What's new

Psycho (Hitchcock): Blah... (1 Viewer)

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
67,599
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
Sorry, but I don't exactly considered what you wrote as backing up anything except the film wasn't scary to you and you wondered why the shower scene is so famous.




Crawdaddy
 

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
67,599
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
Furthermore, Holadem this isn't exactly the first classic film you had trouble with in regard to it not working for you. Maybe, the reason for that has more to do with yourself and not necessarily the films.



Crawdaddy
 

ShawnCoghill

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
78
Man how could you say you didn't like Psycho???
In my opinion,,and many others opinions This WAS the greatest film of all time. And what the heck you talking about not scary? It debuted in 1960!! You show me a film that was a major Hollywood release before that,that implied such brutal violence,and besides it all wasn't just implied.I cant put much faith in people who find fault with this film.THIS FILM HAS IT ALL!!!! This film also had perhaps the best performance of all time by an actor.Especially an actor who wasn't known for being a GREAT actor.Tony Perkins.It had the best jaw dropper up to that point,having The leading actress DIE,and not only DIE but die very early.This had the Best Twist of all time,,I mean for 1960 how many people heard of multiple personality disorder,not many.This film had such sexual overtones im amazed the MPAA let them get away with as much as they did.The camera work is Impeccable,Editing,THE SOUNDTRACK,It just had THE FEEL!!!
It hurts to see someone try and defame this film.
 

Bill Huelbig

Supporting Actor
Joined
Apr 9, 2000
Messages
501
Location
Weehawken, NJ
Real Name
Bill Huelbig
Holadem:

I hope you'll now give VERTIGO a chance. I'm convinced that no other director who ever lived, and certainly not the ones making movies today, would have been able to make that film as beautiful as it is except Alfred Hitchcock. Like Fellini and Kubrick, he's one of those directors that are often imitated but can never be replaced.

--Bill
 

ShawnCoghill

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
78
Oh sorry bout that,I didnt read anyones except the first,but it seems that everyone pretty much felt the same,I was just saying the same things over again.
But Really man What were you Thinking?? hehe
 

Tom Ryan

Screenwriter
Joined
Apr 1, 2001
Messages
1,044
I recently saw Psycho for the first time as well, and I thought it was amazing. I was actually surprised at the amount of very real violence in the film, and the acting was astonishing...probably the best I've ever seen in a Hitchcock film.

Perkins was incredible in this role, and it's not hard to see why he was typecast in the years following. The chilling smile on his face At the end of the film when he rushes in to kill Marion's sister and her boyfriend
was one of the creepiest expressions I've ever seen on film...it made my skin crawl.

The story was also more unique than most of the Hitchcock films I've seen are; who expects the protagonist to die within the first half of the movie?
. However, I really wish I wasn't aware of all the twists, turns, and surprises in this film before seeing it. Since it's a classic film, it's difficult to avoid that, but I think I would've enjoyed the movie about ten times more if I hadn't known That Marion is knifed to death in the shower and Norman IS "mother"
.

Overall, this may be my favorite Hitchcock film now.

-Tom
 

Tommy G

Screenwriter
Joined
Sep 19, 2000
Messages
1,233


Isn't what absurd? I'm stating a simple fact that people were indeed afraid to take showers. Like I said it seemed absurd for people to be scared to go into 3 feet of water in the ocean in '75 as well but it still happened. Movies that scare people that much have thus established themselves as incredible thrillers.
 

Ted Lee

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 8, 2001
Messages
8,390
i'm not 100% sure on this, but i think i'm pretty close:

the actress (janet lee?) said herself that after making the movie, she didn't take showers anymore. couldn't stand to be in them.

i don't know if she was just sick and tired because of the filming or if she had developed some abnormal fear of showers as a consequence....
 

CameronS

Supporting Actor
Joined
Apr 26, 1998
Messages
708
The shower scene from Psycho is not a bloodbath, but it makes me flinch everytime I see it. The fact that it does not show any actual stabbing makes it all the more powerfull as the scene makes it very easy for you imagine the knife deeply stabbing and sliding through her flesh over and over.
Well, thats what makes it scary to me. ;)
 

Bill Huelbig

Supporting Actor
Joined
Apr 9, 2000
Messages
501
Location
Weehawken, NJ
Real Name
Bill Huelbig
I'm stating a simple fact that people were indeed afraid to take showers.
I believe Janet Leigh once stated that she has never taken another shower since making PSYCHO. I guess she has a better excuse than the rest of us but you're right, Tommy - I remember that national fear of shower-taking too.

--Bill
 

Mark Palermo

Second Unit
Joined
Jun 28, 2000
Messages
366
I, too, can't personally see how somebody could watch Psycho and not find it, at the very least, to be a groundbreaking piece of technical filmmaking. Nevertheless, there's no use in wasting time defending a classic, and I've already complained enough about why I dislike the venerated status of certain films in the Citizen Kane thread.

