Psycho (1960) (50th Anniversary Edition)

[Babu93]

Originally Posted by jlk5844

This is odd. I was never even aware of there being an uncut version, or maybe I've simply forgotten. But it says in the paragraph at the beginning that the uncut version was released in theaters. Why would Universal put a censored version on home video, especially since the uncut version has been broadcast on television?

The uncut version was only broadcast on television in Germany and possibly some other places in Europe. From what I understand, the uncut version is what would have been shown in theatres. It was when Psycho started being shown on TV in the 60s and 70s that various countries would have cut it slightly for television.

The US cut version became the version released on home video and the one most of us are used to seeing. Germany didn't make any cuts for TV and so aired the full uncut version.

It's weird to think audiences in 1960 got to see an uncut version of Psycho whereas until now, most of us in 2018 have only seen the cut version!

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by Babu93

The uncut version was only broadcast on television in Germany and possibly some other places in Europe. From what I understand, the uncut version is what would have been shown in theatres. It was when Psycho started being shown on TV in the 60s and 70s that various countries would have cut it slightly for television.

The US cut version became the version released on home video and the one most of us are used to seeing. Germany didn't make any cuts for TV and so aired the full uncut version.

It's weird to think audiences in 1960 got to see an uncut version of Psycho whereas until now, most of us in 2018 have only seen the cut version!

Is there any proof that these were shown in theaters?

And they are very brief additions, nothing revelatory.

[Babu93]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

Is there any proof that these were shown in theaters?

And they are very brief additions, nothing revelatory.

Nothing concrete, so that could be totally off. There seems to be little solid information about the different versions, apart from the differences between them.

[TheHutt]

Somehow, most reports on the censorship in Psycho solely focus on the shower scene. So there might be little information on anything else. It also could be that the movie was cut in the USA during one of the subsequent theatrical reruns.

According to Melonfarmers, the old UK VHS version from the 1980s contained the bra scene as opposed to the US video version. Also, shots of it appear in the Hitchcock/Truffaut book.

So it could just be that in Europe, Psycho always was longer before the DVD.

[Markgway]

I believe these trims were made to the US theatrical version by Hitchcock in exchange for leaving the shower scene alone (token cuts, really).

That's the version that's always been seen in the US and was later rated 'R'.

The uncut version was probably sent out internationally and then subjected to local cuts (variant depending on territory, we know for example that the UK heavily cut the shower scene).

The early European VHS and TV showings were presumably taken from the uncut international master, whereas the retail tapes were sourced from the US cut. I doubt this is because Universal were trying to eradicate the uncut version. More likely they were just giving the same single master to every territory and from about 1986 or so the uncut version was 'lost'.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

...they are very brief additions, nothing revelatory.

The extra footage of the hand gripping the knife during the stabbing of Arbogast changes the entire tone of the film for me, as does the footage of Norman with blood on his hands.

Someone - be it Shout! or Universal - needs to release a BD of the film with those bits included, either reinstated into the film or as bonus features with a seamless branching option for the feature. The fact that we don't have the longest version in America is ridiculous.

[TheHutt]

Well, there is always the German Turbine version for import.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

My OCD has really kicked in now. I can't stand having a "censored" version of a film.

[Bobbyjoe766]

The ‘uncut’ version should have been made available alongside the US theatrical for its 50th anniversary Blu-ray edition.

This film is a classic and every frame of ‘lost’ footage counts.

[TheHutt]

Two extra stabs actually.

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by Bobbyjoe766

The ‘uncut’ version should have been made available alongside the US theatrical for its 50th anniversary Blu-ray edition.

This film is a classic and every frame of ‘lost’ footage counts.

They should had included it as an extra yes, but it was not in the theatrical cut.

[TheHutt]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

They should had included it as an extra yes, but it was not in the theatrical cut.

It was not in the US theatrical cut.

[bigbadwoppet]

Originally Posted by Babu93

Nothing concrete, so that could be totally off. There seems to be little solid information about the different versions, apart from the differences between them.

In those days, once a movie had its final cut, all trims were thrown away.

The fact that uncut versions surface for films of this vintage (such as Horror of Dracula) is only because this cut was sent overseas before censorship was applied in the domestic version. There is no way this uncut version was created afterwards. It is an earlier cut.

By comparison, check the archival versions of Blade Runner. What does make more sense to you, that the violence was added to the international release, or that it was removed from the domestic release? What's easier, more logical?

