The Psycho sequels

laurence1870laurence1870 Posts: 213
Forum Member
I never knew until recently that Psycho spawned any sequels, let alone three of them.

Well I bought the 1-4 boxset and watched the sequels recently and to be truthful I was half expecting them all to be utter rubbish, but they were actually quite watchable! Psycho IV was very silly, but 2 and 3 were very good as stand alone films.

Anyone else seen these?
«1

Comments

  • Fairyprincess0Fairyprincess0 Posts: 30,059
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    2 is very good. 3 is more of a standard slasher....
  • LMLM Posts: 63,460
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Never seen them
    But like a lot of people, the first one is such a masterpiece, i don't want it to be ruined by potentially awful sequels.
  • treefr0gtreefr0g Posts: 23,638
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I like Psycho 2. Its a lot more light hearted than the first.

    Its a bit like Alien vs Aliens. Two totally different approaches but both likeable.

    I can't remember much about Psycho 3 and I agree, Psycho 4 was dire.

    There's a scene in Psycho 2 where somebody is coming into a dark room and there's a shadow on the wall that looks very much like Hichcock's silhouette. I always wondered if it was intentional or just my imagination.
  • StrakerStraker Posts: 79,622
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Never seen them
    But like a lot of people, the first one is such a masterpiece, i don't want it to be ruined by potentially awful sequels.

    But they`re most assuredly not. Two and Three are excellent. Perkins even directed the third and it`s all the better for it.
  • PJ68PJ68 Posts: 3,116
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    i saw 2 at the cinema. it's quite good and has a brilliant jump moment with the hole in the wall and the eye. also, I've always liked meg tilly
  • BigDaveXBigDaveX Posts: 835
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    2 was definitely a worthy sequel, and actually did quite a good job in incorporating a lot of 70s/80s slasher conventions while staying true to the spirit of the original film.

    3 feels kind of redundant, mostly because they never try to disguise the fact that it's Norman who commits all the murders. It's better than a lot of other 80s horrors films however, and Anthony Perkins' direction is pretty good.

    4 is just complete crap, with the possible exception of Olivia Hussey's performance as Norma, and even that's undermined by her having to play a cartoonishly evil stereotype.
  • be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Psycho IV can't decide whether or not it wants to acknowledge II and III. On the one hand, Norman does mention the last set of murders. (Even though he has been released ludicrously soon afterwards.) On the other hand, the death of Norman's father in IV directly contradicts the backstory of Emma Spool and Norma Spool/Bates in III.

    I find it's best to treat II & III as the true sequels and regard IV as an alternate version.

    Of course, there's also the 1987 Bates Motel TV Movie. Not only does this contradict the sequels, but it seems as though the writers knew nothing about the original Psycho. It's like a weird Love Boat / Fantasy Island comedy with a Horror setting.


    Here's an excellent video essay on the sequels:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxwOKgx8xQ0

    And here's a selection from the wonderful Psycho III soundtrack:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMua4VsXmGY
  • rfonzorfonzo Posts: 11,771
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    There was one I saw that was awful. He smacked someone over the head with a spade. I do not know which one it was?
  • Chasing ShadowsChasing Shadows Posts: 3,096
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    rfonzo wrote: »
    There was one I saw that was awful. He smacked someone over the head with a spade. I do not know which one it was?

    The very end of Psycho II. That bit was a bit stupid - him taking out his new mother - but up until then it was a light-hearted homily to the Hitchcock original. A lot of plot-holes - but amusing and effective even so.
  • StrakerStraker Posts: 79,622
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Interesting fact about Perkins:
    He had his first intimate heterosexual experience at the age of 39 while working on the 1972 film The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean with an actress who also appeared in the film. Perkins declined to identify the actress, but "other sources" have identified her as Victoria Principal. Principal confirmed this in a People magazine article about Perkins.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Perkins

    http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41bginGB8DL.jpg

    Lucky, lucky swine! :D
  • MrMarpleMrMarple Posts: 3,431
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Mr Perkins was certainly a stunning looking man. Very attractive IMO.
  • PJ68PJ68 Posts: 3,116
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    victoria principle looks like beyonce there :-0
  • treefr0gtreefr0g Posts: 23,638
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Straker wrote: »

    I also believe that his wife was in one of the planes that hit the twin towers.
  • yaristamanyaristaman Posts: 1,841
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I never knew until recently that Psycho spawned any sequels, let alone three of them.

