Glamorama? WTF?

Paula-nick. All your basic Chuck questions, if you have any more, are located up in the first section of forums in a FAQ.

Check the Author section.

Thanks Ive been saying Paula-nuck for like two years.

I liked it but it's gonna be a confusing movie for people who have not read the book.

The threesome goes on waaaaay too long, but the part with the bombs attached to bently was rather awesome.

It's a great book. The threesome was fucking hard to read. Too...much detail.

...he's not supposed to admit that. Something strikes me...something TELLS me....that BEE is not as smart as we make him up to be.

Lysergicide thanx for the post that helps out a lot.

I thought it was so funny that the book feels like a reality tv show with the directors of the film crew directing everything and some things being completely fake and some things seeming real. It reminded me of the films "Series 7" and to lesser extent "The Truman Show". This was one of the books that makes you feel psychotic but controlled. You never really know whats real or fake but you except it and move on.

The books really cool, I loved it. I bought it recently so I'll have the chance to read it again.

Its actually not that confusing if you look it as a whole. There's a group of model/terrorist who have a tendancy to look like other models (becasue all models look pretty much the same anyway). they go around blowing up elements of current populour youth culture (coffee shop, politics department of uni) this shows their motives are basically anarchist in a project mayhem type styley. They probably hate their lives so they get revenge on the culture that produces them.
They use Victor for their plots so that they can't be caught, they can't let him go back to his live so they send a replacement (around which the second to last chapter is based I believe) and he gets looked after by terrorist (the last chapter).
He deals with the horror of the situation by viewing it all as a movie he's shooting and hallucinating scrips and camera crews.

Thats my view anyway, although I read it a long time ago and I may have got the details wrong.

I heard the alternative viewpoint that he's actually filming four movies at once and if you look closely you can see each one progress.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by leonardshelby [/i]
[B]...he's not supposed to admit that. Something strikes me...something TELLS me....that BEE is not as smart as we make him up to be. [/B][/QUOTE]

The big question is, though...

Does it make the author any less genius if he creates a masterpiece without reason apparent to himself?

In other words, if his subconcious is writing in all of these obvious recurrances for a reason, but his concious mind doesn't think a thing of it, does that really make him a less intelligent author?

Yes

i think what i like best about it....

1. he tied in a bunch of characters from his previous novels
characters that were main characters in one..then "cameo" appearnaces in others..and then the main character: victor.

the heartless asshole from rules of attraction...a nice follow up

however.

what i found really funny.

first the referance to patrick bateman in american pyscho.

but then....christian bale..plays a major role in the book toward the end...the actor who played patrick batemen in american pyscho.

i dunno...i just thought that as the funniest thing ever.
creative little perk for all those who follow easton alot

as far as the novel.

i love how easton can mention so many actors and his details on everything are just out of control

but the plot was so weird....i'm sorry...just...weird.

i guess you have to read it to know what i'm talking about.

It's not actually that hard to cameo across stories and to have a whole little world of characters. It's half good memory and half referencing.

Also, he used a character he himself didn't even create: Alison Poole, who's from an old Jay McInerney book. But I'm not sure which one, because Jay Mcinerney sucks unch.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by paper street [/i]
[B]but then....christian bale..plays a major role in the book toward the end...the actor who played patrick batemen in american pyscho. i dunno...i just thought that as the funniest thing ever. creati [/B][/QUOTE]

Actually, I wonder about that: American Psycho came out in 2002 and Glamorama came out in 1998. And Leonardo DiCaprio was originally being considered for the part with Oliver Stone as director, during the time when Glamorama was being written and then purchased. So was that just some sort of weird coincidence that Christian Bale played such a large part in one of BEE's books and then also went on to star in one of his movies?

Erm patio man, I think you got it the wrong way round or something, the film american psycho certainly did not come out in 2002 (although the dreaded ap2 did) it actually came out in 2000, but I'm not sure how long it was in development for so there is a chance that he wrote Bale in because of that. On the other hand glamorama does mention just about every other famous person in the world.

