PSYCHO IS FIFTY YEARS OLD TODAY - Page 2

I like Psycho 2. Hell, I even like Psycho 3. But they don't compare to the original, not by the long shot. Sure, you might be surprised by them because they contains twists that you don't see coming (unlike the original), but they're pretty lame, inorganic twists that are there only to have twists. And the film making, while sometimes surprisingly effective, doesn't light a candle to the original. And that's what really matters here. They're worth it for Perkins alone, though. The scene with the shovel is priceless.

I had the luxury of seeing Psycho cold when I was really young. I didn't understand how great of a movie it was at a time, but it wasn't ruined for me so it definitely had an effect on me. Later, as I got into Hitchcock, I realized just how well made it is.

If you want to see what it's like to live the movie from a fresh perspective, show it to someone who doesn't know that much about it. I showed it to my girlfriend a while ago. She's not exactly a film buff, but I was surprised that when I talked to her about it, she said "The mother is the killer, right?" I kinda nodded but didn't confirm or deny and convinced her to watch it. She loved it and was generally scared. The Martin Balsm kill actually made her jump! And at the end, in the basement, she was really worried that Marion's sister was gonna get it. It was great watching it from her perspective, reminded of how this movie just fucking sings.

I know you might have a tough time finding someone who doesn't know the whole story. But give it a try.

He does. It's not nearly as chilling for some reason, mostly because Vaughn just doesn't have the right stare for it. But the skull transition is there.

I think we can all agree that the 'schizophrenia for dummies' sequence sucks though.

Sure, but the movie was treading new ground in this area and after a movie this shocking for the time, the audience needed a detailed explanation. Plus, the guy delivering the exposition is pretty funny. He's really hamming it up.

And to top it all off, Hitchcock gets bored of the whole conversation and just floats away down the hall to Norman.

Yeah, Perkins is having a lot of fun in front of and behind the camera in III. I only saw part IV once, but it was brutal and fell to the unfortunate "let's explain all the mystery behind the back story" bullshit that happens after movies get enough sequels.

By the way, the Psycho remake marks a point of pride for me. I submitted a question about it to Roger Ebert's Movie Answer Man column. It made it in print and in one of his review collections! So, my name made it into an Ebert book, which I always thought was pretty cool. I asked him about the state of the last movie Hitchcock was working on with Ernest Lehman and James Costigan before his death. I asked if that script was completed, wouldn't that make for a more interesting movie for Van Sant to make rather than the lifeless remake? Ebert did some checking and responded by saying that the script was never completed, and had long been scraped. It used to be online somewhere but I did a search and can't find it.

I've heard enough good stuff about Psycho II to make watching it a real priority as soon as the opportunity presents itself. The only sequel I've seen any of was IV years and years ago, which I vaguely remember having a soft-focus love scene which employed the awesomely archaic cliche of visualising an orgasm by crossfading to a fireworks display. Or did I dream that?

I prefer II because in a narrative sense it actually takes Bates somewhere interesting and doesn't just repeat the originial. III is just great fun.

Seeing them back, I'm reminded of a few things:

The shadow of Mrs. Bates is ten times more effective in the original.

I hate how Van Sant doesn't pull back from Marion holding out her hand. We get a close up of her grasping the shower curtain that lasts longer, but the pull back isn't nearly as strong.

I hate the close-up of the eye and the cut to the sky.

The scars on her back surprised me. I liked how graphic they were.

Heche does a great job. It's a well acted death scene.

My father who is a really great story teller, tells the tell of seeing Psycho, on opening weekend, as a 14 year old.

I think it was William Goldman who said that Hitchcock put that truly awful shrink speech in there so the audience could, like, catch their breath after the shock of the wine cellar. Makes sense. And you're sort of lulled by the dullness of the exposition, and then Hitchcock leaves you with Norman again.

Didn't think I could add anything, but I can! William Friedkin relates a little anecdote in Linda Ruth Williams' The Erotic Thriller In Contemporary Cinema (I've pimped that book so many times it's ridiculous) about Hitchcock (allegedly) physically assaulting Tippi Hedren after she rejected his advances, he claims this is something Hedren told him directly. He brought the story up in conjunction with PSYCHO (a forerunner of the erotic thriller) and the subject of directors putting their fantasies on film.

