Psycho IV: The Beginning (1990)

Although I put it off for many years, and didn’t hear anything from people who might want me to prioritise this as a viewing option, I decided to finally watch the last of the films that make up the original Psycho film series. Considering the obvious diminishing returns of each instalment, although that is not to dismiss the greatness of the second film, I hoped that this would still provide me with some fun.

Listening to a radio show, about killers who have committed matricide, hosted by Fran Ambrose (CCH Pounder), Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins once again) decides to call in and share his own informed viewpoint. He doesn’t agree with the views expressed by one of the guests (Dr. Leo Richmond, played by Warren Frost), and decides to give listeners the benefit of his life story. This allows us to then see a young Norman (Henry Thomas) living with his mother (Olivia Hussey).

Written by Joseph Stefano, this is a largely disappointing finale for a very unlikely film series. I am not sure that any of us really wanted to see Norman’s childhood (not until they found a better way to do it anyway, with the Bates Motel TV show) and the third act tries to add suspense and twists that fall completely flat. Having said that, it still partially succeeds as an ending for the character of Norman, giving him a closure that feels deserved, for both himself and fans of the series.

Director Mick Garris doesn’t do anything great, although he’s slightly hampered by a script that feels very comfortably within the TV movie parameters it was given. Things feel as if they are being marked off a checklist, from character details to shot choices, but there’s some fun to be had as viewers watch the important moments that turned Norman into what he is/was.

Perkins is very good once again in the main role, but he’s consigned to a supporting role in his own story, setting the scene for the other main players. Thomas and Hussey do well enough, although both are a bit over the top at times, and the focus is on familiar references and touch points ahead of natural and realistic characterizations. Pounder is perfectly fine as the DJ, Frost doesn’t get to do much (seemingly only there to have a character similarly named to someone else from the very first film), and Donna Mitchell plays someone pivotal to the whole plot, but also disappointingly undeveloped. Maybe giving her a bit more material instead of making time for a John Landis cameo could have helped things slightly, but what do I know?

I can’t say I hated this though. It was a bit of a chore at times, and some moments came close to being laughably bad, but I was ultimately won over by a cast all trying hard with very uneven material. I might never rush to rewatch this, but I am glad I finally got around to it. There’s an inevitable sense of satisfaction after joining Norman for the full journey.

5/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Psycho III (1986)

Where Psycho remains a monumental classic, and Psycho II remains an absolutely brilliant sequel, Psycho III is, perhaps inevitably, a bit of simple slasher movie fare. Norman Bates is back, he's still portrayed by Anthony Perkins, and circumstances are once again about to start testing his sanity.

Cleared of any wrongdoing after the events of the previous movie, Norman is trying to live a fairly normal life, running the motel while keeping himself to himself. Unfortunately, some other people won’t let that happen. There’s an opportunistic drifter, Duane (Jeff Fahey), a troubled fallen nun named Maureen (Diana Scarwid), and a reporter, Tracy (Roberta Maxwell), who is curious about whether or not Norman should be viewed as fully rehabilitated and ready to participate in society after his violent past.

As well as returning to his most famous movie role, Perkins also takes on the directing duties for this instalment. He doesn’t do a bad job, helped by his knowledge of the character and the setting, but there’s a feeling throughout that viewers are in the hands of someone not entirely confident in their own abilities.

That might also stem from the script, written by Charles Edward Pogue. Most fun when it leans fully into the sleazier moments and the slasher movie set-pieces, it keeps stumbling when weighed down by the legacy of the movies it is following. The moments most obviously reworking scenes from the first film are the weakest, it’s always a bold move to play around with such iconic imagery, but kudos to both Pogue and Perkins for taking on the assignment.

As for the cast, Perkins is once again wonderful in the main role. Norman has always been a mesmerising mix of vulnerability and danger, and the biggest strength of this film is the way it manages to maintain that mix for most of the runtime. Scarwid and Maxwell both do fine, although the former is much more passive than the latter, but the other highlight is Fahey, portrayed as a con-man who uses his gorgeous good looks to make up for his clumsy attempts at charm. Fahey steals the movie once or twice (one particular moment, featuring his naked form and a pair of lamps, shows both actor and director at their very best), but the script manages to avoid letting him become the focus for too long.

While not as good as the previous two movies in this franchise, Psycho III is worth watching, especially if you like the character of Norman and want to see him in another pickle (to put it mildly). Perkins tries hard to mix more modern sensibilities with the classic suspense that Hitchcock would have supplied, and the macabre humour running throughout is another big plus, but he falls a bit short of delivering something completely satisfying.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Psycho II (1983)

It's a bold move to make a direct sequel to one of the greatest horror movies of all-time. It's an even bolder move to use the first moments to show the most famous sequence from the original film. I am not sure how it was initially received, but everyone should now be aware of the fact that Psycho II is a pretty fantastic film, a smart and entertaining psychodrama that is more than worthy of following the flawless original.

