Alfred Hitchcock stunned audiences in 1960 with his groundbreaking horror thriller “Psycho.” The master of suspense helped birth the slasher genre, releasing a film that broke every rule in the book. The famous shower scene and Bernard Herman’s string-only score became iconic. The Bates Motel, and its haunted Victorian-style house looming in the background, is firmament in the pop culture landscape. Not to mention the tagline “A boy’s best friend is his mother.”
And its influence on other media is immense. The film’s big conceit, killing its main character Marion Crane 20 minutes into the picture, influenced many future filmmakers. Wes Craven’s 1996’s “Scream” offed its big star Drew Barrymore, in that film’s spectacular opening sequence. “Psycho” had the rare quality sequel with 1983’s “Psycho II” and even the “Bates Motel” reboot TV series that ran for four seasons.
In 1998 Hollywood thought indie director Gus Van Sant had lost his mind when he released a remake of the beloved classic. “Psycho” was on that short list of films you do not touch. But Van Sant’s angle was that his remake would be an almost shot-for-shot copy of the original using the same script and music cues. The result was odd, quirky, and a reflection of the unique Van Sant sensibilities.
So, check-in, unpack, relax, and take a shower as we compare the 1960 and 1998 versions of “Psycho.”
PSYCHO (1960)
Chad’s Grade: A
The 1960 “Psycho” is an outlier in the Alfred Hitchcock filmography. The movie features little of the romance and wit that define many of his classics like “North by Northwest” and “Rear Window.” And the film was shot low budget and in black & white, using much of the crew that worked on the “Alfred Hitchcock Presents” TV show.
The plot is straightforward: Marion Crane, a real estate secretary, steals $40,000 in cash from her boss’s client, hoping to use the money to start a new life with her boyfriend Sam, who is crushed by immense debt. On the run, Marion checks into the “Bates Motel” and meets Norman, a seemingly sweet boy next door type who runs the motel. That night Marion is brutally murdered in the shower by what looks like Norman’s vicious, insane mother. Soon, Sam, Marion’s sister Lila and a Private Investigator descend upon the hotel, hoping to find the truth and unravel the secrets of Norman Bates and his “mother.”
The film stars Janet Leigh as Marion, Vera Miles as Lila, and John Gavin as Sam. All three are strong, but Leigh stands out as Marion. She carries the first act effortlessly with her calm, no-nonsense demeanor. Leigh was the equivalent of a Jennifer Lawrence or Margot Robbie, so it was a shock to see the A-List star abruptly killed and removed from the picture.
The film’s extraordinary performance is reserved for Anthony Perkins as Norman Bates. It’s not hyperbole to claim that Perkins’ Norman is one of the great screen villains of all time. He’s introduced as the wide-eyed, sweet son who cares for his invalid mother. Later we discover that the boy next door is a mask for the cauldron of insanity that burns inside. And the big reveal with Norman and his “mother” is one of the great screen twists of all time.
And Perkins is the glue that holds the film together after the shocking killing of Marion. The film effortlessly switches our allegiance from Marion to Norman, and we secretly root for him to come out on top. If you’re unaware of the big twist, you feel pity for Norman as he desperately tries to guard his mother against these encroaching forces.
“Psycho” has a remarkable modern sensibility, and how Hitch got this past the 1960 censors is a minor movie miracle. The film opens in a seedy hotel room with Marion, only wearing a bra and a shirtless (and very hot) Sam lingering in bed after “lunch.” Reportedly, the movie features the first on-screen toilet flushing. And the iconic shower scene with a naked Marion being stabbed to death was considered risqué for the time. The film was shot in black and white due to the blood featured onscreen.
The 1960 version of “Psycho” was a massive success for Hitchcock, becoming one of the biggest hits of his career. The movie was the “Blumhouse” picture of its day, made on the cheap but with a substantial significant return on investment. It’s essentially a B-picture made with A-List prestige talent.
