn't know you were a fascist..... :wink:
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 10:33:39 AM
Quote from: jokerspath
Quote from: children with angels
It felt like it could have been made by a talented film student at that college, rather than someone who had seen that life then grown up and away from it and was judging it with distance from the outside (as Ellis was)


If I'm not mistaken, Mr. Ellis was only about 23 when Rules Of Attraction was published, which doesn't seem like too much of a distance, especially if you take in to fact how long it may have taken to get the book published...


I see your point, but he is obviously standing very much on the outside looking in, whereas I felt like the style and tone of the movie was much more closely involved. As you say so correctly, "I like 'em detatched".

You should definitely read Glamorama: you'll love it...
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: godardian on June 17, 2003, 11:08:07 AM
I've only read Less Than Zero... I've been told over and over again that I should read Rules of Attraction, as the book apparently has a moment of boy-boy romance with apropos background noise courtesy The Smiths, which should be right up my alley. However... I've not been a huge fan of Ellis's. I mean, that's really just why, too: He'll name-check the cool bands, just like Douglas Coupland (who named a whole novel after a Smiths song), but they seem to have had a hard time turning themselves from Gen-X pop-culture babies into real novelists.

I need to read more, but I thought Less than Zero got pretty overestimated. It's a good sensationalist-ennui teen novel, but not great literature.

I loved the film of American Psycho, though I'm still nervous about reading the book. I just liked Rules of Attraction, the movie.

One day, I'll read more Ellis... but so far, I prefer Rick Moody. And Jonathan Franzen's The Corrections has a lot more to say topically about contemporary American society, while still maintaining a high degree of timelessness.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jokerspath on June 17, 2003, 11:49:09 AM
Quote from: godardian
I loved the film of American Psycho, though I'm still nervous about reading the book.


Nervous about not liking it or nervous about it being too graphic?

By the way, has anyone read any Dennis Cooper, specifically Frisk?  That'd get my vote as most graphic material I've ever read...

aw
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 11:58:47 AM
Quote from: godardian
I thought Less than Zero got pretty overestimated. It's a good sensationalist-ennui teen novel, but not great literature.


Well, I haven't read it, but you have to remember that Ellis was only, like, nineteen when he wrote that. His later stuff, Glamorama and American Psycho in particular, are very mature novels in their own way.

The name-checking of the "cool bands" he does is certainly not without a large dose of irony. It's done with a tone that walks a very fine line between cynicism and sincerity. I mean, you read Glamorama and the entire book pretty much has a soundtrack, to the point where it just becomes obscene. There are lists that go on for pages of musicians and filmmakers and actors who vary between the cool, the pathetic and the genius: they're all just lumped in together in a melting pot of modern pop culture until you're just not sure what his opinion of any of them is. He's mocking himself at the same time as he's celebrating things he truly admires.

I've only read The Ice Storm by Moody - because of my extreme love for the movie - and didn't love it. I'd be willing to read more though - and I can see the similarity between him and Ellis certainly: the coldness, the detatchment.

Haven't read any Franzen, but your recommendation makes me think I should.
Anyone read any DeLillo (someone Ellis cites as his major influence)?
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pedro on June 17, 2003, 12:13:26 PM
Quote from: children with angels

Anyone read any DeLillo (someone Ellis cites as his major influence)?

Im reading White Noise right now...not far into it but it's pretty good so far.  I'll post my full review after I'm done.

I've read The Rules of Attraction and American Psycho and I have to say that I enjoy both of them tremendously.  I think American Psycho is the better book but Rules of Attraction was a more "fun" read.  My only problem with AP would be the 6 page each reviews of Genesis and Hey Lewis' careers.  Now, I understand the humor in all of it....I "Get" it.  It's just all of that is not terribly interesting.  And i guess that might really be the  point of it...to be completely riddiculous.  

Anyway, both are great and recommended.  I haven't seen the movie version of Rules of Attraction yet....I'm interested as to how they do the whole "Victor's European Vacation" bit.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 12:20:31 PM
Quote from: Pedro the Wombat
i guess that might really be the  point of it...to be completely ridiculous.


Yeah, it is! But don't you think it's also almost even a little sinister...?! That his mind is so taken up with these tiny insignificant details about the career of Phil Collins and Whitney Huston - that he's so empty and yet speaks about a song being "the most beautiful and moving lament to love and monogamy I have ever heard" (or something to that effect). I find it kinda disturbing - particularly when I'm the kind of person (as we all here are) who does memorize those kind of facts about the music/film we love, and could wax lyrical about them for hours...

I've got White Noise on my bookshelf right now - I've been meaning to read it for ages...
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jokerspath on June 17, 2003, 12:25:08 PM
Quote from: godardian
One day, I'll read more Ellis... but so far, I prefer Rick Moody.


I really enjoyed The Ice Storm, but I picked up the Garden State and did not like it at all.  He must've gained mountains of talent in between those two books.  He has some kind of anthology of his short stories that I was thinking of picking up...

aw
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 12:28:05 PM
Quote from: jokerspath
By the way, has anyone read any Dennis Cooper, specifically Frisk?  That'd get my vote as most graphic material I've ever read...


Seriously? More graphic than American Psycho? Wow! I can't imagine any more intricately detailed, sickening violence than the stuff you get in American Psycho... Does he mix the sex and the violence like Ellis does too? (I'm trying not sound like a perverted sick fuck here with my interest, but it's difficult...!)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pedro on June 17, 2003, 12:31:29 PM
Quote from: children with angels
Quote from: Pedro the Wombat
i guess that might really be the  point of it...to be completely ridiculous.


Yeah, it is! But don't you think it's also almost even a little sinister...?! That his mind is so taken up with these tiny insignificant details about the career of Phil Collins and Whitney Huston - that he's so empty and yet speaks about a song being "the most beautiful and moving lament to love and monogamy I have ever heard" (or something to that effect). I find it kinda disturbing - particularly when I'm the kind of person (as we all here are) who does memorize those kind of facts about the music/film we love, and could wax lyrical about them for hours...

I've got White Noise on my bookshelf right now - I've been meaning to read it for ages...

Oh you've nailed it exactly.  And I got what you did.  I mean I understood and I laughed at how riddiculous all of it was...it was just not um, easy to really read.  For the exact reasons that it's brilliant.  It's so useless and droning.  This provides dark humor and insight into his character, but it's just not the most interesting thing to read....

But not that I think of it...it is interesting to read...I've changed my opinion...

*sigh* I need to read that book again.

!!!LITERARY TECHNIQUE SPOILER!!!
I absolutely love how he switches into third person narration near the end.   Oh! and when he ends in mid sentence....really fitting for all his insanity.
I didn't like it that much in Rules of Attraction, though...but I guess it functioned as sort of saying "this is life...things have come before it and things will come after it....this book just offers part of many lives"....i dontknow....I know what I'm trying to say....Children with Angels...help maybe?
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jokerspath on June 17, 2003, 12:33:18 PM
Quote from: children with angels
That his mind is so taken up with these tiny insignificant details about the career of Phil Collins and Whitney Huston - that he's so empty and yet speaks about a song being "the most beautiful and moving lament to love and monogamy I have ever heard" (or something to that effect). I find it kinda disturbing - particularly when I'm the kind of person (as we all here are) who does memorize those kind of facts about the music/film we love, and could wax lyrical about them for hours...


