User Score
6.8 out of 10

Generally favorable reviews- based on 63 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 43 out of 63
  2. Negative: 19 out of 63

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

  1. RicardoR.
    Oct 31, 2005
    10
    This as got to be one of the most underrated movies of all time. Critics say it's superficial, well guess what? Youth IS Superficial, and the american youth is one of most superficial on the planet, so this movie is nothing more than a loyal portrait of how college life is nowadays. Also the movie is extremely well directed in a sense that's totally innovative!
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  2. JasonZ.
    Mar 4, 2003
    8
    Avary is an up-and-coming director superstar. This film succeeds as a period piece of American college amorality. Its sarcasm is intentionally not funny so as to highlight the finality of youthful transgression. As someone who works in higher education, the film's exaggerations serve only to underscore the intensity of each character as they try to represent iconoclastic college students of today's mixed up world. The film is disturbing, complex, highly watchable, and very unforgettable. Watching this film is not easy because it needs to be discussed and critiqued at every turn in order to do it justice. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  3. HeidiM.
    Mar 2, 2003
    10
    The camera tricks in this movie were among the best. There are still some scenes that I can not get out of head. If you didn't like this movie then you just didn't understand it.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  4. smile
    Jul 18, 2005
    9
    This movie does't tell everything about the Elli's book, but it truly tells the highpoints. The cruel and narsistic way to deal with it works even better in film than realistic comedy. There is no need for searching under the surface. Camden surely lives in the moment or at least Parties, sex and rock'n roll are everything in college life. Everybody seems happy, but nobody isn't thats the real life. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  5. SarahL.
    Oct 11, 2002
    10
    Totally what I needed. A huge reminder of why it's so important not to live on campus. This film was depressingly fun. Just like the real thing!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  6. LindaR.
    Oct 12, 2002
    3
    Aside from a few fleeting original camera tricks and one excellent series of short clips from a Europe trip, this movie is pretty horrible. This is supposed to be Dawson's coming out party as a series actor, but he's terrible. The kid couldn't act his way out of a paper bag. Shannyn seems like she'd be a really good actress in a actual role.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  7. SteveJ.
    Oct 13, 2002
    1
    Of zero usefulness and less than that entertainment.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  8. Jovi
    Oct 17, 2002
    8
    Depressingly good. Great acting and film style. The Reverse effect gets a little borring and too much at times but none the less, it doesn't take away from it at all. I think Vanderbeek is great and under rated - a nice departure from Dawson's Crack... Sex, drugs, depravity, if you enjoy all of that then you'll enjoy Rules...
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  9. NickI.
    Oct 19, 2002
    8
    As a student, i am reading the book. It follows the main parts of the story. As well all the camara tricks are really good. Actors are ok. But the story reaflects the reality of the student life in a liberal rich university. And it's true! Face it guys!!!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  10. LouisP.
    Feb 20, 2003
    8
    A really cool film. Not as good as Avary's Pulp Fiction. But then again has there been a film that has come close in the past few years?
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  11. SeanB.
    Mar 15, 2003
    9
    This movie pushes it to the edge, its brilliant.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  12. OliviaR.
    Mar 30, 2003
    1
    This movie sucked-it was nothing like the previews. The repetitive going backwards part really frustrated me, and so did Victor's monologue about Europe.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  13. FranciscoGabrielA.
    Mar 4, 2003
    10
    This movie will become a classic in a few years. I really enjoyed it... It reflects all that I've ever loved and hated at the same time...van der beek was great, i didn't expected his performance...simply brilliant. Not a so ordinary teen movie... to remember.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  14. JimS.
    Mar 4, 2003
    0
    To those who say "If you don't like it, you didn't get it," I say you are reading far too much into this trifling movie. It's nothing more than a flashy look at the morally corrupt college student. Also, I thought satire was supposed to be funny?
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  15. Stephanie
    Apr 8, 2003
    10
    This movie makes you wanna go out and do only two things.... get f..ked and get laid.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  16. GeoffreyR.
    Aug 29, 2003
    10
    This is a really nice movie. I think we can hate it because it show what is relly inside us...
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  17. RIchC.
    Sep 5, 2003
    9
    Fantastic! I thought it was brilliantly filmed doing things I had never even thought about seeing on the big screen while mixing humor, sadness and just plain ol wackiness all in the same film. All of you who rate this movie poorly I'm assuming are still waiting for 'The Piano 2' or didn't go to College because that stuff in the movie really happens!!!! Wake up!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  18. ArielleS.
    Sep 8, 2003
    10
    Phenomenal, you cannot watch it just once.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  19. EdK.
    Jan 3, 2004
    8
    It was good, but confusing.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  20. SarahB.
