Vertigo and North by Northwest were before Psycho. He was at the top of his game throughout the 50s. Psycho didn't put him on the top. It actually was a gamble and an experiment. He used the TV crew for Psycho and shot it quickly and cheaply. It was a big hit.
Yeah, mid 50s to mid 60s was his height. Basically coinciding with the run of his tv show. Though his career as a director stretches all the way back to the 20s. And the late 60s/early 70s were not a good time for whatever reason.
hitchcock was called the "master of suspense" even before he came to the u.s. one of his last english films "the lady vanishes" (1938) is a perfect example of this. and then his 40s american films were all top notch. his first american film "rebecca," (1940) won best picture but best director went to john ford for "the grapes of wrath." hitchcock himself, though, never won an oscar. throughout the 40s he directed such classics as "suspicion" (1941), "shadow of a doubt" (1943), "lifeboat" (1944), "spellbound" (1945), "notorious" (1946) and "rope" (1948) were all every bit as good as the films he made in the 50s. and 2 of my favorite hitchcock 50s films are sadly overlooked. "the trouble with harry" (1955), his only true comedy has a very young jerry mathers (beaver cleaver) to boot and 1956's "the wrong man". its hard to find a bad hitchcock film and, for me, they're impossible to rank.
And the part where the psychologist explains thing is not only great, but necessary. Maybe if you had been around in 1960 you'd understand. The actor did a GREAT job.
I understand the need for explanation especially in 1960. But there are parts of it that really bother me. Like the "Yes. ... And no..." I think different wording would have been better. Also, an all-out "no" should have been the answer to the transvestite suggestion. Not the same thing at all.
Hitchcock actually said to the actor playing the psychologist "you have just saved my movie". Studios forced the scene through but it still fits the movies tone well enough
It's funny. I've always heard people disparage that part of the movie, but when I started watching CZcams reactors, so many of them seem to really need it to understand it.
The Arbogast falling down the stairs was filmed using rear projection. Footage of a dolly shot going down the stairs was projected behind Martin Balsam, who was sitting in a chair, in front of the screen, and flailing around as if he were off balance.
The $40,000 that Marion stole in 1960 is equal to $415,000 today. In 1960 most homes in the US were under $15,000. A new Corvette cost $4,000. Minimum wage in 1960 was $1.00 an hour. Marion could’ve lived very well for a long time on that money had she not stayed at the Bates Motel.
Anthony Perkins starred in some really great movies. Outside of Psycho, I think his best role is in Orson Welle's The Trial, which is a masterpiece. You guys should check it out if you haven't.
You may be interested to know that ‘Tom Cassidy’ (the “creepy old man” whose $40K that was) was played by Frank Albertson, who was “Sam ‘Hee-Haw’ Wainright” in “It’s A Wonderful Life” (1946)
And you may be interested to know that FA and Janet Leigh were both in Bye Bye Birdie three years later, although they had no scenes together. FA played the Mayor of Ann-Margret's home town.
@@BlueShadow777 True. And I saw Magic when it was first released in theaters in '78. Then again, that has no connection with Frank Albertson, or Janet Leigh, for that matter. --Good movie, though.
"That is the coppiest looking cop in the history of cops" - Major. I'm going to be using that line forever, thanks man! Best reaction to the shower scene I've ever seen; you actually TAUGHT me how an audience member would have reacted to it in 1960; every reaction I've seen for this movie, they know about the shower scene and don't have the same reaction, I've never seen someone actually jump from it, that was priceless!!!! Looking forward to HItch month! Rope is a great idea, would love to see Major's reaction to that one! Strangers On A Train also, that's my fave, what a movie. THANKS! Learned alot on this one!!
PS: Hitchcock's career was in no way on the wane when he did Alfred Hitchcock Presents in the 50s-early 60s, quite the opposite, he was at the zenith of his fame and had plenty of hits in the 50s (some of his biggest: North By Northwest, Man Who Knew Too Much, To Catch A Thief, Rear Window, Dial M For Murder, Strangers On A Train, etc etc). And the early 60s had his biggest box office films, Psycho and The Birds. His career was most definitely not on the wane! Not every movie he did was a smash, but plenty of them were. The reason he did the series was to capitalize on his hits, not because he was in decline.
Bro! Agent Smith vibes all day. The DNA of the Agents in the Matrix started with this guy. The Cop in Terminator 2, this guy was the face they put in that movies pitch deck. He's now iconic in my brain for every as the coppiest cop that will define all cops in movies! LOL
@@TTM9691He also leant his name to anthology books he had nothing to do with, "presenting" them, and to _Alfred Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine,_ which I think is still going.
Hitchcock initially wanted the shower scene to be silent but Herrmann made him listen to the score he had written. Hitchcock was convinced and doubled the composer's fee.
hitchcock was called the "master of suspense" even before he came to the u.s. one of his last english films "the lady vanishes" (1938) is a perfect example of this. and then his 40s american films were all top notch. his first american film "rebecca," (1940) won best picture but best director went to john ford for "the grapes of wrath." hitchcock himself, though, never won an oscar. throughout the 40s he directed such classics as "suspicion" (1941), "shadow of a doubt" (1943), "lifeboat" (1944), "spellbound" (1945), "notorious" (1946) and "rope" (1948) were all every bit as good as the films he made in the 50s. and 2 of my favorite hitchcock 50s films are sadly overlooked. "the trouble with harry" (1955), his only true comedy has a very young jerry mathers (beaver cleaver) to boot and 1956's "the wrong man". its hard to find a bad hitchcock film and, for me, they're impossible to rank.
I don't want to give Richard the 3rd degree for an off-hand comment, but Strangers on a Train (1951) is a great movie for any decade and superior to just about anything made today. I'm excited that you've moved onto Hitchcock, the best in my book. In addition to the usuals (Vertigo, N by NW, etc.,) I hope you also do one of his last films, Frenzy. It is probably his closest to Psycho and also has what I think is the funniest sub-plot in all of Hitchcock.
Strangers on a Train definitely stands the test of time, as it’s uniquely (for Hitch) character driven and involves a lot of basic human interactions. Normally Hitch didn’t have very memorable characters (at least not before this 1951 film) but Robert Walker’s Bruno Antony is brilliantly realized.
I like how Marion is wearing white lingerie at the beginning of the film, but after she has taken the money and turned "bad" she has changed to black lingerie. The film is in black and white because it was cheaper than color film stock, and Hitchcock used his TV show crew for filming because he was financing the film himself.
Several years ago there was a serial killer in Dallas that would remove the victim's eyes. When he was a kid his hobby was taxidermy. His mother bought his supplies but because the glass eyeballs were too expensive she made him use buttons instead. That's as Norman Batish as can be haha.
The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934) Strangers On A Train (1951) Rear Window (1954) The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) Vertigo (1958) North By North West (1959) Psycho (1960) The Birds (!963) Marnie (1964)
How could you forget “Rebecca” (Best Picture Oscar - The only one he ever received, in 1940), “The 39 Steps” (1935), “The Lady Vanishes” (1938), “Rope”(1948), “To Catch A Thief”(1955), and “Notorious”(1946)?
Correct, and he'd been "on the map" in the U.S. ever since his American debut with 1940's "Rebecca," twenty years before "Psycho." During the AHP's run he also put out "The Man Who Knew Too Much" remake, "Vertigo," "North By Northwest" and the "The Birds." The t.v. show made him a lot more famous for sure, but he was already the rare superstar director prior to its success.
Even though the story seems to be disjointed, I think there is a consistent theme throughout the film. From the very beginning we are looking at female beauty in a lustful manner, and the way that men look at Marion continues this "male gaze" idea. It is posing the question about how men mentally handle the sight of female beauty,with their behavior in society and in their own minds. There is a similar idea in The Silence of the Lambs too.