    Well I bought the 1-4 boxset and watched the sequels recently and to be truthful I was half expecting them all to be utter rubbish, but they were actually quite watchable! Psycho IV was very silly, but 2 and 3 were very good as stand alone films.

    Anyone else seen these?

    Yep, got them all (and the remake)

    Enjoyable films though, as stated here, Part IV is a bit poor compared to the others.

    The remake is fairly enjoyable as well if you haven't seen, or can ignore, the original.
  • boogie woogieboogie woogie Posts: 16,398
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I have the box set, I must rewatch at some point...
  • be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Leaving aside parodies and homages, there are at least six separate and incompatible continuities.

    1. Robert Bloch's books
    Psycho (1959)
    Psycho II (1982)
    Psycho House (1990)
    Only the first book was adapted as a film.

    2. Hitchcock's film and its cinematic sequels
    Psycho (1960)
    Psycho II (1983)
    Psycho III (1986)

    3. Hitchcock's film and its TV movie sequel (1)
    Psycho (1960)
    Bates Motel (1987) AVOID!

    4. Hitchcock's film and its TV movie sequel (2)
    Psycho (1960)
    Psycho IV: The Beginning (1990)

    5. Gus Van Sant's film remake
    Psycho (1998)

    6. TV series
    Bates Motel (2013 - )

    I'd have to say that the film trilogy is my favourite iteration of Psycho, closely followed by the current Bates Motel TV series.
  • Fairyprincess0Fairyprincess0 Posts: 30,059
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If I were re-making psycho, I go back to the book and cast someone more like that (id have gone with phillip symore Hoffman, before he past away.)

    By and largely it would be identical to the original, until the shower scene. Then I'd kill of Norman instead of mary/Marion, and take the film in a wholly unexpected direction. Ala hitchcock.....
  • Tindie_BaisTindie_Bais Posts: 2,590
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I really enjoy the series

    Psycho (1960) Fantastic 9/10
    Psycho II (1983) Surprisingly great 8/10
    Psycho III (1986) Weakest of series but still really good 6/10
    Psycho IV: The Beginning (1990) (TV) A perfect ending to series! 8/10

    Not seen Bates Motel (1987) or remake!
  • jake_moore08jake_moore08 Posts: 256
    Forum Member
    I have the DVD boxset, and wasn't holding out much for the sequals, but really enjoyed the second one, despite a rather silly and slightly disappointing ending.

    The third one is actually the one that I watch the most, and I think it stands out as a decent slasher in it's own right.

    I really didn't like Psycho IV and watched it again to see if it really was as bad the second time around as I thought it was the first, it was.

    I very much enjoyed the Bates Motel TV series though, and look forward to catching up with the second season.

    I have never heard of Bates Motel (1987), but might give it a watch anyway.
  • chrisii2011chrisii2011 Posts: 2,694
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    treefr0g wrote: »
    I also believe that his wife was in one of the planes that hit the twin towers.

    How sad:(
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 106
    Forum Member
    all are good. i watched recently and had a little read up

    i didn't know the actor was gay and died of aids and was typecast after psycho. such a shame. good actor
  • dee123dee123 Posts: 46,252
    Forum Member
    II was better than it should be.
  • Chasing ShadowsChasing Shadows Posts: 3,096
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    dee123 wrote: »
    II was better than it should be.

    What was?

    Psycho 2? Psycho 3? Or Psycho 4?
  • be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    What was?

    Psycho 2? Psycho 3? Or Psycho 4?
    Dee was using Roman Numerals for Psycho II.
  • Johnny ClayJohnny Clay Posts: 5,326
    Forum Member
    Only seen Psycho II, but I too found it far better than it had any right to be.

    *thwack!*
Sign In or Register to comment.