| ||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
|
Buy This DVD and Watch it Instantly
Watch the Amazon Instant Video rental on your PC, Mac, compatible TV or compatible device at no charge when you buy this DVD from Amazon.com. Your rental will expire 24 hours after you begin watching or 30 days after your disc purchase, whichever occurs first. The Amazon Instant Video version will be available in Your Video Library and is provided as a gift with disc purchase. Available to US customers only. See Terms and Conditions.
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
First, Vince Vaughn has a completely and utterly impossible task of trying to match up to Anthony Perkins' performance in the original. Perkins' Norman Bates came out of his own personality. He, like Norman Bates, lost his father at an early age and had a internal conflict over his own sexual identity. He, like Norman Bates, had a clinging, possessive mother. Vaughn, in contrast, is behind the eight ball as soon as he appears on the screen in the remake. Vaughn plays Norman Bates. Perkins IS Norman Bates. Vaughn tries his best, but it isn't nearly enough.
The updated touches director Gus Van Sandt has added -- namely the masturbation, vomiting, nudity and the added gore. Instead of making a positive additional contribution to the story, these updates merely seem like a gratuitous tack-on that Van Sandt has added to appeal to modern audiences. Martin Scorcese's remake of Cape Fear earned the right to deal more graphically with its subject matter than the original.
... Read more ›As I've said on many an occasion, I have no problem with a true remake: a fresh look on an old theme is perfectly fine, so long as it's well done and has something new to say. But given Van Sant's directorial talent, and considering the top tier (albeit underrated) acting talent involved (Vince Vaughn, Anne Heche, William H. Macy, and Viggo Mortensen, it's hard to fathom why Van Sant would choose to use his talents on something like this.
It's worth emphasizing to the incredulous that this movie is NOT a remake, but is, indeed, a SHOT-for-SHOT reshoot of the original Hitchcock classic. Except for perhaps two little inexplicable touches, the film uses every camera angle, and every snippet of dialogue, and all of the characters, in the original film: the only departure from the original "Psycho" is that this movie is shot in color. Of the two departures, there isn't much to say: they take the form of brief 'visions' edited MTV-style into the killing sequences, and include a roiling stormy sky, a masked woman in a bikini, and an ewe.
For this we needed a feature film? What's more, while the movie itself is at first intriguing as a curiosity ("hmmm...let's see how Anne Heche plays the shower sequence) quickly begins to resemble bad dinner theater, and the film and actors, by definition, draw comparison to the original. Lamentably, they don't do well in the comparison.
... Read more ›