Rating: 
Summary: Why make a remake if you are not going to take liberties?
Review: Psycho is just a shot for shot remake of the original classic. It would have been great if Vince Vaughn had not been cast in it. He's too cool to be creepy, and too tough to be meek. The rest of the cast does admirably, but why do a remake if you are not going to change things? It would have thrown Hitchcock fans off guard ( for better or worse ) and allowed for some things to happen that we always wanted to happen in the original. At least the remake of Wages Of Fear ( Sorcerer ) got a new plot, and new settings. Bottom line is that there is no reason to see this if you have already seen the original.
Rating: 
Summary: I hate Remakes!
Review: Psycho the HITCHCOCK classic still stands as one of my FAVOIRT movies of all time. Anthony Perkins is also one of my favoirt actors!I did in no way see a reason to remake this Classic. and Miscasting glore.... with that in mind.. is this a spoof? The shot by shot is only showing how unorignal hollywood has become with so many titles. now also what I mean a little by Miscasting. Vince Vaughn in no way was trying to play Norman Bates. He Was Trying to play Anthony Perkins. and in which case he should have been trying to play his own norman bates and not trying to compair himself to Anthony Perkins. Now "PEOPLE" Want to say Color was a good edition to this remake.. I think its sad to say that. Cause Hitchcock (The MASTER of suspence!) ment to make Psycho in Black and white and I think that was a good thing in this film.. Some films were better in black and white, and surly Psycho was one of them. so This film will never even be close to that 2nd star.. If there was away. I'd give it a - 5 stars!
Rating: 
Summary: Pointless remake that was actually good!
Review: True, i must admit it was a stupid idea to remake Psycho scene for scene. There was absolutely no point to this remake and it could have been done so much better had it been at least a little different from the original. And i must say that Vince Vaughn is teribly terribly miscast as Norman Bates. But the eerie score, the beautiful scenery,and the bright colors make up for that. i enjoyed this more than i enjoyed the original, only because of the vibrant color, and i know that if i hadn't seen the original, i would have liked this even more. The only problem is that it is a bit slow moving for modern audiences looking for thrills, but it does have its moments, especially the last 15 minutes or so. if you haven't seen the original, watch this, if you have, don't, I'm sure that you will be disappointed. i however, liked it better......
Rating: 
Summary: Well-Done, interesting.
Review: In the realm of slasher thrillers, Alfred Hitchcock's "Psycho" stands as the best.So why do we need a remake? The truth is, we don't. But who knows what Gus Van Sant was thinking when he decided to make a shot by shot remake of a classic. This new version is in color, has richer cinematography and some extra opticals inserted. So why do I give it three stars? I liked it on the level where even in the 90s "Psycho" can still be thrilling and intriguing in a weird, macabre way. I also liked watching it and comparing it with the original. Other than that, it's not really worth it considering Vince Vaughn is tragically mis-cast and we already know what's going to happen. The new "Psycho" should be passed over for the old. Besides, there is no difference anyway.
Rating:
Summary: What was the point...
Review: of this remake? Gus Van Sant adds absolutely nothing new to this classic and his shot for shot approach and almost identical camera work only further proves that he had nothing to say with regards to this work. If it was meant as tribute to Hitchcock, I really can't say he succeeded, with his few original ideas not amounting to anything substantial. And of course as is Hollywood's tendency, where ever possible what was once only implied is now in your face (i.e. Norman peeping through the hole in the wall as Marion undresses. Where Hitchcock only implied at Norman's arousal, Van Sant makes sure it screams out at you). I was willing to see this movie with more than an open mind, seeing as I do love the original, but what I found was a mere replica, in color, bereft of it's originality and suspense. Incidentally, Julianne Moore exclaiming that she had to go get her Walkman was laughable and a pointless addition to the script. I will say this, though; Danny Elfman's rescoring of Bernard Hermann's original music was terrific.
Rating:
Summary: .
Review: It's true that it never should've been made, and it's equally true that it's a very poor remake. Why are the people of the 90s so obsessed with re-doing things that've been done well enough already? And always adding that "hip, 90s spice" to those things? It's sick, gaudy, soulless, and dull. As for the movie itself ... Vince Vaughn is atrociously poor and terribly miscast ... Anne Heche is adequate at best. I'm not sure about the rest because my interest lapsed in the first 30 minutes and I have to admit I only paid scarce attention for the remainder.
Rating: 
Summary: I think this is the most thrilling movie I've ever seen
Review: Clearly, I rate this great movie, Psycho with five stars. The reason I give it this rating is because it was very thrilling and also kept me wondering what was going to happen next. There are lots of outstanding scenes that would blow you away. Therefore, I highly recommend any and everyone from all ages to go out and see this awsome movie.
Rating:
Summary: I think this is the most thrilling movie I've ever seen
Review: Clearly, I rate this great movie Psycho with five stars. The reason I give it this rating is because it was very thrilling and kept me wondering what was going to happen next. There lots of outstanding scenes that would blow you away. Therefore, I highly recommend any and everyone from all ages to go out and see this awsome movie.
Rating:
Summary: BARELY.BARELY 4 STARS.......
Review: This has got to be the first movie in history that i marginally liked but bought anyways. it barely made a 4 star rating with me. I guess the reason i kind of liked it is because of the way it was filmed and the style gus van zant used. I enjoyed his use of colour and the costumes as well were borderline avant garde. This movie is in no way a "shot for shot remake" by the way! That would be literally impossible to do on film! Wake up cinema buffs! Psycho 1998 is no classic, Vince Vaughn's performance was at most, juvenile and restrained. As if he was embarrassed to really let loose the character. Anne Heech did a mousy job of playing her character but did add a lot of nineties trend and style to the film, which is a good thing! Overall the movie sucked but the style rocked. Worth owning for that only, in my oppinion.
Rating:
Summary: Only one thing
Review: If this version is so damn great, then why is Robert Bloch's novel credited AFTER the film ends? Answer: He wasn't the only one embarrassed by this treatment.
| 
