Mubi Monday: Psycho (1960)

What is the point in even attempting to write a review of Psycho nowadays? People have said everything there is to be said about it, right? It's had a remake that was almost shot for shot, it has featured in movies made about director Alfred Hitchcock, and that classic shower scene has even been dissected in a documentary all on its own (78/52, which refers to the number of shots and cuts, respectively).

And yet . . . it's that feeling that everyone has seen the film, that everything to be said about it HAS been said, that makes me feel it is still worth writing a whole review. Because most of us know Psycho, and know it well, but I would wager that few remember just how great a number of the elements are, especially when you are asked to pick favourites from the outstanding filmography of Hitchcock.

It seems pointless to summarise the plot, and pointless to try and avoid spoilers. So let me roll my sleeves up and attempt to do two pointless things at once. Janet Leigh is Marion Crane, a woman we first see making herself look respectable again after a tryst with her lover (John Gavin) in a hotel room. They are not married, he stays quite a distance away and has very little money, but they do seem to love one another. The whole situation, and an encounter with a customer at her work who seems intent on being as vulgar about his wealth as possible, leads Marion to seize an opportunity when her boss asks her to take a large sum of money to the bank. She leaves town, money in her possession, and sets out to join her lover. It's a long journey, however, and she decides to stop at the isolated Bates Motel, which seems suited to the low profile she is keeping on her travels. And the young man in charge of the place (Norman, played by Anthony Perkins) is very pleasant and accommodating. He seems to take a liking to Marion, but his mother most certainly doesn't.

Everybody remembers bits of Psycho. They remember the shower scene (it's unforgettable, a masterclass in editing and audio-visual synchronicity), they remember the Bernard Herrmann score, they remember the twists and jumps. They even remember how good Perkins is in his main role. They also often remember enjoying Martin Balsam (he plays a detective who ends up trying to track down Marion Crane). Some people also remember that Janet Leigh is quite good in her role, despite being overshadowed by Perkins.

Yet very few people remember everything all together. I rewatched Psycho with the intention of taking down some notes in preparation for this review, and I soon gave up on that idea. I was hooked from the beginning, and I knew there was better still to come. Leigh isn't just quite good. She's great in her role, perfectly portraying a woman who has one moment of madness and then spends the rest of her time onscreen weighed down by that decision. Perkins still manages to overshadow her, but not deliberately, simply due to him being so absolutely perfect as the nervy and pleasant young man with a dark secret. Balsam comes into the movie at just the right time, a shot of energy before the tension starts to ratchet up again in the finale, and Gavin does a good job in his smaller role, working well alongside Vera Miles (playing the sister to the character played by Leigh).

Hitchcock knows just how far to push things, and how to code the characters very effectively, in ways that work with, and subvert, expectations. There are other films from him that are more complex, that are more thematically interesting, that can be dissected even more than this one, but Psycho is arguably his most effective blend of the macabre and the entertaining. He's helped by the team around him. Hermann giving him that classic score, Joseph Stefano giving him a cracking script adapted from Robert Bloch's source novel, the supporting cast members, the titles from Saul Bass, and every key player who helped to bring his vision to life.

And what more is there to say? Nothing, and everything. There are new film fans created every day, of all ages, and some won't have seen Psycho yet. So I hope this may prompt one of them to do so. I also hope it maybe reminds more seasoned film fans to revisit it, to just remind themselves of how utterly fantastic it is, in every aspect of the craft it took to bring it all together. That is the point in deciding to write a review of the movie, after almost sixty years of it scarring the membrane of public consciousness and becoming a pop culture staple. Or maybe it was just another little moment of madness.

"We all go a little mad sometimes. Haven't you?"

10/10

This is the set to buy. And, ummmm, please click on links somewhere on this blog and help because I MAY have just ordered that set for myself. Seriously . . . help.