Those dope credits are all Saul Bass, who pretty much invented kinetic typography and the idea of dynamic opening credits that set up a film in tone or story. He also did the credits in North By Northwest and Vertigo, as well as The Man With The Golden Arm, Walk on the Wild Side, and Anatomy of a Murder, and lots of other iconic sequences. One of my favorite hip hop songs, Jumping Coffin by Aesop Rock, has the fantastic line describing peak game-changing skill with an artform as “like an alphabet to Saul Bass”
My mum watched this when she was just 17 on the rock of Gibralta (my father was sent there to do his national service. At the time Psycho was rated an X movie, almost like going to watch a porn movie at the time. My mum felt a bit guilty anyhow watch an X rated film that you had to be 21 to watch. Now Hitchcock had asked all movie theatres not to let anyone else in, once the movie had started. An announcement was made saying that the doors were now closed until the end of the movie. The combination of eveything, including killing off Janet Leigh off so early utterly petrified my mum. My mum is now 81 and has never watched it again.
After seeing this film more than a few times, I literally only just noticed how similar (and intentional) Marion and Norman's smirks are when listening to parts of their inner monologue (Norman's being the famous final image as the movie ends)... ... definitely hits home the idea that 'We all go a little mad sometimes'. And showd how slow my brain works 😊 Re. Anthony Perkins' performance... I don't know about others' thoughts, but he absolutely gives me vibes of the heinous Ted Bundy (albeit an awkward version) despite his performance pre-dating the FBI introducing the world to the term 'serial killer', and the real-life psychopath not being filmed/interviewed until 15+ years later. Knowing real life monsters with similar 'people facing' facades exist in the real world makes the 'Norman' part of his performance all the more amazing - and absolutely terrifying - for me. Anyone else out there in the Commentorverse gets similar vibes at all?
I believe this was intended to an Alfred Hitchcock Presents but made it into a feature. This is possibly a reason it was B&W. Color was actually more common by 1960. Budget usually dictated color or b&w.
When Norman goes up the stairs to get his mother, a camera crane follows him. When the camera is focused on the top of the door frame, another crane is coming over the top of the wall to the right. At this point, the camera is moved by hand from one crane to another. The first crane withdraws quickly down the stairs before the camera on the second crane lifts and focuses down from above! True genius!
They made the film in 1959, and bringing a mainstream audience up to speed on dissociative personality disorders was a steep hill to climb by itself. Hitchcock made the psychiatrist a smug know-it-all on purpose.
You mention how it seems like the movie is about the money at first. Hitchcock always called that the "MacGuffin." The MacGuffin was the plot device that the movie SEEMED to be about, but which was actually just a distraction from what the movie was REALLY about.
With Psycho, Hitchcock proves that he is the King of Suspense because he surprises and shocks the audience with a story that is telegraphed from the very beginning. I mean, the title is "Psycho," not "Office Thief." Yet everyone is shocked when the movie turns out to be about a psycho, and not a woman who stole money. Even before the you get anywhere near the actual movie, it's based on the 1959 novel Psycho, by Robert Bloch, which was a bestseller and had come out just a year before the film, so lots of people had read the book and knew the basic story, yet everyone was shocked by the big reveal in the movie. It's because nobody was or is better than Hitchcock at getting inside the audience's heads, riveting our attention, manipulating our perceptions and emotions in the moment. The bit with the psychiatrist at the end is annoying, I agree, but I think it's more jarring to a 21st century audience than it was in 1960. We are a lot better educated about serial killers and abusive family relationships than most people were then, so we don't need that explanation. Audiences back then kinda did.
Ok, Major, you cannot use the word "creepy" again in any reaction until 2024. To think of it, both of you! It was fun to watch this with someone who had no clues or spoilers about the plot- pretty rare, but you got the full impact like we did back in the day. (I saw this in the 70's as a teen- freaked me out). North by Northwest is my favorite Hitch movie, and probably in my top 3 of all time.
Hitch actually didn’t want the psychiatrist explanation scene in the movie. He was pressured into its inclusion from the studio powers above. It was a reluctant inclusion.
I always felt that the psychiatrist speech was meant to be tongue in cheek and darkly comic. Everything up until this point in the film was so hypnotic, dreamlike and complex and then to have this “professional” compartmentalize and describe Norman’s entire existence away in such cut-and-dried, clinical terms is like the film throwing cold water on the audience to bring them back to the “real world”- where everything must be rational and literal (almost the way many film critics tend to dissect and unfairly over-scrutinize horror films, Psycho being no exception upon its initial release). The scene serves to remind viewers how unique and specific the language of cinema is compared to other forms of storytelling. And its just so amusing how proud of himself the psychiatrist seems, and by following this up with Norman’s hauntingly seductive final expression as he looks in the camera, its almost as if he is letting us in on the joke and inviting us into his world.
Yes, it was an option to shoot in black and white. The story is that Hitchcock felt the gore of the shower scene would be too much in color. Okay, that may have been part of it, but when you see the night shots of the house and such, I think Hitch knew it would be creepier in black and white photography.
Well, your friend Dorothy's father was possibly the greatest film composer of all time! If I remember correctly, I read after I saw The Devil and Daniel Webster that Herrmann was friends with Aaron Copland. The theme from that film sounds a lot like Copland's Rodeo, but the film came out a year earlier, and apparently no one knows who actually wrote the theme first.
@@melanie62954 I haven't heard Rodeo in a while. Which theme do you mean? The Ballad of Springfield Mountain? Both pieces are rich with folksy Americana, but I didn't know there were the same.
I really love North by Northwest and Rear Window, but Psycho is up there too. Bernard Herrmann was so very talented as a film composer. He wrote the music to many iconic films including one of my favorites "Jason and the Argonauts."
Oooh, I need to listen to the Jason and the Argonauts soundtrack--haven't seen that movie since I was a kid. I think Bernard Herrmann might be the greatest film composer of all time.
Robert Bloch wrote the book Psycho. He also wrote Staitjht Jacket which was adapted to film starring Joan Crawford. The decapitation scene is one of the best i've seen, especially for that era.
First time watching your First Time Watching. It's nice to see a reviewer(s) actually watch and pay attention to the movie instead of just blathering on and missing important bits like some others do. I also like that you comment on film techniques (lighting, camera angles, composition, etc.) Those are what make these movies classic.
Supposedly Hitchcock didn't want the exposition scene at the end and fought hard not to film it, but the studio insisted that it be included because audiences wouldn't be smart enough to understand without it. That's how I heard it anyway.
Dude, Hitchcock's Rebecca won best picture in 1940! I'm pretty sure he was on the map 20 years before Psycho. Maybe even since The 39 Steps in 1935 (he was still in the UK, but it was a hit in the US). Still a great reaction, though--I enjoy the filmmaking insights. I hope you do more of his films. Nearly everything he did between 1940 and 1964 is gold--a few stinkers, but even the flawed ones (like Suspicion, Spellbound, Marnie) are still more interesting than your average thriller.
@@majormoviemadness9927 Oh yeah, it was definitely a game changer in the genre and as you pointed out, the parent of the modern slasher. I think that's why it's still so prominent in pop culture, unlike most of his films.
You guys should watch Hitchcock. It's a movie about the making of Psycho. It answers all your questions about why he put in the scene at the end, and more. The book was controversial. And when Hitchcock announced he wanted to make a movie based on it, he ran into all kinds of pushback. One of the first complaints was Psycho was the first movie to show a toilet, as well as flush a toilet.
I disagree with taking the point off for the explanation because point in time. This movie was ahead of it's time, like Maltese Falcon. It has been so copied and borrowed from that it is easy to say we don't need it. The audience was so different 64 years ago and this was so much a twist they needed the explanation. I do see this a lot with modern audiences reviewing the older films. The chuckle I get is when they say oh this reminds me . It gives me a bigger chuckle when they say this isn't that impressive because of it. Not realizing that your modern film probably took the idea from the original film you are watching.
First time I saw this movie, and she said her name was Crane - I started shouting at the screen, "Not a BIRD!! He STUFFS BIRDS! You're SURROUNDED by DEAD BIRDS!!" Yup, Dead.
