PsychoYear: 1998 Director: Gus Van Sant Written by: Joseph Stefano Threat: Psychopath Weapon of Choice: Knife |
Other movies in this series:
None
Rish Outfield's reviews
Don't get me started. I wish I had an hour to verbally assail this insidious
mistake. If ever I have seen a useless film, it had to be this one. I
thought the whole point of a remake was to look at it in a new light, with
new circumstances, in a new day, with new twists. Not this way, a piece of
filmmaking so worthless that the most foolhardy film student would shy away
from it. They would have been better off paying Ted Turner to colourize
Hitchcock's original and insert the word ‘fuck' severally into the updated
version. The cast and crew made a big deal about the fact that they used the
same Joseph Stefano script from the 1960 film, so the dialogue seems
unnatural and forced from time to time, plus some scenes that created such
tension in the Hitchcock version are only annoying here. Also, are Vince
Vaughan, Anne Heche, and Julianne Moore inferior actors to Anthony Perkins,
Janet Leigh, and Vera Miles? If not, why are their characters so flat here,
so uninteresting, and uninvolving? Obviously, Van Sant is an inferior
director to Hitchcock, but after seeing this, I find it difficult to think of
him as a director at all. You know, I don't care if I never see another Gus
Van Sant film. I don't care if no one else does, either. This movie not
only displeased me, it offended me in a way that stuck, like a spitwad, for
days afterward.
I'd Recommend It To: be handily disposed-of.
The tyranist's thoughts
There really aren't very many legitimate reasons to remake a movie, especially shot for shot. It just doesn't make a lot of
sense. Van Sant and company always claimed that they did this because they wanted to pay tribute to Hitchcock's greatness.
It doesn't work. Updating the movie (poorly I might add), making it color, and adding sound effects that were never needed
or possibly intended doesn't do it for me. There are a couple of really cool shots where the color makes a difference, but
other than that this one merely shows of the mediocre points of the original, without the luster that Anthony Perkins and
Janet Leigh brought to it. I didn't think this was abominable, but it was pretty bad. Mostly I just can't figure out why.
Total Skulls: 13
Sequel | ||
Sequel setup | ||
Rips off earlier film | Psycho | |
Horror film showing on TV/in theater in movie | ||
Future celebrity appears | ||
Former celebrity appears | ||
Bad title | ||
Bad premise | ||
Bad acting | ||
Bad dialogue | ||
Bad execution | ||
MTV Editing | ||
OTS | ||
Girl unnecessarily gets naked | ||
Wanton sex | ||
Death associated with sex | ||
Unfulfilled promise of nudity | ||
Characters forget about threat | ||
Secluded location | ||
Power is cut | ||
Phone lines are cut | ||
Someone investigates a strange noise | ||
Someone runs up stairs instead of going out front door | ||
Camera is the killer | ||
Victims cower in front of a window/door | ||
Victim locks self in with killer | ||
Victim running from killer inexplicably falls | ||
Toilet stall scene | ||
Shower scene | ||
Car stalls or won't start | ||
Cat jumps out | ||
Fake scare | ||
Laughable scare | ||
Stupid discovery of corpse | ||
Dream sequence | ||
No one believes only witness | ||
Crazy, drunk, old man knows the truth | ||
Music detracts from scene | ||
Death in first five minutes | ||
What the hell? | ||
x years ago . . . | ||
Dark and stormy night | ||
Killer doesn't stay dead | ||
Killer wears a mask | ||
Killer is in closet | ||
Killer is in car with victim | ||
Villain is more sympathetic than heroes | ||
Unscary villain/monster | ||
Beheading | ||
Blood fountain | ||
Blood hits camera | ||
Poor death effect | ||
Excessive gore | ||
No one dies at all | ||
Virgin survives | ||
Geek/Nerd survives | ||
Little kid lamely survives | ||
Dog/Pet miraculously survives | ||
Unresolved subplots | ||
"It was all a dream" ending | ||
Unbelievably happy ending | ||
Unbelievably crappy ending |