Categories: Articles - Moviemaking Articles - Producing

When Psychos Compete Does the Audience Win?

Published by
Kyle Rupprecht

When Alfred Hitchcock released Psycho in June 1960, he had little idea how influential his low-budget “B-movie” would become. His experiment in terror would lead the way for the slasher movie craze and redefine the horror genre in the process. Before Psycho, audiences had never seen as suspenseful a sequence as the infamous shower scene, as chilling a score as Bernard Herrmann’s slashing strings, as mild-mannered and seemingly unassuming a villain as Norman Bates, as unexpected a plot twist as the lead actress being killed off halfway through the film and, even, a toilet flushing on-screen (Psycho was the first American film to do so). Almost 50 years later, the story of a young woman (Janet Leigh) with a suitcase of stolen money staying the night at a run-down motel operated by a troubled, mother-obsessed loner (Anthony Perkins), is still remarkably fresh and bone chilling.

This all makes one wonder what Gus Van Sant was thinking when, in 1998, he directed a shot-by-shot remake of Hitchcock’s classic. Using Joseph Stefano’s original script, the updated Psycho stars Anne Heche as Marion Crane and Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates, both woefully miscast. Anthony Perkins, the original Norman Bates, had a natural, boy-next-door quality, which made the twist ending that much more surprising and rewarding. The looming, neurotic Vaughn seems off his rocker as soon as he speaks in the remake, which makes the film significantly less creepy.

Perhaps Van Sant’s biggest blunder in remaking Psycho was shooting the film in color, robbing it of much of the atmospheric power of the black and white original. Ironically, that shower scene isn’t nearly as scary when it’s in blood red rather than stark grey. There are a few other instances where Van Sant’s attempted modernization falls flat, including an unintentionally funny version of a scene in the original, where Bates spies on Crane undressing through a hole in the wall. In the remake, Bates isn’t merely spying but engaging in a bit of self-gratification. A scene like that would have never made it past the censors in 1960, but the original movie’s notion of keeping Bates’ sexual desires repressed is much more interesting and thought-provoking than Van Sant’s over-the-top interpretation.

While the Psycho remake might have made for an interesting film school project, as a big-budget Hollywood reimagining by one of independent cinema’s most respected minds, it still begs the question, “Why bother?” The original Psycho has all the suspense and chills viewers could hope for.

Kyle Rupprecht

Recent Posts

  • Movie News

Dan Schneider Sues Quiet on Set Producers for Defamation, Calls Docuseries a ‘Hit Job’

Former Nickelodeon children's show creator Dan Schneider is suing the producers of the ID docuseries…

15 hours ago
  • Movie News

Ashley Madison: Sex, Lies and Scandal Trailer Dives Into 2015 Data Breach (Video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPEC4yfvoCw When extramarital affair website Ashley Madison was hacked in 2015, it was one of…

18 hours ago
  • Gallery

12 Inspiring Movies About Getting Sober

Getting sober? Dealing with a loved one's addiction? These inspiring movies about getting sober will…

20 hours ago
  • Interview
  • Interviews

The Black List Founder Franklin Leonard on AI, Transparency, and Knowing Your Favorite Films

"It is a deeply courageous thing to share something you’ve written, that is 100 or…

22 hours ago
  • Movie News

Slamdance Leaving Park City for Los Angeles in 2025

The Slamdance Film Festival is leaving Park City in favor of Los Angeles. The festival…

2 days ago
  • Movie News

Atlanta Film Festival to Screen 1992’s Deep Cover Followed by Q&A With Director Bill Duke

The Atlanta Film Festival has announced plans to screen a special presentation of the 1992…

2 days ago