You say Psycho put Hitchcock on the map and then came all these other films like Birds, Vertigo, North By Northwest, Rear Window et cetera, but you're wrong as they all came long before Psycho and the choice to shoot Psycho in B&W has nothing to do with the year of release. My favourite Hitchcock flick will forever be Rope (1948) and it was Hitchcock's first (Techni)color film yet released a full 12 years before Psycho.
Going off of the whole black and white style, you have to do 13 Ghosts (1960) released the same year. My mum saw it in the theater at the age of 3 (can you imagine?) If you continue Hitchapalooza, gotta do Rear Window 1954
The genius of Hitchcock was the casting of Anthony Perkins. The film, plot wise, is a faithful adaptation of Robert Bloch's novel, except that Bloch's Norman is a more unattractive and unpleasant person, much more in keeping with what we picture scuzzy psychopaths to be. But by casting Perkins, he totally wrong foots the audience because you start to feel immediate sympathy for this softly spoken, "gentle", hen-pecked recluse. And I do agree that the psychiatrist scene is heavy-handed, but I've always questioned how audiences would have understood the ending without it (as Hitchcock originally planned).
Marnie (1964) is a Hitchcock film that I saw in my teens and has an amazing story. Tippi Hedren and Louise Latham have a unique mother / daughter relationship and Sean Connery has a bizarre fixation on Marnie!
Agreed. I watched it recently on TCM. It really is a stylish gem. A great WHYdoneit? I love the opening sequence at the train station. Unfortunately on these channels they do the same movies over and over, with few exceptions, and miss out on a lot of great films.
Regarding the info dump at the end, Hitchcock sort of had to do that because of the times. The general public in 1960 had far, far less awareness and understanding of psychological trauma and personality disorders than nowadays. knowing hjow much of a believer in "show don't tell" Hitchcock was, he probably didn''t want to do it, but it was a (pardon the expression) necessary evil. Just having the nerve to make this movie in 1960 was gutsy. I think the last 30 seconds with the mothers' voice, the dissolve with the skull and dsicovery of the body are a brilliant ending. I enjoyed your video reaction to this all time classic. Can you imagine the audience seeing this in 1960? They thought it was about a 40,000 dollar robbery until the female lead dies early on!
I agree, there had been maybe one movie back them about multiple personalities, and Freud was finally filtering down to mass culture (the um, peculiar mother/son relationship). This movie is one reason later movies don't need those explanations. Nowadays it's ho hum, another multiple personality... but it wasn't in 1960.
You should check out _The Last of Sheila,_ which was co-written by Anthony Perkins and Stephen Sondheim, who used to host scavenger hunt parties together.
The work of Alfred Hitchcock's films have become a film school for all directors around the world. This film is also the precursor of a style, the slasher, but which doesn't really have one. But above all the first film which dared, at the time, to show... toilets.
Hitchcock made good films before he went to the US. Unfortunately his best known early film in the US is The Lady Vanishes which while well made just plays up to a cutesy image of England. Often the US remakes aren't as fresh. Saboteur isn't as great as the acclaimed The 39 Steps. And the 50s The Man Who Knew Too Much takes ages to get going. Sabotage is his most underrated film. Hitchcock started in the silent era and Blackmail shows his invention in silents/talkies as he changed his style for the new era. While Psycho and Vertigo are obvious classics I feel some of the US ones can be overrated while people neglect strong films without as much 'star power' or TV showings. I find North by Northwest clunky even if entertaining. Shadow of a Doubt has great acting and filmmaking in comparison. Strangers on a Train has an interesting idea but it doesn't fully work. I prefer Rope which is more constricted but works so well because of it. The Birds is well known in the US because of all the TV showings, but while unusual I find it clunky. The Wrong Man may cut too close to the bone for some but is so much more real and powerful for me. Budgets and 'star power' aren't everything.
They’re probably lying, however they don’t seem to know basic information about Hitchcock’s career, like the order of his films. Chalk it up to a poor education system perhaps??
I understood that the info dump at the end was at the insistence of the studio, as it was concerned that audiences wouldn't know what to make of the situation and would consider Norman a transvestite, hot-button anathema at the time. It does stick out like a sore thumb, narratively, for sure - and the ambiguity without it would've rocketed the creepy factor, much like the ending of The Birds.
But, at that time, movie audiences were used to vampires, werewolves, aliens, mutants, non-flesh eating zombies and kaiju. When the boy next door has a screw loose and goes blood drunk in Eisenhower/Kennedy's America where people say hello and leave their house doors open, you want to know what makes him tick.
Let me tell you again how refreshing it is to watch you two react to such classic films, not like so many reactors do, with just (sometimes badly acted) Ooh!/Aah!/OMG!/{any misuse of the Lord's Name}!, but with the words of people who know the trade and fully appreciate cinematographic genius; I learn a lot from your comments. So please carry on with the sessions on the couch, I'm all hears and unlike Psycho's shrink, I'll keep it shut!
Alfred Hitchcock presents aired in 1955. Then was changed to The Alfred Hitchcock hour from 1962-1965. Presents aired during his height as a filmmaker. The television series also introduced us to his next Hitchcock blonde Vera Miles. Who ended up doing a total of three episodes of his television series and two movies. The Wrong Man and of course Psycho. She’s the only surviving cast member of Psycho among other films. And she’s the only one to appear in the trailer to psycho
The reason for shooting in b&w that I'd heard somewhere, is that Hitch had some issues getting backing for the story, so went behind the studio's back and used the crew/setup from his TV show. I'm not entirely sure if that's right but I can imagine the studio being unimpressed with the story pitch after mainstream blockbusters like Vertigo and North By Northwest, so it sounds plausible.
Note the police officer guarding the door to the room where Norman is is kept while the shrink explains how he became his mother. An uncredited Ted Knight in his first movie roll...
So Psycho (1960) made his name in Hollywood and he could do whatever he wanted and yet he had this TV show when he career was waning called Alfred Hitchcock Presents (1955)... You see what you've done there? Yeah, maybe talk to your clueless friend as if you're an expert but maybe don't show that part to those of us who are because you'll just look foolish. Hitchcock was huge before Psycho and that movie did not make him any bigger. And it was scary as fck at the time. You are used to gore and thus cannot see it.
Two film makers both well into your 40's and neither of you have ever seen 'Psycho'...?!!! Forgive me if a lack of respect seems to eminate from this comment... compelled by the ADR statement.... no, it wasnt.
@@majormoviemadness9927 Actually, I was so dumbfounded from the title of your video (which, on first glance, seemed to imply neither of you had seen it), I went into a ten second zen-like trance of astonishment and disbelief - which clearly also ensured auditory disruption. I nevertheless watched the reaction, and was pleased at Major's (as I now know him to be called) honest and engrossed reaction - jumping several times and being properly repulsed by 'mother' - but less so with your commentary. The Bates Motel set is still very much in residence on the Universal backlot (albeit in a different location to the site in this film. The house was moved for 'Psycho II' and the motel was rebuilt for 'Psycho III'), the psychiatrist explanation at the end (however gratuitous today) was very much needed back then, for audiences less familiar with mental illnesses and (now this may be my misunderstanding) you seemed to suggest Anthony Perkins final chilling grin to camera was influenced by Jack Nicholson!!!! Please tell me that last gripe was just me getting the wrong end of the stick...
It's frankly a bit strange that most of the absolutely iconic and classic movies they're watching ARE first time watches, but they're really good and entertaining analysts.
@rnw2739 I have seen a lot of movies. I worked at a rental store for a year plus. I just haven't seen these movies. And that is the point of the channel. I get to watch the classics and apply my current knowledge and introspective, from working in the industry and from seeing what I have seen, and recognizing where much of what we watch now comes from. Age is not a defining metric for when someone should have seen something. It's upbringing, access, culture, interest, and passions at an early age. I didn't become a filmmaker until I was 28. Before then I just liked movies and watched whatever I wanted to as a fan of movies. Part of the general public. Also, I have done my share of ADR as an audio engineer, if it isn't ADR, it is delayed audio because of the audio and the medium (Film) not syncing or they used audio from different takes for whatever reason. But the sound does not "sync" just right. It's not a critique or judgment. It's an acknowledgment, as an insider, that this is a thing, and for those who don't know... now they know. There is a magic that happens in making a movie.
