The Ending Of American Psycho Finally Explained

American Psycho might have seemed like a straightforward film about a psychotic serial killer — one
who has good hygiene and knows his font types.
But the third act of the movie intentionally unravels and leaves us guessing about what,
if anything, actually happened to our deranged protagonist throughout the whole film.
See, that's the trouble with having a delusional maniac at the center of the plot — his memory
of his own supposed murder spree might not be so reliable after all.
Like any good film, however, there are an abundance of clues scattered throughout the
movie, and subsequent commentaries might help fans parse out Patrick Bateman's reality from
his mental fiction.
So, let's take a look at what really happened at the end of American Psycho.
The body count
There's one surefire fact that we can all agree upon when it comes to Patrick Bateman:
the guy is crazy.
Whether he actually kills all the people he thinks he does is up for debate, but his status
as a lunatic is not.
From his obsessive-compulsive fitness and grooming regimens to his fixation with cardstock
and music history, he's clearly disturbed.
But has he actually killed all of those people, or is he just imagining it all as some sort
of sick fetish fantasy?
"Part of me wants to take her out, and talk to her.
Be real nice and sweet and treat her right."
"What'd the other part of him think?"
"What her head would look like on a stick."
Some believe he's just dreaming up all those intense slaughter sessions, and there's some
serious evidence to back that idea up.
Consider the time his ATM tells him to feed it a stray cat before he shoots a walk-along
witness for interfering.
At least some part of that experience is a hallucination.
And the fact that he then engages in a shoot-out with police that culminates in him blowing
up their cruiser with just his glock was so outlandish even he doesn't believe it's real.
And isn't it a little suspicious that the guy who can rattle off every shade of ink
known to man and recite an entire encyclopedia on Phil Collins somehow can't recall his own
kill count?
"I guess I've killed maybe 20 people.
Maybe 40!"
Let's just say that Bateman takes the concept of the "unreliable narrator" to a whole new
level.
However...
The convenient alibi
The biggest mystery in the film revolves around whether or not Patrick Bateman actually ever
killed his co-worker Paul Allen, played by Jared Leto.
Paul's death scene would prove to be one of the most memorable moments of the movie and
forever change how viewers experienced Huey Lewis and the News' music.
"I think their undisputed masterpiece is 'Hip to Be Square.'
Most people probably don't listen to the lyrics, but they should!"
Patrick is subsequently given an extremely convenient alibi by the detective investigating
Paul's disappearance that may or may not be the real deal.
Before the murder, Patrick is shown going to dinner with Paul under the name of Marcus
Halberstrom, another co-worker Paul has long mistaken Patrick for.
But when questioned, the real Marcus reveals he was out at another location the night of
the murder… with Patrick Bateman himself listed as part of that group.
So, either Patrick has actually gone to the dinner with Marcus and his other work pals
while dreaming up his deadly encounter with Paul — or he's done exactly what he thinks
he has, and his colleagues mistakenly gift him an alibi.
Considering how often all those Pierce & Pierce Vice Presidents seem to call each other by
the wrong names, the narrative definitely seems to be leaning towards the latter.
The cover up?
One of the main reasons we're left to wonder if any of these murders are real is that every
shred of evidence that might convict him disappears overnight.
At the tail end of his murderous rampage, Patrick has turned Paul's swanky apartment
into a mini-graveyard for his victims' bodies.
But when he returns to the scene of the crime, the place is completely clean.
It appears that the property owners have removed all traces of wrongdoing and painted over
the blood-filled closet to ensure the ritzy locale's high rental value.
And the listing agent's attitude towards him certainly betrays some suspicion …
"I want to know what happened here."
"Don't make any trouble, please.
I suggest you go."
Then there's the matter of his lawyer, whom he'd feverishly confessed to via voicemail.
At first, Harold Carnes literally laughs off his message, calls him by the name Davis,
and says Patrick Bateman is a sorry subject choice for such a joke — because he's too
dorky to actually commit murder.
"That was you wasn't it.
Bateman killing Allen and the escort girls that's fabulous, that's rich."
But then, when Patrick makes it clear he's not joking, his attorney claims that there's
no way he could've killed Paul Allen …
"Because I had dinner with Paul Allen twice in London just ten days ago."
"No you...."
Could this man, who has called his own client by the wrong name twice, have simply mistaken
Paul Allen with someone else, too?
Sure.
Which is why it takes some explanation from on high to really understand what was meant
by these ambiguous scenes.
Let's hear from the folks who made this thing...
The voice of authority
Director Mary Harron has since revealed that she never intended for audiences to believe
Patrick was innocent.
"Everyone keeps coming out of the film thinking that it's all a dream, and I never intended
it."
She went on to explain that the last scene wasn't meant to make it seem like Patrick
Bateman can't separate his imagination from reality, but rather that Carnes and the rest
are the ones who are really confused.
Not everything was real, of course.
Screenwriter Guinevere Turner has said that the turning point in Patrick's psychosis takes
place when he gets absorbed in his own reflection while sleeping with two prostitutes.
She told Yahoo Movies, "in real life, they probably weren't as attractive as they are,
and it wasn't all as Penthouse Letters as it is."
In other words, Patrick Bateman might've embellished a few of the more outrageous details — but
he really was hurting people all the while.
What really matters, however, is how others around him react.
According to author Bret Easton Ellis, who penned the novel upon which the film was based,
American Psycho is meant to be a statement on male hedonism in the '80s Wall Street circuit.
The whole reason Bateman gets away with the murder of Paul Allen is that everyone in Patrick's
professional circle is so self-absorbed that they can't even keep each other's identities
straight.
Their attention is firmly focused on acquiring material wealth, and their biggest problems
revolve around getting dinner reservations at the fanciest restaurant in town.
Even the owners of Allen's apartment are willing to dispose of a serial killer's evidence to
ensure maximum profit.
In the end, there are no redeeming qualities about Bateman or anyone he knows, for that
matter.
And even when he tries to come clean about what he's done, the people around him are
too wrapped up in their own interests to care.
"Even after admitting this, there is no catharsis.
My punishment continues to elude me, and I gain no deeper knowledge of myself."
Thanks for watching!
Click the Looper icon to subscribe to our YouTube channel.
Plus check out all this cool stuff we know you'll love, too!
Things You Only Notice About Harry Potter As An Adult Every James Bond Movie Ranked Worst To Best Everything Coming To Netflix In September 2017 Stars We've Sadly Lost So Far In 2017 Movies That Are Going To Blow Everyone Away In Fall 2017 Dead Game Of Thrones Characters Who Are Alive In The Books What The Cast Of The Lord Of The Rings Looks Like Now TV Deaths That Seriously Angered Fans 10 Ambiguous Film Endings You're Getting Totally Wrong The Most Controversial Movie Endings Of All Time

The Ending Of American Psycho Finally Explained

Latest Posts