I saw it recently, and of course it isn't nearly as good as the classic Hitchcock original, but I thought it was a very well done sequel. What made me talk about it on here was about one of the unintentionally hilarious scenes. The movie goes for a while without that unnecessary gore that most movies of that decade had, but near the end this woman is killed in a very uncalled for way, she sees the killer and screams, and the knife is plunged through her mouth and her throat and the blade goes out the back of her head. I started laughing so hard, I couldn't help it. The movie would have been nearer to perfect if it just didn't include that scene.
Any thoughts? (oh, and as an afterword, how are the sequels, Psycho 3, 4, 5, and how badly does the remake suck?)
"Psycho 5" was never planned,nor made,but "Psycho 3" was a pretty weak remake of the first one,with more explicit gore and nudity(where Norman finds out who "really" is his real mother) ,and "Psycho 4" was a made-for-cable TV prequel/sequel,with flashbacks to Norman's teen years(played by Henry Thomas)with his controlling mother(Olivia Hussey),paired with Norman,now married,finally beating his psychotic demons.
Gus Van Zant's way-too-gratuitious remake eternally sucks,with its shot-by-shot (rematching the classic shots) scenes,Robert Forster cameo,and all.
I said "Psycho 5" because there was a sequel called "Bates Motel." I looked on IMDb, and Bates Motel came out before Psycho IV, so I don't know what to count it as. Anthony Perkins did boycott it though, that may have something to do with it.
Bates Motel was, as I recall, an attempt at a TV series that fell through. There is also a Robert Block Novel by the same name that is the second sequel to his Psycho
My opinions on the Psychoes , in capsle form, are as follows:
* - Psycho - Excellent. One of Hitchcock's best, and the best adaptation of a Robert Bloch story for the movies.
* - Psycho 2 - I liked it. I think the last actual conversation Norman has in it ("Are you sure you don't want a tosted cheese sandwich?") is one of the best in the series. Not as good as the first, but as sequels go, not bad at all.
* - Psycho 3 - I liked this one too, as depressing as it is. This has one of the best moments in the series, which I don't think I can describe without ruining the film. Again, not as good as the first one, but good for a sequel.
* - Psycho 4 - I've never seen this one. Never cared for prequels. Knowing how things turns out spoils things. I might watch it, just to finish the series, but I don't think so.
* - Psycho remake - Never saw the point, never cared to watch. Though, if I do watch it, it'll be back to back with the first one. Might be interesting that way.
Robert Bloch, author of the original novel, wrote a sequel for Hollywood, but thankfully, the resulting mess was never filmed...well, not as "Psycho II," anyway.
SPOILER:
Norm escapes the nuthouse by strangling a nun and walking out in her habit. Shortly thereafter, a film crew, shooting "Psycho: The Norman Bates Story," starts getting knocked off one by one...
"SURPRISE" SPOILER:
...it's the movie director. Norman is killed by his second (intended) victim early in the novel, everyone else is killed by the director. For the finale, the director sits in police custody, thinking to himself how if he acts normal, everyone will think "he wouldn't hurt a fly" blah blah blah. Yeah, now HE'S "Norman."
END SPOILER
Pluses: the surprising tragic theme and score by Jerry Goldsmith; Perkins is excellent.
Minuses: slasher-movie mentality requires extra victims who show up just for the sake of getting cut up; over-complicated "surprises" about both Norman and the woman who befriends him; the idiotic scene Private Joker mentioned.
I haven't been able to watch more than a few minutes of "Psycho III," but "Psycho IV" was hilariously awful. The background story--in which Norman is now "cured" and married to his therapist!!--is freakin' unbelievable from the opening moment. One day, I might watch the "remake," but I'm not betting on it.
I'm not sure Psycho 2 was an actual treatment, or if Bloch was pulling a Clump (killing a character of his to spite a movie). I thought he wrote it after the fact.
_________________________________________________________________________
Edit - Nope, I was wrong. The book came first and then the movie. By a year. Oh well, I can't win them all.
Psycho II is okay, except that's it's tainted for me because I ate a really nasty burrito while watching it. Psycho III sucks hard, except for Dennis Franz's death. Heh heh. IV is just trash, pointlessly giving us a look into Norman's past and playing pretty loose with the story. The remake should never have been made. What's the point of A. remaking such an established classic, and B. doing it shot-for-shot, except when you throw in masturbation and gratuitous nudity?
>I said "Psycho 5" because there was a sequel called "Bates Motel." I looked on
>IMDb, and Bates Motel came out before Psycho IV, so I don't know what to count
>it as. Anthony Perkins did boycott it though, that may have something to do with it.
Bates Motel really had nothing to do with the Psycho films, other than a few plot points about Norman handing off the motel to someone else. As I recall, it was more supernatural.