@@rnw2739 All he said was "Jack Nicholson vibes"--it just means he was reminded of Jack Nicholson, not that he though Anthony Perkins was influenced by him.
Hitchcock was an amazing technical director, and I enjoy your reactions to his wizardry with the camera -- I suspect he pioneered many of these techniques. Concerning the *too pat* explanation of the psychologist at the end, we're *supposed* to find it off-putting and not entirely satisfying. Hitchcock had many themes in his work -- the innocent man wrongly accused, Freudian mother-son relationships, men viewing women as "birds," etc. -- but one of his hobby horses was skewering/satirizing authority figures, especially psychologists who act like they've fully sussed out all of human nature and have all the answers. The role of the psychologist in Psycho is to offer some plausible and relevant observations to further our understanding of Norman's psychosis and explain the story, but at the same time, he's *supposed* to come off as a pompous windbag. Picture Hannibal Lecter responding acerbically, "You think you can dissect me with this blunt little tool?" That was Hitchcock's point, as well.
Many thanks to Major & Richard! 🚿 I hope you'll react to PSYCHO II (1983), as well. It's pretty good as far as sequels go... there are nods to Hitchcock's directorial style... even gave his silhouette a cameo. Yes, there's a PSYCHO III and even a PSYCHO IV. Each have their moments, but they don't resonate as deeply for me as PSYCHO II does.
It is ironic that this Hitchcock movie is called a classic, yet Michael Powell made a movie called Peeping Tom, that I think is as good as this, is almost forgotten and destroyed his career,
Martin Scorsese saw Peeping Tom in a Lower Manhattan theater. He was impressed by it and was surprised Powell directed it because he co-directed the drama, "The Ballet Shoes". Marty became friends with Powell and his wife, editor Thelma Schoomaker. Thelma worked on Marty's films. Peeping Tom was ahead of the curve in terms of making the story's villain three-dimensional.
Peeping Tom is such an under-watched masterpiece! Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger are my favorite filmmakers. I read up on it several years ago, and Powell thought the reason Psycho was a hit and Peeping Tom was rejected was 1) because Peeping Tom is a tender love story that asks you to feel sympathy for a killer, which is much more radical than the shock and terror of Psycho, and 2) because Psycho came out 3 months later, and had it come out first, it might have prepared audiences for something like Peeping Tom.
I love how you guys keyed into all the misdirection in the movie. A magician friend, Dartagnan, taught magic online. He specifically used the trailer for PSYCHO as part of his class. The trailer for Psycho is unique. And it somehow doesn't let anyone know jack shit about the story. Black-and-white was a purposeful choice. The studio had zero faith in the project and did not provide much money. So Hitch relied on his TV crew to shoot the movie. The black-and-white and low budget allowed him to engage with the kind of drive-in movie tropes that were popular with kids, like those awesome Roger Corman movies. (I'm betting A Bucket of Blood was an influence, and the low-budget noir Detour years earlier.) Bernard Herrmann chose violins for the score - like black-and-white, they and one kind of tonality, but with a very wide range. After you see more Hitchcock films, check out the amazing book Hitchcock/Truffaut. The French New Wave director interviews Hitch about each of his theatrical films. It's a feast! The book Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho is a lot of fun, with loads of interesting history. But Hitchcock/Truffaut is one of the best books about film, full stop.
Movie acting in the United States, until the late 1960s, was not naturalistic and audiences didn't expect it to be. Simon Oakland's delivery as the psychiatrist explaining what happened was typical of the time -- not at all remarkable and not thought to be corny. The Graduate (1967) was one of the first to seem natural in the European style of the period. (There were flashes of it in the movie Grand Prix the previous year. Also the previous year was The Group, somewhat more naturalistic. Candace Bergen's verbal duel with Larry Hagman near the movie's end is priceless.) By The French Connection (1971) the transformation was complete. You guys might be interested in The French Connection. It was made in an almost documentary style -- rough-edged, perfect for a police story.
It's too easy to criticize the scene with the psychiatrist for telling instead of showing. You could never get that information across any other plausible way. By the way, Simon Oakland did the role of the psychiatrist on the first take and Hitchcock just said, "Thank you, Mr. Oakland."
Studio though this movie was a loser and didn't want to fund it. Hitchcock wrote himself a check for 800k. Due to his low budget he decided on Black and White film stock because it was cheaper.
Spoilers below. ************** The decision to use b/w was deliberate, especially since he had already made some gorgeous Technicolor films ( Rear Window, Dial M for Murder, To Catch a Thief and Vertigo.) 1. The producers were skeptical about the film due to its content and so they gave him a lower budget, which made b/w stock more affordable. 2. Hitchcock had chosen as cinematographer one of the best in the business for use of high-contrast, shadows and shades of gray. 3. The theme, tone and mood of the film were better suited for b/w, as it had similarities to Noir films. Many shots were going to be at night, so color would have been unnecessary. 4. The blood looked more real in b/w; chocolate syrup was used as it had the right consistency and was deep in tone. He didn’t want fake looking red blood to distract viewers. The mother also looked more believable and more shocking in b/w. 5. Small details enhanced the b/w choice; before the theft, Marion’s bra and slip were white but after the theft they were black.
Vertigo and North by Northwest were before Psycho. He was at the top of his game throughout the 50s. Psycho didn't put him on the top. It actually was a gamble and an experiment. He used the TV crew for Psycho and shot it quickly and cheaply. It was a big hit.
Yeah, mid 50s to mid 60s was his height. Basically coinciding with the run of his tv show. Though his career as a director stretches all the way back to the 20s. And the late 60s/early 70s were not a good time for whatever reason.
The Studio didn't want him to make the film so Hitchcock had to pay for it himself and keep the costs to a minimum.
hitchcock was called the "master of suspense" even before he came to the u.s. one of his last english films "the lady vanishes" (1938) is a perfect example of this. and then his 40s american films were all top notch. his first american film "rebecca," (1940) won best picture but best director went to john ford for "the grapes of wrath."
hitchcock himself, though, never won an oscar. throughout the 40s he directed such classics as "suspicion" (1941), "shadow of a doubt" (1943), "lifeboat" (1944), "spellbound" (1945), "notorious" (1946) and "rope" (1948) were all every bit as good as the films he made in the 50s.
and 2 of my favorite hitchcock 50s films are sadly overlooked. "the trouble with harry" (1955), his only true comedy has a very young jerry mathers (beaver cleaver) to boot and 1956's "the wrong man". its hard to find a bad hitchcock film and, for me, they're impossible to rank.
After Psycho debuted in the movie theatres in 1960, it grossed $62,000,000.00. Alfred Hitchcock was set for life afterwards.
@@cjmacq-vg8um _Mr. and Mrs. Smith_ was also a comedy.
And the part where the psychologist explains thing is not only great, but necessary. Maybe if you had been around in 1960 you'd understand. The actor did a GREAT job.
I understand the need for explanation especially in 1960. But there are parts of it that really bother me. Like the "Yes. ... And no..." I think different wording would have been better. Also, an all-out "no" should have been the answer to the transvestite suggestion. Not the same thing at all.
Hitchcock actually said to the actor playing the psychologist "you have just saved my movie". Studios forced the scene through but it still fits the movies tone well enough
It's funny. I've always heard people disparage that part of the movie, but when I started watching CZcams reactors, so many of them seem to really need it to understand it.
@@HuntingViolets same. One of the best scenes in the movie
The Arbogast falling down the stairs was filmed using rear projection. Footage of a dolly shot going down the stairs was projected behind Martin Balsam, who was sitting in a chair, in front of the screen, and flailing around as if he were off balance.
Heck Yeah, I know someone would come through in the comments! Thanks for explaining how this shot was done!