Yeah what the hell is up with Bret Easton Ellis resources on the web? It seems like the best site is one that hasn't actually been updated since american psycho came out on dvd. Probably the first time we'll find out if he has another book coming out is when we see it in the shops.

Ah, dammit. 2000 is what I meant to say. I went to the IMDB to check up on that first, and then, what do I do, I write 2002 instead. Either way, the coincidence about Christian Bale playing a part in a BEE book, and then playing a major part in a BEE adaptation, released two years after his fictional presence in Glam, holds together.

And I actually read a bunch of reports about AP while it was in dev, and I know for sure that it was going to star Leonardo DiCaprio and be directed by Oliver Stone. Like Ellis, I'm not exactly sure if I like how it turned out, with Mary Harron helming, and the satirical slant, but it was a decent movie.

I wondered if maybe Christian Bale was featured in Glam because he and BEE had known each other beforehand, being as it is that BEE is such a public figure or if maybe Bale had been a fan of Ellis's based on AP and that his insertion into Glam was an inside joke. But it turns out that, according to an interview on Salon.com, Christian Bale hadn't read American Psycho until right before he made the movie. So. Hm.

I actually read another interview of BEE somewhere (apologies for not having the source at hand; I think I found it by searching for Bret Easton Ellis on Google) that said he's working on a memoir type of book based on his family that "won't contain any gay content." But he said that a few years ago.

I read an interesting interview with him in which he spoke about how he started writing as a very young child and even then his stories were pretty dark.

Yeah, something about a Christmas tree under attack — ornaments on the bottom prostituting themselves so that an angel can make it to the top before the tree is destroyed, with lots of violence in between. I'd like to read that.

Last I heard he's working on a book that takes place in the world of politics, but is still in the same vein as his other novels. I wonder if the overtly political last 50 pages of Glamorama are an example of where he's going.

Though I did read this in Rolling Stone in December [b]1998[/b].

i just took glamorama out from the library.. i shall begin as soon as i finish naked lunch, which should be sometime next week..

so..yeah, i cant wait to begin reading it n stuff.

Does anyone know what Bret easton Ellis is up to? Is he releasing a new book any time soon?

Glamorama is already signed and confirmed by Roger Avary. He directed The Rules of Attraction. Check him out [url=http://www.avary.com]here[/url].

I read Rules of Attraction and The Informers and wasn't overly impressed by either of them. Is Glamorama his best book?

Yes. By a fucking mile. It's a shame you've only caught his lesser works, since Less Than Zero and American Psycho are fantastic as well. Though I liked the Rules of Attraction a lot, myself.

I dont expect much. This would be a very tough film to make. To eaasy to make mistakes with the characters and the plot lines.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Lysergicide [/i]
[B]JC: In GLAMORAMA confetti is everywhere. It's in the streets, at parties, in hotel rooms, and tracked into apartments. It's also strewn across murder scenes, disaster areas and sites of complete holocaust. Can you talk a little bit about your use of confetti as a metaphor in this novel?
BEE: Writing a book is an intuitive, impulsive process and so many of the motifs that pop up every now and then come from within that process, so as much as I would love to be able to tell you what they mean--I can't, because there really wasn't an intellectual approach to that metaphor. Confetti is a frivolous, useless invention and using it as an element in scenes of torture just felt right. I really don't know why every room in this book is freezing and why steam is constantly coming out of people's mouths. Where did that come from? I don't know. You could make a facile connection and read into it that since it's such a "cold" world, it makes sense, but that's not what I was thinking. It was more that that image seemed suggestive to me. That's it. Plus it's always so much more interesting when a reader gives his own interpretation. [/B][/QUOTE] This is how I write.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ClockworkGoth [/i]
[B](Less then Zero(yes they made that into a movie to)[/B][/QUOTE]

Quiet you, some of us have spent years trying to forget about that.
Though Spader was the bomb. When I adapt it properly I'll invent a time machine in order to have 1987 Spader play Rip again.

I'm currently reading it now and I agree it has a shit load of detail...don't know if I'll finish it or not...picked up the book a books a million for 5.97 (hardcover)