This is a good point as well.  The guy wants to be so goddamned cool, you can just see him memorizing these essays on music, or full Zagat reviews.  I haven't read the book in a few years, but I specifically am recalling an early scene in the film where Patrick's fiancee brings him to a restaurant where he responds to a coworker/friend's rant [Brice, maybe?] with an equally empty and non-sensical tirade in the name of justice blalhbalhbalhb.  

The characters are empty, their identities can be swapped at will, they're nameless WASPs running the city, trying to have an identity, trying to be cool.  They want...to fit...in.

I love that book...

aw
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 12:42:22 PM
Quote from: Pedro the Wombat
!!!LITERARY TECHNIQUE SPOILER!!!


 :lol:

And I totally agree with you about the third person thing: fantasic way to show that, not only is the author distanced from the character, the character is distanced from himself: he's just watching himself, helpless. I thought they did that really well in the movie too: with the massive explosion when he shoots the cop car, and he just looks at his gun, like: "What the fuck...?"

(Oooh: and you've got to love the "By the time you finish reading this sentence a Boeing 747 will have taken off and landed somewhere in the world" just being slipped in there too...)

Yeah, in Rules I feel like the technique is slightly less valid (when you're not dealing with a psychotic mind) - it's obviously just an idea he'd had brewing for a while... But, having said that, all his characters are just variations on each other really: the shallowness, the disconnection, the fetishising of modern culture in place of human connection: Bateman just takes it to the extreme. Whe the sentences end mid-way it's just so jarring, like: this is all so pointless: I might as well just stop writing. This is all so fucking empty and sterile and

...You know?
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 12:53:29 PM
Quote from: jokerspath
 I haven't read the book in a few years, but I specifically am recalling an early scene in the film where Patrick's fiancee brings him to a restaurant where he responds to a coworker/friend's rant [Brice, maybe?] with an equally empty and non-sensical tirade in the name of justice blalhbalhbalhb.


Yeah! That's one of my favourite parts...

"Well, we have to end Apartheid, slow down the nuclear arms race and stop terrorism and world hunger. We need better and more affordable care for the elderly, control and find a cure for the Aids epidemic, clean up environmental damage. We have to ensure that America is a respected world power. We have to find a way to hold down the inflation rate and reduce the deficit. We have to provide jobs for the unemployed, whilst protecting existing American jobs from unfair foreign imports. We need to promote economic growth and business expansion and hold the line against federal income taxes and hold down interest rates. We need to promote a return to traditional family values, lest consummerism destroys us all."

Superb!
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pedro on June 17, 2003, 12:53:47 PM
Quote from: children with angels
But, having said that, all his characters are just variations on each other really: the shallowness, the disconnection, the fetishising of modern culture in place of human connection: Bateman just takes it to the extreme. Whe the sentences end mid-way it's just so jarring, like: this is all so pointless: I might as well just stop writing. This is all so fucking empty and sterile and

...You know?

 :lol:

Yes, I know.  
I like you. will you be my friend?
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 12:58:40 PM
:-D  Certainly!
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 01:16:23 PM
So, wait - have none of you guys (Pedro, Joker, Cecil) read Glamorama? I cannot, cannot recommend it strongly enough. If you like Ellis, I think this really is the pinnacle of his style and vision. It's epic, man. So cold, so violent, so funny, so detatched, and yet ultimately really beautiful. Plus it's got a massive movie metaphor running through the whole thing.

I've cut/pasted a few quotes to try to entice you into making it the next book you read...

I'm just staring at nothing or what I imagine is nothing until I'm finally moved to say, "As a general rule you shouldn't expect too much from people, darling," and then I kiss her on the cheek.
"I just had my makeup done, so you can't make me cry."

"I am so tired of looking at that empty expanse that's supposed to be your face-"

"A smart suit," she sighs. "Being buff. A cool haircut. Worrying about whether people think you're famous enough or cool enough or in good enough shape or . . . or whatever." She sighs, gives up, stares at the ceiling. "These are not signs of wisdom, Victor," she says. "This is the bad planet."

She waves me away. "Animals need as much love and respect and care as we give people."
I consider this. I think about all the things I've seen and done, and I consider this.
"I think they're better off without that, baby," I say. "In fact I think they're doing okay."

"My motto is: the better you look, the more you see."

Sinead O'Conner was singing "The Last Day of Our Aquaintance" and it was either 11:00 or 1:00 or maybe it was 3:15. A big murder trial was going on that week in which the defense convinced me that the victim - a seventeen-year-old-girl fatally beaten by her drunken father - was actually guilty of her own death. Mermaids had been spotted during a swim before dawn.
"Could you kill somebody?" I heard a voice ask.
A moment passed before another voice answered, "Yeah, I guess so."
"Oh, so what?" someone else answered.

(...Plus my signature) You guys must read it!
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pedro on June 17, 2003, 02:26:02 PM
Quote from: children with angels
You guys must read it!

Next on my list  :-D
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: godardian on June 17, 2003, 02:36:00 PM
Quote from: jokerspath
Quote from: godardian
I loved the film of American Psycho, though I'm still nervous about reading the book.


Nervous about not liking it or nervous about it being too graphic?

By the way, has anyone read any Dennis Cooper, specifically Frisk?  That'd get my vote as most graphic material I've ever read...

aw


I've read quite a bit of Cooper... Wrong and Period and the essays/interviews. Not Frisk, though I have seen the pretty bad movie.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jokerspath on June 17, 2003, 03:14:22 PM
Quote from: godardian
Quote from: jokerspath
Quote from: godardian
I loved the film of American Psycho, though I'm still nervous about reading the book.


Nervous about not liking it or nervous about it being too graphic?

By the way, has anyone read any Dennis Cooper, specifically Frisk?  That'd get my vote as most graphic material I've ever read...

aw


I've read quite a bit of Cooper... Wrong and Period and the essays/interviews. Not Frisk, though I have seen the pretty bad movie.


Really, is there a movie?  Never even thought too look into that...

Ya, Frisk is the only Cooper novel I've read so far, as well as a book of poems and a book where he provides text for this collection of puppet photos (sounds weird, I know).  

Frisk connected with me in an odd way: I happened to be abroad for a few months and someone there just finished it and she couldn't even wrap her mind around it, so I had to borrow it. Its a bit sick, but I have a few windmills in my town and that whole sequence (I remember the chapter was aptly titled Numb) made me homesick to see them.  

The friend who had originally recommended Cooper to my friend (who in turn recommended it to me, if you can follow) told us about how she would read his books on the subway and look around at people completely oblivious to the twisted and ultragraphic situations she was reading about.  

aw
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jokerspath on June 17, 2003, 03:22:26 PM
Quote from: children with angels
Quote from: jokerspath
By the way, has anyone read any Dennis Cooper, specifically Frisk?  That'd get my vote as most graphic material I've ever read...