    May 6, 2004
    10
    This movie is the best movie even i rent it all the time anyone who doesn't like this movie is insane ps ian you are a total babe.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  21. Disco_Stew
    Oct 14, 2005
    0
    Rules Of Attraction is by far the worst movie I have ever seen in my entire life, I am still recovering from it.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  22. BrttR
    Jan 24, 2005
    10
    The most amazing movie ever. If you don't like it then your a loser! Dick is the most amazing/hottest character I have ever seeen. The book is good too.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  23. JEd
    Mar 6, 2005
    9
    Not for the faint hearted or those with a heart of stone -- I found this to be absolutely compelling watching. Many of the characters are dislikeable but all of the main characters are all too human. This movie is about love (or more generally, longing for another human being). The central love "triangle" is really about everyone shooting off in different connections, never really connecting. "Do you every really know anybody?" No, you will never really know another human being. Shannyn Sossamon is fantastic and some of the "artsy" film techniques are truly creative and add depth This is thoughtprovoking stuff. Aside: I wonder how many of the low scores by users and mainstream reviewers are a (sub?)conscious reaction against the fact that a main character, one of the first we meet, is gay, and about the most honest depiction of what it's like that I've seen (that love can be hard for everyone and anyone). Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  24. JessicaL.
    Oct 15, 2002
    0
    This movie sucked. It had no point to it at ALL!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  25. PimpDaddy
    Oct 15, 2002
    10
    This movie was great.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  26. Jordan
    Nov 3, 2003
    10
    Absolutely remarkable...
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  27. Richard
    Feb 24, 2003
    3
    As a character said in Poltergeist 3, "Well, that was a load of crap that doesn't mean anything." Decent performances (and an absolutely insane and welcome one from Russell Sams) amounts to diddly-squat in a movie that tells us things we already know in ways we've already seen. My own fault, though - Avary's "Killing Zoe" was similarly structured, with a deadeningly "hip" amorality and absolutely no point to make about anything. A waste. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  28. NicholasO.
    Mar 15, 2003
    10
    Most people, if not everyone can relate this film to their own lives. Even if only as a reminder that things dont work out how we want them to much of the time.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  29. NickM.
    Aug 22, 2003
    10
    I don't like documentaries but this one rocked.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  30. JaredSS
    Feb 17, 2004
    8
    Very entertaining, disturbing, and well-done. Bravo to Avary for some very innovative sequences (the split-screen turning into one shot, the Europe trip in fast forward, among others). I wish Avary would make more movies...this is his first in 8 years, and only his second feature! Ahh! Killing Zoe rocks, too. Think of Rules of Attraction as American Psycho meets Go...that's what it plays like to me. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  31. DaveC.
    Jun 28, 2004
    2
    Only one aspect of this film impressed me and that was the suicide sequence where it goes over a series of flashbacks which consists of shot from earlier on in the film where we would have missed the depressive girl earlier. This is a clever idea and really illustrates how easily ignored these kinds of people are. Still, it just just doesn't coherently fit into the film, although nothing could in this mess. So what's wrong with this film? Okay, first off, for a film that seems to love getting on its high horse over serious issues such as teenage suicide, it happily avoids any sort of social insight and instead opts for one dimensional (and not to mention offensive) stereotypes and implausibly OTT melodrama, and I'm not talking the Mike Leigh's Secrets & Lies kind of melodrama, but boneheaded off the scale melodrama. All of this is typified in a scene where a gay student attempts suicide and his neurotic, flamboyant friends take him to hospital all of whom seem to be on the verge of nervous breakdown only to be refused assistance by the nurse because she's on her break. Not content with its already shallow, loathesome representation of homosexuals, there is also a young gay man in the film named Paul who lusts after shallow, self-centered jock (more stereotypes) Sean played by mediocre Dawsons Creek actor James Van De Beek and who doesn't seem to have anything better to do. It is of course an unrequited love (after all, in spite of an adequete array of gratuitous sex and violence to appeal to the lowest common denominator, we still wouldn't want anything THAT taboo), slimey Sean as the film's main protagonist (or at least I think, all I know is that out of all the disparate incohesive plot threads, he got the most screen time) has his sights set on the pretty but dull girl Laura, played by the utterly useless Shannyn Sossamon, but as long he doesn't get over that big ego of his, he can kiss any chance with her goodbye. So, I should think that in terms characters and story I have now established that this film has all the intelligence and subtlety of Jessica Biel (who funnily enough also appears in this film in a small role that meant nothing) running away from Leatherface in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake... but wait, there's more. In a clearly self-conscious aim to achieve a sort of cult status, the film is highly stylised. With a non-linear structure, reversed sequences, a choppy narrative and one utterly senseless and pretentious split screen moment in the first meeting of Sean and Laura. Pompous pseudo-film buffs who think that anything that doesn't make sense is cool and fans low brow humor should both be pleased by this, but I should think that anyone else would see this film for what it is. A cynical teen gross-out film posing as an "intellectual" art-house film. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  32. holley
    Mar 1, 2005
    8
    The camera work is kick ass, the charaters are innteresting and sexy, and althought it is not completely true to the book it makes for a very compellinig film.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  33. Lana
    Jun 22, 2005
    10
    This is one of the very best movies i've ever seen, because it was so REAL. Watching this film was like watching my own life. i have definately met many people in real life who are virtually identical to the types of characters in this film, and these situations are very realistic. The characters are selfish and narcissistic, greedy, thoughtless and cruel, just like real people. Finally, a film that shows something other then sugarcoated fairy tale fantasies of "love" that never happen in the real world. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  34. ChelseaE.
