Reimagining Hitchcock: Where The Psycho Remake Went Wrong
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 12. 2023
- Despite the incredible execution and near-perfect performances of everyone involved in the making of Psycho- Someone, somewhere, thought it would be a good idea to create an almost shot-for-shot remake of the classic 1960 title, and bring it into the modern era, while simultaneously remaining detrimentally faithful to the original film- which was not meant for the modern era.
WATCH OR OWN THE FILM HERE: amzn.to/3F4sSQM
Written by Kier Gomes
Narrated by Kier Gomes
Edited by Kier Gomes
Produced by Tyler Nichols & John Fallon
Executive Producer by Berge Garabedian
For more HORROR MOVIE NEWS, visit: www.joblo.com/horror-movies/n...
SUBSCRIBE for all the LATEST JoBlo Horror Videos here: bit.ly/38TqIT1
#GusVanSant'sPsycho #Psycho1998 #revisited #joblohorror - Krátké a kreslené filmy
The amount of star power in the remake is insane. Along with the stellar main cast, even the smaller parts were well known including Robert Forster, Philip Baker Hall, James Remar, Rita Wilson, and James LeGros. It had mad potential and it were done as a shot for shot remake and may have done better. It’s like “Red Dragon” is to “Manhunter “.
It was merely a shot for shot, line verbitam recreation of the original, in a colour format. The actors were decent, but Vince Vaughan seemed to be miscast as Norman.
You watched the video too?👍🏻
Raimi's Spider-Man himself
Tobey Maquire was one of the original actors considered for Norman Bates in the '98 remake.
Also, Nicole Kidman was considered for Marion Crane.
Hands down the only person who could even come close to touching on Perkins' original portrayal as Freddie Highmore (not kidding at all) in the BATES MOTEL series, which despite being a "re-imagining" is a gripping and more dramatic/thriller approach while still showing Norman as this sympathetic yet tormented person rather than a caricature of a "crazy dude".
As an avid fan of the Psycho franchise, I quite enjoy this movie. I love the artistic style and colour saturation of this movie. Is it perfect? No! Is it a classic? No! But, ultimately, I'm not bothered one bit by it. I just dont find myself bothered by this film like others do. It's the ultimate tribute to the original, and I do get a kick out of it.
hows the original novel compare?
i wanted to like it but just couldn't, so yes I'm one of those who was so bothered i don't have the energy to list everything that was wrong with it
I feel the same way.
If the momentum is indeed to keep the 60s vibe to the 90s movie, may Julianne Moore outlive them all in this movie like Vera Miles. Still alive at 94!
I'm guessing Julianne Moore would be happier having the remake of Psycho removed from her resume: "alright let me get my walkman" - worst line update in film history
i read the book when i was going to Karachi Grammar School in 1981 i think. It was an old paper back. Since moving to USA i watch this movie every year. Since 1985 i have lived in 2 different countries and i have seen how the world has rotted out, but for some reason movies like this allow me to stay connected to my past. Another movie i watch all the time is Final countdown, with Martin Sheen. I watched that movie in Karachi in 1981, Capri Cinema.
I loved this video, the passionate "Why?" Is spot on. I never even knew it existed until this video. Sometimes you just get tired. Thanks JoBlo!!
I totally agree with you. Watching the remake there was no subtlety. The original it was so subtle. Every once in a while his tone would change or he would give a weird smile but then reel it back in. I love the original Psycho. I watch it every year
This is the one movie that didn't need a remake. The original is a classic
And then there´s The Omen remake...followed closely by the Nightmare on Elm. St. remake.
It failed mostly because it was way too much almost exactly like the Alfred Hitchcock classic (and begs the question - why watch this remake when you can just watch the original?)....The TV series Bates Motel was a much better reboot, because it actually did something different with the material while still giving winks & nods and callbacks to Psycho & it's 3 sequels. IMO.
I didn't know they made a remake, and I wish I stayed ignorant about it tbh
Doing a shot for shot remake is like doing a modern dress production of Hamlet.
Was said somewhere that this movie was being made for people who won't watch black and white films, but that's not a good enough reason to remake it shot for shot.
