Psychose II

Would Hitchcock approve of this? In general you can say: No. Why? Because he apparently did not like Sequels to his movies (maybe not in general either?). But when this was made, so many years after the original, Hitch was not around to object. And he could have since he had the rights to the original. Something that may not be too common, but was the case, because he did not get as much money as he wanted, but instead could have more rights to the movie, which in the end proved essential.

Now, would this make sense if Perkins did not reprise his iconic role? I would argue that it would have not. There were some initial doubts, but fortunately he came back. There is a bit of a twist and there are quite a few callbacks to the Original. Of course catching lightning in the bottle is not possible. But it is still a valid story and a good continuation.

If you are a fan of the original, I don't think you will be too dissapointed in this (as most have been with the other sequels). But one thing is for sure: Perkins seems to be born to play this role ...

What a pleasure it is to see good old Norman in this rather decent sequel to the acclaimed the movie 'Psycho' - Anthony Perkins' role in this film is one fantastic, also an interesting and unpredictable plot buffers up the quality of this film, a great film, and a hidden gem....RECOMMENDED

Safe to say that Psycho II suffers from all the prejudices possible. Numberless elements could be used as an excuse to avoid this movie and to place it among other pointless and money-making sequels. Brought out 22 years after the original masterpiece by Hitchcock himself, I can imagine that many fans refuse to give a subjective look at it. Very wrong, though!! Number two is a very worthy and underrated sequel, which brings perfect homage to the Master of Suspense best film. Even though Franklin can't fully live up to Hitchcock's style, he shows a pretty intense and mind-blowing story here. Franklin obviously worships Hitchcock (which was also clear in one of his previous films - Patrick) and this sequels is made with nothing but respect and goodwill. The very creative script - written by Tom Holland - has more than enough positive aspects and perplexing twists to consider the entire movie a triumph. Sure, some of the twists are far-fetched but overall the continuation of the Psycho couldn't be better. It actually takes place 22 years later with Norman Bates judged sane and released from the mental institution. Some people immediately want to forgive and forget but some others are convinced that Norman will soon go crazy again. This last group of people also has a complete plan worked out to make Norman snap again. Soon there are people dying again in the infamous Bates ' Motel but who is the vicious murderer this time??? Psycho II manages to keep you guessing the entire movie and the terrific acting performance by Anthony Perkins keeps you even closer to the screen. If you were a fan of the original masterpiece ( and I can't imagine anyone isn't a fan of that ), make sure you catch this sequel too!! There were made two more sequels after this but you can easily skip then....and whatever you do...keep your hands off the Gus Van Sant remake of 1998. I wish I had!!

Of course, PSYCHO II can't hold a candle to Hitch's original masterwork, but then what film can? The surprise is that it turns out to be a decent little film in itself, purely because it isn't a slavish copy but instead a stand-alone psychological thriller that takes its plot in a different direction to most.

Instead of emulating the then-popular slasher craze of the 1980s, PSYCHO II plays out as a whodunit for the most part. Norman's back on the streets and back in his motel, and the grisly slayings start up once more. But who's the killer? Is it Norman himself, or the young, seemingly innocent girl (Meg Tilly) living with him? Could it be the returning Vera Miles as Lila Loomis, seeking vengeance for her sister's slaying in the original by setting Norman up? Or somebody else with an axe to grind?

While there is the expected bloodshed in this film, for the most part it's deeper than that, working hard to build up a creepy atmosphere. Anthony Perkins is on top form as his most famous creation, and he succeeds in making Norman a sympathetic protagonist; watching this guy losing his mind for the second time is truly a tragic occurrence. The presence of supporting players like the reliably sleazy Dennis Franz and the solid Robert Loggia help to make this an effective horror film all in itself.

The original "Psycho", directed by Alfred Hitchcock, is one of the seminal horror films of all-time. However, Hitch didn't believe in sequels, so it took about two decades and a new director (Richard Franklin) to revive this franchise. Surprisingly, it is an entertaining re=entry into the world of Norman Bates.

For a basic plot summary, "Psycho II" picks up with Bates (Anthony Perkins) being released from prison after his earlier murders. After being brought back to his motel business, Norman begins to struggle once again with the demons of his past.

What really gives this film credence is the return of Perkins as Bates. He does a remarkable job of playing a supposedly "reformed" Bates, both tortured by past memories yet trying to get back on the right mental track. A major role for Vera Miles is also a nice nod to the original.

I can't say much about the plot without giving things away, but suffice it to say that it is very thoughtful as horror flicks go. It's never stale, and the ending easily recalls the "shock factor" of the first effort.

Thus, "Psycho II" is a solid addition to one of the stalwart thriller/horror franchises. It is well- acted, has an engaging plot, and will at least make you curious about checking out part three.