While the new film Rules of Attraction offers up a stylized technique not usually assosciated with this type of picture, that hardly makes it a great movie.

This new slice of college life opens interestingly enough. The introduction of each main character (who happen to be at a party) takes place at the same time. How is this achieved? The camera follows one character and at the end of their little moment, the film runs in reverse, taking the audience back to the beginning of the scene. At this point, the camera focuses on a different character, follows them, and then repeats the whole "reverse" process again. After these major characters are introduced, the film takes us back to the beginning of the semester, and we the audience are treated (or subjected) to a sort of character study about a group of college students and how they live their screwed up lives.

The film was adapted from a novel (by Bret Easton Ellis) and directed by Roger Avary. Avary helped develop Pulp Fiction with Quentin Tarantino, and it's quite obvious, for Rules of Attraction is very flashy, but not necessarily in a good way. Most of the characters in this picture are either dispicable or completely stupid. Now it could be argued that that's the point the movie is trying to make. For me, Rules of Attraction was uninteresting because I didn't give a crap about anyone on screen. Even hating them would be something, but I just didn't care.

This isn't to say that Rules of Attraction is a total waste. Some of the dialogue is witty (there's even a Tarantino reference), and there is one scene that blisters with realism and power, with it's depiction of lonliness and despair. In addition, there's a funny sequence in which one character makes an ass out of himself in a restaraunt. I was also keen on the ending, simply because of it's unexpected abruptness. Ultimately, most of the acts these characters commit, seem to be in the film just to shock the audience, rather than to move the story along.

Avary has assembled an impressive, youthful cast, and while most of them do their best, the movie never really amounts to anything. James Van Der Beek will probably be discussed the most because of his attempt at shedding his Dawson's Creek image. He does manage to do so. He's downright creepy, giving looks at the camera that are quite reminiscent of the evil stares given by Vincent D'Onofrio in his final moments of Full Metal Jacket.

I guess Rules of Attraction is supposed to be about dysfunction and young people trying to figure out who they are. It just never felt real or honest to me. I felt like I was watching a Todd Solondz movie, so I guess if your a Solondz fan, you'll probably like Rules of Attraction. Despite some dazzling visual style, and a couple of previously mentioned moments, I found it to be quite boring.