AMERICAN PSYCHO Reviews — Page 3

Whoops—accidental double post!

Updated On: 4/21/16 at 10:15 PM

^ I think the critics are saying that the film and musical play up the humor and satire and go light on the gore and violence, which is true. Both entities shy away from depicting anything near the degree violence portrayed in the novel, for better or worse. I think that's all they're trying to point out.



Queen Alice, I don't think American Psycho has really been getting much of a love it/hate it response. Myself and most of the people I've spoken with have been pretty mixed about the whole thing. Lots of "I liked the first act, but I got bored with act two," or "the music is good, but becomes monotonous after awhile." I don't think there's really anything offensive enough about the musical, either in terms of content or execution to really hate it, and although it certainly seems to have its fans who love it, my experience with those who have enjoyed it seem to be in a "liking it short of loving it" situation.



I'm going back again next week to see how they've used the preview period. I hope I like it more on second viewing, but the reviews seem to highlight some of the issues I had with the musical in early previews so it makes me wonder how much they actually changed.

But did they really think a musical would do that kind of gore and sex? And if it's a heavily stylised piece and that's something they like then how else would they possibly do the violence?



really odd so far, negatives, mixed, positives, rave. I guess this was always going to be the case with this show in NY

Positive/rave http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20160421/entlife/304219712/

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the movie not get great reviews when it came out either? This kind of seems like a similar case, something that like its source material and previous adaptation has the potential to develop a cult following but isn't going to be something critics rave about. I personally really loved it and thought it was very effective but I think everyone is going to have a different reaction to this one.

Find most of Brantley's reviews incomprehensible .

Post is positive. I always call her Vincent Minelli

I wonder what will happen with the tonys.... the reviews haven't really said anything about Helene York in which i really hope get at least a nomination...

OCC are critics outside of New York, so not necessarily a good indicator of what the NY critics will say. They have had a history of heaping nominations on shows largely ignored by the Tonys- Young Frankenstein instantly comes to mind.

Positive http://www.ew.com/article/2016/04/21/american-psycho-broadway-review

Yeah, I don't think the Tony nominators give a fig about reviews. They're going to nominate what they liked plain and simple.



The Visit didn't get particularly nice reviews last season, save for Chita, and the box office was dead- still the committee as a whole must have loved/respected it because it got quite a few nominations including Best Musical.

The Hollywood Reporter (Positive?)

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/benjamin-walker-american-psycho-theater-886156?utm_source=twitter

Jesse Green (who I find to be one of the most fair and insightful critics we have right now) is ALMOST a pan for Vulture, but he does have one or two semi-nice things to say. So let's just call it SUPER negative:

"I say “sloppily” though the physical design, especially the interlocking sets and video by Es Devlin and Finn Ross, is as neat and tucked-in as aTurnbull & Asser poplin double-cuff contrast-collar shirt. Even the tighty-whities look pressed. But the structure and tone are a lazy mess, with no thought given to the differences between a first-person novel and a third-person play. Take the scene in which Patrick savages his red velvet birthday cake with a huge butcher knife he apparently keeps in his jacket. This scene does not exist in the novel because Ellis was at least smart enough to leave all of Patrick’s violent episodes unwitnessed. That way, when we later understand that they are fantasies, we are free to revise the picture in hindsight. Here, the guests are (as the script puts it) “in silent shock,” and the girlfriend suffers a moment of “quiet — and real — hurt.” But why real if it’s not really happening? Similarly, the big reveal near the end has been rejiggered as an in-person encounter instead of a phone call to make it more actively theatrical, but the result is actually limper and more confusing. Reading the novel, one might not have cared about logic but at least a trail of breadcrumbs existed allowing you to retrace your steps. Onstage, someone’s eaten them. "

http://www.vulture.com/2016/04/theater-review-american-psycho.html

I like Jesse Green a lot too, but damn was he harsh towards Psycho. It seems he had such a strong distaste for the novel that no stage adaptation was going to please him.



I think Brantley was more on target in this case than Green. I didn't find his review incomprehensible either. He was pretty clear and there were a few laughs.