Honestly, considering Hitchcock was very much into dominating his actresses, it wouldn't surprise me if this were 100% true, making PSYCHO a unnerving tour through the emotionally dysfunctional lives of the men in front of and behind the camera.

I saw a documentary about the making of in which the screenwriter says that it's definitely inspired by his relationship with his mother who he hated.

A little trivia on the the source novel. The story is Psycho author Robert Bloch got the idea for Norman Bates not from the stories of killer Ed Gein, but from his frequent encounters with Castle of Frankenstein magazine editor, Calvin Thomas Beck. Apparently Beck was a slovenly, shy fat man who was dominated by a mother who followed him wherever he went and was constantly nagging and browbeating him. Bloch never admited this because he was afraid Beck, or more likely his Mom, would sue. But everybody who knew Beck and his mother immediately saw it.

"Oh, there's mother now. Watching me. What's that mother? Well I have a right to be here. It's school business. I... mother, that sailor suit doesn't fit anymore!"

Simon Oakland is terrific, and I've always assumed Hitchcock had his tongue in cheek. So, no, I don't agree.

Btw, Bates suffers from dissociative identity (or multiple personality) disorder. He's not schizophrenic. And not quite a transvestite, as the good doctor informs us.

Sweet.

A Vertigo Blu-ray needs to hurry its ass up, too.

EDIT: Not Hitchcock, but Citizen Kane would be nice, too. Not to derail into a Should Be on Blu-ray thread, but I never got around to buying it on DVD, and when Blu-ray kicked off I said "Well, I'll just hold out for Blu."

I've always thought that the end speech is meant to be funny.

Anyone who is really interested in Psycho should read this. It's one of the best books I've ever read detailing the making of a film.

http://www.amazon.com/Moment-Psycho-...7077860&sr=1-4

I was going to post just this. I'm often amazed that the old confusion between schizophrenia and multiple personality disorder is still so prevalent. People just can't seem to shake it.
Janet Leigh's book (which is, confusingly enough, simply called Psycho) is quite good as well.

I've always wondered if part of Van Sant's motivation for the remake was simply that he wanted the current generation to see the film, and knew they wouldn't seek it out on their own. Making something almost exactly by the numbers meant that an audience would see it who otherwise wouldn't.

I don't think I would agree with that idea, but it's a thought.

Actually I meant this book. Sorry guys.

http://www.amazon.com/Alfred-Hitchco...7077860&sr=1-8

I wonder if the hardcore Robert Bloch fans bitched about Hitchcock's Psycho as much as Stephen King fans did Kubrick's the Shining.

Don't know about the fans, but in the interviews I've read and seen Bloch himself often seemed to me to come just short of admiting the movie was actually better than his novel.

I have a chance to see Psycho on the big screen:

http://www.victoriatheatre.com/index...t01returnid=80

Might just go.

Thanks for keeping us informed.

The only way a working stiff in the 50s could suffer more. Be a woman.

Each time I watch this I'm convinced more and more that that toad Cassidy, the virulent catalyst in Marion's tragic mistake (but also Norman Bates' ultimate undoing as well!), deserved to have his money vanish into the ether. If I were Marion, I might've even just burned the damn pile outright. It's a measure of Perkins abilities and his nuance with Norman's complex substance that he actually makes Cassidy the more loathsome of the two character in the film.

On more goosepimpling note, in trying to change her car, Leigh is nothing short of stunning as she tries to speed along the irritatingly garrulous "California" Charlie, that particular type of character that populated the suburban landscape of the mid 20th century, invariably involved in service jobs and so committed to the idea of customer service excellence one is overcome with the dreadful sense that they're dealing with a borderline sociopath.


The terrifying face of the American service station circa mid-20th Century.

Leigh's wide, gorgeous panicky eyes, flitting again and again to the highway cop lurking like a Carpenter baddie just across the street, draws you in and makes you literally want to reach through the screen and throttle good 'ol "California" Charlie (character actor John Anderson, who would have quite a few roles that capitalized on his knack with this archetype).

Frighteningly clever way to have us side, almost without hesitation, with the person we just watched embezzle big time from her employer.

I didn't even realize this was out this Tuesday. Thanks for the heads-up, Phil.

I'm pretty sure my first exposure to Psycho was through a clip show hosted by Anthony Perkins back in the mid to late 80's. It was kind like watching "cliff notes" versions of all the classic horror films.