The $40,000 that Marion stole in 1960 is equal to $415,000 today. In 1960 most homes in the US were under $15,000. A new Corvette cost $4,000. Minimum wage in 1960 was $1.00 an hour. Marion could’ve lived very well for a long time on that money had she not stayed at the Bates Motel.
Only fifteen miles to Fairvale too. If she'd only gotten a second wind on hearing that and decided not to stay after all.
Anthony Perkins starred in some really great movies. Outside of Psycho, I think his best role is in Orson Welle's The Trial, which is a masterpiece. You guys should check it out if you haven't.
I loved him in "Pretty Poison."
He also co-wrote _The Last of Sheila_ with Stephen Sondheim, based on treasure hunt game parties they used to host (but made more deadly).
You may be interested to know that ‘Tom Cassidy’ (the “creepy old man” whose $40K that was) was played by Frank Albertson, who was “Sam ‘Hee-Haw’ Wainright” in “It’s A Wonderful Life” (1946)
And you may be interested to know that FA and Janet Leigh were both in Bye Bye Birdie three years later, although they had no scenes together. FA played the Mayor of Ann-Margret's home town.
@@histubeness
And you may be interested to know that Ann-Margret starred with Anthony Hopkins in “MAGIC” (1978).
@@BlueShadow777 True. And I saw Magic when it was first released in theaters in '78. Then again, that has no connection with Frank Albertson, or Janet Leigh, for that matter. --Good movie, though.
Did not know that. Thanks.
@@histubeness It has a connection to _Psycho,_ though.
"That is the coppiest looking cop in the history of cops" - Major. I'm going to be using that line forever, thanks man! Best reaction to the shower scene I've ever seen; you actually TAUGHT me how an audience member would have reacted to it in 1960; every reaction I've seen for this movie, they know about the shower scene and don't have the same reaction, I've never seen someone actually jump from it, that was priceless!!!! Looking forward to HItch month! Rope is a great idea, would love to see Major's reaction to that one! Strangers On A Train also, that's my fave, what a movie. THANKS! Learned alot on this one!!
PS: Hitchcock's career was in no way on the wane when he did Alfred Hitchcock Presents in the 50s-early 60s, quite the opposite, he was at the zenith of his fame and had plenty of hits in the 50s (some of his biggest: North By Northwest, Man Who Knew Too Much, To Catch A Thief, Rear Window, Dial M For Murder, Strangers On A Train, etc etc). And the early 60s had his biggest box office films, Psycho and The Birds. His career was most definitely not on the wane! Not every movie he did was a smash, but plenty of them were. The reason he did the series was to capitalize on his hits, not because he was in decline.
Bro! Agent Smith vibes all day. The DNA of the Agents in the Matrix started with this guy. The Cop in Terminator 2, this guy was the face they put in that movies pitch deck. He's now iconic in my brain for every as the coppiest cop that will define all cops in movies! LOL
@@TTM9691He also leant his name to anthology books he had nothing to do with, "presenting" them, and to _Alfred Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine,_ which I think is still going.
Hitchcock initially wanted the shower scene to be silent but Herrmann made him listen to the score he had written. Hitchcock was convinced and doubled the composer's fee.
hitchcock was called the "master of suspense" even before he came to the u.s. one of his last english films "the lady vanishes" (1938) is a perfect example of this. and then his 40s american films were all top notch. his first american film "rebecca," (1940) won best picture but best director went to john ford for "the grapes of wrath."
hitchcock himself, though, never won an oscar. throughout the 40s he directed such classics as "suspicion" (1941), "shadow of a doubt" (1943), "lifeboat" (1944), "spellbound" (1945), "notorious" (1946) and "rope" (1948) were all every bit as good as the films he made in the 50s.
and 2 of my favorite hitchcock 50s films are sadly overlooked. "the trouble with harry" (1955), his only true comedy has a very young jerry mathers (beaver cleaver) to boot and 1956's "the wrong man". its hard to find a bad hitchcock film and, for me, they're impossible to rank.
I don't want to give Richard the 3rd degree for an off-hand comment, but Strangers on a Train (1951) is a great movie for any decade and superior to just about anything made today. I'm excited that you've moved onto Hitchcock, the best in my book. In addition to the usuals (Vertigo, N by NW, etc.,) I hope you also do one of his last films, Frenzy. It is probably his closest to Psycho and also has what I think is the funniest sub-plot in all of Hitchcock.
Strangers on a Train definitely stands the test of time, as it’s uniquely (for Hitch) character driven and involves a lot of basic human interactions.
Normally Hitch didn’t have very memorable characters (at least not before this 1951 film) but Robert Walker’s Bruno Antony is brilliantly realized.
I like how Marion is wearing white lingerie at the beginning of the film, but after she has taken the money and turned "bad" she has changed to black lingerie. The film is in black and white because it was cheaper than color film stock, and Hitchcock used his TV show crew for filming because he was financing the film himself.
I think the amount of blood in the movie was a factor in deciding on B&W--too gory in color.
Several years ago there was a serial killer in Dallas that would remove the victim's eyes. When he was a kid his hobby was taxidermy. His mother bought his supplies but because the glass eyeballs were too expensive she made him use buttons instead. That's as Norman Batish as can be haha.
I liked the psychiatrist part, great actor who was in many Twilight Zone episodes.
Me too
The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934)
Strangers On A Train (1951)
Rear Window (1954)
The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956)
Vertigo (1958)
North By North West (1959)
Psycho (1960)
The Birds (!963)
Marnie (1964)
How could you forget “Rebecca” (Best Picture Oscar - The only one he ever received, in 1940), “The 39 Steps” (1935), “The Lady Vanishes” (1938), “Rope”(1948), “To Catch A Thief”(1955), and “Notorious”(1946)?
His film career had not waned when he had the TV show. He did _Psycho_ at this same time.
Correct, and he'd been "on the map" in the U.S. ever since his American debut with 1940's "Rebecca," twenty years before "Psycho." During the AHP's run he also put out "The Man Who Knew Too Much" remake, "Vertigo," "North By Northwest" and the "The Birds." The t.v. show made him a lot more famous for sure, but he was already the rare superstar director prior to its success.
@@slc2466 Yes.
Even though the story seems to be disjointed, I think there is a consistent theme throughout the film. From the very beginning we are looking at female beauty in a lustful manner, and the way that men look at Marion continues this "male gaze" idea. It is posing the question about how men mentally handle the sight of female beauty,with their behavior in society and in their own minds. There is a similar idea in The Silence of the Lambs too.
the voice in marion's head foreshadows the voice in norman's head at the end - perfect
Those dope credits are all Saul Bass, who pretty much invented kinetic typography and the idea of dynamic opening credits that set up a film in tone or story. He also did the credits in North By Northwest and Vertigo, as well as The Man With The Golden Arm, Walk on the Wild Side, and Anatomy of a Murder, and lots of other iconic sequences.
One of my favorite hip hop songs, Jumping Coffin by Aesop Rock, has the fantastic line describing peak game-changing skill with an artform as “like an alphabet to Saul Bass”
Dial M For Murder is a good one as well. 1954. Ray Milland and Grace Kelly.
One of my top favorite Hitchcock movies, along with The Lady Vanishes from the 1930's.
My mum watched this when she was just 17 on the rock of Gibralta (my father was sent there to do his national service. At the time Psycho was rated an X movie, almost like going to watch a porn movie at the time. My mum felt a bit guilty anyhow watch an X rated film that you had to be 21 to watch. Now Hitchcock had asked all movie theatres not to let anyone else in, once the movie had started. An announcement was made saying that the doors were now closed until the end of the movie. The combination of eveything, including killing off Janet Leigh off so early utterly petrified my mum. My mum is now 81 and has never watched it again.
After seeing this film more than a few times, I literally only just noticed how similar (and intentional) Marion and Norman's smirks are when listening to parts of their inner monologue (Norman's being the famous final image as the movie ends)...