Danny Elfman's score was great. Of course, Bernard Herrmann's(which is one of Elfman's film music inspirations) score for the original Hitchcock's classic was awesome.
This remake is such a fascinating failure. Some of the cast is good, but it needed a more convincing actor as Norman to actually work.
There is a window of time where Andrew Garfield would have been the PERFECT age to play Norman Bates in a Psycho Remake.
Freddie Highmore was a much better Norman Bates than Vince Vaughn.
I completely agree
Freddie acted like a cartoon character
Vince was actually intimidating because of his size along with his serial killer eyes he was much more believable
no
I remember this one. I prefer the original myself. They did the same thing to cabin fever, nearly scene for scene word for word with the exception of one or two characters being gender swapped
RIP Anne Hache 😢 🙏
I've never seen the Psycho remake, and I don't plan on it. I didn't even know it was shot-for-shot until I started watching the Dead Meat Podcast. James already hates remakes if they pay too many homages to the original. For anyone who doesn't know, just imagine how pissed he is about Psycho '98. 😂
First Off What The Hell Was Gus Van Sant Thinking. I Love Him Directing Milk And To Die For But Directing A Remake To Psycho I Remember They Played The Trailer To This Remake A Whole Lot On TV Back In '98 When I Was 11 Years Old. Janet Leigh, Anthony Perkins, Vera Miles And Alfred Hitchcock Did An Awesome Job In The Original Version And To Be Honest Psycho Remake I Never Watched It And Never Will.
Well, the recent film is a favorite target, but it has its qualities. I think it is an example of cinematic chic, done because the director wanted to do it. In the theatre (including opera), very often the trappings of a classic piece, sets, costumes, dialogue, are very much the same, but the slight twists to it are worthwhile, and of course the cast is different, and have their own good qualities. Maybe one should accept it as it is. But, as I say, it is a favorite target to safety show off diatribes.
I was hyped before this film came out and tried to get a group to go see it, because I loved the original and thought the cast was incredible. I’m glad I was unsuccessful getting anyone to go see it. My favorite theory on why it was made was that Gus Van Sant didn’t want the pressure of high budget film making, so he went and did this almost as a dare, an FU to Hollywood, and he was perfectly fine going back to the art house scene after the experiment failed. All heresay, but it kinda fits.
The whole film was just an experiment in what would happen if you reshot a film exactly like the original except with different actors and in colour the problem is it's an experiment that ends with people saying "Why did you do that? What did you think was going to happen"
I don't believe I've ever met anyone that said they liked this movie! But if I ever do tho, I tell them Just Say No Drugs!!😂😂
I think what they could have done to make it more shocking is to do the shower scene as described in the book. In which Mary/Marion gets her head cut off while being murderd. Because everyone was expecting the shower scene but they wouldn’t have been expecting it to be so different from the 60s restrained version of that scene. Just saying having done it like the book would have made the remake stand out more I think as well as to fully commit to the 90s setting but still being faithful to the original. I agree it could have been something good
Julianne Moore ans Anne Heche were awsome
You don’t know? Allow me to blow your mind. After Good Will Hunting became a hit and won its awards, all of Hollywood wanted to work with Gus Van Sant and they’d say that you can make whatever you want. He chose Universal to work with and he said that he wanted to remake Psycho just to see if he could get away with it and they said “Yes!”. So he’s allowed to remake one of the crown jewels in Universal’s library, immediately calling their bluff about doing whatever he wanted. No one understands it but it’s one of the great trollings in film history.
I actually saw the remake before the original. Back in 1998, I was able to see Psycho II and III. So, basically, I learned who Norman Bates was before I ever saw the original film. Shortly after watching the two sequels, my Mom and I heard about the remake coming out. Despite my Mom being skeptical, she decided to give the film a chance and took me to see it on opening day. I still remember when we went into the theater and that we were the only two in there throughout the film's entire runtime. That should have been a sign that the film was going to flop. Afterwards, we sort of moved on and forgot about the film.