Seriously? More graphic than American Psycho? Wow! I can't imagine any more intricately detailed, sickening violence than the stuff you get in American Psycho... Does he mix the sex and the violence like Ellis does too? (I'm trying not sound like a perverted sick fuck here with my interest, but it's difficult...!)


I guess the mix is a bit lopsided, as Cooper heavily integrates sex and rape into his violence, but it is just as graphic.  American Psycho is a longer novel where you get to see more of Bateman's life and actions, and everything is a bit more developed, but Frisk just has jarring chapters, spilling over w/ sleaziness and graphic sequences.  

As a reader, I'd say American Psycho is the better novel.  Frisk reads more like a collection of short stories linked by a narrator (such as Denis Johnson's Jesus Son).  Frisk also isn't as funny or intelligent (I can't recall any humor to the best of my knowledge); overall (and this is just relative) it is the lesser read, but it is along the same lines and you cannot deny its power.

Good times...

aw
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jokerspath on June 17, 2003, 03:26:51 PM
Quote from: children with angels
So, wait - have none of you guys (Pedro, Joker, Cecil) read Glamorama? I cannot, cannot recommend it strongly enough. If you like Ellis, I think this really is the pinnacle of his style and vision.


I was planning on reading the books from the beginning, not skipping over them even if I've read them, but I think I'll pick up Glamorama just as soon as I finish what I'm reading at the moment and read them out of order.  

aw

ps-I have no clue how to quote more than one post, cuz I'd do that and answer them seperately in one reply instead of three straight posts.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 17, 2003, 07:04:40 PM
Quote from: Pedro the Wombat
Next on my list


Quote from: jokerspath
I think I'll pick up Glamorama just as soon as I finish what I'm reading at the moment


Yay!  :yabbse-cool:  

Quote from: jokerspath
ps-I have no clue how to quote more than one post, cuz I'd do that and answer them seperately in one reply instead of three straight posts.


I just cut then go back and paste in the reply I was making - there may be a better way... (I only figured this out recently)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Ghostboy on June 17, 2003, 07:48:01 PM
I haven't read any Ellis, although I did pick up American Psycho and read random passages out loud to a friend one day while she was working at a bookstore and tripping on acid (simultaneously). I've been wanting to read Glamorama for a while; maybe I'll pick it up when I finish this current stack of books.

On the subject of Franzen, I really loved The Corrections, but I don't think it is a truly great book, as many reviews suggested. Franzen sometimes seems to be verging on satire (particularly during Chip's trip), which I think the book overall most definitely isn't. Also, I'm curious to see what other readers thought of the ending. I thought it was extremely cold and dystopic, but I remember reading one review mentioning that it all wrapped up too happily.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: godardian on June 17, 2003, 09:28:07 PM
Quote from: Ghostboy
I haven't read any Ellis, although I did pick up American Psycho and read random passages out loud to a friend one day while she was working at a bookstore and tripping on acid (simultaneously). I've been wanting to read Glamorama for a while; maybe I'll pick it up when I finish this current stack of books.

On the subject of Franzen, I really loved The Corrections, but I don't think it is a truly great book, as many reviews suggested. Franzen sometimes seems to be verging on satire (particularly during Chip's trip), which I think the book overall most definitely isn't. Also, I'm curious to see what other readers thought of the ending. I thought it was extremely cold and dystopic, but I remember reading one review mentioning that it all wrapped up too happily.


Well, I thought it pretty admirably balanced the social exploration (encompassing both satiric humor and an overall despair). That part doesn't keep it from being great to me...

The ending brought tears. Not that it was sentimental; I was just very moved by it. As far as the plot goes... well, Mr. Franzen is very on-the-edge-of-despair when it comes to our culture (I'm reading a book of his essays right now), and I found that to be reflected throughout the book. I suppose that could be seen as coldly dystopic, but I don't see it that way; the ending, particularly, seemed to offer the happiest possible ending for people. The over-correcters learned to stop living their lives as corrections, and the one who didn't ever really have her say resolved to make a new start.

I think he was aiming for truthful. Not "realistic," necessarily, but truthful. And I think he pulled it off.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Cecil on June 17, 2003, 10:11:00 PM
Quote from: children with angels
what did you think of Glamorama, Cecil?


argh. i have not read it yet. shame on me. ill try to pick it up soon

i half-agree with what you say about RoA though. but i cant help loving every second of it. ellis has said that this is his favorite film based on one of his books so far, and that he actually likes the movie alot.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Ghostboy on June 17, 2003, 10:56:01 PM
Quote from: godardian
The ending, particularly, seemed to offer the happiest possible ending for people.


I agree with that -- except for Alfred. His seemed to be the sort of tragic hero of the book, and he gets stuck in a nursing home -- a pretty sorry fate -- leaving Enid to start anew. That solution is what made the otherwise sunny ending seem very cold to me.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 18, 2003, 06:50:26 AM
Quote from: cecil b. demented
i half-agree with what you say about RoA though. but i cant help loving every second of it. ellis has said that this is his favorite film based on one of his books so far, and that he actually likes the movie alot.


Huh. That actually surprises me a lot. I guess he gets a kick out of how much everyone responded to it by saying "I hate this movie: everyone in it is just so disgusting!" I guess he digs the trashing of the innocent images of Dawson and that kid from the Wonder Years too. Or maybe I'm just missing something in it. I should watch it again. Like I said, I did enjoy it - but Ellis' writing makes me do more than enjoy, it's something else...
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: godardian on June 18, 2003, 10:00:11 AM
Quote from: Ghostboy
Quote from: godardian
The ending, particularly, seemed to offer the happiest possible ending for people.


I agree with that -- except for Alfred. His seemed to be the sort of tragic hero of the book, and he gets stuck in a nursing home -- a pretty sorry fate -- leaving Enid to start anew. That solution is what made the otherwise sunny ending seem very cold to me.


I actually didn't see Alfred as the hero, which may have been why it didn't seem nearly so cold to me... He wanted the best for his family, but he wanted it HIS way, and he was a very cold person himself, so... I can't say I felt he really had any more pain than many of the other characters, proportionally. He was the only character coming to the end of his life, which isn't a pretty thing for any of us... and it didn't seem to me that he was dumped in the nursing home by an uncaring family so much as there was no other place for him to go, and they did as much as they could before that. I don't think they (or the author) were taking revenge on this guy with the nursing home thing (though obviously the parents were the conscious or unconscious cause of the "corrections" the children so desperately, despondently, and sometimes humorously inflict on themselves to escape their pasts).


Sorry to turn your Ellis thread into a Franzen one, children! It just came up!
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 18, 2003, 10:13:48 AM
Quote from: godardian
Sorry to turn your Ellis thread into a Franzen one, children!


That's okay. I'll agree to forgive you if you agree to read Glamorama... :wink:
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: godardian on June 18, 2003, 10:16:07 AM
Quote from: children with angels
Quote from: godardian
Sorry to turn your Ellis thread into a Franzen one, children!


