Intermission

by Jim Wunderle

"Psycho"

Directed by: Gus Van Sant

Starring: Anne Heche, Vince Vaughn, William H. Macy, Julianne Moore

Rated: R

I had a strange relationship with scary movies when I was a kid. I loved them but, well, they scared me. "Children of the Damned" rendered me sleepless for several nights after. Even the campy William Castle movies and the films from Hammer Studios gave me the creeps.

There was one movie, though, that was deemed so disturbing by those in the know that kids like me weren't even supposed to see it. I remember adults talking about it in hushed tones with grim faces. That film was Alfred Hitchcock's 1960 masterpiece "Psycho."

After seeing it as an adult, I'm sort of glad I didn't get to watch it when I was kid. I wouldn't have gotten a peaceful night's sleep for a month, nor would I have understood the psychological implications that are at the heart of the film's terror.

At the time Hitchcock by then an established master of suspense and mystery claimed that this low-budget, black-and-white film, with its decidedly sleazy subject matter, was a joke.

The original preview had no scenes from the movie but rather featured the director giving the audience a guided tour through the Bates mansion atop the hill next to the now infamous Bates Motel.

Hitchcock also borrowed a few gimmicks from master showman William Castle. There were no advance screenings of "Psycho," critics were asked not to reveal the intricacies of Norman Bates' relationship with his mother, and theaters were instructed that no one should be admitted after the film had begun. In his own dry, macabre way, Hitchcock was having a real hoot.

Critics (who had been forced to see the film with the general public) weren't all that enthusiastic about "Psycho" some called it "sadistic," even "pornographic" but the box office receipts told the real tale.

Audiences, whether engaged or repulsed, were paying to see it, and "Psycho" became one of the highest grossing films of its time. This too gave Hitchcock much joy, since the folks at Paramount initially wanted nothing to do with the movie.

I guess by today's standards set by the likes of "Nightmare on Elm Street," "Friday the 13th" and, more recently, "I Know What You Did Last Summer" kids might wonder what all the fuss was about "Psycho."

Remember, in the original shower scene, Hitchcock never once showed knife meeting flesh. For me, it just goes to show that explicit scenes aren't always the most gruesome. A good director knows that the ultimate terror resides in each viewer's own mind.

So now it's 1998, and director Gus Van Sant ("Good Will Hunting") tells his studio executives he wants to redo an established cinematic masterpiece. He doesn't really want to do a "remake" but rather a "replica," using the original screenplay, all of the camera angles and moves, even the original Bernard Herrmann score (one of the greatest pieces written by arguably the best film composer ever).

I'm sure the guys in the suits at the studio were greatly enthused. ... "Well, uh, gee, Gus, we know that the last 'product' from you won Oscars and all, and we're happy to have you on board, but you know, some of your earlier films were rather, well, uh ... strange, and now you want to do what?"

I think Hitchcock was probably looking down and smiling. Critics everywhere thought it was a stupid idea, but most admitted they couldn't wait to see it.

Van Sant himself defends his vision by saying he believes a lot more of these "replicas" will be forthcoming. I'm not sure if that's really a great idea (it's better than recycling another old TV show, I guess) but in this case it works. It works surprisingly well.

Using the original screenplay by Joseph Stefano, which was based on the novel by Robert Bloch, and following Hitchcock's film like a blueprint, Van Sant pulls off the seemingly impossible. Nearly every shot is framed and blocked as in the original, but a few minor points have been changed.

For one thing, Marion absconds with $400,000 instead of $40,000 (inflation) and there is no doubt what Norman is doing as he peeps through the wall into Marion's room. There are also a few editing changes that, to me, make more sense of the narrative.

The only "flaw" here and I don't want to slight Vince Vaughn, he's great is the fact that in Hitchcock's version Anthony Perkins, as Norman Bates, was a lot more sympathetic character. Perkins had a certain vulnerability, and I think audiences, even when repulsed by Norman's actions, identified with him more than they will with Vaughn.

Hats off to Gus Van Sant.

(Jim Wunderle works at Associated Video Producers and is a Springfield free-lance writer and musician.)

[[In-content Ad]]