It wouldn't be until 2007, when I was finally able to see the original Psycho. It now stands as being one of my favorite Hitchcock films (The Birds being my favorite), and one of my favorite films, in general.
Now, I'm able to understand why people disliked the remake and felt it was a disservice to the original. Still, I do find the remake interesting as an experiment, trying to see if a shot-for-shot remake can succeed. It didn't, ultimately, but it was still interesting. Another way to experiment with this remake (and the best way to watch it) would be to edit the two films together and compare how the actors from both play the characters. I've actually seen some people do that and it's a creative way to watch the films.
If you really want to to know "WHY?", listen to the dozens of interviews with Van Sant, or watch the doc on the remake, 'Psycho Path', it answers all the why's. For the filmmakers, the remake was an experimental art project, marketed as a mainstream horror movie. I don't think it works but I also don't agree with many of your points. But again, it's a studio funded piece of experimental cinema - this had never been done before in terms of a "remake" which delivers on the term remake, literally.
I would love to hear you guys discuss bates motel!
Ben Wheatly made the same mistake with Rebecca... You just can remake movies made by the masters. You need to do something so unique it completely deviates from the original. Example: Solaris, a Sci-Fi classic made by Tarkovsky first, a great readaptation of the novel by Sohderberg later...
I saw this on USA Network around the time I was attending Elementary School & didn't like it. Cause it's crappy by & the graphics were awful. I didn't know about The Original until I saw a documentary called Halloween: A Cut Above The Rest. & John Carpenter says Psycho is the granddaddy of horror films. Then some years later I saw The Original Psycho & since then love it.
I agree a whole 100% with you on this one. However, IMHO, I give this a 4 rather than a 3 because I felt that both Macy and Baker Hall gave pretty good performances in this film. I do give Heche kudos for trying to make the role of Marion Crane her own, but she fails, but again, IMHO, she tried. I also agree with you on Vince Vaughn as he truly was miscast. IMHO, John Malkovich would have been a better choice for Norman Bates. I bought a used DVD of this version for the sake of buying it and I felt the same way that you felt about it. I still have the DVD in my library, but I don't really watch it. The original 1960 film is still tops in this regard. I have even seen the original 1960 film colorized, which I also have on DVD (though it is unofficial), alongside the original, and official, B&W version and I enjoyed it much more. I also review the 1998 version on Amazon, where I gave this two stars and the title of the review is "Mediocre, Pointless and Unnecessary". When you can, please check it out and let me know what you think. Thanks.
Looking forward to more as I subscribed to your channel and also, signed up for notifications.
I hear you. I saw the original when I was 7. This so called shot for shot "remake" (a lie) reminded me of a derivative film school project. At least they kept the original Bernard Herrmann's music score... like Scorsese's much more original remake of "Cape Fear". Maybe Vince Vaughn was cast as Norman because he played a "psycho" in a film earlier that year in a film called "Clay Pigeons". He did wield a knife and had that same creepy laugh.
I will say that the remake did cast a guy who seemed innocent and had a way of playing sheltered characters but it not deviating much from the original film kinda made it suck
Vince has played scary as hell killers before and after this version of Psycho
Original did so many things first that would later be a major staple of horror
It might come across as tame by comparison to movies that it inspired even slightly but it was the best psychological horror of the 1960's and one of the most important
What a strange experience watching a video by a guy pissed off about a movie that pissed me off at the time and now I'm also re-pissed about that stupid movie 😂
😂
Didn't get the addition of the cow in the road. Why?
Part of the creep factor of the original, as my parents told me, was that Perkins came off as light in the loafers, a thing which isn't scary now. Vince was too muscular to sell a weak, feminine Bates.
Looks like a 'cash cow' about to be run over, which could also be the description for this remake.
Used to own the remake, but parted with it because I decided to just stick with the original. I did eventually see the remake again some time ago, during a PSYCHO marathon high. Tried to pinpoint the tiny differences, but it's still amazes me how little it offers over the first.
How high were you?
@@fishrenfroeboyd7954 high enough to like the TV movie BATES MOTEL (1987).
