[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by h8kurdt

The only thing with Psycho that bothers me is the absolute last scene. Where he's shown in hospital and there's the two psychiatrist talking about him. Hitchcock deciding to RAM home what it means was stupid. The audience has figured out that he's hearing his mum's voice and that he dresses like her already. There's no need to have a scene explaining what everyone knew.

Other than that it's a great film.

oh ha ha yes-- that last bit is clunky.

i see it as a concession to a 1950s audience more than anything (it's a 1960 film but it's a "50's" movie to me). i wonder if it was a hitchcock decision or the studio did that. i'll investigate.

the other thing is that we grew up in the aftermath of all that... psychologization (is that a word?) of life, so i don't know if the audiences from 70 years ago would have picked up on it the way we do it today. we're hitchcock's children.

the last-last shot that follows is also a bit of overexplaining... that's the car being dragged out of the swamp with a chain. i would have liked more i think not to know what happened, but again 50s audiences most likely wanted a clear ending. too early in history for something like "inception".

but shot by shot, the way douglas gordon made it explode, it's just so brilliant.