That's okay. I'll agree to forgive you if you agree to read Glamorama... :wink:


I'll try. Would you say that's the next one I should read, having only read Less than Zero??
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 18, 2003, 10:25:12 AM
Quote from: godardian
I'll try. Would you say that's the next one I should read, having only read Less than Zero??


Well, it would be quite a jump from his first to his last I suppose. But I don't think it would spoil your enjoyment of any others you might want to read later. Although his books do share overlapping characters, it's not done in a linear way that affects your view of the narrative of their lives or anything (that stuff is actaully relatively unimportant, in my opinon).

It's just it's his best, I think, and it'll give you a good idea of why I think he's a writer who's worth reading. If, after that, you wanted to read more, you'd have already had a pretty all-encompassing crash course in his concerns and style, and could appreciate them fully in his earlier books.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Ghostboy on June 18, 2003, 11:16:04 AM
One last regression to Franzen: I shouldn't have said tragic hero. He is the most tragic character, I thought, but he's not a hero. But anyway, I loved the book, and even if I didn't tear up at the end, I did at the point where Enid has to pin the Baby Jesus on the calendar herself. Beautiful stuff.

And now back to Mr. Ellis, who I didn't know was first published at the age of 23. That makes me jealous.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: godardian on June 18, 2003, 11:37:02 AM
Quote from: Ghostboy
One last regression to Franzen: I shouldn't have said tragic hero. He is the most tragic character, I thought, but he's not a hero. But anyway, I loved the book, and even if I didn't tear up at the end, I did at the point where Enid has to pin the Baby Jesus on the calendar herself. Beautiful stuff.

And now back to Mr. Ellis, who I didn't know was first published at the age of 23. That makes me jealous.


I'm always jealous of prodigies... I have to try hard not to think about the fact that PTA had already made 2 films by the time he was my age.  :(  And Ellis at 23... well, that's just wrong, even if Less Than Zero is easy to spot as the work of a twentysomething (and I don't mean that pejoratively).
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pubrick on June 18, 2003, 11:46:09 AM
why do i keep clicking on this thread, i hav no interest in it and i think every new post will have spoilers for the books i havn't read and i just can't STOP----CLICKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: children with angels on June 18, 2003, 02:26:39 PM
Quote from: Ghostboy
Mr. Ellis, who I didn't know was first published at the age of 23. That makes me jealous.


Well, prepare to be even more jealous: that was his second book. His first one was published when he was 21! He was still in college when they made it into a movie. I know: sickening really...

Quote from: P
why do i keep clicking on this thread, i hav no interest in it and i think every new post will have spoilers for the books i havn't read and i just can't STOP----CLICKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!


 :lol:  Odd...
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: RazorbladeKid on August 06, 2003, 01:20:06 PM
I'm sorry for jumping right into your thread here, but I've been looking up information on Ellis and I came across this site.  I only started reading Ellis last year, but I read all of his books as soon as I read the first one.  Glamorama was the first book I read by him, and by far my favorite.  I would recommend this book to anyone who hasn't read it yet, it is phenomenal.  I was wondering if anyone knew any way to get anything autographed by Mr. Ellis, or where to purchase these items.  I would love to get something like that for the man who initially introduced me to this great author.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jokerspath on August 06, 2003, 02:06:04 PM
I wouldn't know off hand about autographs and such, but its funny this thread resurfaced.  I started Glamorama yesterday and I am planning to watch Rules Of Attraction tonite.  Good times...

aw
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Mesh on August 06, 2003, 03:00:48 PM
Quote from: children with angels
Well, prepare to be even more jealous: that was his second book. His first one was published when he was 21! He was still in college when they made it into a movie. I know: sickening really...


I don't care how young Ellis was when he wrote it, Less Than Zero did less than nothing for me.  I couldn't understand why I was reading about such one-dimensional, pathetic, annoying poeple.  I suppose Ellis was going for just that: a portrait of how pathetic, one-dimensional, and annoying those times and people were....but others who write in that general way do it with so much more depth and resonance (DeLillo and Franzen are two excellent examples, btw).

On the contrary, I thought American Psycho (the film, did not read the novel) really had its moments.  I'd rewatch it.

BTW, Ghostboy and godardian are right: The Corrections has no "hero."  In fact, it'd be non-sensical for it to have one.  Like Magnolia, The Corrections is about how every family/individual/group is flawed and how individuals within those groups compensate for the flaws fostered upon them by those around them.

Also, I'd describe Alfred as tragi-comic.  His deterioration is both terrible in its certainty and funny in that his outlook on his own demise is so matter-of-fact.  He's such a fully drawn character...the most realistic of the book's people.

One last thing: putting a loved one in a nursing home is always a blessing and curse for those who opt to do so.  I know first-hand.  When a person deteriorates, those left behind feel obliged to go on with life; similarly, they often feel that's what the person they've left to the care of others would have wanted.  From Alfred's perspective, it may be a prison sentence...but it's a sentence that serves to release his family from what he was and has become.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: RazorbladeKid on August 07, 2003, 01:39:16 PM
Quote from: jokerspath
 I started Glamorama yesterday and I am planning to watch Rules Of Attraction tonite.  Good times...

aw


I actually just watched RoA this weekend, after reading it quite some time ago.  I really did enjoy the movie, especially Victor's European trip.  There was no way that the relationships in the book explored as deeply as in the book, but it was still enjoyable.  I still hold strong and fast to Glamorama as my favorite book however, it was riveted after reading it.  By the way, has anyone read The Informers?  If so, what did you think of it?
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Dirk on August 07, 2003, 02:37:25 PM
Quote from: RazorbladeKid
By the way, has anyone read The Informers?  If so, what did you think of it?


I'm reading it right now actually. Very good read, probably one of my faves from him with American Psycho. Highly recommended  :yabbse-thumbup:
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: RazorbladeKid on August 12, 2003, 04:26:59 PM
Wow, I'll have to admit, I'm quite surprised that The Informers would be anyone's favorite (or almost favorite) Ellis novel.  I believe it could be my least favorite out of all of his books.  Right now I'm re-reading Less Than Zero, and I was planning on going back to Glamorama next, but I guess maybe I'll give The Informers another try.  I already know Glamorama is my favorite, so I guess I can hold off on reading that one again.  As for right now I'm going to look into some of the authors that have been spoken of recently.  Any suggestions on where to start?
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jokerspath on September 04, 2003, 02:47:17 PM
This afternoon, on my lunch break, I finished Glamorama for the first time.  I enjoyed it, though not as thoroughly as American Psycho, or even Less Than Zero.  Still, there were some amazing sequences.  His language, and attention to detail, are astounding. It felt a bit weird to be reading a narrative in one of his books, one where something "happens", but, as anyone who has read the book can attest to, there is still a thick layer of ambiguity to work with (or through, as it were).

There is a terrific interview of his at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/8506/Ellis/clarkeint.html.  Awful lengthy, too...

