coverHe Said/She Said: The Rules Of Attraction
What is it?: 2002 Drama starring
James Van Der Beek, Shannyn Sossamon, Jessica Biel, Ian Somerhalder, Kip Pardue, and Kate Bosworth; directed by Roger Avary
Price: $24.99 list,
Amazon.com offers it for less, I'm sure.
by Mark & Bridget Warren, special for Buhner.com via
the16thparallel.com

    Note: He Said/She Said reviews can be found normally on the16thparallel.com.  Buhner.com offers these reviews as a service to our readers. He/She Said movie reviews give couples the opportunity to see a review from two perspectives--while Mark may have loved Stupid Action Movie because it was "cool," Bridget may have translated "cool" to mean "dumb." So, on with the show.


The Rules of Attraction (2002)
Drama, R
Mark's Rating: 
2/5 | Bridget's Rating: 2/5

A satiric look at a sexual triangle between Sean Bateman, the bisexual Paul, and Lauren, his ex-girlfriend, at a New England liberal arts college.

We had actually tried to pick this flick up a few times at the video store but they only had one copy and it was always rented out. Hence, converting to the Netflix lifestyle. Anyway, this is one that was largely triggered by me. I love the American Psycho flick. We even own it. Why am I talking about that?

Well, it was written by Bret Easton Ellis and so was The Rules of Attraction. So what's the connection? The main character, played by James Van Der Beek, is the younger brother of Patrick Bateman. But this is a completely different movie.

Roger Avary directed it and I have only seen one of his other movies -- Killing Zoe. I really enjoyed that flick. You probably are familiar with Avary's work and are not even aware of it. He had a hand in a few of Quentin Tarantino's flicks and apparently has stated that he won't hang around with Tarantino anymore because Quentin always steals his ideas. Among the things that were his work? He wrote all of the radio dialogue in Reservoir Dogs and added a few elements to Pulp Fiction including the ideas of a boxer who won't throw a fight and two assassins who accidently shoot somebody in the back of their car.

Anyway, we both thought that this movie was okay. Near the beginning of the movie, there is alot of this "reverse motion" effect which is used to show a bunch of different things happening at the same time between the main characters in the movie. It was cool but after a few minutes, it started getting old. We understood why they did it and it even looked pretty cool a couple of times, but I started wondering if the whole movie was going to be that way.

I thought Van Der Beek was great and I hope that he will eventually be able to break away from the "Dawson" image because it seems like he is a pretty good actor.

The way in which the character Victor was introduced to the film (after hearing about him second-hand for almost the entire film) was done very well and very effectively. I got a really big kick out of his character and not really because of the performance or anything that he said. It was all about how they did it.

I probably wouldn't watch the flick again but it wasn't horrible or anything. It just moved along and when it was over we both thought "Well, that was okay."

There was also another part in the flick where this crazy character.. I think his name was Harry.. showed up and we both laughed through just about the entire "dinner" scene because he was just so weird.

If you do check this film out and enjoy it, you might be interested to know that Roger Avary will be directing another Easton novel, Glamorama, and it is already in production due out in October 2004.

Copyright 2003  Buhner.com  All Rights reserved.