... definitely hits home the idea that 'We all go a little mad sometimes'. And showd how slow my brain works 😊
Re. Anthony Perkins' performance... I don't know about others' thoughts, but he absolutely gives me vibes of the heinous Ted Bundy (albeit an awkward version) despite his performance pre-dating the FBI introducing the world to the term 'serial killer', and the real-life psychopath not being filmed/interviewed until 15+ years later. Knowing real life monsters with similar 'people facing' facades exist in the real world makes the 'Norman' part of his performance all the more amazing - and absolutely terrifying - for me.
Anyone else out there in the Commentorverse gets similar vibes at all?
Interesting point
I believe this was intended to an Alfred Hitchcock Presents but made it into a feature. This is possibly a reason it was B&W.
Color was actually more common by 1960. Budget usually dictated color or b&w.
When Norman goes up the stairs to get his mother, a camera crane follows him. When the camera is focused on the top of the door frame, another crane is coming over the top of the wall to the right. At this point, the camera is moved by hand from one crane to another. The first crane withdraws quickly down the stairs before the camera on the second crane lifts and focuses down from above! True genius!
They made the film in 1959, and bringing a mainstream audience up to speed on dissociative personality disorders was a steep hill to climb by itself. Hitchcock made the psychiatrist a smug know-it-all on purpose.
You mention how it seems like the movie is about the money at first. Hitchcock always called that the "MacGuffin." The MacGuffin was the plot device that the movie SEEMED to be about, but which was actually just a distraction from what the movie was REALLY about.
FYI The closeup of Marian's eye after she was killed was NOT a still shot.
With Psycho, Hitchcock proves that he is the King of Suspense because he surprises and shocks the audience with a story that is telegraphed from the very beginning. I mean, the title is "Psycho," not "Office Thief." Yet everyone is shocked when the movie turns out to be about a psycho, and not a woman who stole money. Even before the you get anywhere near the actual movie, it's based on the 1959 novel Psycho, by Robert Bloch, which was a bestseller and had come out just a year before the film, so lots of people had read the book and knew the basic story, yet everyone was shocked by the big reveal in the movie. It's because nobody was or is better than Hitchcock at getting inside the audience's heads, riveting our attention, manipulating our perceptions and emotions in the moment.
The bit with the psychiatrist at the end is annoying, I agree, but I think it's more jarring to a 21st century audience than it was in 1960. We are a lot better educated about serial killers and abusive family relationships than most people were then, so we don't need that explanation. Audiences back then kinda did.
Ok, Major, you cannot use the word "creepy" again in any reaction until 2024. To think of it, both of you! It was fun to watch this with someone who had no clues or spoilers about the plot- pretty rare, but you got the full impact like we did back in the day. (I saw this in the 70's as a teen- freaked me out). North by Northwest is my favorite Hitch movie, and probably in my top 3 of all time.
Hitch actually didn’t want the psychiatrist explanation scene in the movie. He was pressured into its inclusion from the studio powers above. It was a reluctant inclusion.
Figures
I think Notorious is the Hitchcock that is most ... not talked about ... that deserves to be talked about xxx
I always felt that the psychiatrist speech was meant to be tongue in cheek and darkly comic. Everything up until this point in the film was so hypnotic, dreamlike and complex and then to have this “professional” compartmentalize and describe Norman’s entire existence away in such cut-and-dried, clinical terms is like the film throwing cold water on the audience to bring them back to the “real world”- where everything must be rational and literal (almost the way many film critics tend to dissect and unfairly over-scrutinize horror films, Psycho being no exception upon its initial release). The scene serves to remind viewers how unique and specific the language of cinema is compared to other forms of storytelling. And its just so amusing how proud of himself the psychiatrist seems, and by following this up with Norman’s hauntingly seductive final expression as he looks in the camera, its almost as if he is letting us in on the joke and inviting us into his world.
Yes, it was an option to shoot in black and white. The story is that Hitchcock felt the gore of the shower scene would be too much in color. Okay, that may have been part of it, but when you see the night shots of the house and such, I think Hitch knew it would be creepier in black and white photography.
My friend Dorothy's father composed the music for Psycho.
Wow...Bernard Herrmann had quite the career! In addition to several other Hitchcock films, he also composed the music for Taxi Driver.
I wouldn't be surprised if they now think your friend Dorothy is the daughter of Busta Rhymes....
@@rnw2739 huh?
Well, your friend Dorothy's father was possibly the greatest film composer of all time! If I remember correctly, I read after I saw The Devil and Daniel Webster that Herrmann was friends with Aaron Copland. The theme from that film sounds a lot like Copland's Rodeo, but the film came out a year earlier, and apparently no one knows who actually wrote the theme first.
@@melanie62954 I haven't heard Rodeo in a while. Which theme do you mean? The Ballad of Springfield Mountain? Both pieces are rich with folksy Americana, but I didn't know there were the same.
I really love North by Northwest and Rear Window, but Psycho is up there too. Bernard Herrmann was so very talented as a film composer. He wrote the music to many iconic films including one of my favorites "Jason and the Argonauts."
Oooh, I need to listen to the Jason and the Argonauts soundtrack--haven't seen that movie since I was a kid. I think Bernard Herrmann might be the greatest film composer of all time.
@@melanie62954 I agree with you. Herrmann was one of, if not the best at it.
Robert Bloch wrote the book Psycho. He also wrote Staitjht Jacket which was adapted to film starring Joan Crawford. The decapitation scene is one of the best i've seen, especially for that era.
Black & white was so effective and Hitch uses it brilliantly. I grew up on B & w movies.
Most movies from that era featuring psychiatrists seem dated today - Spellbound, The Three Faces of Eve, Suddenly, Last Summer, etc.
First time watching your First Time Watching. It's nice to see a reviewer(s) actually watch and pay attention to the movie instead of just blathering on and missing important bits like some others do. I also like that you comment on film techniques (lighting, camera angles, composition, etc.) Those are what make these movies classic.
8:43 True; he looks like Clancy Brown in _Shawshank._
Supposedly Hitchcock didn't want the exposition scene at the end and fought hard not to film it, but the studio insisted that it be included because audiences wouldn't be smart enough to understand without it. That's how I heard it anyway.
Dude, Hitchcock's Rebecca won best picture in 1940! I'm pretty sure he was on the map 20 years before Psycho. Maybe even since The 39 Steps in 1935 (he was still in the UK, but it was a hit in the US). Still a great reaction, though--I enjoy the filmmaking insights. I hope you do more of his films. Nearly everything he did between 1940 and 1964 is gold--a few stinkers, but even the flawed ones (like Suspicion, Spellbound, Marnie) are still more interesting than your average thriller.
I guess that for whatever reason this movie really hit a nerve with people, I am aware of Rebecca tho
@@majormoviemadness9927 Oh yeah, it was definitely a game changer in the genre and as you pointed out, the parent of the modern slasher. I think that's why it's still so prominent in pop culture, unlike most of his films.
Psycho was the film that set Hitchcock up financially for the rest of his life.
_Spellbound_ with Ingrid Bergman and Gregory Peck. I wouldn't say the dream sequence is "hokey" now. Maybe you two should react to it.
31:17 But necessary for the time, as mental illness was not fully understood.
looking forward to this
Norman tells us early on that his mother is "as harmless as one of those stuffed birds."
thanks for the info, I always thought those were later
You guys deserve more attention.
You guys should watch Hitchcock. It's a movie about the making of Psycho. It answers all your questions about why he put in the scene at the end, and more. The book was controversial. And when Hitchcock announced he wanted to make a movie based on it, he ran into all kinds of pushback.
One of the first complaints was Psycho was the first movie to show a toilet, as well as flush a toilet.
Wasn’t from dusk til dawns setup a nod to psycho: first half a heist as the red herring and second half vampire flick.
I disagree with taking the point off for the explanation because point in time. This movie was ahead of it's time, like Maltese Falcon. It has been so copied and borrowed from that it is easy to say we don't need it. The audience was so different 64 years ago and this was so much a twist they needed the explanation. I do see this a lot with modern audiences reviewing the older films. The chuckle I get is when they say oh this reminds me . It gives me a bigger chuckle when they say this isn't that impressive because of it. Not realizing that your modern film probably took the idea from the original film you are watching.
