Psycho IV: The Beginning (1990)

[format916]

so now part 4 is the worst? part 3 still holds the crown, at least part 4 brings it back to the feeling the original two had. the third is like a redneck version of psycho.

[balthazar_bee]

Originally Posted by format916

so now part 4 is the worst? part 3 still holds the crown, at least part 4 brings it back to the feeling the original two had. the third is like a redneck version of psycho.

I'm a bit..."shocked" probably isn't the right word, but surprised anyway, to see Psycho 4 being regaled as the best of the sequels. I've long been a fan of this series, and in my circles, 4 is easily the least of the series.

Not that it's a bad movie, exactly, but the first three are each, in their own way, miles better.

Everyone loves the first movie and almost everyone at least respects, if not loves, the second one. So there's that.

But let's look at Psycho 3, one of the most inventive and otherwise "interesting" slasher sequels in a decade that was absolutely festooned with them.

For one thing, it's the only sequel that achieves the deft balance of horror and comedy we see in the original. It actually manages to double down on the comedy -- in a way that put off many viewers and critics -- while injecting an element of the tragic, which naturally carries over from the second one. This is largely thanks to Perkins' remarkably assured direction and his performance, the latter of which manages the nearly impossible task of making us laugh at, feel sorry for, and fear Norman Bates simultaneously.

I don't expect to win any converts -- we all have our favourite slasher films, and justifying such choices can be a fool's errand -- but there are days when I prefer Psycho 3 to the brilliant second movie, just for its sheer moxie, great imagery, and hysterical sense of humour. If they'd let Perkins end the film the way he'd wanted, we'd have had a perfect conclusion to the series. As it is, just turning off the movie a few seconds before the credits achieves the same effect.

I've seen Psycho 4 at least three times, and despite my undying admiration for CCH Pounder, it never quite manages to justify its own existence. Very little about it is remarkable -- not story/performance wise like the second one, or stylistically/visually like the third one. And, Stefano or not, the script just doesn't cut it.

One imagines Perkins showing up on the set, ready to shoot, a bit deflated, thinking, "I meant to end this damned series with the last one, now here I am again." Hopefully he was well compensated.

And hey, kudos to those who are jazzed about this. But I ask, if you have a moment, that you give the third one another try. If Hitchcock had lived, I'd put cash money on the fact that it'd be his favourite of the three; he wasn't one to shy away from gruesome humour or from dipping an oar into more lurid subject matter. Duke stealing mother's corpse and singing "oh, god bless you, and keep you, dear mother Bates" would've put a smile on his face, guaranteed.

[Bumblefeet]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

I've seen Psycho 4 at least three times, and despite my undying admiration for CCH Pounder, it never quite manages to justify its own existence. Very little about it is remarkable -- not story/performance wise like the second one, or stylistically/visually like the third one. And, Stefano or not, the script just doesn't cut it.

One imagines Perkins showing up on the set, ready to shoot, a bit deflated, thinking, "I meant to end this damned series with the last one, now here I am again." Hopefully he was well compensated.

I shared this in the australian thread, Garris discussing that Perkins was initially set to direct:

Mick Garris on PSYCHO IV: THE BEGINNING - YouTube

[balthazar_bee]

Originally Posted by Bumblefeet

I shared this in the australian thread, Garris discussing that Perkins was initially set to direct:

"...he wanted to direct Psycho 4, but the studio wanted me instead."

[Member-222782]

Anthony Perkins never seemed to age. To me he looked about the same way in the original Psycho as he did in Psycho IV 30 years later - give or take a wrinkle or two. It was amazing.

[gates70]

Never seen any of the Psycho sequels so I'll give them all a shot.

[themadbutcher]

While I'm not even sure I would buy Psycho IV, I would love it if Scream could include the intro by Janet Leigh, done for the first broadcast.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by themadbutcher

While I'm not even sure I would buy Psycho IV, I would love it if Scream could include the intro by Janet Leigh, done for the first broadcast.

Cool, I didn't know she did that

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

I'm a bit..."shocked" probably isn't the right word, but surprised anyway, to see Psycho 4 being regaled as the best of the sequels. I've long been a fan of this series, and in my circles, 4 is easily the least of the series.

Not that it's a bad movie, exactly, but the first three are each, in their own way, miles better.

Everyone loves the first movie and almost everyone at least respects, if not loves, the second one. So there's that.

But let's look at Psycho 3, one of the most inventive and otherwise "interesting" slasher sequels in a decade that was absolutely festooned with them.

For one thing, it's the only sequel that achieves the deft balance of horror and comedy we see in the original. It actually manages to double down on the comedy -- in a way that put off many viewers and critics -- while injecting an element of the tragic, which naturally carries over from the second one. This is largely thanks to Perkins' remarkably assured direction and his performance, the latter of which manages the nearly impossible task of making us laugh at, feel sorry for, and fear Norman Bates simultaneously.

I don't expect to win any converts -- we all have our favourite slasher films, and justifying such choices can be a fool's errand -- but there are days when I prefer Psycho 3 to the brilliant second movie, just for its sheer moxie, great imagery, and hysterical sense of humour. If they'd let Perkins end the film the way he'd wanted, we'd have had a perfect conclusion to the series. As it is, just turning off the movie a few seconds before the credits achieves the same effect.

I've seen Psycho 4 at least three times, and despite my undying admiration for CCH Pounder, it never quite manages to justify its own existence. Very little about it is remarkable -- not story/performance wise like the second one, or stylistically/visually like the third one. And, Stefano or not, the script just doesn't cut it.

One imagines Perkins showing up on the set, ready to shoot, a bit deflated, thinking, "I meant to end this damned series with the last one, now here I am again." Hopefully he was well compensated.

And hey, kudos to those who are jazzed about this. But I ask, if you have a moment, that you give the third one another try. If Hitchcock had lived, I'd put cash money on the fact that it'd be his favourite of the three; he wasn't one to shy away from gruesome humour or from dipping an oar into more lurid subject matter. Duke stealing mother's corpse and singing "oh, god bless you, and keep you, dear mother Bates" would've put a smile on his face, guaranteed.

I agree with your comments about Psycho III. Anthony Perkins was a very smart guy who had a wickedly dark sense of humour, something he shared with Hitchcock and it definitely shines through in Psycho III.

Psycho IV is not bad, but it's like Hannibal Rising. There's nowhere left to go forward with the character, so let's just depict the backstory and rip down any mystery there was about his origins.

[Adilkusltd]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

I agree with your comments about Psycho III. Anthony Perkins was a very smart guy who had a wickedly dark sense of humour, something he shared with Hitchcock and it definitely shines through in Psycho III.

Psycho IV is not bad, but it's like Hannibal Rising. There's nowhere left to go forward with the character, so let's just depict the backstory and rip down any mystery there was about his origins.

Completely agree with this statement. Personally, I believe part III is one of the greatest horror films ever made. It manages to be both dirty and beautiful at th same time. Highly underatted.

[JackForrester]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

I'm a bit..."shocked" probably isn't the right word, but surprised anyway, to see Psycho 4 being regaled as the best of the sequels.

Thanks. I thought everyone in this thread was crazier than Norman for a sec