Sorry about pimping sart_04 the other day, *sigh* peer pressure is so hard to overcome..
Anyway. The other day I bought and watched the original 'Psycho' on DVD for the first time, and let me just say it was not all it was cracked up to be.
*anticipates being bitch-slapped by oh-so-rightious film buffs*
I was so disappointed by the shower scene: L-A-M-E. I can sort of see how it would have been 'shocking' and 'controversial' at the time - but does that mean I have to pretend to enjoy it now? hell no.
I mean, sure, hitchcock is the master of suspense and yadda yadda, cool violins ect, revolutionary techniques and so on - BUT THAT WAS THEN. compared with modern movies (probably which would not have been any good without the earlier advances that AH made), PSYCHO is very mediochre indeed. And trust me, its impossible to set your mind back to what it would have been like in the 60s seeing this film - you can try but it won't work.
I guess what I'm getting at here is that there is a difference between good quality and entertainment value, and I think that lots of people think that if a film is well made, then its got to be entertaining as well.
agree/disagree? have a rant.
having said all this there were 2 things in PSYCHO witch I really loved though. firstly the characterisation of Bates, and secondly the very end two shots - where Bates smiles slowly and a skull is breifly super-imposed over his face - and the dragging the car out of the swamp accompanied by omnious music: v. spine chilling
please have a rant.