I remember catching Psycho III. at a young age and really enjoying it. Upon seeing it recently after nearly two decades of watching some of the better horror and suspense films both genres have to offer and having a far greater fondness for the original, I just don't find the third film as interesting.

The first sequel just works for me. I liked how sympathetic they've made Norman and more interestingly, how they made Vera Miles' Lila Crane (now, Lila Loomis(?)) into this very better bitter and bitchy character. It's kind of the direction you need to go (at least, in the case of Perkins) for a sequel to be at all passable and probably why IV. didn't work for me.

On the subject of sequels, remakes, etc., anyone else remember the made-for-TV movie, Bates Motel?

Watched the Blu-ray, fell in love.

The Blu-ray lists it as rated R. Since when is the original rated R?

The clarity of Janet Leigh's bra strap is remarkable! Some scratches on the print here and there, but overall, a truly beautiful transfer for a movie that's 50 years old. The background details of Norman's office and stuffed birds adds to the environment quite a bit. And Mother looks even faker, which somehow makes her creepier!

The 5.1 surround sound track is a little weird though. The dialogue just sounds a little off when it's not in mono...as if everyone is throwing their voices. Music sounds fantastic, though.

Just started going through the special features. I think my favorite so far is the excerpt from Hitchcock/Truffaut. The content isn't new, I've read the book years ago, but it's great to hear their interviews (and the translator). Hitchcock especially comes off as particularly candid and relaxed (for him) which is great to hear.

If I recall correctly, it was re-rated M when re-released in 1968, then re-rated R upon its home-video release in 1984. Thus making Frenzy no longer Hitch's only R-rated film.

This opens for a 4-night run at The Plaza tonight at 7:30, here in Atlanta, if anyone's nearby.

I'm 25 years old and I watched Psycho for the first time yesterday. I feel like a bad film geek. Just an amazing film, even knowing most of the beats of the standout sequences I was kind of riveted by the thing. I'm only just getting into Hitchcock but his use of form is astounding to me. I kind of love that throughout the work he seems focused on testing and developing himself, creating cinematic confines like the continuous takes in Rope or the apartment complex in Rear Window. What I love most about Psycho is how unsettling the entire thing is, even the build up to the Bates motel is thick with tension. It's fascinating because you're essentially watching a character reflect her guilt onto the people around her. I kind of love the sequence in the used car lot with the continuous cut backs to a police officer. It's also fascinating because it completely sets up Bates as a potential ally, someone who is going to help Marion.

 

At first we think possible conspirator, then we think he's actually going to turn her life around and just when Marion is on the verge of returning home she's dealt with. Even knowing that sequence from various bits of pop culture it's still a shocking sequence because Marion is genuinely likeable, if flawed. I think the switch to Bates as protagonist probably isn't handled as smoothly as the rest of the film, especially because aside from the private detective the film looses all of its interesting characters once Marion is dead. The first half of the film is full of odd, charming, characters whilst the second half is focused on the boyfriend and the sister who are both kind of dull. Still I kind of love the last sequence of the film with Bates sat in the cell, his mothers voice echoing in his head and that final quick dissolve to his mothers face. 

 

I'm also determined to double dip and see this on Blu Ray even my crappy DVD was stunning looking. 

The boyfriend and sister are pretty dull, but I think the transition to Bates as a protagonist itself is still masterfully handled.  By the time Norman is trying to bury the evidence, you WANT Marion's car to sink for his sake. 

 

What's also nice is that Marion gets a fairly full character arc by the time she meets her fate.  You have a good sense of how a movie in which she survives would've ended.  You don't feel cheated out of that movie.

I kind of love the shot of the swamp enveloping the car. It doesn't even look like water, just sludge. The film does a good job of setting up Bates as creepy but dutiful, his revulsion at the scene and then pensive looks as he clears stuff up really sets up the Mother and Bates as separate people.

Are you going to watch Van Sant's remake? 

 

Definitely get the blu-ray.  At least to marvel at Janet Leigh's arm hairs.  The disc itself is finely put together.

I'm a fan of Van Sant, but given how parodied and osmosed by pop culture the original is the idea of a remake almost seems pointless. 

 

Actually...that kinda makes me morbidly curious. 

Morbidly curious is the best way to watch it.  It's just a very strange experiment.  It's pointless (and maybe that was Van Sant's point), but I'm kinda glad that it was done.