My 2 cents, it had 2 do with the (uban) legend that Hitchcock owned a color copy of Psycho.
Its frustrating because we could have gotten a truer reimagining a decade or so later, with Jake Gyllenhaal or Joquin Phoenix. I say that because Nightcrawler and The Joker both seemed pretty much cut from the same cloth as Norman Bates, and those guys nailed it.
yeah it should have been, lol. Vince Vaughn being Norman is just icing on this cake.
RIP Anne 😢🙏
Why TF they changed the look of the house? Would’ve been amazing to see the iconic house in that modern setting.
The latter half of rob zombies Halloween is more or less the same kinda very close remake and I still dig it as much as the first half lol
Norman Bates? Forgotten about?
I wonder what the cast thinks about this movie, many years on.
Where it went wrong was reimagining/remaking it if you're doing a shot for shot remake there's no point, adding his creepy solo scene wasn't needed in it, just like Cabin fever no remake needed
fair assessment
but at least it didnt go out of its way like the majority of modern remakes and reboots do today which is use the story and recognition and nostalgia to hook in people and bludgeon them with modern day messaging
i will give it that
To me, the 1998 Psycho remake would have been much more interesting if it'd kept to its alleged mirroring ambition and actually tried to replicate every aspect of the original with even more devotional adherence than it did. Casting actors as close in resemblance and mimicking the precise mannerisms of their predessessor's performances, while sticking to every composion and timing of what Hitchcock's masterpiece did as exactly as possible. No deviations aside from maybe trying it in color, and obviously using new modern actors with the expressed assignment to dopplegang.
That's the experiment Gus Van Sant failed to achieve because he only really commited 75% to the idea. If you're gonna do it, then do it all the way.
In 1998 I would have cast:
Ashley Judd = MARION CRANE
Christopher Gorham = NORMAN BATES
Amy Ryan = LILA CRANE
Eddie Cibrian = SAM LOOMIS
Stanley Tucci = MILTON ARBOGAST
Pete Postlewaithe = GEORGE LOWERY
Bruce McGill = TOM CASSIDY
Alexandrea Borstein = CAROLINE
Clancy Brown = HIGHWAY PATROLMAN
Noah Emmerich = CAR DEALER
I was excited to see this. I went to the theater opening day. A wow what a disappointment. With lines like " let me go back for my walk man? Wtf?
It was remade. That's where it went wrong.
I agree why? I honestly think Gus just wanted to take a stab at it. pun intended but point true. also a pun.
I didn't hate this remake as much as everyone else!
Me neither, it looks great...remember when movies actually looked like real films and not the CGI post-production weirdness we get these days.
I actually like this movie the 1 thing I hate about the orginal is its black and white so this movie doesn't bother me at all
Lmao I’m surprised you didn’t mention Flea and crush him too even though he had nothing to do with this movie being bad but hey, he was also in Obi Wan Kenobi and that was terrible too! Hahaha 😂
It’s literally a sHoT FoR ShOT remake which wasn’t needed when have the original classic with a better cast staring Janet Lee and Anthony Perkins also a director with Hitchcock
It was fine.
I didn't care for it at ALL
Vince Vaughn is NO Anthony Perkins. Vaughn is an overactor.
Great breakdown . WHY? Sums this film up perfectly. I saw it when it 1st came out and have never subjected myself to it ever since. One of the worst remakes out there.
You do realize Norman Bates in the book was a slobbily looking, fat and kind of looked like a pedophile stereotype?. So your description is of Anthony Perkins, NOT Norman Bates.
I would love to see a faithful adaptation of the book. All they did here was reuse the original script and that's why they had to give him credit even though he didn't work on it.
In fact there's 3 sequel books that haven't gotten adaptations. Psyco 2, Psycho House, Psycho Sanitarium.
Drugstore Cowboy is one of my most beloved films. The one about the Columbine school shooters was not my thang, nor the Kurt Cobain one either. The Psycho remake was poorly cast and Gus ain't no Hitchcock, baby.
I saw some BAD movies at the theater in my life but this is the only movie im ashamed to say i paid money to see!!!!.... it was in 98'.... i was young and dumb!!!