Good times...

aw
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: NEON MERCURY on January 08, 2004, 09:05:14 PM
...MacG..thanks....nice name BTW...... :wink:

......i just wannnted to say that i am bout 1/2 through reading American Psycho.....and its one of the most wondeful page turners that i have read.or currenntly reading...(next to thin red line)....and i was wondering for my next read....which do you guys suggest......?

11..Rules off Attractioonn
2. Glamorama.
3. Innformers..
4..Less than Zero..
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Weak2ndAct on January 08, 2004, 09:12:16 PM
I've read every Ellis book 'cept 'Less Than Zero,' which I keep meaning to do.  NM, as for what you should read next, I would just say read them in order of publication since some of the characters crossover from book-to-book and you get to see where they end up/progress.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: NEON MERCURY on January 08, 2004, 09:16:01 PM
Quote from: Weak2ndAct
I've read every Ellis book 'cept 'Less Than Zero,' which I keep meaning to do.  NM, as for what you should read next, I would just say read them in order of publication since some of the characters crossover from book-to-book and you get to see where they end up/progress.


....thanks Weak......i'v eheard that in Rules of Attraction  ...pat bateman makes an appearennce so it would be better your way....but .whats the order??.....

my guess....

less than zero
american psycho
rules o A.
glam
inform...... :?:
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Weak2ndAct on January 08, 2004, 09:58:28 PM
Here's the order:
- Less Than Zero
- Rules of Attraction
- American Psycho
- The Informers
- Glamorama
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on November 06, 2011, 06:22:08 AM
I think this dude is the most interesting guy I follow on Twitter. I've never even read any of his work outside of a few pages from AP. He goes on these tweeting sprees about movies and stuff and I find them very enjoyable.

BretEastonEllis

"The Shining" is so emotionally complicated (the frustrated artist, the bad marriage, the crazy dad) that it's more fascinating than scary.

Stephen King's "The Shining" has as much to do with Stanley Kubrick's "The Shining" as the "Less Than Zero" movie had to do with the novel.

The novel "The Shining" has Wendy and Hallorann hanging out together (in the summer!) comforting Danny about the loss of Batshit Dad. Happy?

The original ending of Kubrick's "The Shining" is Danny traumatized in a hospital room still tormented by the ghosts of his Batshit Dad...

Stephen King has very powerful female characters but in Stanley Kubrick's universe they're either passive, whores, nonexistent, murderers...

Like Wendy in "The Shining" Nicole Kidman in "Eyes Wide Shut" is never part of her husband's "dream" movie that plays out in front of us...

Kubrick re-imagined the books he adapted. Example: Barry Lyndon becomes a cad because his girlfriend is a whore. This is NOT in Thackeray.

Can't sleep. Rarely change my mind about movies. The last time: Fincher's "Zodiac" which I disliked when I first saw it. Now: a masterpiece.

Zodiac: not even Hitchcock was this perverse or discursive. The crimes are over in the first third and then the futile search begins.

Zodiac: the only two people who find the truth are in an airport and they're not even in the movie and then it all slams shut. Devastating.

The trailers for "Dragon Tattoo" are better than the totality of most movies.

The Game is a trick movie. Its humanist ending destroyed the menace and fear that preceded it. "I Love My Brother" film that kinda sucked...

The Empire side of The Social Network is FOR the Winklevoss twins: they represent nature, being OUTSIDE (the extended boat race sequence).

The Social Network was a 50 million dollar movie. The Kings Speech was 12 million. The budgets needed to be switched. That's why KS won.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pubrick on November 06, 2011, 08:16:31 AM
Those are all shit insights and pretty much proof that twitter is not a medium for intellectual discourse.

None of those statements pack any punch. If he linked them to an essay or something they would have some vague value at least.

As they stand they are the least persuasive, most half assed comments I've ever read. Communication: you're doing it wrong.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on November 06, 2011, 12:08:36 PM
I like where he's going with these tweets. If you were on twitter you'd notice that ppl post the most banal crap. These catch my eye and are at least a little thought provoking, because they're about movies I love. It helps that he usually does this with movies that are on my mind, too. When I was fixing to watch Eyes Wide Shut, BAM! He tweets about EWS. I watch 'Let Me In', 'The Shining' BAM! He tweets about those. This weekend I was planning to watch The Social Network and he goes on a tear about that. Twitter is definitely not the place for this type of thing. I want more! I hear he writes books too...
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: ©brad on November 07, 2011, 10:18:33 AM
His insights are surprisingly trite as are most of his tweets,especially the one's about his live-in boyfriend who he shamelessly refers to as "the 25 year old." The more he tweets the less I like his books.

Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pozer on November 07, 2011, 12:07:28 PM
he's the type that would tweet the tired Rick Astley vid behind the words: The Master teaser.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on July 18, 2012, 01:37:55 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/se7kW.jpg)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: ©brad on July 18, 2012, 10:25:12 AM
Yeah he said the same thing about Glamorama (which Avery also wrote a script for) that went nowhere.

I like Ellis but he is such an arrogant prick on Twitter I almost want to de-follow him because he's ruining his books for me. Dude is gay with a 25-year old live-in boyfriend (who he coyly refers to as "the 25 year old") and he won't fully own up to it. He lives in this internalized homophobic glass closet all the while making the most catty, crude comments about other gays in Hollywood.



Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on July 18, 2012, 11:27:52 AM
^ so true, but no matter how brash he can be or how much I disagree with some of his opinions ( he went on a whole tear about Kubrick being gay and having a secret lover his whole life ) I can't unfollow him because I really do value his thoughts on stuff when he's not being annoying. All these 50 shades of Grey casting ideas have really been getting tiresome, though.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: ©brad on July 18, 2012, 01:34:54 PM
Hah totally, it's basically just a list of male actors he wants to bone.

I do agree he does make sense sometimes, but his grander thoughts on film history are usually absurd, especially the Kubrick gay bit.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: polkablues on July 18, 2012, 05:32:16 PM
Ellis is a talented writer, but he's definitely one of those guys who came up in the 80s and still mistakes cocaine for wisdom.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on July 18, 2012, 09:47:03 PM
I agree with most of the above but I'll bite at Jeremy Blackman's ©brad's comment: I don't think Ellis is homophobic so much as he despises gay stereotypes and what has come to be accepted as "gay culture", applied blanketly to most everyone who self-identifies. I'm not going to pretend I completely don't know what you're talking about, because I've definitely seen it here and there, but the majority of the time I think he's calling a spade a spade when a lot of other people are pandering to self-pity bullshit or are equating underdogs with angels. Ellis is big on self-hatred, for sure, but I don't think his being gay has very much to do with it.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pwaybloe on July 19, 2012, 08:36:45 AM
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-vQLhwjhCWWc/UAgMHM8LvfI/AAAAAAAAF38/Qrq0anFt0cg/s400/bee_pic.png)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pubrick on July 19, 2012, 09:06:05 AM
What does that mean
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pozer on July 19, 2012, 04:44:22 PM
His insights are surprisingly trite as are most of his tweets,especially the one's about his live-in boyfriend who he shamelessly refers to as "the 25 year old." The more he tweets the less I like his books.

or perhaps you meant the tweet in general.

or perhaps the dude holding the clapperboard up there is the 25-year old.

or perhaps i'm so gay too.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pubrick on July 22, 2012, 08:25:01 AM
OK that makes more sense in this thread now.

