Rating: 
Summary: Surprisingly well made shot by shot reamke
Review: Gus Van Sant(To Die For, Good Will Hunting) did a good job directing almost Shot-By-Shot. Danny Elfman redoing the classic score is Very Impressive. All the cast of the remake are good. I was most impressive with Anne Heche(Return To Paradise) Good Performance as Marion Crane, It is Different from Janet Leigh(The Fog) performance from the original Psycho. Sometimes i think actor:Vince Vaughn(The Lost World:Jurassic Park)is also good as Norman Bates or sometimes he`s could be a Miscast but Pretty Good. Am not complianing that Vince Vaughn is a Bad Actor. I want it Norman Bates to more of an innocent look, Just Like Mr. Perkins did in The Original Pyscho. People who Played Norman Bates before are very good are Herny Thomas(E.T., Suicide Kings), He did the younger version of Norman Bates in Psycho 4:The Beginning, was Made for T.V. and Jeremy Davies(Saving Private Ryan) are Two of my choice to played Norman Bates. Julianne Moore(Boogie Nights) is fine as Lila Crane. Viggo Mortensen(G.I Jane, Leatherface:The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 3) did fine as Sam Loomis. He also had a supporting role in a Alfred Hitchcock`s Remake-Dial M For Murder. The 1998 title version-A Perfect Murder. William H. Macy(Fargo, Mr. Holland`s Opus) did very Good as Milton Arbogast-The Detective.I liked both films are just different film from an different. Pyscho(1998) has excellent commentary track from Gus Vant Sant, Vince Vaughn and Anne Heche is enjoyable and funny to listen, What they Said. Good 30 minutes behind the scenes. Dolby Digital 5.1 is great sounding with strong surround and deep bass. Widescreen anamorphic format(1.85:1) is a fine transer also. This remake of Psycho is not for all tastes. Grade:B+.
Rating: 
Summary: Great movie!
Review: I don't understand you people! First Psycho isn't so good, but this is. Anthony Perkins (Norman in first Psycho) wasn't even good actor, but Vince Vaughn is! And this one has colors!Spot is the same, but killing-scenes are worse than in first Psycho. I don't understand why they showed a naked woman for a second when that secret agent was murdered. It didn't make it rougher! Old Psycho and this new Psycho aren't scary, but they are nice and you can really relax when you're watching them! Gus Van Sant should be respected because he has ability to make this like old movie. But he should've make murder of Marion Crane more rough and bloody. I'll rate this with 5 stars, you people!
Rating: 
Summary: BAD bad BAD bad BAD
Review: One of the worst ideas ever. Why remake something that is perfect? Gus Van Sant, you will never be Hitchcock. Your movies will be forgotten, especially this rubbish, ten years from now, as the Master's will be remembered forever. If you're going to do a remake exactly, don't add your own creations such as the woman and the clouds. They make 0 sense and you should not be allowed to ever make a movie ever again. If anyone has not seen the original, do so. AVOID THIS AT ALL COSTS.
Rating: 
Summary: Indescribable.
Review: And by saying this, I'm not sure as to whether I mean it in a good or bad way. The anticipated remake of the classic Hitchcock movie Psycho, while remaining entirely accurate (sometimes too accurate), has many stylistic and acting flaws which make it a bit of a waste of time. The movie begins with the same opening, only bursting with black and green lines instead of the original black-and-white. Many of the shots and camera angles from the first film are resonant in the remake, with only the colors being the contrasting factor. Dialogue and stances of the actors are also uniform, most notably that of Norman Bates' lanky jog from hotel to house. Anne Heche stars as Marion, who steals the $400,000 from her boss's largest client, and Vince Vaughn plays the boyish yet sinister Norman Bates. Some liberties were taken with the scene in which Bates and Marion have dinner in the parlor, from added lines of dialogue to Bates' masturbation session while spying on Marion through the peephole in the wall. The shower scene sequence is identical to the old version, only things being added are a little bit of blood and tiny cuts of storm clouds rolling through the sky. Viggo Mortenson and Julianna Moore give credible performances, about as credible as you can get with a picture like this. While the script is basically identical to that of the original, clashes in the styles and set designs are maddening. Clothing worn by the actors, while supposed to look like the latest in nineties fashion, look as though they were purchased from the 20% off bin at the Retro Room. Sets looks like they came straight from a 70's porno flick, with cheesy, clashing colors and a heinous furniture scheme. All-in-all, this movie isn't that bad, but does have a lot of flaws that prevent it from being as haunting and frightening as the original. Take my advice: try it out, but stick with the old version.
