Xixax Film Forum

I didn't like this film very much at all.  I felt it was about as deep as the Carrot Top commentary that accompanies the DVD.  That isn't to say it wasn't well made.  I think it was expertly edited and filmed and it had some nice musical choices and some good performances (nothing spectacular).  To me, I think Roger Avery cared more about his shot set-ups than he did about any of his characters.  I don't know, maybe I missed the point or maybe the point was to be shallow.

I'd like to hear what people think about it.  I know there's people who like it and I'd like to hear your reasons (maybe it'll give a little insight into it that I might have missed).

I don't think you missed anything. The Rules of Attraction was a muddled mess. Poorly written, uninvolving characters, laughable editing techniques, a 'cool' super-fast montage of a trip in Europe that serves no purpose whatsoever. blah.

Quote from: life_boyTo me, I think Roger Avery cared more about his shot set-ups than he did about any of his characters.  

that may be true. i think this is the kind of film expected from a guy fresh out of film school (since its so "stylized"). but i think thats what happens when you dont make  a movie for like 8 years.

Quote from: life_boy
maybe the point was to be shallow.

yes thats what the point was. and to get through with its "point" the film alienated many many moviegoers. maybe this was the result of bad writing (afterall, kubrick did such wonders with clockwork, even if the character is a monster, you still fall victim to his charm). or maybe because it tries to be "realistic" in its showing of college kids: maybe if it was set in the future, in a "now depraved world" it wouldve been easier to swallow.

Its not what I would call a good movie but I really liked it. I fell victim to the MTV style and just let myself have fun. I thought it was pretty funny.

i didn't care too much for this movie even though i wanted, so badly for, it to be good.  this movie is another example of style over substance which is always a bad thing.  good films = good writing.  i will probably rent this movie again and give it another chance.  some of the MTV style editing was pretty cool like the "my trip to europe" montage.  i really liked that.  and besides, shannyn sossamon is really fuckin' hot!!

Yeah, this was the worst movie that I saw in 2002 frankly. I can't really say much about it that hasn't already been said. It tries to hard to be hip and edgy, it's just sickening to watch. It's almost laughable how hard it tries to be controversial when all the rewinding effects start in and all the trick shots invade the screen.

It's like a poor, shallow, prejudice, misogynist, arrogant man's A Clockwork Orange. That's what I think about it, call me fucking crazy. It's A Clockwork Orange without the heart and charm and poignancy and humor and....I could go on but I don't think I have to.

I don't think this movie would have gotten all of the Clockwork Orange comparisons if it hadn't been for the trailer. The trailer was an extension of what ebeaman said. They pretty much did the Colockwork trailer but slowed it down so all the words could be clearly read by any moron. And at first I didn't mind the backwards thing (like during the credits) but then it just kept going and going. The split screen coming into a single screen thing was a cool idea, but kind of pointless. I also enjoyed the trip to Europe sequence at first, but then it seemed like it was never going to end. I agree that it was style and little substance.

oh well. i guess im the only moron that liked it  8)

but didnt anyone find it funny? even just a little bit?

It seemed like it would be really funny to read. Like when Sean says "I only slept with her cause I'm in love with you" the delivery just ruined it for me. Actually seeing the the nasty stuff acted out made it seem like it would be funnier in the book.

The Carrot top commentary is almost funny if you stay up late enough.  It might help if you drink too.

I was really disappointed by it, but there are some parts I really like. Mainly the suicide sequence, which is beautifully done. The backwards stuff got annoying after the opening sequence, but it was really cool how the music worked in both directions. And there is some stuff in it that makes me laugh. But there are also so many pointless, over the top detours that any impact the story might have had gets muddled. And the scene with Faye Dunaway and Swoozie Kurtz and 'Dick' was really damn annoying.

I liked ROA, and that's due mostly to my love for the book.  The author writes in surreal overtones and creates ambiguous situations that makes filming hard to do.  Although I think Oliver Stone has the best shot at making one of the novels mostly from his surreal style in his movies.

On the other hand, I still think it would be extremely difficult to convey the same situation that BEE wrote on paper to be shown on film.

Beaman that's a cool avatar. Where is that picture from? Would love to hear what those two had to say to eachother...

Quote from: cbrad4dBeaman that's a cool avatar. Where is that picture from? Would love to hear what those two had to say to eachother...

Oh, thank you. I think it's pretty cool to see them together too. I added the names on photoshop, I got the picture from a really cool Wes Anderson site that any fan should definitely check out...

//www.wesanderson.org

Here's the little article that went with it....

When I first started hearing about Spike Jonze, it was through these pictures in magazines that showed him jumping off of hotel roofs into swimming pools. Apparently he did a nationwide tour. Then I saw some of his films and I thought, maybe the same personality trait that makes you want to jump off of buildings somehow relates to the movies he's done," said filmmaker and DGA member Wes Anderson (Rushmore). Anderson moderated a Q&A with DGA director member Spike Jonze (Being John Malkovich) after a screening of his newest film, Adaptation, at the DGA in Los Angeles.

Anderson asked Jonze about his very unique visual style, which was honed making dozens of skateboard videos in his late teens and music videos in his 20s, particularly his work with the Beastie Boys.

"With the two movies I've done, it's been about what's appropriate visually for the story and the ideas behind the story, whereas with music video, the idea is the visuals. We did a music video, for example, with an L.A. hip-hop group, and had them learn the song backward. They learned the lyrics phonetically backwards, then we filmed them walking backward and then we reversed the film, and had all these images sort of popping up off the ground."

