Psycho | | Cast : | Vince Vaughn, Anne Heche | | Director : | Gus Van Sant | | Studio : | Universal Studios | | Format : | Color, Closed-captioned, Widescreen, Dolby | | Released Date : | December 04, 1998 | | DVD Released Date : | August 24, 2004 | | Language : | English (Dubbed), French (Dubbed), English (Original Language), French (Original Language) | | Audience Rating : | R (Restricted) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | July 21, 2005 | | Summary | Worth Watching For Anne Heche's Performance Alone | Content
 | First off, I wasn't exactly wowed by Hitchcock's original, and the only reason I started watching this version was because it was on late-night TV and I had nothing better to do. That said, what kept me watching was Anne Heche's performance. Did Van Sant give the Marion character more to say or do? Certainly, I found Heche's performance far more engaging than Janet Leigh's. Heche had presence. And it was only after her demise that the film lost its plot. Then it just seemed to return to a carbon copy of the creaky, old original.
Why Julianne Moore took on the nothing role of the sister is beyond me. (And what was the Walkman crap about?) Memory tells me that Vera Miles had the pivotal role in the original. In this film the impact of the sisters was fully reversed. If I found my sister had been murdered by a psycho, I don't think I'd sit calmly by whilst some expert delivered a monologue about how the psycho had become a psycho. Where was the emotion? Like everyone else, I guess, I was left just wondering why they went to the expense. If the addition of color meant so much, why not just colorize the original. Other than Heche's subtle, multi-layered performance, I don't think this version added anything. |
| Rating | | | Date | July 18, 2005 | | Summary | An apology to Alfred | Content
| Mr. Hitchcock, we the faithful cannot apologize enough for the egotistical gall of Gus Van Sant and what he attempted to do with your legendary film!
First of all, never ever, remake the Master!!!
Second, if you're going to do something that stupid, then REMAKE it! This film is supposed to take place in 1998??? Since when are we still driving pick-up trucks from the 1950's in 1998? Since when are we making telephone call through a switchboard operator that we know by name in 1998? And why was William H. Macy deliberately dressed like Marty Balsam, again from the '50's? In fact, the only real update that seemed apparant for the time was Julliane Moore's line about getting her walkman.
Remaking a film traditionally involves interjecting your own originality and perspectives, not a cheap shot-by-shot copy. It was like watching PSYCHO as a high school play!
Maintain your Hitchcock purity and stay away from this movie! |
| Rating | | | Date | June 30, 2005 | | Summary | GREAT TRIBUTE TO THE MASTER | Content
| I am a big fan of Hitchcock and I thought the shot by shot remake was excellent. Gus Van Zant did a great job of creating the same mood only in color...Impossible! most people would say. I found it absolutely astounding that an exact remake in color could have the same effect. And I thought all the performances were outstanding. I think it was pure genius to be able to recreate this great film to a tee. Hats off to Mr. Van Sant for having the guts to pull this off. By the way, Vince Vaughn was every bit as convincing as Anthony Perkins. I put both versions at the top of my favorite movies list, but maybe in different columns. |
| Rating | | | Date | June 13, 2005 | | Summary | In defense of one of my favorite directors... | Content
| PLEASE NOTE: This review only reflects my own philosophy on the film. I have not done any research on Gus Van Sant or any of his films. This is simply my reaction having watched the film quite recently.
Let me take you back to 1998. This was a time when remakes were starting to surge their way to the box office. There were countless remakes, and I can't even begin to name them all, but I will mention in particular the Michael Douglas film A Perfect Murder, a remake of Hitchcock's Dial M For Murder. So, already Hitchcock's films had been tried a second time, and yet not so many film enthusists were ready to lynch that director. But then Gus Van Sant makes a shot-for-shot colorized version of the classic Hitchcock thriller, and movie fanatics screamed blasphemy.
Now, this is what I got out of this bold move. Gus Van Sant was making a statement to all these directors preparing to cash in on their own interpretation of the master's work...HITCHCOCK ALREADY NAILED IT, SO THERE'S NO SENSE IN MESSING IT UP! Van Sant remade the film exactly as Hitchcock did because he wanted to make a tribute to the Master of Suspense, and wanted to do it before some hack of a director decided to butcher it up any more than the numerous sequels to the film already had. So, in his own way, he made his film a testimony to why directors shouldn't remake films in an arrogant attempt to make a few bucks. It's not criminal...it's genius. And really, Gus Van Sant is one of the only directors that could pull it off, and still shrug off all the criticism and continue making some of the better films of the last 20 years. |
| Rating | | | Date | April 09, 2005 | | Summary | This remake is bad | Content
| It is astonishing (or maybe not?)....the original is great cinema, the remake is bad and boring. Forget it. 1 star is still one star too much!
Walter |
|
Picture 01 (20)