I still don't get why I should care what this idiot does with his penis.

It's weird that people have a sudden interest in him again, that canyons show can go to hell too. There's nothing he can do that gaspar noe hasn't already achieved with his odes to human scum.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on July 22, 2012, 10:02:47 AM
I agree with most of the above but I'll bite at Jeremy Blackman's comment: I don't think Ellis is homophobic so much as he despises gay stereotypes and what has come to be accepted as "gay culture", applied blanketly to most everyone who self-identifies.


I don't think JB has even posted in this thread. What comment are you talking about?


I still don't get why I should care what this idiot does with his penis.

You shouldn't. And if any of us do, the terrorists win.

Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on July 22, 2012, 12:49:30 PM
The comment is gone never existed, it doesn't matter it ain't no big thing.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on July 22, 2012, 02:59:00 PM
You might have been referencing this (http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=2156.msg315988#msg315988) post from ©brad. I haven't posted here until now.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on July 22, 2012, 03:14:07 PM
it ain't no big thing.

you mistook Cbrad for JB? HUGE mistake dude. You're gonna pay for this one..
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on July 22, 2012, 04:00:34 PM
We are considering administrative action. We'll let you know when we've come to a decision.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: polkablues on July 22, 2012, 04:37:53 PM
We apologize for the confusion of admins for one another.  Those responsible have been sacked.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on July 22, 2012, 05:52:12 PM
Ha sorry JB, my mistake.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Pwaybloe on July 23, 2012, 11:37:29 AM
Guys, sorry for posting the joke.  I thought at least those involved in the conversation would have got a laugh.  Definitely no insults and/or confusion intended.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on July 24, 2012, 07:21:25 PM
It really makes me question someone's character to repeat such an insensitive joke as that. I had been growing out a full beard for three years and had to shave it all off after I read that tweet due to my extreme homophobia.

alright, this thread has endured enough of my sarcasm.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on August 03, 2012, 06:20:19 AM
I always had the feeling Ellis wanted to sell a persona through every public appearance and twit and whatever he does. Like extending parts of his character's personalities (mostly from Lunar Park) to the real world. Either that or he's a douche, but who cares. He's still a talented fucker.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: KJ on August 03, 2012, 10:15:17 AM
He's still a talented fucker.

So gay.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on October 04, 2012, 09:40:46 AM
I just felt like doing this, it's fun to bond over hate for Ellis! ( his twitter persona at least )

People way cooler than Bret Easton Ellis he has gone after on twitter:

Stanley Kubrick ( Deceased )
David Foster Wallace ( Deceased )
Lars Von Trier ( "The one great director who's never made a great film" MELANCHOLIA STUPID! )
Michael Haneke ( ditto the exact same thing he said about Trier FUNNY GAMES/THE PIANO TEACHER STUPID! )
Paul Thomas Anderson


Those are just off the top of my head, and they are all filmmakers, a craft that Ellis is trying desperately to succeed in. Well, sort of. With the exception being Wallace, which is just messed up for so many reasons.

Please add your lists of people Ellis has flamed who are way cooler than him.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: ©brad on October 04, 2012, 10:33:21 AM
He's in full-on troll mode now. The other day he made a tweet admitting that he "kind of agreed" with Paris Hilton's homophobic "every gay dude is a whore and has aids" comments. He's starving for relevance and attention that his output of crap novels and movie adaptations aren't giving him.

What really angered me were his tweets about David Foster Wallace, who years ago rightfully criticized BEE's work of being vapid and without substance. It's just petty and tactless.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on February 27, 2013, 11:56:31 PM
On a new novel (https://medium.com/on-a-new-novel/968169a9e204)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on March 31, 2013, 01:58:38 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/5UJUrVo.jpg)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on May 14, 2013, 10:14:17 PM
Reddit AMA (http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1ebx4z/im_bret_easton_ellis_author_and_screenwriter_ama/)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on June 02, 2013, 09:39:34 PM
A conversation between Bret Easton Ellis and Matthew Specktor (http://www.salon.com/2013/06/02/bret_easton_ellis_interviews_matthew_specktor_people_in_l_a_arent_afraid_to_read/singleton/)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on July 11, 2013, 03:57:10 PM
Guilty Pleasures: Bret Easton Ellis @ Film Comment (http://www.filmcomment.com/article/guilty-pleasures-brett-easton-ellis)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on August 04, 2013, 06:27:37 PM
Good interview, the AV Club (http://www.avclub.com/articles/why-bret-easton-ellis-doesnt-care-how-the-canyons,100998/)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on February 25, 2014, 06:03:52 PM
Well, I have to say I only listened to one of these BEE podcasts (the one with Matt Berninger) and I have to say I was very very pleasantly surprised with the quality of discussion. No douchebaging at all by Ellis, it was actually a great interview, with a few personal, interesting questions and a very personal introduction to the guest (or, in that case, the band). I actually downloaded the rest to see if they're all worth it. Interestingly enough, they discussed the Jeremy Blake and Theresa Duncan suicides, because Matt knew them as well and it seems they left a big mark on Ellis.

It's my new favorite. Oddly enough, I wasn't familiar with Brett's voice outside of twitter ( hadn't read American Psycho until now ) and got a much different impression of him through how he chose to use his 140 characters than how he comes off as just a guy, speaking on things. He has typed some stuff that truly made my blood boil through that account, but somehow listening to him explain himself on the podcast has made all that vanish. It's an odd kind of backwards relationship to have with a public figure, where you get to know a novelist through his  slew of opinions on the internet, but I kinda like it. I'm enjoying American Psycho more than any novel I have since I can remember. I recommend the Chuck Klosterman one http://podcastone.com/Bret-Easton-Ellis-Podcast (http://podcastone.com/Bret-Easton-Ellis-Podcast)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on February 26, 2014, 10:04:00 AM
I now listened to the one with van Sant and loved it as well. Bret may talk a little too much on that one, but this is how interviews should work. He asks interesting, personal and sometimes tough questions without any sense of condescending or exploring but always trying to understand his subjects. I've also started listening to him with Kevin Smith and now it's Smith who talks a lot but Ellis knows exactly where to take him on that discussion.

