Yeah that's another popular and completely plausible theory, I like how there's multiple ways to look at the film

@@erenkonen There's that which works with the owner of Paul Allen's apartment complex covering up the murders of the escorts because it would be hard for her to be able to sell the apartment where women had been brutally murdered and what remained of them was hung up in the closets like business suits. And would lose its overall property value seeing as no neighbors reacted to hearing a woman getting killed in the hallway if how it's shown is how it happened. But regarding the lawyer and Paul Allen you also have the theory about mistaken identity since everyone besides Luis all try to act, perform, look the same. And the commentary about how they have the exact same job title so people easily confuse which person they talked to or spent time with. By the end of the movie, it's clear that he is experiencing psychosis, from the ATM asking him to feed it a cat, the cop car blowing up from a couple of bullets during that killing spree and no cops following him inside the building. The idea that he can't remember how many people he's killed according to one guy whose job it is to speak to serial killers in real life is apparently not far-fetched. But while the point is that these people are so self-absorbed. Not to mention that people clearly look at Bateman as too much of a dork to be able to do such things. I understand that a movie can time skip but when he's confessing on the phone that he has killed 20 maybe 40 people. He's at his height of psychosis, and trying to make himself sound bigger than he is. The way I've always seen it is he did for sure kill the homeless guy and the dog which then gave him the guts to move up and kill Paul Allen. Before he started killing escorts in Allen's apartment but the way he did it was likely much grander in his head. Both the writer and the director have suggested that while Patrick in his head believes that he's having sex with high-end priced escorts, in reality, they were street workers. Because he knew street workers would be more willing to put up with his sadism he displays by hurting them before he that's no longer enough for him. You have the debate regarding which victim was in the fridge but likely real too. The most confusing whether or not it was a kill or not is the lady he meets before he's killed the the homeless guy. The sheets at the cleaners would suggest that he did. If he had started with the homeless guy before the sheets I'd say 100%. Then again it would make real world sense in terms of how killers work their way up for the types of victims they go after and being sloppy their first go around. He might have been able to get her to go home with him. Killed her without thinking about how it would now ruin the bedsheets that he valued so much he was willing to risk getting caught instead of getting rid of them. So he did kill but at some point reality slipped.

The director says he did and the author of the book says he didn’t. So it’s all a matter of interpretation really

To explain a movie's meaning I look at what it critiques and what it affirms, often they don't say it directly so you have to pay attention. You can also find interviews with the director or often read the book/script the film was based on. To explain a movie's plot I just watch it over and over again, until I understand each scene's significance to the overall story. Thank you for the compliments!

Thank you mozz, please dox me