It is a movie about a man who hates his dry cleaner. It is also a movie about a serial killer who may or may not have actually killed anyone. When people ask is American Psycho good, they aren't usually looking for a simple "yes" or "no" because the film itself refuses to be simple. Released in 2000 and directed by Mary Harron, the adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis’s controversial novel was initially met with a shrug and a grimace. Critics didn't know whether to laugh or call the police.
Fast forward to today. Patrick Bateman is a "Sigma" icon on TikTok. He’s a meme. He’s a warning. He is the ultimate symbol of corporate emptiness. Whether you’re watching Christian Bale flex in a mirror or trying to figure out why he’s so angry about a business card, the film sticks to your ribs. It’s a polarizing, blood-soaked satire that manages to be hilarious and horrifying at the exact same time.
The Performance That Saved a Movie
Let’s be real. Without Christian Bale, this movie is a disaster. At the time, Lionsgate wanted Leonardo DiCaprio for the role. DiCaprio was the biggest star in the world post-Titanic. But Harron fought for Bale. She saw something "alien" in him. Bale’s performance is a masterclass in performing-as-a-human-being.
Bateman isn't a person. He’s a collection of traits. He’s a "mask of sanity." Bale spent months tanning, exercising, and distancing himself from the crew to achieve that eerie, plastic perfection. He famously based Bateman’s social mannerisms on a televised interview of Tom Cruise, noting how Cruise had "this very intense friendliness with nothing behind the eyes."
That’s the core of why is American Psycho good remains a debated topic. It’s not a slasher flick. It’s a character study of a man who has everything—the money, the looks, the Valentino suits—but lacks a soul. When he delivers a monologue about the artistic merits of Huey Lewis and the News before swinging a chrome axe into Jared Leto's head, it’s not just gore. It’s a commentary on how consumerism replaces personality.
Satire vs. Horror: The Great Tonal Tightrope
Most people go into this expecting Friday the 13th on Wall Street. They get disappointed. If you watch this looking for scares, you’re looking at the wrong screen. It’s a black comedy.
The horror isn't the blood. The horror is that no one notices. In one of the most famous scenes, Bateman confesses his crimes to his lawyer, and the lawyer laughs it off because he thinks Bateman is too "boring" to be a killer. Or even better: he thinks Bateman is someone else entirely.
- Characters constantly mistake each other for other people.
- The fashion is so uniform that individuality is dead.
- The quest for a reservation at Dorsia is more important than human life.
The business card scene is the pinnacle of this. It’s three minutes of men in suits looking at shades of white paper. Bone. Eggshell. Pale nimbus. It’s absurd. It’s ridiculous. But for anyone who has worked in a high-pressure corporate environment, it feels strangely authentic. The "goodness" of the film lies in how it captures the narcissism of the 1980s and reflects it back at us.
The Ending: Did He Really Do It?
This is the question that keeps the film alive in Reddit threads. Did Patrick Bateman actually kill Paul Allen? Did he really blow up a police car with a handgun?
Mary Harron and co-writer Guinevere Turner have been on record saying they didn't want the ending to be a "it was all a dream" trope. However, the film descends into a surrealist fever dream in the final act. The ATM tells him to "feed me a stray cat." The physics of the world start to break.
The brilliance is that it doesn't matter.
📖 Related: Sam Pepper Big Brother: What Really Happened to the Most Divisive Housemate
If he did it, he’s a monster who got away with it because society is too self-absorbed to notice. If he didn't do it, he’s a man so broken by his environment that he had to invent a violent fantasy just to feel like he existed. Either way, the "confession meant nothing." That final line—"This confession has meant nothing"—is the gut punch. There is no catharsis. No justice. Just another day at the office.
Why Critics Originally Hated It (And Why They Were Wrong)
When it debuted at Sundance, reviews were mixed. The New York Times was lukewarm. Some called it "mean-spirited." Feminists protested the book and the film, citing the brutalization of women.
But Harron, a female director, brought a perspective that changed everything. She turned the "male gaze" on its head. In the scenes where Bateman is with sex workers, the camera doesn't focus on the women; it focuses on Bateman looking at himself in the mirror while he’s with them. He is the object of his own affection. It turns the violence into a pathetic display of ego rather than a celebration of cruelty.
The Cultural Legacy of Patrick Bateman
In 2026, we see the "Bateman" archetype everywhere. The hyper-fixation on skincare routines (the 10-step morning ritual), the gym culture, the obsession with status symbols—it’s all there.
Is the movie "good" for you?
If you enjoy fast-paced, linear storytelling where the bad guy gets caught, no. You’ll hate it. It’s frustrating. It’s repetitive. But if you appreciate a film that challenges you to laugh at things that aren't funny and look at the hollowness of modern success, then it’s a masterpiece.
✨ Don't miss: Why the Wicked City Spider Woman Still Haunts Our Nightmares
What to Look For on Your Next Rewatch
Don't just watch Bateman. Watch the people around him. Look at how often they ignore what he's actually saying.
- The "I'm Into Murders and Executions" Line: He says this to a woman at a party, and she thinks he said "mergers and acquisitions." It’s a perfect microcosm of the movie.
- The Constant Cleaning: Bateman is obsessed with sterility. His apartment is white. His clothes are perfect. The blood is the only thing that provides "color" to his world.
- The Soundtrack: Pay attention to the lyrics of the songs he likes. "Hip to be Square" isn't just a catchy tune; it's Bateman’s literal manifesto. He is trying so hard to be "square" (normal) that he’s lost his mind.
Honestly, the film is better now than it was in 2000. We live in an era of personal branding. We all curate our "masks" on Instagram and LinkedIn. We are all, in some small, non-violent way, Patrick Bateman. We are performing ourselves.
How to Approach American Psycho Today
If you're going to dive into this, do it with the understanding that you are watching a satire of masculinity. Don't take the violence at face value. Look for the comedy in the vanity.
- Watch for the cameos: Reese Witherspoon and Willem Dafoe put in incredible, understated work.
- Compare it to the book: If you think the movie is "too much," stay away from the Bret Easton Ellis novel. It is significantly more graphic and harder to stomach.
- Observe the lighting: Notice how the lighting gets harsher and more clinical as Bateman loses his grip on reality.
The movie doesn't give you the satisfaction of an answer. It leaves you feeling a bit cold, a bit dirty, and very confused about whether you should buy a more expensive moisturizer. That’s exactly what a good piece of art is supposed to do. It lingers. It annoys you. It makes you think.
Next Steps for the Curious Viewer:
To truly understand the film's impact, watch the 1987 film Wall Street immediately after. It provides the "earnest" version of the world that American Psycho is deconstructing. Once you see Gordon Gekko, Patrick Bateman makes a whole lot more sense. After that, look up Mary Harron’s interviews on the "female gaze" to see how she intentionally subverted the book's most misogynistic elements to create a critique of the men themselves.