I do, however, feel that Hitchcock's films are not very intense or suspenseful when viewed today. They're interesting to me mainly on analytic terms (Vertigo is one of my favorite films, period.) But you've gotta remember that Hitchcock "wrote the math" for how to create suspense. Others are still putting it to use. Although De Palma is always living under the stigma (perpetuated mainly by critics who don't understand his work) that he's a poor man's Hitchcock, in terms of sheer intensity, it's hard to find a prolonged sequence in any Hitchcock film that--for me at least--is as gripping and unsettling as the final 20 minutes of Carrie. In fact, I genuinely believe that if you removed De Palma's name from the credits and replaced it with Hitchcock's, it would be one of The Master's most beloved works.

Mark
 

Jefferson Morris

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
826
It is my opinion that this movie is dated.
My first full-blown experience with Psycho was perhaps a decade ago, watching it with a modestly sized audience of college students (of which I was one at the time).

The film elicited the expected jumps in the right places...and more than a few unintentional laughs in the wrong places (including Martin Balsam's famous tumble down the stairs). As groundbreaking and extraordinary as the film was, for all the reasons elaborated by the HTF'ers above, I must agree that parts of it are dated for a young audience. What was shocking forty years ago rapidly becomes corny to the jaded sensibilities of youth.

Of course, part of the problem with a film as influential as this is that its pioneering techniques rapidly become hoary cliches as they're adopted and imitated. The modern moviegoer experiences a similar problem upon first viewing Citizen Kane--not understanding how much of the modern cinematic vocabulary is being pioneered before their eyes, the reaction of the newbie is often, "Well...so what was the big deal?"

I suppose it may be the ultimate fate of many suspense/horror classics to lose their impact with time, to the extent that they rely on shock and taboo-breaking for their effect. Younger moviegoers may well be laughing at films like Psycho now (and soon we can probably add The Exorcist and Alien to that list, if they're not on it already). Whether this weakens their status as genre classics is debatable, but it certainly doesn't negate the rewards they offer for those willing to research and understand their place in film history.

--Jefferson Morris

P.S. As for my opinion, I think The Birds is scarier, and even more far out.
 

Mark-W

Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 6, 1999
Messages
3,297
Real Name
Mark
Another amazing thing about this film:
Hitchock tricks us into rooting for the killer.
When Norman cleans up the mess and puts Marion in
the trunk of the car and then shoves it into the
bog...how many of you were thinking, "Oh, no!" when
it ceased to sink for a few moments, and then sigh
a sigh of relief when it starts sinking again.
Clever clever celver.
Hitch was a visual genius, and while Psycho isn't
my favorite film of his (that would be Rear Window),
it was revolutionary and represents a director at the height
of his powers just when people thought he was losing his
touch.
Mark
 

Jack Briggs

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 3, 1999
Messages
16,805
And, Holadem, no one is flaming you. You came to this board, posting something to the effect that simply because you didn't cotton to a groundbreaking, innovative (think montage taken to new levels), superbly directed and acted classic for the ages then it must be the film's fault. Nope, you just didn't care for it, and are not open to it. The film is not about gore. The film is about the ever-mounting tension--not to mention that it's a film about guilt and self-loathing.

Alfred Hitchcock was such a pioneer in every way that, even decades after his career began, he was still breaking new ground at every turn. Here's a man who already has such upper-tier films as Rear Window, Strangers on a Train, The 39 Steps, Rebecca, and North By Northwest to his credit--and he still gives us something so innovative as Psycho so late in his career.

Amazing.

What's with the dissing of established classics, anyway? A lot of that going on lately.
 

Ted Lee

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 8, 2001
Messages
8,390
i wonder if holadem would have elicited such passionate responses if he chose to criticize "dude, where's my car?" instead....
no offense holadem...that's just me being stupid. i respect your opinions and will still love you in the morning. :D
 

Peter Kline

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 9, 1999
Messages
2,393
It did indeed leave a lasting impression on Janet Leigh as she never took a shower again after doing that role. (Yes, she takes baths).

In the art of story telling and how it is presented on film, less can be more. One's imagination is scarier then having everything shown. Hitchcock knew this. Today many young people are insensitized to violence, as it is often ultra graphic. So a film, like Psycho, which implies it more seems tame. I'm not going to condemn Holadem for his viewpoint. I would hope he will eventually understand subtlety and the other finer points of film making rather then the bang 'em over the head style prevelant in many films today.
 

Holadem

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2000
Messages
8,967
If I may quote myself from another thread (very pretentious, I know):

Like I said it seemed absurd for people to be scared to go into 3 feet of water in the ocean in '75 as well but it still happened.
Tommy, then it seems we are in agreement here aren't we? Taking a bath instead of a shower is as absurd as swimming in the pacific instead of the atlantic or flying Delta airlines instead of AA and United Airlines. That was all I meant to say.

--
Holadem
 

Peter Kline

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 9, 1999
Messages
2,393
Holadem,

Your use of the word "blah" was sure to get responses. It can be considered "baiting". What did you expect? I think you wanted to be flamed, no? it doesn't matter. People on this forum love film and will defend what is generally considered to be a fine or even great one.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,810
Messages
5,123,574
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top