.....you learned a valuable lesson in a harsh way
@@petermulder7480 Indeed i did... but thats life, we have to learn from are mistakes 😄but on the bright side, after watching this, i watched the FAR BETTER og Psycho and now im a BIG Hitchcock fan!!!
Nothing went wrong with the remake, I disagree with Gomes, the whole point was to do it like Hitch did but in color. Had it been done in some weird new fashion, it'd been sure to fail compared to the original. Maybe this remake failed too but if so at the box office, at least the director was smart enough to do it the only way to do remakes; copy the original in every way - try something new and fail dying a quick death at the box office. Take for instance the Suspiria, Wrong Turn, Halloween, The Fog or Amityville Horror remakes, they sure missed the point of the movies they remade. I wish every remake would be like the Psycho remake, that way you'd be sure to see something you can actually stand watching rather than having to reach for the barf bag in visual disgust.
I feel bad for the majority of the cast who signed on to this junk. Plus Van Sant basically killed any momentum he had after “Good Will Hunting” became a hit and got him an Oscar nod. While Danny Elfman is mostly copying the same score, his musical style at least works and he tries (like many of cast), but you can’t replicate what was perfect to begin with
Although Perkins gave a master performance even he was miscast. In the book he was an overweight glasses wearing mamas boy who loved porn magazines😂 But he was able to pull it off. This one I just did not like at all hell, psycho 2 with perkins was better than this😂😂😂😂
Call me weird but I don't hate this movie
there's nothing to hate.
It was ok but nothing comes close to the original
Don’t fudge with the original
the toilet. the horrible toilet.
i would challenge that anyone who prefers this [series of vulgar expletives] excuse of a movie over the original classic, that it's those individuals that are responsible for the same [series of vulgar expletives] excuses of movies existing at all, and i curse the stars that they were born under!
ie. tom cruise in the mummy
ie. elizabeth moss in the invisible man
ie. vince vaughn in psycho
ie. bill skarsgård in it
ie. godzilla minus one
these movie, excuse me, as it must actually be said, sucked!
of course, it's just the opinion of someone who's childhood is being systematically erased, but yes, please, belittle me with your insults, pathetic as these movies, i'm sure...
The Psycho remake is one of the all time best horror remakes, and a fascinating experiment. One day people will recognize that. Unfortunately people just parrot other people’s opinions, especially if they’re not of particularly high intelligence.
Spot on. I love its look, it's shows everything that's wrong with horror movies today and movies in general it's a spit in the face of all the idiots in the industry now. I love every scene in this movie, whereas I throw up at every scene in shaky cam fast cut grading ugliness modern horror.
Shot for shot remake was the worst decision.
The masturbation scene ruins the whole movie. Those repressed feelings make him turn into mother. Van Sant didn’t understand the source material.
Absolutely agree.. one n done for me👍 some scenes were so cheesy I think it was embarrassing. I only watched for Vince love him but this was a disaster.. they should’ve kept looking for Mr. Right. Vince should stick with comedy..
Would it be fair to say this film was the beginning of Hollywood running out of ideas?
I remember when this movie was first announced, my thought was it would be an interesting concept. But after seeing it, that perception changed dramatically.
there is one problem with this movie...vince vaughn is miscast.
I prefer this version over the original
The director explained why he made it. In the 90's people thought black and white movie's were worthless and old and boring. Ted Turner colorized a bunch of old stuff, and that inspired the idea to totally remake an old movie shot for shot with modern technology and actors. He was trying to get young people interested and appreciate old out of date movies
Definitely one of the worst remakes ever! My friend likes it but I never see them watching it soo...😂
Pointless unnecessary remake
25 year later and it's still a piece of sh*t of a film great review of it.
The Psycho remake was a complete waste of time, from concept to production to release. If only I could have back the time spent viewing this obviously avoidable trainwreck...smfh
I love the original, I love it way more than this one, but I also enjoy this one. And honesty, (I truly believe this) I think that most of the hate this movie gets is manufactured. It’s done to get more views on CZcams.