MOTW Psycho July 9-15

[GL]

Ok, we're gonna get the first one up and running with this one, the forebarer of modern horror and one of the most inspirational horror films ever. My thoughts after a few of you have given yours.

[Conan]

I love this movie, it was the first "Slasher" movie I ever saw. It was a bit slow getting started, but besides that I can't say nothing bad about it. I gave it a 5.

[Canetoad]

Ditto for Toad. It was also the first true horror flick I ever saw at about 10 years old. I remember sneaking into the living room to watch it on late night telly while my parents were in bed, and later trying to push away images of Anthony Perkins' face as I was trying to get to sleep.

Have seen it numerous times since. Very atmospheric, and groundbreaking for its era... and still I would posit a very frightening film for someone taking it in for the first time.

[Conan]

I just watched the remake last week, I really don't know why people don't like it. Sure it ain't as good os the old one, but its still worth watching.

[GL]

Ok, good enough. I gave it a 4, but in actuallity I would give it a 4.5. The beginning introduction is just too long and it drags the tight pacing down. We didn't need as much time as we had with her. Sure, it's instrumental, but you could hack off five or ten minutes without ruining anything in the pacing or tone. Still, it's quite infamous for a number of reasons (the execptional editing, the scares, the suspense) and is one of horror's most legendary films.

[Canetoad]

I disagree on the long introduction argument GL. The whole point of that slow burn introducing us to Janet Leigh's character (Marion Crane) was that audiences wouldn't expect such a central character (and a star at her height) to be brutally killed off so relatively early (after about 40 minutes).

[Conan]

Yeah I liked that too. The slow paceing of this movie made for the kill to come out of nowhere.

[HNT]

You got it guys. Allowing a full reel of film to pass befoer killing off what appeared to be the film's main character was a structural coup that rivals any other that I can think of for sheer audacity. This film is beautifully shot, and riope with tension throughout. It doesn't even seem very dated, save the absurd cod-Freudian psychoanalysis at the end. This one gets a 5 from me. It is one of the few perfect horror films about which nothing could benefit by change

[GL]

canetoad said:

I disagree on the long introduction argument GL. The whole point of that slow burn introducing us to Janet Leigh's character (Marion Crane) was that audiences wouldn't expect such a central character (and a star at her height) to be brutally killed off so relatively early (after about 40 minutes).

Ok, but I didn't want to spend as much time with her. It could've started with her in the office complaiming about Sam and his problems rather than opening with it. A third of the movie has gone by and we only know one character. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but it could've used some scissors to the opening. I wouldn't even feel bad about taking some indivual moments from the office scenes. I'm not talking life-altering moments in the film, five minutes isn't that bad.

[CT]

5. Definately a worthy movie with some disturbing surprises.

[HNT]

THat opening scene between Sam and her was very important, GL. In 1960 a scene with a woman and man laying in bed together after what was clearly an affair between non-maried people in the middle of the day, no less, was quite shocking to audiences. Not to mention, showing Janet Leigh wearing only a bra was also a bit of a jolt to audiences. You have to be a littel bit sensitive to teh fact that the expectations that we have for our films in 2006 are completely different thatn those that the original audience for which this film was intended would have had.

On another note, Hitchcock has always stated that he viewed Psycho as a black comedy, and that he was genuinely surprised that his film terrified audiences rather than amusing them. How do you guys see the film? Is it a comedy or not?

[Canetoad]

I've read that yair. It is many years since I last watched Psycho and while I can remember the odd moment of subtle wit, I can't agree that its comedic elements outweigh the horror. Will have to revisit it

[CT]

Wow, I never considered it comedic at all really. Great info though HNT.

[HNT]

As Toad says, it does have some moments of levity, but they are much more subtle chuckles than outright laughs. Then again, the whole second half of the film is intentionally set to create a very intriguing question that never gets answered (namely, who is buried in Mrs. Bate's coffin in Green lawn cemetary)? Hitchcock had fun with his audience by leaving what he perceived as a gaping plot whole. Amusingly,very few people even notice because the rest of the film is so compelling. Add to that some of the dialog between the two secretaries on the office, and between Arbogast and Norman, and you can genuinely see some of the comedic aspects. It isn't a knee slapper or anything, but there is some seriously caustic and sarcastic black humor at play

[Canetoad]

Well put as usual. Will definitely revisit