Either way, Universal should be ashamed that another label has taken the initiative to release this cut and not them. Psycho is one of the greatest, most influential films ever made and the fact that a more complete cut still exists is something that should be made available to audiences worlwide. This is the truest version of the film.

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by bigbadwoppet

By comparison, check the archival versions of Blade Runner. What does make more sense to you, that the violence was added to the international release, or that it was removed from the domestic release? What's easier, more logical?

I agree that it's the most likely possibility, but I don't think it's the only possibility. For instance, Hitchcock may have deliberately prepared a pre-release cut with material he was willing to cut out in order to negotiate the shower scene, and that this cut was sent to Germany without realizing the extra footage was there. Or he handed in a cut and then decided he had crossed a line into bad taste, went back and made some trims. The thing that seems weird, to me, is that we have no explanation of this cut. I've even seen some rumors claim that this WAS released this way in 1960, but was only recut for a re-release later in the 60s. I don't think that's true in this case, but given how often that did happen, I'd love to be more sure.

There's a similar debate with "Topaz", but it's a lot less famous because it's "Topaz" and not "Psycho". But basically, Hitchcock finished the film, and it tested badly, so he reshot the ending and cut a lot of footage out. The movie was still considered a failure, but Hitchcock fans spent years insisting that the original version had to be better. So now the only version you can get in this country is "restored" to a preview cut (rather than the final release approved by Hitchcock). Both versions have reasons to be considered "official" and have arguments against them.

[bigbadwoppet]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

I agree that it's the most likely possibility, but I don't think it's the only possibility. For instance, Hitchcock may have deliberately prepared a pre-release cut with material he was willing to cut out in order to negotiate the shower scene, and that this cut was sent to Germany without realizing the extra footage was there. Or he handed in a cut and then decided he had crossed a line into bad taste, went back and made some trims. The thing that seems weird, to me, is that we have no explanation of this cut. I've even seen some rumors claim that this WAS released this way in 1960, but was only recut for a re-release later in the 60s. I don't think that's true in this case, but given how often that did happen, I'd love to be more sure.

There's a similar debate with "Topaz", but it's a lot less famous because it's "Topaz" and not "Psycho". But basically, Hitchcock finished the film, and it tested badly, so he reshot the ending and cut a lot of footage out. The movie was still considered a failure, but Hitchcock fans spent years insisting that the original version had to be better. So now the only version you can get in this country is "restored" to a preview cut (rather than the final release approved by Hitchcock). Both versions have reasons to be considered "official" and have arguments against them.

I thought of that, too. The problem with that argument is that censorship is relative. There's no way for Hitchcock to have known exactly what he would have been asked to cut, hence putting it expressly as bait.

David Cronenberg, speaking about the MPAA censorship on Videodrome, said that he was not told exactly what to cut, only hinted at. MPAA rules forbid telling the director what to cut (I guess it goes against freedom of speech, etc). By contrast, British law (both in the UK and Canada) meant that the director would be told exactly what to cut in order for the film to be approved for exhibition.

I'm sure that if the MPAA had not requested these cuts, the US would have seen this version in theatres back in 1960.

[Donl1282]

Will Scream Factory ever release this film?

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by Donl1282

Will Scream Factory ever release this film?

No. Popular Hitchcock titles such as "Psycho" are too much of an "evergreen" title for studios to let go. Not to mention with Uni getting into B&W 4K starting with "Schindler's List"; I expect for "Psycho" to follow.

[Namuhana]

Originally Posted by bigbadwoppet

I thought of that, too. The problem with that argument is that censorship is relative. There's no way for Hitchcock to have known exactly what he would have been asked to cut, hence putting it expressly as bait.

Hitch had been working in Hollywood for 20 years by the time Psycho came out. I'm sure he knew exactly what to do to leverage his way with the censors.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by bigbadwoppet

Either way, Universal should be ashamed that another label has taken the initiative to release this cut and not them. Psycho is one of the greatest, most influential films ever made and the fact that a more complete cut still exists is something that should be made available to audiences worlwide. This is the truest version of the film.

Ehhh... the cut that played pretty much everywhere is the classic, true version of the film I'd say. People always think more is better, but it's not always the case. Not saying I wouldn't be interested in this cut, I would, but I wouldn't say it's some holy grail lost "true version of the movie" or anything.

That's me though.

[Markgway]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Ehhh... the cut that played pretty much everywhere is the classic, true version of the film I'd say.

By everywhere you mean America?

Because as we all know America is the World.