Anderson also pointed out Jonze's signature of mixing comedy, irony and tragedy in his films. Jonze gave part of the credit to his two-time screenwriter, Charlie Kaufman. "Charlie's writing is so amazing and so complex that it's easy for me as a filmmaker to find all those different elements: the comedy, the tragedy, the irony. For example, the Chris Cooper character in Adaptation is sort of this goofy, comic character up until a tragic event, and then he becomes much deeper and much more real. So I can't really take credit for those elements being my signature, as much as a signature of my collaborations with Charlie."

Jonze also emphasized the importance of casting well. "It's tremendously helpful to have people like Chris Cooper, Meryl Streep and Nic Cage in your film. When we met Chris, we met this very thoughtful, kind, deep person whereas his character is this sort of swaggering, boisterous guy. We cast Chris because of his depth as a person, and that depth helped bring this wild man to life. And Meryl and Nic share those same qualities as well, and are nothing like their characters, but if you have intelligent actors who have lived life and gained a lot of wisdom, they're going to bring that to work with them every day, and one of the biggest parts of my job is to find those people."

Anderson concluded the questions by asking Jonze how his experience acting in David O. Russell's Three Kings in 1999 helped shape him as a filmmaker. "We shot that after John Malkovich and before Adaptation, and it really helped me as a director. If nothing else, it made me sympathetic to what an idiot an actor can feel like and being sensitive to that. I think it's very easy for a director who's never acted to take that for granted, because all you see is the actor going up there, saying his or her lines, talking with you about the part, or not and unless you've been on the other side, it's a lot more difficult to talk about those things. Almost every set I've been on, I've been able to learn something, but on that movie, I really had a front row seat to see what a director goes through."

That's so cool. Sounds like they might be friends or something.

Macguffin better watch out. I think I just may be getting the hang of this article thing.  8)

Yes, wesanderson.org is an excellent site. Their webmaster allowed us to put a link to Xixax from his site! I haven't checked lately to see if it was up yet or not. Nice guy though.

Quote from: ebeaman69We did a music video, for example, with an L.A. hip-hop group, and had them learn the song backward. They learned the lyrics phonetically backwards, then we filmed them walking backward and then we reversed the film, and had all these images sort of popping up off the ground."

Is he talking about the Pharcyde video?

Quote from: Duck Sauce

Quote from: ebeaman69We did a music video, for example, with an L.A. hip-hop group, and had them learn the song backward. They learned the lyrics phonetically backwards, then we filmed them walking backward and then we reversed the film, and had all these images sort of popping up off the ground."

Is he talking about the Pharcyde video?

Yeah, "Drop" I think it's called. That's one of my favorite music videos. I didn't know that's the way they filmed it, that's fucking amazing. Spike always has made the best music videos.

Quote from: XixaxYes, wesanderson.org is an excellent site. Their webmaster allowed us to put a link to Xixax from his site! I haven't checked lately to see if it was up yet or not. Nice guy though.

Yeah, it's a really great site. I can't believe how much information they already have on his next film. Are you involved with any other cool sites man? I've been meaning to ask you that. I was looking for a links section or something.

Quote from: ebeaman69

Quote from: XixaxYes, wesanderson.org is an excellent site. Their webmaster allowed us to put a link to Xixax from his site! I haven't checked lately to see if it was up yet or not. Nice guy though.

Yeah, it's a really great site. I can't believe how much information they already have on his next film. Are you involved with any other cool sites man? I've been meaning to ask you that. I was looking for a links section or something.

Only other sites I have had the privilege of working with are ptanderson.com and theuncool.com, both run by Greg Mariotti.

I'd like to do more for the art of film, though... That's kinda why I started this place. To help out indie filmmakers. I wish I could do more.

Quote from: Xixax

Quote from: ebeaman69

Quote from: XixaxYes, wesanderson.org is an excellent site. Their webmaster allowed us to put a link to Xixax from his site! I haven't checked lately to see if it was up yet or not. Nice guy though.

Yeah, it's a really great site. I can't believe how much information they already have on his next film. Are you involved with any other cool sites man? I've been meaning to ask you that. I was looking for a links section or something.

Only other sites I have had the privilege of working with are ptanderson.com and theuncool.com, both run by Greg Mariotti.

I'd like to do more for the art of film, though... That's kinda why I started this place. To help out indie filmmakers. I wish I could do more.

I had no idea Greg Mariotti ran theuncool, I love that site. I knew he ran ptanderson, which I also think is great....that's wild though. He's really great at what he does.

And hey man, for what it's worth...if you can make more sites half as great as this one, I would probably go to them all the time. This is already me favorite site of all time, seriously. I'm not trying to suck up.

i guess i'm a minority around here, but i absolutely loved the movie. i just got it on dvd too. saw it five times at the cinema [am i a fan boy?].

and believe me, i know what you guys mean by "mtv editing" and whatnot, but i really did not find this film to have that type of crap going on. sure, maybe the camerawork/editing were trying to make it look cool, but at least every single spilt screen and reverse shot served a purpose. they all helped structure a scene and/or setting. there was only one single instant where that isn't true - where lauren throws that v.d. book to the floor in reverse. big deal. everything else just worked. they were not useless by any means. and i always hear alot of people saying how the camera tricks got tiresome...ok...there was reverse motion for the introduction into the film....and there was a split screen a little later when sean meets lauren in the hallway...correct me if i'm wrong, but isnt that the only times in the entire movie [except the very very end, i think] where that took place? this fancy camera work that was "so psuedo-controversial" took up like...5% of the film?

however, as far as storylines go...well, the characters were shallow, so there's not much character study to be done, so...whatever. victor's european holiday...well, that didn't really add much to the real story, but it was in the book, so, blah. at least it had some cool glamorama references.

anyways. i know what mtv-editing stuff is like and i hate it as much as the rest of you guys, but i just don't consider this movie to have what i call "mtv". it's almost the antithesis of mtv. come on...at least it didn't have some flavour of the month/buzz clip soundtrack.