First time I saw this movie, and she said her name was Crane - I started shouting at the screen, "Not a BIRD!! He STUFFS BIRDS! You're SURROUNDED by DEAD BIRDS!!" Yup, Dead.
I never made that connection before! Creepy.
Also when Norman sees the bathroom he knocks over a picture of a bird. At the time, bird was slang for girl.
_Alfred Hitchcock Presents_ was an anthology series--actually started before _The Twilight Zone,_ by the way.
My favorite Hitchcock films: 1 "Marnie" (1964) 2 Spellbound (1945) 3 "Family Plot" (1976)
Alfred HItchcock presents started in the 50s. His career was definitely not on the wain. He actually directed several episodes.
You say Psycho put Hitchcock on the map and then came all these other films like Birds, Vertigo, North By Northwest, Rear Window et cetera, but you're wrong as they all came long before Psycho and the choice to shoot Psycho in B&W has nothing to do with the year of release. My favourite Hitchcock flick will forever be Rope (1948) and it was Hitchcock's first (Techni)color film yet released a full 12 years before Psycho.
Going off of the whole black and white style, you have to do 13 Ghosts (1960) released the same year. My mum saw it in the theater at the age of 3 (can you imagine?) If you continue Hitchapalooza, gotta do Rear Window 1954
Freddie Highmore played Peter in _Finding Neverland,_ I believe.
Did you know that Hitch made a cameo in most of his movies, My favorite Hitchcock movie is The Trouble with Harry
The genius of Hitchcock was the casting of Anthony Perkins. The film, plot wise, is a faithful adaptation of Robert Bloch's novel, except that Bloch's Norman is a more unattractive and unpleasant person, much more in keeping with what we picture scuzzy psychopaths to be. But by casting Perkins, he totally wrong foots the audience because you start to feel immediate sympathy for this softly spoken, "gentle", hen-pecked recluse. And I do agree that the psychiatrist scene is heavy-handed, but I've always questioned how audiences would have understood the ending without it (as Hitchcock originally planned).
Marnie (1964) is a Hitchcock film that I saw in my teens and has an amazing story. Tippi Hedren and Louise Latham have a unique mother / daughter relationship and Sean Connery has a bizarre fixation on Marnie!
Agreed. I watched it recently on TCM. It really is a stylish gem. A great WHYdoneit? I love the opening sequence at the train station. Unfortunately on these channels they do the same movies over and over, with few exceptions, and miss out on a lot of great films.
Regarding the info dump at the end, Hitchcock sort of had to do that because of the times. The general public in 1960 had far, far less awareness and understanding of psychological trauma and personality disorders than nowadays. knowing hjow much of a believer in "show don't tell" Hitchcock was, he probably didn''t want to do it, but it was a (pardon the expression) necessary evil. Just having the nerve to make this movie in 1960 was gutsy. I think the last 30 seconds with the mothers' voice, the dissolve with the skull and dsicovery of the body are a brilliant ending. I enjoyed your video reaction to this all time classic. Can you imagine the audience seeing this in 1960? They thought it was about a 40,000 dollar robbery until the female lead dies early on!
I agree, there had been maybe one movie back them about multiple personalities, and Freud was finally filtering down to mass culture (the um, peculiar mother/son relationship). This movie is one reason later movies don't need those explanations. Nowadays it's ho hum, another multiple personality... but it wasn't in 1960.
You should check out _The Last of Sheila,_ which was co-written by Anthony Perkins and Stephen Sondheim, who used to host scavenger hunt parties together.
The work of Alfred Hitchcock's films have become a film school for all directors around the world.
This film is also the precursor of a style, the slasher, but which doesn't really have one.
But above all the first film which dared, at the time, to show... toilets.
Hitchcock made good films before he went to the US. Unfortunately his best known early film in the US is The Lady Vanishes which while well made just plays up to a cutesy image of England. Often the US remakes aren't as fresh. Saboteur isn't as great as the acclaimed The 39 Steps. And the 50s The Man Who Knew Too Much takes ages to get going. Sabotage is his most underrated film. Hitchcock started in the silent era and Blackmail shows his invention in silents/talkies as he changed his style for the new era.
While Psycho and Vertigo are obvious classics I feel some of the US ones can be overrated while people neglect strong films without as much 'star power' or TV showings. I find North by Northwest clunky even if entertaining. Shadow of a Doubt has great acting and filmmaking in comparison. Strangers on a Train has an interesting idea but it doesn't fully work. I prefer Rope which is more constricted but works so well because of it. The Birds is well known in the US because of all the TV showings, but while unusual I find it clunky. The Wrong Man may cut too close to the bone for some but is so much more real and powerful for me.
Budgets and 'star power' aren't everything.
So how on earth someone MAJORING in film making has never seen Psycho before this? Or any of the other films.
I don't get it. Please explain.
They’re probably lying, however they don’t seem to know basic information about Hitchcock’s career, like the order of his films. Chalk it up to a poor education system perhaps??
I understood that the info dump at the end was at the insistence of the studio, as it was concerned that audiences wouldn't know what to make of the situation and would consider Norman a transvestite, hot-button anathema at the time. It does stick out like a sore thumb, narratively, for sure - and the ambiguity without it would've rocketed the creepy factor, much like the ending of The Birds.
But, at that time, movie audiences were used to vampires, werewolves, aliens, mutants, non-flesh eating zombies and kaiju. When the boy next door has a screw loose and goes blood drunk in Eisenhower/Kennedy's America where people say hello and leave their house doors open, you want to know what makes him tick.
Let me tell you again how refreshing it is to watch you two react to such classic films, not like so many reactors do, with just (sometimes badly acted) Ooh!/Aah!/OMG!/{any misuse of the Lord's Name}!, but with the words of people who know the trade and fully appreciate cinematographic genius; I learn a lot from your comments. So please carry on with the sessions on the couch, I'm all hears and unlike Psycho's shrink, I'll keep it shut!
Hitchcock chose b&w for cost since Paramount executives wouldn't provide his usual budget, so he personally financed the project.
Hitchcock did the film in black and white because of the blood. They used Hershey's syrup, by the way.
Variety, 2023: 'Psycho best movie ever made."
Alfred Hitchcock presents aired in 1955. Then was changed to The Alfred Hitchcock hour from 1962-1965. Presents aired during his height as a filmmaker. The television series also introduced us to his next Hitchcock blonde Vera Miles. Who ended up doing a total of three episodes of his television series and two movies. The Wrong Man and of course Psycho. She’s the only surviving cast member of Psycho among other films. And she’s the only one to appear in the trailer to psycho
I love The Rear Window. They excavated the set to allow for the height of the building. Fabulous film. Also, Rope, was another one of his finest ❤
It’s “Rear Window”, not “The Rear Window”.
Turn momma's picture to the wall.
That's an expression.
The reason for shooting in b&w that I'd heard somewhere, is that Hitch had some issues getting backing for the story, so went behind the studio's back and used the crew/setup from his TV show.
I'm not entirely sure if that's right but I can imagine the studio being unimpressed with the story pitch after mainstream blockbusters like Vertigo and North By Northwest, so it sounds plausible.
this was the first american movie to show a toilet for use
so weird
Note the police officer guarding the door to the room where Norman is is kept while the shrink explains how he became his mother. An uncredited Ted Knight in his first movie roll...
The story you say this movie is based on, or the killer is, is in fact the story that "Silence of the Lambs" is based on.
I like candy corn, too.
So Psycho (1960) made his name in Hollywood and he could do whatever he wanted and yet he had this TV show when he career was waning called Alfred Hitchcock Presents (1955)... You see what you've done there? Yeah, maybe talk to your clueless friend as if you're an expert but maybe don't show that part to those of us who are because you'll just look foolish. Hitchcock was huge before Psycho and that movie did not make him any bigger. And it was scary as fck at the time. You are used to gore and thus cannot see it.