    Apr 8, 2008
    10
    There is only one word that can properly portray this movie; real. The reality of the movie is almost disturbing. There is an undeniable college energy about it. Being a college student, I can completely relate to most of the characters and their actions. It’s so much more than just another portrayal of wild parties, drugs, and sex in most college flicks. Those movies show the superficial side of college students, while The Rules of Attraction allows the audience to identify with the actors and get a glimpse inside their souls. It focuses on the brutal reality of life… “Luck has nothing to do with it. Everything is preordained. Manifest destiny. You can stop time from happening no more than you can will the oceans to overwhelm the world, or to cause the moon to drop from her outer sphere. Luck has nothing to do with anything.” Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  35. FredK.
    Oct 11, 2002
    2
    Trash..and not in a good way. Quite disappointing, considering I was really looking forward to this film.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  36. JustinB.
    Oct 13, 2002
    9
    Every major critic who says it's pointless either didn't go to college or was a nerd in his room doing homework the whole time. Otherwise brilliant book, good movie, and for people who don't understand try reading this book along with ellis's other novels and all the characters link and tell a real whole story about these charecters.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  37. AngryJonny
    Oct 18, 2002
    2
    Although a favorite book of mine in high school that I read three times, it's not exactly a great work of literature, but it's a fun, amusing, vapid tale about humorously idiotic college students and the constant sex and drugs that consume their superficial lives. Well, the movie is arty, pretentious, and boring as hell. It doesn't even have any interesting sex or nudity. Very disappointing. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  38. ShawnP.
    Oct 18, 2002
    10
    Not since Run Lola Run have I been so deeply engrossed in a movie. Daring and original, Avery and his young cast go for broke and create a future cult classic!!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  39. FredD.
    Oct 21, 2002
    10
    If you've been to college you would know two things: that this can be very realistic, and also that it's not really the standard. For those who have written about how this movie sucks, I would guess you've never attended college for two reasons: this movie is great, and, few of you so far seem to grasp the mechanics of the written English language.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  40. Nic
    Dec 12, 2003
    0
    A film that had my stomach churning in the beginning, vomiting through the middle, and left me with bad after taste in the end. Terrible.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  41. AL
    Dec 7, 2003
    0
    Pointless and a waste of good money.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  42. Zamin
    Feb 23, 2003
    9
    It's been a while since I have been so compelled by a movie. From the first scene, Rules of Attraction grabs you and doesn't let go. The cinemtography is superb. I actually have respect for James Van Der Beek after this movie. Deeply dark, satirical, and sometimes just funny, a movie worth viewing.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  43. MeganP.
    Mar 21, 2003
    9
    This movie kept you wanting to know what was going to happen next. Wasn't predictable, which made it all the more unique.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  44. TedB.
    May 18, 2004
    3
    This film does require a second viewing, but only because the storytelling is done poorly. Who gives a crap about the Jack Daniels-swallowing hard-on who walks in, gets hammered, and walks out? The film's editing and cinematography were fantastic, but the direction and writing were untimely. The film was a bunch of short stories that came together on a thread. I wasn't hanging on the edge of my chair, but I was trying to put together the pieces. It's not American Psycho; it's not Pulp Fiction; it's not really even an okay movie. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  45. KatieO.
    May 21, 2004
    10
    This movie is amazing.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  46. JohnF.
    Nov 17, 2005
    9
    A tough, forcefully abrasive adaptation of a flawed (and decidedly forgettable) Bret Easton Ellis novel? Roger Avery didn't do himself any favours in following up the empty (and ugly, and flat) Killing Zoe, but has gone on to inadvertantly create one of the most important films of this past decade. This is an angry, hugely inventive dissection, and one that mercilessly attacks (like all of the very best satire) EVERYBODY. Its nihilistic viewpoint is raw, but not without heart; the final, artfully composed twenty minutes wring the heart whilst also throwing arms in the air in utter disillusion. We, as a species, are fucked... but how did we let it come to this? The dearth of religion? The church of the self? Avary suggests nothing, merely letting us bathe in the horror of our own complicity. Much as I loathe many of this movie's supporters, it is almost inarguable that this is a film that's going to be avidly devoured for decades to come. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
Metascore

Mixed or average reviews - based on 30 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 30
  2. Negative: 8 out of 30
  1. The harder the movie tries to shock, the shriller it rings.
  2. 70
    Actually I quite enjoyed the film -- but how do I get rid of this awful discharge?
  3. Reviewed by: Todd Levin
    40
    The big screen has a very difficult time capturing the talent of James Van Der Beek - literally. The aspect ratio of projected film simply cannot accommodate the full breadth of his enormous melon head.