I finally saw this last night and all I can say is that Avery tried to do too much with too little. The backwards theme was overused the second time it ran and was annoying from then on. All the characters were shallow and you really couldn't care less if they all offed themselves. In fact, I kind of felt like handing out phone coard to all of them. And the story was bad. It just was. The only thing I kind of liked was Van Der Beek's acting. The editing came off as a bastardization of Pulp Fiction, but without point.

All in all, very disappointed with it.

Quote from: RaikusThe editing came off as a bastardization of Pulp Fiction, but without point.

yeah. avary ripping off his own previous film is sooo bastardizing.

Quote from: RaikusThe editing came off as a bastardization of Pulp Fiction, but without point.

also, i'd like you to explain how pulp fiction's editing "had a point" and the rules of attraction didn't.

Sorry to upset the fanboy.

Quoteyeah. avary ripping off his own previous film is sooo bastardizing.

Because co-writing and directing is the same thing, right? And let me define bastardization: "To lower in quality or character; debase." So yes, Avary bastardized Tarantino's style in Pulp Fiction in that it's lowering the quality of the same style used by Tarantino.

Quotealso, i'd like you to explain how pulp fiction's editing "had a point" and the rules of attraction didn't.

Well, I'll forgo the explanation of Pulp Fiction's point as I'm sure you already know that and were only using it as contrast. But Rules of Attraction had segways that were unneccessary (like the whole Paul/Dick thing). And the beginning, y'know, the bastardization of Pulp Fiction, wasn't even the right part of that movie to start from in my opinion. It didn't fit. It immediately took away the whole point of the movie: a villian's pining for a pure maiden, because the "pure maiden" is seen being raped within the first 10 minutes of the movie.

Maybe not having a point is a little incorrect. It had a point, I suppose, but that point wasn't interesting, or poignant, or really even relevant. It was a film done badly.

blah, blah, blah...

i dont get the mtv editing comments either. was there a cut every 3 seconds? no.

Quote from: cecil b. dementedblah, blah, blah...

i dont get the mtv editing comments either. was there a cut every 3 seconds? no.

I agree. It's not like Michael Bay directed it. And what funny is all the complaints are about that, and yet:

BEST EDITING
Gangs of New York (Thelma Schoonmaker)
Lord of the Rings: Two Towers (D. Michael Horton & Jabez Olssen)
Minority Report (Michael Kahn)
Punch-Drunk Love (Leslie Jones)
The Rules of Attraction (Sharon Rutter)

Quote from: cecil b. dementedoh well. i guess im the only moron that liked it  8)

but didnt anyone find it funny? even just a little bit?

the whole film should of been just walking around following that " dick" guy


now thats a star

I haven't seen the film yet (it only just came out here) but I'm definitely going to, just because I'm a big Bret Easton Ellis fan. From what you guys are saying I'm kind of afraid that it's going to be too cool in its style, considering the whole thing is about the shallowness of the culture these guys inhabit. I thought American Psycho was a good adaptation because it was so wilfully uncool in its style: everything about it ridiculed Bateman rather than elevating him through flashy camerawork. Nevertheless, I'm guessing I'll probably enjoy the movie if it keeps to the book at all...

Glamorama: now that would make fucking AMAZING movie if it was done right...

On imdb.com is says the editing was done with Apple's Final Cut Pro on a Macintosh because it's cheaper.

Quote from: RaikusIn fact, I kind of felt like handing out phone coard to all of them.

I have to say the only scene I really enjoyed was Van Der Beek repeatedly failing to kill himself (not sure if it was simply funny in its own right or the fact that it was Van Der Beek heightened the hilarity). The music playing in this scene was some kind of "Monster Mash"-type thing that I think was by tomandandy (who i think should do more film scoring on the strength of this picture and their bits from Natural Born Killers). The track was as hilariously inappropriate for a suicide scene as "Without You" was eerily appropriate for the other. Anyone know the title? I don't think it's on the soundtrack but I could be wrong.

the song youre referring to is called "boogyman bash" by tomandandy. originaly, avary intented to have "monster mash" play with the scene, but couldnt afford it so had tomandandy write a similar tune. unfortunately its not on the soundtrack or even available anywhere.

Quote from: Dekadetiatomandandy (who i think should do more film scoring on the strength of this picture and their bits from Natural Born Killers).

tomandandy also did brilliant scores for Mothman Prophecies and Killing Zoe.

rules of shit

I kinda sorta liked this movie and also kinda hated it. i didn't believe that van der beek and that hot chick were even in love. had they even spoken to each other after that ultra clever split screen shot? the whole thing felt like a gimmick, like i was being toyed with. perhaps i would have liked it with a better script maybe (?). overall... eh.

