PSYCHO (1960) Full Length Movie REACTION!
Added 2023-10-12 18:10:42 +0000 UTCFor Film Friday #92, Madison watches Psycho for the first time.
Become a channel member: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCRO...
Become a patron: https://www.patreon.com/madisonkthames
Get Gone Outlaw on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Gone-Outlaw-Ma...
Add Gone Outlaw on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
Get Gone Outlaw merch and prints here: https://www.madisonthames.com
Follow @goneoutlaw on Facebook and Instagram for the latest news and updates.
Website: madisonthames.com
Instagram: @madisonkthames
Twitter: @madisonkthames
Facebook: @madisonkthames
Music by Oak Studios.
Thank you to my patrons!
David Bennett, paulh7791, maninthewilderness, A. L. Bingham, Montee Presto, Aaron Bailey, Lorni23, Greg Nelson, Vidal (BillyG!) Gomez jr, Jason Chirevas, Randall Oman, Daniel, Jacob Dankovchik, Michael Weiner, Tom Frankiewicz, Bill Vogel, Venture 619, NWCountrygirl 18, madverse137, Tyrone Tyrone, Celeste McAllister, dragoons7
Comments
When I watched this as an adult for the first time in over 40 years, I was surprised how little action there was since I had remembered this as some intense horror movie. Of course, I was young and more impressionable so I guess I just remembered those few dramatic, sensational scenes such as Janet Leigh murdered in the shower and the quick other murder at the top of the stairs. Basically, that was about it, action-wise, BUT I have no complaints because the more I watch this film, the more I like it. It has become my favorite Alfred Hitchcock movie, along with Rear Window. I mention the lack of action, and blood, too, because younger people who might be watching this for the first time are not going to see the kind of horror film they're accustomed to seeing. A generation back, movie makers tended to build up characters and suspense, so there was a lot more storytelling and less action than you see today. Also, this movie doesn't have the shock value today for audiences, either, not after years of Freddie Krueger or Jason Voorhees-type slasher films- blood-and-guts seen in the past 40 years. But, what you saw in this movie is (1) superb acting; (2) a fascinating lead character; (3) excellent photography, and (4) a bizarre story. "Norman Bates" whose name sounded familiar to you, is one of the most famous fictional names in film history, thanks to this film and the great work portraying him by Anthony Perkins. "Norman" is a nutcase, as it turns out and the more you know all about him, the more fun it is to study Perkins and his character "Norman" in subsequent viewings. He really has the guy down pat. However, it isn't just Perkins' film; the supporting is just fine with Leigh, whose figure is still awesome no matter how many times you see it; Martin Balsam as the private detective; Vera Miles and John Gavin. Everyone contributes. What makes me really enjoy this movie is the cinematography. I appreciate John Russell's camera-work and Hitchcock's direction more and more. I wonder if this isn't Hitchcock's best job of directing as his camera angles and lighting are outstanding. The sound effects in here don't hurt. When Balsam is attacked, the accompanying frightening music never fails to bring chills down my spine. The music literally "screams" at you. One of my top ten greatest film of all time.
Joe Lazarus
2023-10-13 03:39:45 +0000 UTCFabulous reaction, Madison! You took me back to 1960 when, as a 10-year-old, I saw this on its first run. None of the secrets were yet known. And I was too totally an innocent child for the intensity of this film. It truly creeped me out, and it was a good 20 to 30 years before I could stand the thought of watching it again. Now, I've grown so jaded in my old age, especially knowing all the twists, and knowing who survives and who doesn't, I thoroughly enjoy another viewing, and especially when I can share the freshness of a blind unspoiled reaction. (Don't worry, once you're ready to see it again, knowing the secrets ahead of time mutes the creepy vibes considerably; not completely, but considerably.) Anthony Perkins (Norman) had only played nice, easy-going leading men, or juvenile love interests, until Psycho. But after that, he was fatally type-cast as the creepy bad guy. Occasionally he'd show up as something else, but rarely, and he always seemed out of place. Janet Leigh (Marion), yes, was Jamie Lee Curtis's mother, and wife of Tony Curtis (of Some Like It Hot, among many other films). Leigh was such a big name star, Hitchcock required theaters to only allow patrons to enter at the start of the film, not later (as was the common custom up until then; show up anytime, watch to the end, then stick around to see the beginning of the film, off the same admission ticket). But the fear was that people would come in late to a Janet Leigh film and never see Janet Leigh. This changed movie attendance customs from then on; theater owners now clear the theater after each show, and you have to buy another ticket to see it again. Vera Miles (Lila) had been one of Hitchcock's "protegees," until she turned down the lead in Vertigo to have a baby instead. She had been chillingly great as the emotionally damaged wife in The Wrong Man, a very different Hitchcock film, and worth a viewing for what it is. After she turned down Vertigo, Hitchcock then wrote her off his insiders list, and moved on to other "paper dolls," but brought Miles back in a somewhat dowdy role as the glam star's sister. I think she nails it big time. Martain Balsam (Arbogast), yes, was Juror #1 in 12 Angry Men. I know, TL;DR probably. Short version: Great reaction. Looking forward to The Birds. (When it came out, there were billboards everywhere with the slogan "'The Birds' Is Coming," with a shot of Hitchcock pointing very determinedly at the "Is.") 'Nuff said. Thanks, and good evening!
Alan Jones
2023-10-13 00:38:36 +0000 UTC