The Taking Of Pelham One Two Three (1974)

Welcome to another pointless review of a classic film that you already know is a classic, even if you haven't yet watched it, and don't need to be reminded of by someone who can't hope to add anything new to the reams of critical appraisals that it has already received.

The Taking Of Pelham One Two Three is all about a group of robbers (Robert Shaw, Martin Balsam, Hector Elizondo, and Earl Hindman) who take over a subway car. They then demand a large ransom, to be delivered within a tight timeframe, or they will start killing passengers. A lot of the police struggle to find any other solution to the situation, leaving the bulk of the communication and consideration of the options to Zachary Garber (Walter Matthau), a Police Lieutenant with the New York Transit Authority.

From the colour codenames of the crooks to the canny elements of the heist, right up to the classic final scene, this is an influential and entertaining crime thriller that holds up just as well for newcomers today (over four decades after it was originally released). Hey, I enjoyed the Tony Scott-helmed remake, despite being sad that I saw it before the original, but this easily remains the best version of the story.

Director Joseph Sargent keeps everything moving along at a great pace, working from a great script from Peter Stone (an adaptation of a novel by John Godey) that uses dialogue to build and maintain tension, as well as reveal more of each main character. There are also infrequent moments of violence punctuating the long stand-off. The violence isn't too graphic but it always serves as a sobering reminder that these criminals aren't bluffing.

Matthau gives another performance that makes great use of that hangdog expression he is so good at. Whether he's wondering just how the criminals hope to make their getaway or he's talking to the head of the group (Shaw) as he buys time and tries to glean more information, he's consistently wonderful. Shaw is a fantastic baddie, a man with a plan and a moral code. He will follow through on anything he says but he hopes to avoid unnecessary risks. Balsam is solid support for him, working through the plan while dealing with an unexpected cold, Elizondo is a bit of a hothead, and Hindman is there to make up the numbers, really, although he doesn't do bad. You also get Jerry Stiller as a colleague of Matthau, Lee Wallace as the mayor, Nathan George and Julius Harris as two determined members of the police force, and Tony Roberts as the man advising the mayor on the best way to navigate these tricky waters.

Go and see it immediately, if you have somehow avoided it until now (as I did). It's a near-perfect blend of crime and wit. You also get a wonderful score from David Shire AND one of the best final lines/shots in the history of cinema.

9/10

You can buy the film on shiny disc here.
Americans can pick it up here.

The Sentinel (1977)

If Michael Winner was anyone else he'd surely have a bit more recognition from people. But he's Michael Winner. He's the annoying windbag who went from directing movies to critiquing restaurants and telling people in the most patronising manner to "calm down, dear" while advertising insurance. And he had the cheek to do that after "glorifying" vigilante justice with a the first few Death Wish movies. Here's the thing that's easy to forget. Death Wish was a very good film. As was The Mechanic. And The Jokers. The Sentinel is an unfairly neglected horror that manages to throw in some real mystery, real shocks and some great performances. Unfortunately for those who hate him, it was developed into a screenplay (based on the Jeffrey Konvitz novel) by Michael Winner, produced by Jeffrey Konvitz and Michael Winner and directed, of course, by Michael Winner.

The Sentinel is all about a beautiful young woman who moves into an apartment and then starts to worry about her sanity as she starts to see stranger and stranger things happening around her, things involving her strange and creepy neighbours. Maybe it's all tied in to the old man who lives upstairs, the one that she never sees out and about because he never goes out and about. He seems to just sit there, gazing out of his window, like some kind of sentinel.

The script and direction don't really seem to be all that spectacular here but as the movie builds towards a fantastic and horrific climax it becomes easier to see that, in fact, everything is almost perfectly crafted. The film has a real sense of mystery and develops the plot beautifully. Even if you remain a step ahead of the film, it's a pleasure to see how every detail is revealed and how the unreal horror continues to pile up in a surprisingly realistic manner.