I just recently saw it again, and it is far less impressive on second viewing. It didnt really have my attention and my feelings about the film have now dropped. Why is this?

it is kinda neat that while this film was in develepment, roger avary was the fucking man in hollywood.


he could of just become a tarantino footnote

....finnally got around to seeing this (blind bouththis phucker on dvd)...and its good.....nothing monnumental but i ffeelits at least a "solid" film....

.i like the mtv editinng sh*t .i think it neat .....
..i liked the ...suicide scene..its well done and effetive..and the SORTA-SPOILER..scenes where it shows the girl who killed herself ..where she was during the film...
...i liked the music....
..the "Dick" resutrant scenes was the only bad thing int he film..it played like a bad skit on SNL ....or ANNNY skit on currennnt SNL....

....the "herion-flute" guy was also nnot worth wasting film for.....

...basically (with the setup of the film) one was supposed to feel "something" after viewing it when it circled back around again ..and i felt "moved" some...

its ***1/2 out of *****

i apaologize for bashing this earlier........

i revisited this movie friday afternoon and enjoyed it much more. but this was after seeing it once and reading the book.

Quote from: taz.I kinda sorta liked this movie and also kinda hated it. i didn't believe that van der beek and that hot chick were even in love. had they even spoken to each other after that ultra clever split screen shot? the whole thing felt like a gimmick, like i was being toyed with. perhaps i would have liked it with a better script maybe (?). overall... eh.

that's the main problem. in the book there is so much w/ van der beek (sean) and lauren that u don't get in the movie. also, i forgot how little was devoted to the paul character, who's part in the book may even be bigger than sean's. i think the film devoted too much time to some of the more minor characters (the drug dealer, the teacher lauren hooks up w/) cuz ur right, just by the film itself u don't really see the attraction btwn. sean and lauren.

i will say that the film is much more enjoyable after reading the book. and w/o a doubt, the most beautiful/powerful scene is the suicide sequence.

the problem with Rules of Attraction is that Sean has absolutely no redeeming qualities. you can't like him, or sympathize with him, so you can't like the movie. i think it's partly acause of Van Der Beek's performance, but mostly the writing.

Quote from: picolasthe problem with Rules of Attraction is that Sean has absolutely no redeeming qualities. you can't like him, or sympathize with him, so you can't like the movie. i think it's partly acause of Van Der Beek's performance, but mostly the writing.

I don't think sympathyzing with him is necessary. You can just sympapthize with humanity in general. Something like that... but the movie works for me.

"acause"....how clever

the problem with Rules of Attraction is it wasn't a very good movie.

My problem with it is that it tries to be something dramatically tragic with  cheap material. Pulp Fiction understood the limits of this kind of material.

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanI don't think sympathyzing with him is necessary.

okay. but i think you have to at the very least like the main unit in some way, no matter how abstract or sickening, for anything to work.

I liked that the guy from Dawson's Creek was playing Sean Bateman, Patrick Bateman's younger brother... so he was a psycho only because his brother was also a psycho... hmmm... doesnt make any sense

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetMy problem with it is that it tries to be something dramatically tragic with  cheap material. Pulp Fiction understood the limits of this kind of material.

but it is tragic.

Quote from: andykI liked that the guy from Dawson's Creek was playing Sean Bateman, Patrick Bateman's younger brother... so he was a psycho only because his brother was also a psycho... hmmm... doesnt make any sense

patrick bateman makes an appearance in the book.  

i watched it w/ a buddy of mine who hadn't seen it and really isn't into movies all that much. we both agreed that the movie really has more of a high school feel than a college one. (the 'dressed to get screwed party' is something u may see in high school, but not in college, atleast not in these days) i don't think its entirely necessary to sympathize w/ every character. it's just kinda sad how fucked up high school/college life can be.

again, i must recommend reading the book.

Quote from: ©brad

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetMy problem with it is that it tries to be something dramatically tragic with  cheap material. Pulp Fiction understood the limits of this kind of material.

but it is tragic.

I know a lot of people believe Pulp is tragic, but I don't. The only scene that seems to display inner struggle at a strenious point is Jackson's intervention in the robbery. The scene does attempt something tragic, but is so wrapped in clever dialogue (like the rest of the film) that I didn't believe that it was trying to be as emotional as much of Rules. It felt like it going for good tension instead.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet

Quote from: ©brad

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetMy problem with it is that it tries to be something dramatically tragic with  cheap material. Pulp Fiction understood the limits of this kind of material.

but it is tragic.

I know a lot of people believe Pulp is tragic, but I don't. The only scene that seems to display inner struggle at a strenious point is Jackson's intervention in the robbery. The scene does attempt something tragic, but is so wrapped in clever dialogue (like the rest of the film) that I didn't believe that it was trying to be as emotional as much of Rules. It felt like it going for good tension instead.

I kind of agree with GT here. I think the minute you try to see anything philosophical/moral/emotional in Pulp Fiction, it either is diminished greatly or just falls apart; it's a masterpiece of "external," surface storytelling, but even the big "tragic" scene with Jackson's speech is very superficial (which, as I see it, is just as it should be for the film). Tarantino is a genius at making his gimmicks seem like more than tricks, but anything he has is in the style and storytelling.

no no no, i meant the rules of attraction was tragic, not pulp fiction.

Quote from: ©bradno no no, i meant the rules of attraction was tragic, not pulp fiction.

Oh.......well, cool. The movie is still fun for me to watch, but I don't think it really succeeds in what it is trying to do.

I thought there was scattered brilliance throughout.