Two film makers both well into your 40's and neither of you have ever seen 'Psycho'...?!!!
Forgive me if a lack of respect seems to eminate from this comment... compelled by the ADR statement.... no, it wasnt.
If you bothered to watch ten seconds which you clearly didn’t you would see that I have seen it quite a lot and major hasn’t
@@majormoviemadness9927 Actually, I was so dumbfounded from the title of your video (which, on first glance, seemed to imply neither of you had seen it), I went into a ten second zen-like trance of astonishment and disbelief - which clearly also ensured auditory disruption.
I nevertheless watched the reaction, and was pleased at Major's (as I now know him to be called) honest and engrossed reaction - jumping several times and being properly repulsed by 'mother' - but less so with your commentary. The Bates Motel set is still very much in residence on the Universal backlot (albeit in a different location to the site in this film. The house was moved for 'Psycho II' and the motel was rebuilt for 'Psycho III'), the psychiatrist explanation at the end (however gratuitous today) was very much needed back then, for audiences less familiar with mental illnesses and (now this may be my misunderstanding) you seemed to suggest Anthony Perkins final chilling grin to camera was influenced by Jack Nicholson!!!! Please tell me that last gripe was just me getting the wrong end of the stick...
It's frankly a bit strange that most of the absolutely iconic and classic movies they're watching ARE first time watches, but they're really good and entertaining analysts.
@rnw2739 I have seen a lot of movies. I worked at a rental store for a year plus. I just haven't seen these movies. And that is the point of the channel. I get to watch the classics and apply my current knowledge and introspective, from working in the industry and from seeing what I have seen, and recognizing where much of what we watch now comes from. Age is not a defining metric for when someone should have seen something. It's upbringing, access, culture, interest, and passions at an early age. I didn't become a filmmaker until I was 28. Before then I just liked movies and watched whatever I wanted to as a fan of movies. Part of the general public. Also, I have done my share of ADR as an audio engineer, if it isn't ADR, it is delayed audio because of the audio and the medium (Film) not syncing or they used audio from different takes for whatever reason. But the sound does not "sync" just right. It's not a critique or judgment. It's an acknowledgment, as an insider, that this is a thing, and for those who don't know... now they know. There is a magic that happens in making a movie.
@@rnw2739 All he said was "Jack Nicholson vibes"--it just means he was reminded of Jack Nicholson, not that he though Anthony Perkins was influenced by him.
Hitchcock was an amazing technical director, and I enjoy your reactions to his wizardry with the camera -- I suspect he pioneered many of these techniques. Concerning the *too pat* explanation of the psychologist at the end, we're *supposed* to find it off-putting and not entirely satisfying. Hitchcock had many themes in his work -- the innocent man wrongly accused, Freudian mother-son relationships, men viewing women as "birds," etc. -- but one of his hobby horses was skewering/satirizing authority figures, especially psychologists who act like they've fully sussed out all of human nature and have all the answers. The role of the psychologist in Psycho is to offer some plausible and relevant observations to further our understanding of Norman's psychosis and explain the story, but at the same time, he's *supposed* to come off as a pompous windbag. Picture Hannibal Lecter responding acerbically, "You think you can dissect me with this blunt little tool?" That was Hitchcock's point, as well.
Many thanks to Major & Richard! 🚿 I hope you'll react to PSYCHO II (1983), as well. It's pretty good as far as sequels go... there are nods to Hitchcock's directorial style... even gave his silhouette a cameo. Yes, there's a PSYCHO III and even a PSYCHO IV. Each have their moments, but they don't resonate as deeply for me as PSYCHO II does.
It is ironic that this Hitchcock movie is called a classic, yet Michael Powell made a movie called Peeping Tom, that I think is as good as this, is almost forgotten and destroyed his career,
Martin Scorsese saw Peeping Tom in a Lower Manhattan theater. He was impressed by it and was surprised Powell directed it because he co-directed the drama, "The Ballet Shoes". Marty became friends with Powell and his wife, editor Thelma Schoomaker. Thelma worked on Marty's films.
Peeping Tom was ahead of the curve in terms of making the story's villain three-dimensional.
Peeping Tom is such an under-watched masterpiece! Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger are my favorite filmmakers. I read up on it several years ago, and Powell thought the reason Psycho was a hit and Peeping Tom was rejected was 1) because Peeping Tom is a tender love story that asks you to feel sympathy for a killer, which is much more radical than the shock and terror of Psycho, and 2) because Psycho came out 3 months later, and had it come out first, it might have prepared audiences for something like Peeping Tom.
@@Madbandit77 Marty actually introduced Powell to Thelma Schoonmaker! They married in 1984.
I love how you guys keyed into all the misdirection in the movie.
A magician friend, Dartagnan, taught magic online. He specifically used the trailer for PSYCHO as part of his class. The trailer for Psycho is unique. And it somehow doesn't let anyone know jack shit about the story.
Black-and-white was a purposeful choice. The studio had zero faith in the project and did not provide much money. So Hitch relied on his TV crew to shoot the movie. The black-and-white and low budget allowed him to engage with the kind of drive-in movie tropes that were popular with kids, like those awesome Roger Corman movies. (I'm betting A Bucket of Blood was an influence, and the low-budget noir Detour years earlier.) Bernard Herrmann chose violins for the score - like black-and-white, they and one kind of tonality, but with a very wide range.
After you see more Hitchcock films, check out the amazing book Hitchcock/Truffaut. The French New Wave director interviews Hitch about each of his theatrical films. It's a feast!
The book Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho is a lot of fun, with loads of interesting history. But Hitchcock/Truffaut is one of the best books about film, full stop.
Movie acting in the United States, until the late 1960s, was not naturalistic and audiences didn't expect it to be. Simon Oakland's delivery as the psychiatrist explaining what happened was typical of the time -- not at all remarkable and not thought to be corny. The Graduate (1967) was one of the first to seem natural in the European style of the period. (There were flashes of it in the movie Grand Prix the previous year. Also the previous year was The Group, somewhat more naturalistic. Candace Bergen's verbal duel with Larry Hagman near the movie's end is priceless.) By The French Connection (1971) the transformation was complete.
You guys might be interested in The French Connection. It was made in an almost documentary style -- rough-edged, perfect for a police story.
Did you really think she was going to go to the bank?
It's too easy to criticize the scene with the psychiatrist for telling instead of showing. You could never get that information across any other plausible way. By the way, Simon Oakland did the role of the psychiatrist on the first take and Hitchcock just said, "Thank you, Mr. Oakland."
Studio though this movie was a loser and didn't want to fund it.
Hitchcock wrote himself a check for 800k.
Due to his low budget he decided on Black and White film stock because it was cheaper.
Spoilers below.
**************
The decision to use b/w was deliberate, especially since he had already made some gorgeous Technicolor films ( Rear Window, Dial M for Murder, To Catch a Thief and Vertigo.)
1. The producers were skeptical about the film due to its content and so they gave him a lower budget, which made b/w stock more affordable.
2. Hitchcock had chosen as cinematographer one of the best in the business for use of high-contrast, shadows and shades of gray.
3. The theme, tone and mood of the film were better suited for b/w, as it had similarities to Noir films. Many shots were going to be at night, so color would have been unnecessary.
4. The blood looked more real in b/w; chocolate syrup was used as it had the right consistency and was deep in tone. He didn’t want fake looking red blood to distract viewers. The mother also looked more believable and more shocking in b/w.
5. Small details enhanced the b/w choice; before the theft, Marion’s bra and slip were white but after the theft they were black.
Which spoilers???
@@philjones45 about the blood and the Mother. Some people get upset if you reveal too much…
_Peeping Tom_ came out before this.
The shrink was explaining the movie as if he had written the script. That's the only flaw of this masterpiece.
Alfred Hitchcock’s movie career never waived. Do some homework before you post.
I will, I think you would agree marnie topaz and family plot were not as well received
Do you make PVC thin film or plastic sheet film?
The commenter doth protest too much, methinks. Judge us when you know us, never before.