Universal Pictures
Nothing is sacred in Hollywood . But that ’s not a late truism — it’salwaysheld true . If Hollywood smells an chance to take advantage or exploit , it will do so with gusto . Take , for illustration , Psycho . You ca n’t get more consecrated than that , right ? Alfred Hitchcock ’s seminal 1960 film changed cinema incessantly , and while it was immediately ripped off left and right , no one dared touch it in the two ten after it was released .
Yet the picture show also made a ton of money , and if it function once , why ca n’t it forge again ? Director Gus Van Sant , flush from his 1997 commercial-grade discovery withGood Will Hunting , surely think so and remade it in 1998 . That version flop , but he was n’t the first to go back to thePsychowell to ring an extra buck or two . The comparatively strange Australian director Richard Franklin ( Roadgames , Fantasm ) was hired by Universal to make a follow - up to Hitchcock ’s classic in 1983 , three year after the Master of Suspense had exit away .
Universal Pictures
Another flop , right ? Well , not just . It was a hit when it was relinquish , and some notablefilm publications like Variety praise it . EvenQuentin Tarantino is a fan . Psycho IIprobably should ’ve never been made ; after all , who require a continuation to Norman Bates ’ descent into fury ? But learn it over 40 age after , it ’s remarkable how well it holds up . It ’s understandably indebted to its predecessor , but by the goal , it carves out its own unique personal identity as a cruddy footling shocker with a sucker slug of an ending .
What happens when Norman Bates comes home
psychotic IItakes places 22 twelvemonth after the original . In that metre , Norman Bates has been rehabilitate in a mental infirmary and , against the wishes of his psychiatrist , Dr. Bill Raymond ( Robert Loggia ) , decides to move back to his hometown . Once there , he tries to reintegrate into society by taking a task as a short order of magnitude Captain Cook at a local diner , where he befriends the older waitress Mrs. Spool ( Claudia Bryar ) and her twentysomething conscientious objector - proletarian , Mary ( Meg Tilly ) . Although he ’s a chip dazed from the modulation from patient to steady citizen again , Norman is on the face of it content and rid of the homicidal impulse from long ago .
But a lot has change since 1960 . No longer a literal black - and - white world , the life Norman once had is long go . Customers and townie are suspicious of him . Is he really sane ? Is the Mother persona truly gone ? To make matters worse , the Bates Motel has fallen into disrepair under the management of Warren Toomey ( Dennis Franz ) , a sleazoid whose side business is contend drugs and looking away as harlot use the motel ’s cheap chamber for business .
And then there ’s Lila Loomis ( Vera Miles ) , the sister of Norman ’s most famous victim , Marion Crane ( Janet Leigh ) . She ’s livid that he ’s been released , and thinks he ’s not as cured as he ’s letting on . She ’s constantly hovering around , keeping her eye on Norman , and peradventure cooking up a plot of ground of her own to put Norman back where he belongs for dependable .
It ’s not severe to share her worry since as soon as Norman settles back into civilian life-time , and begins to produce nearer to Mary , his past times begins to haunt him . He relives puerility memories of him poison his mother , he act unknown when fondle a shiny knife , and , bad of all , he starts receiving strange note from someone called Mother . Is Norman ’s long - deceased mom somehow back from the grave ? Or is Norman ’s flimsy sanity already initiate to crack ?
Caught between an ode to Hitchcock and a schlocky slasher
And soPsycho IIbegins more or less how you ’d mean it would begin — with Norman back in his old stomping ground , and the threat of Mother brood in the screen background . And let ’s get this out of the fashion right on now : psychotic person IIisn’t nearly as in force asPsycho . It ca n’t be , but what it is a fascinating movie to keep an eye on as it more less come through as an ode to Hitchcock ’s original and an efficacious slasher film in its own right .
Throughout the movie , there ’s this tension between the director ’s intentions in crafting a worthy successor toPsychoand fulfilling the vehement demands of the slasher writing style . psychotic person IIwas made in 1983 , and the horror genre was still in its visor slasher cycle with freeing likesSleepaway CampandAmityville 3 - D. Franklin could n’t make his continuation as bloodless and insidious as Hitchcock ’s original ; the marketplace simply would n’t permit it . And soPsycho IIcontains far more execution , and graphical violence , than Hitchcock ever put on cover .