My college experience was nothing like this.

I'd watch it again just to see Jessica Biel.

Quote from: snaporazat least it didn't have some flavour of the month/buzz clip soundtrack.

uhh it had that thicke song, sampling the fifth of beethoven,  is it called " I want you to know" or something...which actually was a buzzclip thing on mtv.  I thought the song was cool when I heard it, now its pretty lame...but maybe that was avary's point since it was playing at the party scene.  And being a freshman in college, we did have a party which was very identical to that dress to fuck party or whatever.....and boy was it great

i was very close to walking out on this film, but figured i'd stay just to see how it ended

the funniest part to me was when Van Der Beek was playing guitar for the girl......that just reminds me of some jerks in high school just like that

I really have an affinity for this film. I go to a small liberal arts college now, and it's nothing like it's depected in ROA, but I could see larger schools having people like this. The visual style is almost totaly brilliant, with the exception of the reverse stuff which gets a little old.

I think the film is definatly tragic, but in the best way, which is to say, I laughed my ass off the whole time. Several actors I wasn't a fan of turned in great performaces, and I think it's  very loyal to the book in that it keeps the spirit without trying to stick to it too closely.

It's also, on the simplest level, damned entertaining.

Roger Avary is cool.  On his website (www.avary.com), he let people know that he was having a garage sale this weekend, plenty of goodies for sale and other freebies to be handed out.  I showed up way too late (apparently there was a mob at 7AM!) and missed out on any of the cool stuff for grabs-- Roger said the sale was pretty much over.  But despite that, I was welcomed into his house and was handed some beer.  Roger hung out and chatted movie-geek-talk with the few of us there.  And the best part: he gave me a uber-rare Rules poster that features the bathtub girl, nude and bloodied, kissing Shannyn Sossamon.  And he autographed it too.  Rock 'n' Roll.

He sounds like the coolest guy ever.

I guess that inter posistion is now filled.

Quote from: Weak2ndActhe gave me a uber-rare Rules poster that features the bathtub girl, nude and bloodied, kissing Shannyn Sossamon.  And he autographed it too.  Rock 'n' Roll.

tubgirl?! sickkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk.

Quote from: Ptubgirl?! sickkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk.

Actually, the poster is kinda hot.  If I had a digital camera, I'd take a snap of it.  Sadly, I do not.

This movie made we wish the characters were real, just so I could murder them. lol

bad movie!!!  die!!

Quote from: Weak2ndAct

Quote from: Ptubgirl?! sickkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk.

Actually, the poster is kinda hot.  If I had a digital camera, I'd take a snap of it.  Sadly, I do not.

haha. not to be too vulgar or anything, but i think he was talking about tubgirl. the tubgirl.


EDITED FOR VULGARITY BY ADMIN:

http://www.thugs.biz/tubgirl.jpg

What the fuck!

Just link to it, asshole.

prudes!

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsuicidegirls.com%2Fmedia%2Fauthors%2F743%2Farticle.jpg&hash=d366a359ad4a887d74f5fa2fcb7c7551ea8fceb8)

Roger Avary is probably one of the most popular cult filmmakers in America. After winning an Oscar for co-writing Pulp Fiction, Avary made the cult film Killing Zoe and a TV pilot called Mr. Stitch; many people were wondering if he was just a flash in the pan. That is until he exploded the neutron bomb known as The Rules of Attraction on the world. Starring a myriad of WB network stars including James Van Der Beek, Avary finally captured the true essence of Bret Easton Ellis' novel.

Roger is a major cult personality in outsider culture and stays in close contact with his fans due to his constantly updated website.

Daniel Robert Epstein: How did you first discover Suicide Girls?

Roger Avary: Wired magazine a while back did a thing on the site and a couple of other similar sites. I immediately checked it out and was delighted at the discovery.

DRE: So it wasn't just searching for porn on the net?

RA: No I was definitely searching for porn on the net. Searching for interesting and artful porn. I'm very heavily into the combination of arthouse films and exploitation films and finding a connection between the two. That naturally extends into my normal life and I completely appreciate gestalt of taking exploitation and making it artful.

DRE: Well I found it because I was searching for naked Goth girls.

RA: [laughs] Naked Goth girls. If only I had the wherewithal I would have saved myself a year.

DRE: So you see them as artful?

RA: I've had this vampire movie I've long wanted to do. Part of it is because I love Goth culture. I'm not Goth at all. I couldn't fit it with that culture if I wanted. But I love the subculture. Its fantastic and Goth girls are smoking hot. What's not to like? As far as style goes its both artful, romantic, a little dangerous, interesting, maybe a little nasty and theatrical. It's the theatrical part that gets me and I happen to be more attracted to those girls.

DRE: The kinds of art you've been involved with definitely put you outside the mainstream.

RA: A little left off center definitely. I wander around in the mainstream mostly because of Pulp Fiction. I do all sorts of stuff.

DRE: But originally Pulp Fiction wasn't even mainstream.

RA: It sort of became that way. When we did it, it was this $8 million movie and we did because we thought it was cool. All the early indicators were that no one was going to care.

DRE: At that time John Travolta didn't make anyone care.

RA: Quite literally. It was like John Travolta's new movie, eh. It became as a surprise.

DRE: So you must like being on the fringe. When one goes to adapt a Bret Easton Ellis novel it definitely is a choice.