It has been over two decades since Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins, reprising his role) was committed to psychiatric care after the grisly discoveries shown in the first movie. He has now been declared sane, which means he is a free man. This upsets Lila Crane Loomis (Vera Miles), also reprising her role from the previous movie, and Lila plans to get Norman sent back to prison as soon as possible. But Norman may have an ally, in the shape of the lovely Mary (Meg Tilly), even if Mary may also be manipulating Norman at times.

Although not quite on a par with his portrayal of the character in the first movie, being over 20 years older naturally removes some of the vulnerability and seeming innocence of Norman, Perkins is once again a captivating screen presence. Despite his past, viewers know that he's not necessarily bad, or evil. He's sick. And, compared to those around him who want to make him sicker, or want to take advantage of him, he's often sweet and well-intentioned.

Tilly is the heart of the film, Mary is a young woman with a way about her that makes it easy to believe Norman would fall for her, and want to believe the best about her. And Miles is fantastic, playing a relentless woman who wants justice, no matter how far she has to go to get it. Robert Loggia is also very good, playing the doctor who is trying to help Norman, Dennis Franz adds another sweaty douchebag role to his filmography, and Hugh Gillin returns to the role of Sheriff Hunt.

Director Richard Franklin doesn't overdo things, in terms of style and technical flourishes, he seems very much aware of the fact that the film relies on the brand name, the main character, and the script, from Tom Holland. Speaking of the script, it's a fantastic concoction of reworked moments from the original film, twists and turns involving the new characters, and a beautifully-crafted narrative that uses Norman, and his struggles with sanity, in a way that allows everything to move along on an intriguing journey that never betrays the essence of the central character.

There are some minor issues. It often feels a bit flat, more akin to a TV movie than a cinematic release, and it's a shame that the rest of the movie doesn't manage quite the same level of dark humour and playfulness that is packed into the superb third act. Those quibbles aside, however, Psycho II holds up as one of the best sequels ever. Nothing was really going to equal the first film, but this comes surprisingly close.

9/10

https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

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

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Crimes Of Passion (1984)

I've said it before and I'll say it again, god bless the brilliant and bonkers Ken Russell. Crimes Of Passion is his usual mix of sex, death, and blasphemy. It's a good film, but it's lifted up further by a starring role for Kathleen Turner and a brilliantly off-kilter turn from Anthony Perkins.

Turner stars as Joanna Crane, a successful businesswoman who leads a double life. At night she likes to dress up, head out, and get her kicks as a prostitute named China Blue. Many of her clients, end up smitten with her, and it's not hard to see why. She knows just what everyone wants, and will enthusiastically work to please almost any fetishist. She risks losing her anonymity and security when a man (Bobby Grady, played by John Laughlin) is hired to shadow her, all because her daytime boss suspects her of theft. Bobby finds himself joining the long queue of smitten men, but China does her best to stop people getting too attached to her. Meanwhile, an unbalanced preacher (Anthony Perkins) becomes determined to save China's soul.

Written by Barry Sandler, Crimes Of Passion is blessed with a script that's profane, witty, lovably ludicrous, and consistently entertaining. The introduction of Turner as China Blue is a scene that no viewer will ever forget, and with good reason. Everything is, quite rightly, skewed towards adoring China and showing just how good she is at her job, and also how being naughty in all the right ways doesn't necessarily make you a bad person. The numerous men who want to save China from her situation fail to realise that she doesn't need saved. She will choose when and how she wants to change her life, and when she will return to a life of being Joanna Crane full-time.

Russell directs with a fearlessness that defined most of his movies. He revels in the material, even if it's somewhat lighter fare than some of his more acclaimed pictures, and doesn't do anything by halves. Russell may be an acquired taste, to put it mildly, but I feel sorry for anyone who can't relax and enjoy the exuberance and sheer cheek present here, and in the majority of his work.

Laughlin is decent enough, I guess, in his role, and Annie Potts is as solid as ever in the role of his unhappy wife (the marriage is not in good health), but all of the best moments revolve around either Perkins, or Turner, or both. Both are brilliant, happily going up to the very edge and then, in different ways, completely over it. Perkins almost seems to be foaming at the mouth during his every moment, while Turner effortlessly mixes comedy, confidence and sexiness in a lead performance that acts as the keystone for the entire film.

It's ridiculous, but it knows exactly what it's doing. Crimes Of Passion will keep you entertained throughout, and also have you laughing out loud at times, but you'll be laughing WITH the film, which may be the highest compliment I can give. Because, in lesser hands, it would have been so easy to laugh AT it.

8/10

http://www.amazon.com/Crimes-Passion-UNCUT-China-Blue/dp/B006PM86JO/ref=sr_1_5?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1401637528&sr=1-5&keywords=crimes+of+passion