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

[Jack Briggs]

Case in point, Peter: Robert Wise's 1963 The Haunting versus that awful, show-'em-everything/CGI-'em-to-death thing from two or so years ago. What you don't see is always much scarier. Too bad this concept is being lost on so many younger movie-goers.

 

[Tom Ryan]

Classic films I didn't love: Chinatown, Raging Bull, Platoon, All Quiet On The Western Front, 2001 (flees from Jack Briggs' wrath). I did love Psycho though .
-Tom

 

[Jordan_E]

Forget it, Tom, it's Chinatown!

 

[Seth Paxton]

The shower scene is disturbing because it makes the villain our sole constant for the rest of the movie, which was revolutionary for the time and is still somewhat off-putting even today.

An excellent point by Jason. Just think of Deep Blue Sea if you want to talk about influence. People raved about that "shocker" yet it had been done before and in much more dramatic fashion considering how big Leigh was in comparison to the rest of the cast, and more importantly how dominating of screen time her role has during the beginning of the film. The film is about HER until she takes a shower.



Sidebar to What Lies Beneath. Totally grabbed from multiple Hitch films. More shameless than DePalma ever was.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Since each person is unique in their personal makeup and as I stated above, we all bring a certain amount of personal baggage whenever we view a film or any piece of art which presents the possibility that our uniqueness might have an influence on how we perceived a film or a piece of art.




Crawdaddy

 

[Holadem]

Quote:

I rest my case.
--
Holadem

 

[Seth Paxton]

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

Um, it doesn't help when he remakes a bunch of Hitchcock films too, like Vertigo (Body Double), Pyscho (Dressed to Kill), and Rear Window (Blow Out).

I like DePalma and I like those films, but they are Hitchcock films redone. So he brought it on himself.

 

[Seth Paxton]

BTW, Holadem, we DO have the chance for you to evaluate Pyscho in a "non-dated" manner. The scene for scene remake basically tried to sex and gore up the original without changing anything else.

Most people felt that it made it a much worse film, losing all it's subtle nuances.

But as I say, it's a unique situation that you can actually view a film that adds what it sounds like you wanted added. If you didn't watch it yet I suggest you do. Then come back with your feelings comparing the two versions.

Perhaps you will like the remake (or Dressed to Kill as well) over the original. Maybe it holds the elements that you feel are missing.

For me they both fall short, though Dressed to Kill does better at capturing the Hitch tone than the direct remake (ironically).

 

[Holadem]

Too bad this concept is being lost on so many younger movie-goers.

More condescension and selective reading of my posts. Beautiful. With this kind of attitude, this place will soon turn into a 10 member forum where everyone has a tremendous knowledge of film and they all agree with each other. Always.

Robert, fair enough.

--
Holadem

 

[Holadem]

Seth, I appreciate the sentiment but I won't go out of my way to watch a notoriously dreadful movie to compare it to one that left me cold. I can already picture what the remake looks like and despite what you may have heard, I appreciate subtely very much...

--
Holadem

 

[Peter Kline]

You're welcome.

 

[Jeremiah]

Holadem, I actually like Psycho and didn't care for Rear Window or Vertigo.

To sum up my thoughts on "Psycho" is.........Norman bates is Psycho.

 

[Peter Kline]

"Bates Motel"... people check in but they don't check out.

 

[teapot2001]

As for coming to this board, I have been on this board.

Yes, I know you've been a member here for a while. What I meant was how you came here and started a thread to seek others' opinions, instead of visiting other movie resources.

~T

 

[Jack Briggs]

Now, now, let's loosen the collar a bit.

It's in the approach, Holadem. Perhaps if the thread title and your initial post had been along the lines of, "I went into this really expecting to like it, but I had these problems: a) the shower scene didn't strike me as scary, b) all your other points, etc.

Instead, there was a testiness that made the post seem like a challenge. It was how your post was perceived.

So, with all that baggage attendant to your post, it's surprising you were surpised at the responses you received.