RA: Well when I adapted this novel [Rules of Attraction] in particular I didn't own the rights to it. I had read the book in college and it was so true to my experiences and observations that I knew I had to make it. I went to a small liberal arts college in northern California which is sort of the west coast equivalent to Bennington which Bret Easton Ellis went and the place that the college in Rules is based on. So I'm reading the book and I look up and a character from the book walks by. I knew I had to make this one day. 13 years went by and it suddenly struck me how to do it because the book has an intensely complicated structure. It feels like it has no form although it has a very tight form. It's told from 15 or 20 first person narratives all streams of consciousness. You have little chapters each told from another person's personal narrative. The things they are reflecting on are often in conflict with other people's remembrances are. It's a little like a Rashomon story. Bret Easton Ellis tends to write in a kind of code. It took me years of thinking to figure out how to translate it and convert his fantastic literary devices into appropriate cinematic devices and remain true stylistically.

My problem with the other two films based on his books [American Psycho & Less Than Zero] is that they stripped away his literary devices and his themes are integrated into them. So if you strip them away and you have very little left. I just wanted to keep that intact so that you have the Bret Easton Ellis when watching the movie. It was just a matter of coming up with cinematic devices which complimented what he was doing.

DRE: The Goth culture has certainly embraced your work. How does that feel?

RA: I did this TV pilot years ago called Mr. Stitch which was something of a disaster [laughs]. It was a difficult production; it got cut pretty badly and in general had a bad history. It was sort of a sore spot for me. I have an online presence with my website and I started getting all this email from mostly people in Goth culture who were totally in love with the movie and the character. There was this Swedish Goth girl in particular who did a tribute page to the film. Goth culture completely embraced the ideals and the look behind the film. As well as, oddly enough, transvestite and transsexual culture. I have more transsexual fans I think because of that TV pilot than your average filmmaker. I thought that was kind of weird.

DRE: So you now realize that anything you do no matter how much you don't like it will always be embraced by a certain part of the audience. Once you have a cult following you do no wrong in some people's eyes.

RA: Maybe it's just my sensibilities of how, mostly when and where I grew up, I grew up in the very sexually ambiguous 80's, though I am intensely heterosexual, married and have two kids; the 80's fashions, haircuts and everything were sexually ambiguous. It was all about this mockery of uniformity which I completely embraced in my youth. The ideals and attraction to those things of what is now known as Goth culture has stayed with me and finds itself into my work. I try very desperately to make normal movies.

DRE: No you don't.

RA: [laughs] I do. I try very hard but I can't. This is just what I do. I just have a way of thinking that is a little more attuned to the left of center.

DRE: Rules of Attraction just recently hit DVD.

RA: I know and I can't seem to find it anywhere because it's been sold out. I'm told by the studio that it's done so well.

DRE: I felt there was so much for anticipation for the movie when it was coming out and then it hit theaters and it opened so badly.

RA: There were several mistakes made in the release. They are so easy to see in hindsight.

DRE: Well I live in New York City so maybe the promotion looks more wide to me.

RA: We totally did well in the big cities where we were selling out constantly. Lion's Gate put it out on 1400 screens. A movie like this to go out wide on the scale of Van Wilder or something like that is kind of crazy. Every other movie of this tone like One Hour Photo or Punch Drunk Love had small platform releases to build audiences. It was a fantastic experiment to take this weird movie throwing it out there and selling it largely as American Pie. In the Midwest, kids would go into the theatre and leave crying. It was bringing the party down. You can imagine the people that would wander into the theatre because they want to see Road Trip and they end up with a treatise on nihilism and the luxurious debauchery of the ruling class. That's not what people thought they were getting. That kind of worked against us to say the least. Though Lion's Gate heroically stood behind the movie there really wasn't enough money to go wide like that with the advertising budget they had. Having said that the movie generated such interest that the movie comes out on DVD and a lot of people have heard of it. Its notorious in some ways. It could be argued that the movie industry is now a DVD industry and theatrical releases are just designed to push DVDs. It's been like gangbusters.

It's great because I designed the DVD. On the new DVD we got [college favorite] Carrot Top to do a commentary track. I know that sounds like a major disappointment to most of my Goth fans. To me it's the ultimate way to understand what people were thinking in the Midwest when they wandered into this movie. I don't know Carrot Top at all. I'm not even a fan of Carrot Top.

DRE: Did you see Chairman of the Board?

RA: Oddly enough I have it because Lion's Gate sent it to me.

Carrot Top had never seen Rules of Attraction or even knew anything about it. I just put him down in front of it and recorded his stream of consciousness as he watched it. Its one of the most hilarious things I've ever heard because he thinks he's going to see Road Trip or at most American Psycho. He sits down, watches it and to watch the way his thought patterns work to me was the greatest gift of all time. It will be the ultimate dorm room companion. It completely defuses any pretension I may have as a filmmaker. There's nothing anyone can say to me about this movie that Carrot Top hasn't perfectly matched. If you take your work too seriously then you're setting yourself for disappointment.

DRE: With the cast it seemed like you watched a lot of the WB network and then cast them against type. It seems too obvious that you would do something like that.