Rating:
Summary: Pointless remake.
Review: I still can't beleive that a fine director like Van Sant could have made this junk. It's an exact word for word replica of Hitchcock's classic. When I first rented it I was very excited. But when I began watching it and saw that EVEN THE OPENING TITLES WERE EXACTLY AS THE FIRST ONE'S. I really got bored. And sometimes, you can throw a big HA HA! because there are some scenes that look like if it is comedy. Anne Heche's performance was terrible (she even won an award for worst supporting actress). What was the idea of copying every line of the first one. It doesn't bring anything new. If you haven't seen it, trust me, don't watch it. You'll regret later.
Rating:
Summary: Worst idea of 1998
Review: So when is the remake of "Citizen Kane"? . . . I have read interview after interview about this film and not one of them can offer any reason as to why the filmmakers chose to remake a film that was perfect to begin with. Two terrible scenes immediately spring to mind; the first, where Norman is spying on Marion through the hole in the wall and - well, let's just say the screenwriter for the remake added an unnecessary (tasteless) detail that the original did not; and the scene when the detective is murdered on the steps and images of cows and a woman with a mask flash up on the screen (I'm still stumped as to what it meant, exactly) . . A terrible waste of time, money, and resources for these people and the studio. It says something about American films - it seems all Hollywood can come up with are special effects duds, films based on TV shows, disgusting comedies, and remakes (in this case, music, script, everything virtually the same as the original).
Rating:
Summary: Fine Remake
Review: This a a fine remake of a classic film. Forget the critics and naysayers. The cast are all excellent in their roles: Heche, Moore, Vaughn, Macy, etc. You get bonus audio commentary by the director, Van Sant and Heche and a making of the movie addition. Elfman's recreation of the soundtrack is dead-on. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Just as much as the Hitchcock version.
Rating:
Summary: From the Simpson School of Film Making...
Review: "Hey, why don't I remake 'Psycho,' shot for shot, but this time, film it in color?" said Homer.
Rating:
Summary: psyhoctically terrible
Review: When I first saw the theatrical teaser trailer in theaters Ithought this was going to be amazing. A fresh look at a true classichow wrong I was. I was sure that this was going to be on the same level of what Scorsesse did for his Cape Fear remake. Then I heard it was a shot for shot remake just in color. This, mind you, is not a remake its plagerism in the worst degree. I saw it in the theater and was just disgraced. Then I rented it on DVD and it was just more of a disgrace.The commentary on the DVD is incredibly annoying. Especially Anne Heche you really get the feel that she doesnt really regard the original very highly here. The costume design on Heche is terrible and that shower scene with the intercut lightning? Its just distracting and takes you out of the scene. This movie could have been extremly horrific if it had been handled in a nineties fashion.Major dissapointment all around. END
Rating: 
Summary: PERFECT REMAKE, BUT A LITTLE TOO PERFECT?
Review: WHEN FIRST I SAW THIS MOVIE, I REALIZED THAT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT HAD GONE INTO THIS FILM TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE THE ORIGINAL AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. THE SCENERY, MUSIC, AND ACTORS BARE A FRIGHTENINGLY SIMILARITY TO THE ORIGINAL. WHEN I SAW THIS I REALIZED THAT GUS VAN SANT HAD GONE TOO FAR. SHURE HE WAS TRYING TO MAKE IT LIKE THE ORIGINAL AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, BUT WERE LEFT WITH A MOVIE THAT WAS REMADE SO WELL THAT IT JUST LOOKS LIKE A COLORIZED VERSION, AND LET'S BE HONEST, WHO WANTS TO SEE "PSYCHO" IN COLOR WHEN THE BLACK AND WHITE ADDS A DARK AND CREEPY EFFECT. THE ONLY THING THAT IS NOT SO MUCH THE SAME IS THE PERFORMANCE OF NORMAN BATES BY VINCE VAUGHN. HIS ADAPTION OF NORMAN IS HIS OWN WAY AND DOES NOT HAVE THE REMAKE FEEL. HE ALSO ISN'T THAT BAD OF AN ACTOR. OVER ALL THIS MOVIE IS OK, BUT IF I WERE YOU, I WOULD DEFINITELY STICK TO THE ORIGINAL.
|