That's all. Nobody's being condescending here. Post about this film, saying "blah" in your title, then expect these kinds of responses. No one is attacking you. As Crawdaddy noted, it's your post that's being contested.

Try screening the film again. I just bet, in time, you will come to appreciate the film, even if you never end up liking it.

 

[Anthony Thorne]

Well, I think PSYCHO is one of the 10 best films ever made. Not one of the top ten horror films, but one of the top American movies of any genre. Others may disagree, and that's fine.

There are a lot of Film 101 things I noticed as a teen while watching it. The consistent use of horizontals and verticals. The way the film insitently uses 'forward' movement (POV shots from people walking, cars driving, going down plugholes etc.) to ultimately descend into the basement, and then the final shot of the film reverses the movement with the car being pulled back out of the swamp. The cheeky placement of mirrors in the background of various scenes. The shot in Marion's city apartment which reveals (in the background) an open doorway, a parted shower curtain and a prominent shower nozzle. The ominous painting of a swamp seen on the wall of Marion's workplace as she leaves it with the money. The uncanny shot of the folded-hands statuette causing Vera Miles to notice herself in dual mirrors, and the very slight distaste on her face when she opens the book in Norman's bedroom and discovers its contents. The bird imagery. The music... There are lots of things like this, but my impression now is of a movie made with absolute confidence and directness of vision. There are hundreds of film classics, and even a few which Hitchcock might cite as a loose inspiration, but, for me, none of them quite quite equal the supremely entertaining and extremely unnerving mix that Hitchcock pulled off with PSYCHO.

 

[Ted Lee]

heck holadem -
everyone has movies that they don't like that elicit a "what the hell are you thinking" response from other people.
for the record, i thought AI and Moulin Rouge were terrible...blew chunks...sucked eggs....etc.
different strokes for different folks...that's all.

 

[Mark Pfeiffer]

The psychological explanation at the end is probably the most dated element in the film, FWIW, although it does lead into that dissolve between Norman's face and that skull. Yikes.

I think a good thing also to remember is how little information most people had about the film prior to seeing it. Unlike today, when we know practically everything up to the end credits before going into the theater, Hitchcock was particularly tightlipped about Psycho. If memory serves, there were no advance screenings even for the press, who had to see it when it was released to the public.

When watching older films, I try to tailor my reactions to the times the films were made. Not sure I can explain how I do that, but suffice it to say that I'm still able to be "shocked" by elements that were intended to be shocking at the time. (There's a murder in Strangers on a Train that really kicked me upside the head.) Maybe it comes with time and experience watching a lot of films. I'm not implying you don't have the background, but I'd encourage you to go back a year or two from now and watch some of these classics that didn't strike you and see what your reactions are then. The more we see and learn as film buffs, the more we are able to appreciate what might have previously hit us indifferently.

If you're interested, there are plenty of excellent resources about Hithcock and Psycho (Truffaut's interview book with The Master has a good section on it) that might help put it all in perspective.

 

[Steve Christou]

If there's one director I'm fanatical about its Hitchcock, no other director IMO comes close to the amount of great movies he has directed, and Psycho IS his masterpiece, again my opinion, not my favorite of his films, North by Northwest and Rear Window just edge it out.
For its time 1960 Psycho redefined horror/suspence films, it was cheaply made in BW using a tv crew with little blood and scared the crap out of everybody at that time, its still effectively creepy today, a brilliantly made exercise in brooding terror.
But Jack is right, there has been a lot of 'dissing' of established classics on the forum in the past few months, what's going on?

 

[Bill Huelbig]

Holadem said:

I have been looking to rent Vertigo without success. I will probably have to buy it.

The last time I bought a DVD without seeing the movie first (SEXY BEAST), I didn't like it and ended up giving it away. But I feel very safe in saying that you can't go wrong with VERTIGO. One good reason besides the film itself: you'll get to see the incredible restoration work done by our fellow HTF member Robert A. Harris.

--Bill