RA: I met with James Van Der Beek. He had done a Todd Solondz film and Todd clearly saw what I saw in him. I had the initial reaction anyone would have ìYou think we should put Dawson in this movie.î I haven't watched a single episode of Dawson's Creek. I met with James and he took off his sunglasses. I look in his eyes and I see the capacity for cold dark emptiness. He's got shark eyes. It's completely contrary enigmatic puppy dog charisma that he has on the outside. That is exactly the kind of juxtaposition of qualities I needed for the Sean Bateman character. I needed somebody who had this mask on the outside but was vacuous on the inside. There's plenty of young actors in Hollywood who could have played that dark gloomy evil Sean Bateman. I had been meeting with all of them. They all think they're Marlon Brando or James Dean. When I met with James I realized that he was the one. It crystallized that since I was already assassinating the teen film genre because there is nothing in this film you haven't seen before in another teen film but its just how you see it. Since I was doing that it just made sense to use the actors and tools of teen cinema against itself.

DRE: Do you think James Van Der Beek has a big head physically?

RA: Yes he has a physically big head. I have a relatively large head as well. Its not to his proportion. I think he has the most interesting head. Its so fascinating, interesting looking, not normal and unusual. It's so beautiful to frame with a spherical lens because I was designing the movie with many close-ups. When I got really close to James and framed it from the middle of his forehead to just the bottom of his chin the proportions within the frame were perfect. He was so cool looking and he's an amazing actor. People forget that he started on Broadway doing Edward Albee when he was 17 and then he got Dawson's Creek. It's a testament to how good he was on Broadway.

DRE: He and I went to the same high school and I had seen him in many plays.

RA: Really how was in the high school plays?

DRE: Good, I wouldn't say they were best plays.

RA: The guy is tireless. He was a joy to work with and he's got an amazing stamina and control. I could work all day and night. He was doing Dawson's while doing the movie and would fly back and forth. He would sleep on the plane.

What he has that other young actors don't have is 200 to 220 days a year in front of the camera. Most people don't have that luxury. He knows how to do everything you need him to do. They just don't seem to do anything too daring.

DRE: I've talked with the other actors from Dawson's Creek and they don't seem to like the show very much.

RA: Well you never love that which makes you great. Its like the way everyone wants to do something other than which brings them great success. I think that's silliness. I've had this talk with James who like anybody would show a little frustrating when the show wouldn't reach for something different. But that's not the nature of TV. People tune into TV to see something familiar and comfortable.

DRE: I think my favorite sequence in Rules was the trip to Europe.

RA: That was a wild experience. What I did was that I told Kip Pardue that I don't want to go to Europe with Kip I want to go with [his character of] Victor. From the moment we got on the plane to the moment we land you're Victor. I just followed him with a video camera and he just did his thing. We would go to a Ford model party and I'd follow him in. One time the guy from Simply Red looked at me and said ìFucking Paparazziî. I shot Kip's conversation with this model from every angle and she called me the ultimate tourist. At that point I would stop, introduce myself and show her some footage from the movie since we had finished shooting. Then Greg Shapiro [the producer] who was following me would step in and get them to sign release forms. Invariably at the end of the night I'd be at the foot of the bed shooting Kip stripping the clothes off this model. I shot about 70 hours of footage. It was an extraordinary experience. Kip and I actually do an audio commentary on that sequence.

DRE: Just when you think its going to end it keeps going. Thank god.

RA: I had traveled through Europe when I got out of college. I remember I did this whirlwind trip where you're in a city for a couple of days then you move on. I kept a journal and when I wrote the screenplay I was looking at Victor's journal in the book and it was exactly like my journal not in the things he did but in the tone. I do this, I do that, I fuck her, I climb the Eiffel tour, I buy this. It was all done with this mundane tone no matter if I was describing my sexual conquests or if I was describing how much eggs cost. It was al the exact same tone. I wanted to capture that. You kind of become disconnected from your life. I figured the only way to recapture it was to do it. I'm actually cutting it now into its own feature.

DRE: The movie is obviously confusing at times. How did you keep on track during shooting?

RA: Just intense planning. I had 8 months before shooting to plan everything. Naturally everything changed. Four days before we shot the end of the world party we got our location and it was all different so I had to completely rechoreograph the entire sequence. It was intensely difficult. It was how people relate to each other while everything is rewinding backwards and forwards. While shooting other scenes I had to refigure from scratch the entire opening of the movie.

DRE: Is it true you cut it on Final Cut Pro [a nonlinear editing system that can be used at home]?

RA: Absolutely. I wanted to prove that it could be done. To prove that any kid in the Midwest with enough money to buy a Macintosh and the software essentially has the same tool set I had to make this movie. The proof of concept being is when they start releasing 24p camera with 2K resolution or more then you are going to see a real revolution in cinema.

DRE: It's going to be amazing in a few years when kids get to film school when they are 18 and they've already completed five feature length films.

RA: Exactly. I think about its not too unlike what happened with the film revolution known as the French New Wave. Suddenly you had film cameras that were light and small. You could actually take them out of the studio. Then you had film stocks that were very sensitive to light so you didn't many lights. I believe another revolution is coming. People talk about The Blair Witch Project and digital video but to me it's not the same.

DRE: I think it's the Dogme movement and the digital video.

RA: I think those Dogme guys are fags.

DRE: [laughs] Well the films can be a little faggy for sure.

RA: Why would you ever take a vow of chastity of any kind? That's what they publicly say they do. ìI take my vow of chastity and refuse to create an artificial world of filmî. Iits like come on, give me a bucket.

They make restrictive films. I think it's more of a stunt they pulled. I don't see why you shouldn't put every ounce of your being into the making of a project. You should still be allowed to create a reality from scratch.

DRE: They're definitely not interested in making entertainment. It can be very masturbatory.

