'American Psycho' luxury London property ad is pulled after barage of criticism

Redrow London admits 'maybe we didn’t get it quite right with this one'

Click to follow
The Independent Online

A London property firm has pulled its advert for luxury apartments just days after it emerged online, when critics likened it to psychological slasher flick, American Psycho.

Reactions to the advert ranged from ridicule, to spoof, to cries of class warfare, as an actor – in yuppie, Patrick Bateman-esque suit, using a retro mobile phone – stalked about his flat and executive offices making profound statements like: "They say nothing comes easy. But if it was easy, then it wouldn’t feel as good."

Yes, really.

A Redrow London spokesperson told The Independent: “We tried to do something a bit new and different from the typical property videos out there, but we accept that maybe we didn’t get it quite right with this one.”

Over the weekend architect Sam Jacob uploaded a hilarious (or should that be chilling?) mash-up of the advert and scenes from American Psycho, while elsewhere it drew comparisons with Fight Club and even the apocalypse.

On a more serious note (although it obviously doesn’t get much more serious than Bret Easton Ellis), the advert also sparked anger at its apparent glorification of wealth and acquisition, viewed as insensitive at a time of increasing hardship for regular renters and home-owners in the city.

In one scene, the 'hero' of the piece stands looking (literally) down his nose at the rest of London, presumably happy to be elevated above it, and its residents.

Dan Hancox, author of The Village Against the World, the story of a Communist town in Spain, journalist on the housing crisis and vocal critic of UK gentrification, said on Twitter: “Oh my. This is a bold, terrifying new dawn in promo videos for luxury flats.

Sam Jacob described the ad to The Guardian as: “A totally clear expression of the psychotic nature of housing in London.

“It plunges us back into the ultimate yuppie fantasy – the fact that the individual only exists in relation to the brands that they own, the things that they’ve bought.”

Comments