Psycho IIdelicately straddles the line between the two , which result in surprisingly disingenuous pic that is punctuated by some pretty gruesome slaying . For instance , there ’s a sequence need two teenagers who pinch into Norman ’s home to make out and fume dope in the basement . They ’re disrupt by Mother , or someone dressed as Mother , and the teenage male child is stab to dying while the girl run off .
The sequence itself is excess ; it adds nothing except another kill to thefilm ’s total kill counting . But it ’s here where Franklin show some artistry in his havoc by framing the execution as a series of quick cuts , like how Hitchcock staged Marion ’s memorable death in the shower , and conclude it by have got the boy ’s go hand mottle a dusty windowpane . Franklin then redact the daughter ’s relief valve from the sign of the zodiac in an extreme overhead shot that emphasize the Bates home as a tall , almost cathedral - same , building , dwarf the panicked young lady as she run away .
Those overhead shot will pop up throughoutPsycho IIas well as Dutch angles and imaginative role of light and shadow that clues us into Norman ’s crumbling state of mind . Nothing like that is reckon in typical slashers of this era , and while the destruction are wild and sanguinary ( one lineament obtain stabbedthrough the mouth ! ) , they aren’tthatout of place . Psychogave birth to the slasher musical genre , so it ’s only jibe its sequel fun by the rules it helped establish .
The sequel’s ending is just as good as Psycho’s
Another view ofPsycho IIthat makes it a worthy sequel is the unmingled amount of twist its more and more bonkers patch has . This motion-picture show always surprises you , and just when you retrieve you know what ’s break down on , another surprise is uncover … or another major character is fleetly kill off to keep you judge as to who ’s behind Mother ’s restoration . It ’s not every sidereal day a slasher can keep you in suspense , butPsycho IIdoes so with accomplishment , and it never lets up .
The photographic film also nails the ending , and I think it ’s just as good , and just as shocking , asPsycho‘s . That ’s eminent praise , butPsycho IIearns it , and close on a note that ’s just as unsettling as a young Norman smiling at the screen in the original . Stop reading now if you do n’t desire to be spoiled .
In the final import ofPsycho II , Norman is visited by Mrs. Spool late one Nox at his home . call back her ? She ’s one of Norman ’s co - workers at the dining compartment . Well , it change by reversal out she ’s much more than just a protagonist — she ’s Norman ’s material mother , and she ’s the one that ’s been murdering hoi polloi in lodge to protect her thin boy .
How is that potential ? In a monologue lay in Norman ’s kitchen , she confesses that after she give birth to him , she could n’t handle being a mother , so she give way him to her sister to raise . She did n’t contact Norman when he was growing up as she was in genial institutions through most of her adult life . She hump Norman would come back eventually , so she start a chore at the buffet car and has been biding her time until his return .
Norman takes in all this news program with surprising composure and offer his new mother some tea . As she is sipping it , and as we ’re inquire if he ’s poisoned it ( he has a story of doing that ) , he sedately nibble up a shovelful and bash her over the head with it . The chair shatters , she fall to the ground , and as her body convulses , Norman begins to whistle and pull the shades down .
Everything about this conniption is splendidly carry out . From the sudden deed of wildness , which Franklin accomplishes all in one snap with utterly no edits , to the gradual pull into an overhead slam that frame Mrs. Spool ’s kick the bucket consistency in a grotesque tableau , this sequence left me just as bowl over as I was the first time I realized Norman was really Mother in the 1960 pilot .
For Norman Bates, you can go home again
It ’s a stunning climax , and as we see Norman , who ’s been innocent this entire time , revert back to his Mother image by localise Mrs. Spool ’s body in the window overlook the Bates Motel , Franklin achieves the same effect that Hitchcock reach when he has a conquer Norman , as “ female parent , ” smile threateningly at the camera all those age ago . Both ending are deeply disturbing , butPsycho IIis maybe more scary since Norman is now spare to down again .
DidPsycho IIneed to be made ? Probably not , but it was , and it could ’ve been far sorry . That sound like faint praise , but the movie is a desirable follow - up to a dear classic , one that is so well - known , even the people who have never learn it know what it is , and it honors the lamentable , harebrained story of Norman Bates . The sequel complete Norman ’s tragical discharge and underlines the true revulsion behind this twisted tarradiddle . For people like Norman , home is where the horror is , and there ’s no escaping it , no matter how firmly you try .
Psycho IIis streaming onNetflix . Need more streaming recommendations ? discipline out thebest flick on Netflix , thebest motion-picture show on Hulu , thebest movies on Amazon Prime Video , thebest movies on Max , and thebest movies on Disney+ .