RA: Well its show business. I believe that movies are the most powerful mechanism for delivering your messages. It's the closest thing to dreaming in real life there is. I just don't see the point in taking any kind of vow of chastity. It's sort of like to vow to be a lover of women but not to use my penis. It's ridiculous.

DRE: The critics seemed to rip apart Rules because it was shallow. The point was to be shallow.

RA: That was American critics. I think it touched them a little too close to home. Two phenomenons that happen as you get older is people don't want their young to go through what they went through. So they go into denial about everything they did when they were young. I wanted to make this movie before that happened to me. I think it's a natural thing. Every seven years the cells in your body have completely changed you are effectively a different person. So much of what happened in this movie is real and true. I just applied a very hyperreal lens on top of them. I know what I made and what I feel in this film. It's the closest artistic success that I've ever had. I know how good it is. There is nothing a critic can say that will affect me. Usually when somebody freaks out on the film that there is something within them that they don't agree with. What they're not realizing is that I myself by making this film which is condemnation of the luxurious debauchery of the ruling class.

Lets be honest I really shot it so I could film Kate Bosworth and Jessica Biel getting fucked.

DRE: I've been looking through your website and I'm reading all sorts of stuff about you, something about a day job?

RA: I'm rewriting a screenplay for David Fincher called Lords of Dogtown which is about skateboarding in the 1970's. It's a more fictionalized version of the documentary Dogtown and Z-Boys [directed by Stacey Peralta]. I do all sorts of day jobs. When I won the Academy Award for Pulp Fiction my writing rate went through the roof. I make enough money doing one writing job to afford me two years of experimentation for weird movies.

DRE: Where do you keep your Oscar?

RA: In my tool drawer. It's kind of a tool. I've had a lot of women ask me to fuck them with my Oscar. Coincidentally 10 and æ inches long, which is the exact length of Ron Jeremy.

DRE: Neil Gaiman mentioned that you wanted to do a movie of Beowulf with him.

RA: Yes we adapted Beowulf, Neil and I were trying to get that off the ground. I was also attached to the Sandman movie for a while which would be the big Goth movie. The reason I left it is because the studio wanted to make Sandman into something he isn't. He's a passive observer more than anything. He's very introspective and they wanted him throwing punches. I said fuck that I don't want legions of fans coming after me for ruining Sandman. That's my fanbase. probably because of that I got very close to Neil and we decided to work on Beowulf. We wrote it together and I'm attached to direct. It was at DreamWorks for a while but they decided not to do it. The rights then came back to us.

Neil just directed a short film from a short story he wrote. He's still in post and I can't wait to see it.

DRE: Do you read other comics?

RA: Yeah I'm a huge comic fanatic. Nothing has hit me like Sandman. I like Nocturnals by Dan Brereton. We got to be friends because of that. I would love to make Nocturnals into a movie of modern comics. Lately I've reading a lot of Italian and Spanish comic books. I can read some Spanish.

DRE: The [Alejandro] Jodorowsky books?

RA: Yeah Jodorowsky. He's always been one of the greats. His imagination is so large that it almost can't be contained within a film. For him to do comic books makes perfect sense.

DRE: He's supposedly making another movie.

RA: Yeah Marilyn Manson is a good friend of mine and he's been working with Jodorowsky.

DRE: Someone has to give him some money.

RA: That's my feeling and Marilyn's also.

DRE: You've adapted Ellis' Glamorama to a screenplay as well.

RA: Yeah whether I make it next I can't decide at the moment. I've been inside the world of Bret for a while now.

DRE: It would be unusual for a filmmaker to do two movies in a row from the same author's books.

RA: I'm trying to decide.

DRE: Would it be with Lion's Gate?

RA: They would be invited to. I don't know that they would. I had a fantastic experience with them. They squeezed my balls when it came to the budget. It was not easy to make this movie on the budget they gave me.

DRE: Was it about $5 million?

RA: It was about that, it should have cost $15 million. I managed to pull it together. It was not an easy process. What they gave me for staying on budget and on schedule was complete and total freedom. They let me do whatever I wanted to. They never visited the set and left me alone. It was magic. Everyone should be so lucky.

I really was disapointed in rules of attraction but I didn't think it was that terrible. but I'm looking forward to glamorama

EVERYONE SHUT THE FUCK UP! ITS A GREAT FILM!

i enjoy the fuck out of rules.  where else can you see fred savage play clarinet with a cigarette in his belly button?

i thought about it yesterday when i saw the dvd in the 5.50 bin at Wal-Mart.

too flashy, not great but not horrible.  has anyone heard any recent info on the feature that avery was supposed to release of the european trip?  this was going to be the connection between glammorama and rules.  i remember he talked about it a while ago and it's listed on imdb.  mac you heard anything?

-sl-

I like this movie. it has a lot of interesting stylistic choices, I love the details avary uses to create an order of events.  It's great directing, in my opinion. plus it's very very very funny.

the video diary of the trip to europe is worth watching it for. and owning for that matter.

the commentaries were alrite too.

I really liked the ending, some of the backwards stuff ran a little long, but otherwise, I enjoyed the film.

I have to rewatch this and seee what is so compelling about it. Maybe I jumped the Gun when I said I was disapointed. I did like James Van Der Beek's performance though, so if I see it at Wallmart for 5.40 I'll probably get it.

Everyone is talking about how one-dimensional the characters are, but what about Paul? I thought he had a really interesting character. And the actor that played him did it really well. then again, I enjoy this movie a lot... even with its many flaws.