I'm a big fan of his novels and since I don't use Twitter, I never got caught on his rants that much. Whatever I read from Twitter, it was usually an angry transcription from someone who got really angry at his rants which I, I must confess, found hilarious, mostly because I never took either Twitter or Ellis's public persona very seriously. Now I think he's found a great medium to communicate and I'm all on board. I also think everyone should listen to the introduction of the first part of the Kevin Smith conversation and, if you want, Smith's answer to it. Very good, interesting stuff from people who the general public opinion seems to look down to as of late.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on April 21, 2014, 10:40:08 PM
This week's episode of The Bret Easton Ellis Podcast (http://podcastone.com/program?action=viewProgram&programID=592) with Jim Rash opens with a fairly perceptive 15-minute discussion of television vs. film aesthetics and the reasons for the culture's receptiveness to the television form at the moment (Ellis posits that the continual "explanation" and dispensing of "information" inherent to the television series format and its storytelling methods is somehow related to our "information" culture right now). I recommend it, Pubrick included. Start at 1:50 to skip the requisite sponsor plug.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: ©brad on April 22, 2014, 05:09:16 PM
The podcast has its moments but BEE is so insufferable. Each episode begins with him going on a long (10-20 min) rant while the guest is forced to sit there silently. He's not good at letting his guests talk without interrupting and never shuts the fuck up about himself, as if any of his work in the last 10 years is relevant (it isn't). He is smart and makes some solid arguments here and there but his uppity douchiness can be hard to stomach.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: cinemanarchist on April 23, 2014, 01:15:34 PM
This week's episode of The Bret Easton Ellis Podcast (http://podcastone.com/program?action=viewProgram&programID=592) with Jim Rash opens with a fairly perceptive 15-minute discussion of television vs. film aesthetics and the reasons for the culture's receptiveness to the television form at the moment (Ellis posits that the continual "explanation" and dispensing of "information" inherent to the television series format and its storytelling methods is somehow related to our "information" culture right now). I recommend it, Pubrick included. Start at 1:50 to skip the requisite sponsor plug.

Perceptive yes, but he's been forcing guests to speak on this topic for weeks now and to little effect. He's definitely brought it up during the BJ Novak and Fred Armisen/Carrie Brownstein episodes, and those are just the only two I remember specifically. I appreciate the podcast being whatever BEE wants to talk about, which very rarely has anything to do with his guests, but I wish his desired topics were a little more varied. That said I listen weekly, perhaps only to hear him beat the same drum about millennials and there inability to go to a theater to see a movie or maybe just to hear him sigh as he pimps cheap razors and used cars. 
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on September 12, 2014, 08:08:25 PM
Legendary comedy duo of Bret Easton Ellis and James Van Der Beek reunite
via The AV Club

Continuing a tradition of laughter that has brought untold merriment to the young and young at heart, the legendary comic duo of Bret Easton Ellis and James Van Der Beek has reunited to produce a “darkly comedic” hour-long series for U.K. television. Called Post Empire, the series will star Van Der Beek as a Bernie Madoff-type American investor struggling to maintain his ill-gotten empire as his misdeeds become public. Roger Avary, the man who made America smile again with Killing Zoe, has also joined the project in an undefined role. The last time the trio worked together was in 2002 on The Rules Of Attraction, where Van Der Beek starred as Sean Bateman, the adorably monstrous younger brother of Patrick Bateman—easily Ellis’ most beloved comedic creation.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on September 18, 2014, 03:21:32 PM
Last week BEE spoke with Tom Sizemore (http://podcastone.com/Bret-Easton-Ellis-Podcast) (9/15/14) about the place character actors hold in the current film industry. I wasn’t going to post this but then this other thing came out on The Playlist today and it seems more relevant than before.

This subject has been on my mind for a while, a discussion I’ve had with friends — that the changed film landscape in the US also has to do with a changed acting pool — that with film projects say pre-2000 or mid 90s, all looks and types of people, not traditionally handsome or necessarily beautiful people, had an opportunity to act as leads or in large supporting roles (for a living), and maybe a lot of the leading actors of the previous generation weren’t even considered (as) good looking before they became famous - it was their stardom that made them so. Would Keitel or DeNiro get all their roles today? Dustin Hoffman, or Cagney? Or Nicholson, even, given his hairline? Where would Lily Tomlin be? Or Shelley Duvall for that matter?

As Tobey Maguire and Ed Zwick mention in the following interview excerpt, the majority of opportunities for young American actors are primarily in network television, where attractiveness often trumps acting chops. I’m betting a lot of interesting faces who might have considered an acting career twenty years ago don’t even attempt to make a go of it now, recognizing that that just isn’t what the industry is anymore.

Quote from: Tobey Maguire and Ed Zwick
"Movies now have more to do with an aesthetic, than they do with a performance," Maguire said. "Growing up, it was always my ambition to work with great actors and great directors, and it was Leo[nardo DiCaprio]'s ambition, too, so that's what we were focused on and aiming for. Parts like those start to shape you as an actor, and they shape people's perception of you, too. Leo going into 'This Boy's Life' at 15 years old and working with Robert De Niro, that shapes the rest of his career — and the studios aren’t [making] many movies like that anymore.”

Ed Zwick, who directed "Pawn Sacrifice" and did the interview with Maguire, sees the rush of franchise projects as particularly damaging as well. “There's a poaching of young people where they're put into CW television shows, and they learn bad habits. They're given too much responsibility too quickly, and without the opportunity to work with these great directors that Tobey and Leo had. Young actors used to be cast as the third lead opposite stars like Spencer Tracy or Henry Fonda, and they had apprenticeships of a kind, learning their craft. That doesn't happen now.”

“If Leo and I were young now, I'd still aspire to work with great people, but those jobs don't exist anymore. I would feel like my only opportunities were in YA franchises and superhero movies. You can hold out for something better only for so long until you're like, Okay, I need a job!”

It depresses me. This is half the reason why the American film market has turned to shit.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jenkins on September 18, 2014, 03:57:33 PM
i think the market dictates price and always has
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on September 18, 2014, 04:00:08 PM
Blah you know what I'm saying
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: jenkins on September 18, 2014, 04:36:49 PM
yeah. it's a big topic that requires outside perspective and i'm being short. my bad
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on September 18, 2014, 06:37:23 PM
Listen to the interview, probably the most decent I've ever heard Tom Sizemore be
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on September 22, 2014, 02:59:03 PM
The opening monologue on today's episode (http://podcastone.com/downloadsecurity?url=aHR0cDovL3NlcnZlLmNhc3RmaXJlLmNvbS9hdWRpby8yMzMyMDk4LzIzMzIwOThfMjAxNC0wOS0yMi0xMTM1MzguNjRrLm1wMz9hZF9wYXJhbXM9em9uZXMlM0RQcmVyb2xsJTJDUHJlcm9sbDIlMkNNaWRyb2xsJTJDUG9zdHJvbGwlMkNQb3N0cm9sbDIlN0NzdGF0aW9uX2lkJTNEMTc4MCoqfDE0MTE0MTU5NTU4MzMqKnw=.mp3) with Gerard Way is both horrifying and invigorating in the way that Ellis' early books were - words creating a menace and tone so singularly his voice/style. If you were ever a fan of his writing give it a listen.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on May 04, 2015, 01:39:38 PM
The podcast is back (http://www.podcastone.com/Bret), first interviewee: Alex Ross Perry

Edit - now behind a paywall ($7.50/mo)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: OpO1832 on May 13, 2015, 10:46:39 PM
Sizemore is great along with the rest of the cast in The Red Road, the writing is awful and the directing is limp but the interplay between the actors is gold
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on June 04, 2015, 03:20:55 PM
It's free again (http://www.podcastone.com/Bret-Easton-Ellis-Podcast)

