“Did you know I’m utterly insane?”
As Director Mary Herron’s Patrick Bateman recites this in his monotone voice, for some reason, a select group of youth ignore this. They see this and think ‘real’ and ‘literally me’.
Patrick Bateman, depicted by Christian Bale, is an extremely wealthy and regimented investment banker in the cult-favorite film “American Psycho”. He gets women and he possesses more money than any one person needs. With a powerful job on Wall Street, he may seem successful to the naked eye, but there’s just one thing: he is a serial killing psychopath.
The black comedy satire is just as one would expect— a dark humor comedy that makes fun of the vacuity of Wall Street and the yuppies of the 80s. Yet, when young impressionable individuals, predominantly boys, see the wealth and power, they ignore the real message of the movie.
Bateman is not a good person; he is a misogynistic murderer who has no genuine emotions. He sacrificed his life to pursue a chauvinistic dream filled with power and class, and now he is simply a puppet of a larger system. These viewers don’t see this though. They see a man of wealth and prosperity who lives the life he wants.
Viewers who do not clearly get the author’s message believe that these psychopathic tendencies are the path to getting such wealth. That could not be more deviant from Herron’s goal at all, yet, it is seen to be revered by a select population.
In a less overt sense, 2013’s “The Wolf of Wall Street” makes it even harder to distinguish satire and reality. This movie features the story of Jordan Belfort, portrayed by Leonardo DiCaprio, cheating his way into millions, going to extravagant parties, having relations with plenty of women, and taking an exorbitant amount of drugs.
To impressionable youth, this is the dream. This is the goal and characters like Belfort and Bateman become the blueprint, but is this even the goal they should have? The whole point of the movies is to recognize the faults in society, yet young men begin to idolize these flawed characters.
The most challenging part of this is the fact that these characters are— like everyone else in society— neither absolutely good or absolutely bad, but rather in that gray area that is a mix of both. These characters have redeeming qualities while simultaneously showcasing major flaws.
Junior Otto Hoffman has watched these movies and believes that these characters are both good and bad, “I think a big part of the movies is that the men are the main characters and do whatever they want. With Belfort and Bateman, they’re both insanely rich, insanely good looking and they essentially do whatever they want.” Hoffman continues, “In a way, this links success with perfection, and I think it helps promote seeking perfection into the minds of youth, especially since some may say that society has become too complacent. I think one of the traits instilled in a strong, focused man is the want to be successful and constantly improving oneself.”
Despite the positives that these characters exude, Hoffman believes that there is a fundamental flaw behind them, “These characters [Belfort and Bateman] hurt viewers by their forms of respect towards other people; both these characters lack respect towards minorities and women, and I believe that respect is just as important of a part of being a man.”
So, when the positives and the negatives mesh into a singular narrative, the author’s purpose can get obscured. “These characters are clearly rich and successful, but what it means to be a man all comes down to character. That’s where these movies have their downfalls, and when viewers don’t pick up the author’s subtle messages, that is where it hurts men.”
These characters and their intentions are deviated from its original purpose into an almost hero like pedestal by certain fans, as if the director means to say doing all these immoral traits lead to the ideal life. This extends beyond just Wall Street. There are many flawed characters like Walter White in “Breaking Bad” and Mark Zuckerberg in “The Social Network”, where film producers unintentionally pump in ideas that can be interpreted into idolization, instead of critique as they intended.
This stems beyond just the impression that young people feel towards these characters. They see these characters and they see something that they aspire for and it’s not the drugs or the money: it’s the freedom.
As young teens see these individuals, they don’t care that they broke their family apart or ostracized an entire community. They idolize the strong, independent, and individualist trailblazer. Certain boys aspire for this freedom, so they view these flawed characters and brush past the outrageous actions and notice the freedom that they flaunt.
From the psychopathic murderers to the unscrupulous billionaires that are portrayed, there is somebody who finds a way to idolize them. These issues stem deeper than just film or social media, but is an adolescent urge for individualism and power. How characters are portrayed are so much more than just the purpose of the author, and recognizing the difference between purpose and the many varying interpretations is essential.
Anthony • Oct 14, 2022 at 12:20 pm
I think this movie is a great showing of how psycho people can manipulate you into becoming your friend and then they betray you.