Rating: 
Summary: pretty good
Review: I found this to be sort of entertaining. I found the original to be very interesting, and exciting to watch, and since this was a remake in colour i thought that this would be as exciting. Even though I found this movie to be boring at parts, I found the performances of all actors to be well especially Vince Vaughn as Norman, and William H. Macy as the detective
Rating: 
Summary: Love the Movie! yes people love it! more that the original
Review: I LOVE THIS MOVIE, COME ON! THE ONLY REASON THE 1960 MOVIE WASN'T IN COLOR WAS BECASE THEY COULDN'T MAKE ON COLOR YET. PLUS IT WAS THE SAME THING OOHH AND ANN YOU THE BEST.....AND PLESE CAN YOU GUYS MAKE A REMAKE OF THE BIRDS(MAKE IT A GOOD MOVIE)BEACAUSE THE 1963 WAS REALLY BAD.
Rating: 
Summary: I'll try to be polite
Review: I anticipated this film greatly upon earing of its being remade. What a disappointment. I've read a bunch of previous reviews and here goes.As far a acting-----anyone who thinks the update has better acting doesn't understand the craft. Today's audiences are so used to non-actors being called actors that the art of acting has been truly diluted. Reading lines is NOT acting. Does anyone remember character or motivation? Anne Heche almost puts her tongue through her cheek in her portrayal, and Vaughn displays no depth or characterization at all. I've really liked Van Zant's previous films, and his negligence here is a mystery. I guess he got so wrapped up in the "exact replica" he was creating that he forgot about the emotion of the piece...which is what creates all the tension! Immediately following my first viewing of the remake I put both movies on two tvs and watched them side by side. The color photography is missing all of the nuance of the black and white. The b&w has great shadows and depth which are lacking in color. And what's with the cloud inserts? In the final scene the remake completely leaves out the final speech. And in the opening scene where is the talk of getting married? Very important to character motivation. Much more so than the extranneous shot of "Sam's" buttocks. I did find it amazing that the fade in on the scene of Marion sleeping in the car on the side of the road appears to have been shot at the exact location as the original. Compare.....even the telephone poles and hills in the background are exact. All in all a decent attempt, but it missed. I love Hitchcock, and would like to see more attempts at remakes, because it is interesting to see another interpretation of a great work, but I hope the next one is a lot better than this one. One more thing.....in the original when Lila is in Norman's room he has a recording off Beethoven's "Eroica" on the turtable. What the hell was with the George Jones and Tammy Wynette duet in the remake. That must have been put there to humor the buffs who couldn't wait for that shot. I was not ammused.
Rating:
Summary: Now, its a masterpiece!
Review: 10 reasons of why Gus Van Sant's version is better: 1. Vince Vaughn 2. Anne Hetch 3. the sound is in Dolby Digital instead of "HI-FI Mono" whitch makes the soundtrack even greater. 4. It's in colour. 5. The picture quality is(of course)mutch better. 6. Gus Van Sants extra shots. 7. The helikopter-shot,and some others that Hitchcock couldn't make. 8. The house. The motel. The shower curtain.
Rating: 
Summary: A bit too verbatim to the original.......
Review: I did not expect the remake to be basically the same as the original. I still think that Anthony Perkins made the creepiest Norman Bates and I enjoyed him in the two sequels that followed the original. I also expected more effects. It was nice to catch a glimpse of Anne Heche's U NO WOT in the shower scene (unless they used a stand in) though. I still recommend the original black and white version. You won't be missing much if you do not get to see this remake.
Rating:
Summary: Much better than the original. so I guess I'm Psycho???
Review: Well, I watched this and I appreciated the acting and the color. I thought Vince was excellent and Heche was innocent and meek. Where as Julianne Moore was much better than Vera Miles along with William H. Machy who was also much better. I don't know why people hate this film but I know I didn't have a problem with the clothes and would rather see this than a person wearing black and white the entire time. So I guess cause a I like a movie with IMPROVED camera angles(like the opening crane shot) and essentially the same dialogue with much better acting and color, I guess it makes me Psycho. Oh, and I'm glad they added the sexual reference, it made sense and it was funny. Ha!
Rating:
Summary: The Perfect Movie, The Perfect Remake? Let's Complain.
Review: Okay. Forget that review I wrote back then. The only reason I saw the remake was to see the story, because I'd never seen the original. And after seeing the original, I really believed that Van Sant had gone overboard. It's still a good remake to watch, but now I believe it will never measure up to Hitchcock's standards.I'm not saying Vince Vaughn, Anne Heche, or Jullianne Moore did bad jobs, But we didn't need to try and fix it. Universal could've done a special re-release of Psycho to introduce a new generation of movie fans to Hitchcock's world. At least Van Sant, who I respect, got newer fans introdiced to hitchcock, even if it meant taking bad press. And having seen the original Psycho so many times on the DVD player, after seeing so many scenes cut or shortened, it feels like you're watching a TV version, which is what it might as well been. So after seeing the remake which is good, but not that good, go back and see the original. Uncut, intact, and no one admitted except at the beginning.
Rating:
Summary: Waste of celluloid
Review: I'm sorry Vince(Norman Bates)I love you babe, but this movie SUCKED!! I went to see it in the theatre, and people were laughing through it and rightly so, I on the other hand , wanted to cry when I saw Norman dressed as his mother, because it was just that bad. It was a terrible idea to remake this movie shot for shot, the original one was scary because of what you couldn't see because of the standards at the time. Now audiences are so used to everything being so expicit that the movie just doesn't work in the 90's. Skip this and watch the original one, I found it scary and believe me I'm pretty jaded. Also if you love Vince Vaughn don't buy this, you'll only be dissapointed.
Rating: 
Summary: NOBODY CAN DO IT BETTER THAN HITCH!!!
Review: Hitchcock was and forever will be the master of suspense and this film was a totally disastrous insult to the original. For all time I'll be asking, "Why? Why? Why? WHY???"
Rating:
Summary: What was that????
Review: Okay, i have seen all of the Psycho movies from I-IV:The Beginning, and they all run as perfect in my book. I was actually excited to see that they were re-making Psycho (the greatest movie i have ever seen, hell i would have loved it if they remade all of them). What i saw, was PATHETIC. This is the worst attempt at making a film i have ever seen. Personally i believe that Anne Heche was just insulting the movie, not to mention Vince Vaughn. You can not perfect perfection, and this movie proves that. Psycho is a God among movies, the re-make rates well below the devil. Maybe if i had seen this one first before the original) i wouldnt have thought it so bad, or judged it so harshly, however i would not be a rabbid Psycho fan if i had to judge the movie on those terms. So as a lesson to anyone who wants to recreate another perfect film, DON'T!!!!
|