Another pleasure here is the cast. Winner managed to get himself a superb cast here, with some big names even in small roles. There's a fleeting appearance by Jeff Goldblum before he became a well-known actor, Christopher Walken gets a bit more screentime but was also in the very early days of his career and then you also get to see Ava Gardner, Beverly D'Angelo, Burgess Meredith, Eli Wallach, John Carradine, Jose Ferrer, Martin Balsam, Sylvia Miles, William Hickey and Jerry Orbach. Each and every one is a great actor, with Burgess Meredith being one of the very best. Then there's Chris Sarandon in a main role, doing an okay job, and the beautiful Christina Raines playing Alison Parker, the beautiful young woman. Heck, Tom Berenger even appears in the last minute or so for perhaps the smallest role of his career.

There was (and, indeed, still is . . . . I suppose) quite a controversy regarding the decision made by Winner to use people with real deformities during a scene in which "denizens of Hell" appear but, for some reason, I didn't find this bothersome. Perhaps I should have, and future viewers have been forewarned, but I didn't. In fact, that sequence felt as strange and disturbing as the rest of the movie, which meant that it felt as if it belonged right where it was.

I really like The Sentinel and I encourage others to at least check it out. It might be fashionable to automatically dislike and mock any Michael Winner movies but it's a lot more enjoyable to give them a chance and maybe even be entertained by them.

8/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Sentinel-DVD-Chris-Sarandon/dp/B00149XOVI/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1350167969&sr=8-2

Death Wish 3 (1985)

Try as I might, I just can't fully shake the feeling that I haven't actually watched Death Wish 3. As the credits rolled I had almost convinced myself that what had gone before my eyes couldn't have been anything else but a fevered dream full of crazy gunplay and heroic vigilante behaviour. My mind had somehow blended together Home Alone, *Batteries Not Included and Behind Enemy Lines. With a bit of Rambo thrown in there for good measure. Amazingly, it wasn't a dream. None of it. It was all real. Surreal yet real, all the same.

Charles Bronson returns to play, arguably, the role that defined him throughout the 1980s. He's Paul Kersey, a man pushed so far over the edge that he can no longer see where he used to hang on to any semblance of normality. Worries about going too far have been banished from his mind, he has returned to New York and is now a killing machine, secretly endorsed by police and dropped into an urban warzone like some OAP prototype of the T-101.

It's Michael Winner directing once again and Don Jakoby takes care of the writing duties (which probably just consisted of writing "punks kill people and upset Charles Bronson, who goes on a killing spree with increasingly-heavy artillery at his disposal). The essence of the movie remains similiar to that classic original film but, in oh so many ways, they are also both very, very different. America is not a country with a major crime problem that causes some upset this time, it's just one big gang-controlled area not unlike something normally seen only in the wilder movies from Troma. Old folks are hassled and hurt and even killed while eagerly awaiting a chance to draw blood and fight back. And thugs can actually call in other gangs of thugs whenever they need backup. In fact, I was quite surprised that this WASN'T a Troma movie. It certainly had the heightened lunacy throughout.

Bronson is, of course, very good in the lead role once again. Martin Balsam gets a decent bit of screentime, as does Ed Lauter. Deborah Raffin is shoehorned in there, her character almost laughable and completely unnecessary for most of her screentime. But that is more than made up for by Gavan O'Herlihy and his superb turn as the lead villain. Other folks get their chance to play scumbags but viewers of my age (mid-30s) will probably have the most fun watching another rare film outing for Alex Winter (aka the one who wasn't Keanu Reeves in the Bill & Ted movies).

For Jimmy Page fans, there is the extra enjoyment gained from the fact that he has returned to create the score after his work on the second movie.

I can't deny that I was entertained from beginning to end with this movie. I'm just not sure how much of that entertainment factor stemmed from the ridiculousness of the whole thing and the feeling of incredulity it filled me with.

6/10.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Death-Wish-3-UK-DVD/dp/B0067LGHUS/ref=sr_1_1?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1328915534&sr=1-1