And as stated before, the film had a long afterlife, piercing the pop culture landscape. “Psycho” is considered one of those perfect movies, unable to be remade or improved upon…
PSYCHO (1998)
Chad’s Grade: C+
In the late 90s, highly acclaimed indie director Gus Van Sant was flirting with mainstream Hollywood. Van Sant was riding off the success of the 1997 Oscar-winning “Good Will Hunting,” the breakout picture of Matt Damon and Ben Affleck. Hell, he even directed a music video for teen pop group Hansen (the clip was for their “Weird” track.)
Van Sant stated in interviews that he wanted to remake “Psycho” in a reverential way, treating it like the revival of a theatrical play or musical. He would use the same Joseph Stefano script (still alive at the time of the remake) and recast it with new actors using a modern setting. And yes, he would attempt to recreate the film, shot for shot, following the original 60-day shooting schedule.
There’s no need to rehash the plot, as the remake did use the original script, with a few edits by Stefano. The new take was able to amplify some of the unsavory aspects that couldn’t pass muster with the censors. We now hear Norman unzip his pants and masturbate when he spies on Marion through the peephole. And the shower sequence is a bit more graphic with blood and nudity. Interestingly, the film garnered an “R” rating.
While the movie is billed as a shot-for-shot remake, there are minor tweaks and trims. The opening scene at the hotel is slightly re-blocked, mainly to show Sam’s nudity. A few lines of dialogue have been updated to reflect the modern-day setting. And in true Van Sant style, he intermingles erotic shots of masked women and road cattle when “mother” kills private detective Arbogast.
The remake is a curious watch, especially if you saw the original dozens of times and are familiar with the slow cadence of the picture. You’re constantly comparing the new take with the original in your mind. While it’s nice to see “Psycho” in color with a modern setting, the dated 60s dialogue creates a disconnect. And in 1998, horror audiences found the deliberate pacing that builds to the bait & switch finale too much of a slow burn, especially if you know the twist in advance.
But the body blow to the new “Psycho” is the utter miscasting of Vince Vaughn as Norman. It’s daunting for any actor to follow in Anthony Perkins’s footsteps, but Vaughn exudes too much weird chemistry. Norman is supposed to be the sweet boy next door, but one look at Vaughn, and you know this guy is a wacko serial killer. Also, Vaughn gives Norman nervous ticks and fidgets, adding to his creepy vibe. During the critical dinner scene where Norman and Marion bond, you’re yelling at Marion to jump in her new Volvo and speed away.
The rest of the cast is solid and does interesting variations of the classic characters. Anne Heche makes for an excellent Marion, decked out in pixie blond hair and classy outfits. She’s warmer and flirtier than Leigh’s more subtle performance. Viggo Mortensen gives Marion’s boyfriend Sam a rugged country makeover, complete with a cowboy hat and boots. But the film’s most exciting and radical reinterpretation is for Lila Crane, played by Julianne Moore. In Moore’s hands, Lila gets a lesbian update (her keychain is a dead giveaway) along with a grungy wardrobe and attitude every time Sam glances her way.
The 1998 “Psycho” flopped badly upon release and received a critical drubbing, criticizing Van Sant for messing with Hitchcock’s masterpiece. Audiences had no desire to see a strange, carbon copy reproduction.
I still think that Van Sant should have taken the script and filmed the remake in his style. Doing the cinematic equivalent of a theatrical revival is an interesting concept. But even the resurrection of musicals or plays changes the staging and choreography to keep things fresh. Instead, Van Sant’s film locks audiences in the Hitchcock prison of the original.
IN CONCLUSION:
Both versions are worth a watch. Hitch’s original is required viewing and belongs in any self-respecting cinephile’s library of films. Gus Van Sant’s remake is an interesting experiment, worth checking out for its quirky qualities but never watching again.
Great review and objective critique. For me it’s 1960 all they way!