He also made a "short film (http://vimeo.com/127153991)"
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Drenk on June 04, 2015, 03:39:28 PM
I know that Orpheus looked back because he's an anxious idiot. But why did that man looked back? Because he was scared he wasn't cool enough? Nice narration, though.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on June 04, 2015, 04:34:17 PM
It's free again (http://www.podcastone.com/Bret-Easton-Ellis-Podcast)

He also made a "short film (http://vimeo.com/127153991)"

Thanks, I love this podcast. The commercial was super meh, but some of the driving shots had a cool film look to them.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on December 09, 2015, 08:28:15 AM
Living in the Cult of Likability - The NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/08/opinion/bret-easton-ellis-on-living-in-the-cult-of-likability.html)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: Reelist on December 09, 2015, 09:36:18 AM
holy shit, Quentin Tarantino did the BEE podcast!? Very exciting…

http://podcastone.com/Bret-Easton-Ellis-Podcast (http://podcastone.com/Bret-Easton-Ellis-Podcast)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: ©brad on December 09, 2015, 01:43:53 PM
It was pretty good. Bret is his usually insufferably smug self, and I generally disagree with about 70% of his opinions on pretty much everything, but Tarantino is fun and interesting when he's allowed to talk. Bret continues this amateur interviewer habit of talking too much and stacking questions, making this less of an interview and more of a Bret monologue where the guest occasionally chimes in.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: cronopio2 on December 09, 2015, 02:19:08 PM
no matter how petulant and repetitive bret is in each show, i admire his balls for renouncing to his novelist ethos and opting for this new way of his of engaging with pop culture. it's fun.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on March 03, 2016, 04:07:08 PM
Directing again

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBtNqPZlRIE
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on April 26, 2016, 03:34:14 PM
Bret Easton Ellis to Make Directorial Debut With Cult Thriller for Fullscreen
via The Hollywood Reporter

'The Deleted' is a thriller about the disappearance of three people in Los Angeles.

Bret Easton Ellis is making his directorial debut with a new series for Fullscreen's forthcoming standalone video service.

The American Psycho author is attached to The Deleted, described as a thriller about the disappearance of three people in Los Angeles. Although they seem to be unconnected to each other, the deaths trigger the collective paranoia of a group of twenty-somethings who recently escaped from a cult.

Ellis, the bestselling author of The Rules of Attraction and Less Than Zero, wrote and produced 2013's Lindsay Lohan starrer The Canyons and has directed two short films, but The Deleted will be his first time directing a serialized project.

Additional details about the project have yet to be announced. Fullscreen is targeting an early 2017 premiere for The Deleted on its subscription video service, which launches Tuesday, April 26. The $4.99-a-month service is going after teen audiences with original scripted programming from YouTube stars like Grace Helbig and licensed TV shows and movies including Dawson's Creek and Center Stage.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on May 23, 2016, 05:46:31 PM
The Bret Easton Ellis Podcast returns with John Carpenter (http://podcastone.com/Bret-Easton-Ellis-Podcast)
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on June 13, 2016, 07:30:55 PM
On the most recent episode of the BEE podcast he talks about American Psycho: The Musical with Duncan Shiek. Ellis said this:

Quote from: Bret Easton Ellis
“Bateman’s entire awareness that the society he is a part of doesn’t care about his crimes forcing him to imagine that maybe he didn’t commit them is a very tricky thing to dramatize on the stage…”

I haven’t read American Psycho since I was 15. I don’t remember making that explicit connection between the ambiguity of the serial killer aspect of the narrative and the wall street layer, beyond it being an extreme inflation of the depravity of the finance world. I like the way he just described it, a crime unacknowledged as not being a crime at all - what an ingenious narrative device. Dude doesn't get enough credit.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: wilder on September 12, 2016, 08:01:03 PM
The latest episode of the BEE Podcast with Moby is one of the most interesting yet. Even Ellis’ film criticism, which I don’t necessarily agree with, is getting stronger - the connections he makes between the films he talks about and the culture at large more clear and lucid than they've maybe been in the past.

I liked this exchange from the final few minutes:


Ellis: We both left New York after having pretty long runs there…why did you leave ultimately and why did you relocate here [Los Angeles]?

Moby: I was born in Harlem in 1965 and I thought I would live in New York forever. You know, when I was growing up in the 70s and 80s everything that interested me had happened there or was happening there - whether it was The Velvet Underground or Basquiat or, I mean, my favorite books were written by New Yorkers… And then, living there in the 90s it was so — it was cheap, and it was dirty, and it was filled with artists and writers and musicians, and it felt so central: you could get to Europe easily, you get get to LA easily, you could get to South America and Asia - it just felt like this epicenter of the world. And then at some point, I guess about ten years ago, well I got sober, and I very quickly realized: New York is paradise if you’re a drunk—

Ellis: …completely…

Moby: …and kind of a difficult place to be if you’re sober.

Ellis: Completely agree.

Moby: So I suddenly realized that my priorities shifted, and I just became much less interested in the— I mean New York is a wonderful place I don’t want to demean it or denigrate it or slander it, but…it is deeply provincial, it looks in at itself. It’s essentially like a walled medieval city except the wall is water. So…New York loves New York. And New York loves the things that New Yorkers make. And they make amazing things, but as time has passed I think I just became more interested in the rest of the world. And LA, apart from the fact that it’s warm in the winter, is filled with such baffling odd people. We have David Lynch, and we have Shepard Fairey, and we have Kenneth Anger. There’s such an incomprehensible strangeness to Los Angeles. And even the geographical elements: the fact that we have 2 million acres of mountainous state parks in LA County, and we have desert, and we have bizarre beaches, and we have Latino culture and Russian culture, and so much oddness.

And I think, the main thing that keeps me here — it’s like two things. One: comfort, because you can be very comfortable here. For what you spent on a studio apartment in New York you can have a four-bedroom house with a pool and trees outside, so that’s nice, but there is a sort of byzantine strangeness to Los Angeles that never bores me. Even if LA is boring, at its core I’m not bored because I know that something odd, wrong, complicated, and baffling is going on somewhere. And to be a little esoteric about it, I like the fact that LA is one of the only cities on the planet that is surrounded by non-human environments. You know, like, when you’re in Europe, if you’re in Brussels, or you’re in New York, or you’re in Milan or you’re wherever, all your neighbors are human. You throw a rock and you hit another city. So you start having this very anthropocentric view of the universe. LA: you drive a few miles in one direction and you are in a desert that does not support human life that is millions of acres large. And there’s something existentially relevant and fascinating about that.
Title: Re: Bret Easton Ellis
Post by: WorldForgot on August 24, 2017, 04:05:56 AM
Does anyone have their hands on Roger Avery's Glamorama material?
Let me know!

(I'm awful at keeping up with podcasts, but every year I end up rereading Glamorama, which leads into The Rules of Attraction, and that loops me toward Lunar Park, and before I know it... time to read Glamorama again.)