| Author | Message | ||
     Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.155.203.110 |
I really really like and rewatch often Psycho, but have realised, flaws and inferior technique and all, that I love Psycho 2 more. Discuss. I think it has something to do with the fact that Bates is very sympathetic in this one, even more a victim than Marion Crane was in the first. And it gives the characters time to breath, for us to get close to them. And is it me, or have the Psychos been done ok by by the sequel people? | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 89.19.83.234 |
I've watched II and III over the last two nights and so far they're entertaining, but really the first one, despite its flaws, is the only one with classic status I feel. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.155.203.110 |
That is true. But it made me wonder if classics are always close to us. It's just a thought. I've just watched 3 - it's a bit wrong, the tone misjudged. It has it's moments but it feels like it didn't quite matter so much to those involved. And Bates lost the spark he had for the others. 4 actually looks ok - I've just given it a look. Yeah, Mike Garris directed, but I've always a curiosity about very bad things. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 89.19.83.234 |
Maybe the opening few seconds of 3 (which I love) made me see its flaws as deliberate choices. It feels canted to one side a bit. But yes, it does feel like a "product". | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.155.203.110 |
Basically, and somewhat dumbly, it just wasn't so damned cosy... | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 89.19.83.234 |
Yeah. [SPOILER] And what kind of policeman doesn't notice someone is carrying a corpse's hand when he arrests them? | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.178.26 |
I like Psycho 2 (I like Meg Tilly in anything), but I don't think any of the sequels can match the original. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
Psycho 2 was the last one that had any surprises in (unless you count the similarity between Elliot from ET and the young Norman Bates in IV). Number 1 is by far the best. 3 was OK. the best thing about it was the tagline on the poster - Norman Bates is back to normal, but Mother's off her rocker. Again. I've actually got the poster on the wall in my bedroom. Number 4 isn't really worth bothering with for any reason more than a sense of completeness. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.170.178.214 |
No! Me and Proto spent late last night texting/emailing one another while watching it and found it entirely beatiful, appropriate and affecting! If the film wasn't called Psycho 4 it would be being revered in the annals of horrordom, or rather at least nodded affectionately about in conversation. I thought it was the best written since the first (well, it was Stefano), as well as perhaps the most beautifully filmed of them all. It completely bowled me over, apart from a couple of musical plops in the finale, and a tad more running about than I would have liked (I wanted to hear Norman and the other person talk more). A completely overlooked gem of a film, it's discovery (for me and Proto) a reason to celebrate, especially as it must surely mean there's more jewellery out there. I won't go into how parallel and painfully close it was to my own childhood, however...  | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.185.12 |
I can't remember much about Psycho IV other than Olivia Hussey was in it, and it was directed by (ahem) Mick 'master of horror' Garris (surely 'master of bland Stephen King adaptations' would be a more fitting title). | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.170.178.214 |
And young Norman WAS Elliot! | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 160.6.1.47 |
I should warn everyone that it contains the most disappointing pair of breasts in screen history. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 160.6.1.47 |
But yes, considering its title, its director and the fact it was made for TV it's surprisingly affecting in places. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.5.3.58 |
...it must surely mean there's more jewellery out there. I'm watching EXORCIST II: THE HERETIC for the very first time. I'm about 40 minutes in, and it's completely nonsensical - it's closer to Italian horror, like Fulci - but it's eerily compelling, hypnotizing even (literally), so far... will it ultimately produce gem-like qualities as well, I wonder?... | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.170.178.214 |
I liked Exorcist 2! I thought, once you stopped expecting 'Exorcist 2' you were ok. I was memsmerised by it. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
The only remarkable thing about Psycho IV (IMHO) was the likeness of young Henry Thomas (Elliot) to the young Tony Perkins. Otherwise it was a mostly forgettable effort. There is one scene that I sort of half remember and I sort of remember liking seeing the Bates house painted up in bright colours and a young(ish) good looking woman playing Mrs bates. I also remember thinking that they broke the golden rule of sequels and threw in details which contradicted established fact in the series. Norman Bates had killed only one person, his mother. After that Mother killed the rest of them. In this Norman kills Mother AND her boyfriend. He had never been mentioned before. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
"And young Norman WAS Elliot!" I did know that when I wrote the original comment. My point was that the only surprising thing about the film was how much he looked like Bates/Perkins. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.170.178.214 |
When did you see it Weber? I felt moments teetered on being a bit Heavenly Creatures, the intensity of their relationship. It wasn't a hugely sophisticated film by any means but it had *something*. Moments just really shone for me, and it was, in several places, quite beautiful. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
A couple of years ago. It pops up on telly every now and then. It did precisely nothing for me except annoy me at breaking the series' continuity by inventing the boyfriend. | ||
| Simon Bestwick (Simon_b) Username: Simon_b Registered: 10-2008 Posted From: 86.24.165.182 |
Did it invent the boyfriend? It's been a while since I've seen the film, but in Bloch's novel I'm pretty sure Norman murdered both of them. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
I don't remember him being mentioned in the first film and I re-watched that fairly recently. If he had been mentioned I'm sure it would have stood out as an "Aha, that wasn't wrong" moment. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 89.19.88.137 |
In the first film, the sherriff's wife says that Norman discovered them (sotto voce) "in bed". | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.246.23 |
Indeed, Tony, I got great enjoyment from EXORCIST II: THE HERETIC. It's more like an Italian horror film than American, and looking at it that way, I was able to "get it" - it did in the end make a kind of sense, and had a more novel-ish plot, than a movie-ish one: I'm always happy to give points, when they try forms other than the standard feature film's form - anything daring, and different, I do appreciate. Good fx, good story too, really. Hell, I've seen a LOT worse. Fascinating tangent, are the locusts mentioned. Knowing little about them, really, I went scurrying for my Wikipedia - where I found - ever hear of the Rocky Mountain Locust? - what an amazing creature - er, creatures, this was! And what a thing of majesty and horror, it must have been to see, back in that year of 1874.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Mountain_locust | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.170.178.214 |
'One 1874 sighting famous to entomologists recorded a swarm 198,000 square miles (513,000 km²) in estimated size—greater than the area of California' Woah... |