tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post7322971865628109101..comments2024-03-22T14:44:41.519+00:00Comments on Checking On My Sausages: Psycho IIUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-9973462779580754332010-03-02T13:43:36.947+00:002010-03-02T13:43:36.947+00:00Doniphon,
I haven't yet seen Dressed to Kill ...Doniphon,<br /><br />I haven't yet seen Dressed to Kill but I have seen the museum scene and really liked it.Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07036103762441216161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-20364422359344412472010-02-24T21:32:52.097+00:002010-02-24T21:32:52.097+00:00I'm really surprised Dressed To Kill hasn'...I'm really surprised Dressed To Kill hasn't come up here. I have the same problems with the third act of Psycho that Bob does, and while I haven't seen Psycho II, I consider De Palma's film to be a superior update of Hitch's material, taking it in all sorts of weird, wonderful directions. I do really love parts of Psycho though, which makes its conclusion so disappointing.Doniphonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02407443845368110678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-15102969430021865922010-02-24T19:34:32.033+00:002010-02-24T19:34:32.033+00:00Blast you, Stephen! Looks like my review of "...Blast you, Stephen! Looks like my review of "A Single Man" will not be going up today - you've short-circuited my new site!<br /><br />Seriously, though, contentious as they may get I thoroughly enjoy these discussions.Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-81502322401211365622010-02-24T19:28:42.977+00:002010-02-24T19:28:42.977+00:00"As someone with creative interests, and crit..."As someone with creative interests, and critical judgements, I'm not interested in facilitating an environment in which my possible accomplishments are not valued because everything's samey"<br /><br />You misunderstand. The word 'critic' does not mean 'good critic'. Of course there are good critics and bad critics.Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07036103762441216161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-41577254583587759982010-02-24T19:28:19.369+00:002010-02-24T19:28:19.369+00:00That's the argument from principle above. Here...That's the argument from principle above. Here are some arguments from pragmatism.<br /><br />If you find the attacks and dismissals tiresome, it's in your hands to defuse them somewhat. You would also have to explain yourself less, and you would not give the impression that you are attention-seeking nor contrarian for its own sake nor full of hubris (these are not my views but they are views your work has repeatedly incited, particularly in the case of Kane).<br /><br />Now if you want to accept all that - though your frustration often implies that you don't - keep on the same path.<br /><br />But acknowledging your readers' opinions is not pandering to them it's showing them respect even as you disagree. Sometimes I think you're kidding yourself. Why post this blog if your only intention is diaristic? Couldn't it be that on some level, somewhere deep inside, you want some sense of affirmation or communication to result from them?Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-63402746258539577552010-02-24T19:24:23.320+00:002010-02-24T19:24:23.320+00:00Stephen,
You are invested in a universe of meanin...Stephen,<br /><br />You are invested in a universe of meaninglessness, with no distinctions between right and wrong. I am not. Call it insecurity, or call it recognition of the fact that the strong always prevail and if I concede ground someone else is going to take it. As someone with creative interests, and critical judgements, I'm not interested in facilitating an environment in which my possible accomplishments are not valued because everything's samey.<br /><br />Ironically, you made something akin to this point on our simultanous discussion on my blog. What use is capability without ability (though to make this distinction with Kubrick is preposterous)? Yet you want to do away with any larger framework for judging that with any solidity.Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-34766995345759140232010-02-24T19:21:30.210+00:002010-02-24T19:21:30.210+00:00"One word: Taxidermy."
We actually see ..."One word: Taxidermy."<br /><br />We actually see him happily stuffing his birds at the beginning of III and the creepiest part of the film it is too.Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07036103762441216161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-53100064284651998882010-02-24T19:19:49.225+00:002010-02-24T19:19:49.225+00:00"but philosophically accepting the philistine..."but philosophically accepting the philistine who will write off the film thoughtlessly and refuse to be challenged."<br /><br />Why should he be challenged, or made to justify his views? Are they not real thoughts and emotions if they are not satisfactorily 'backed up' to be given the critical green light after interrogation?Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07036103762441216161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-41876849091837436242010-02-24T19:19:21.409+00:002010-02-24T19:19:21.409+00:00Does it make a difference? Remember it was Hitchco...Does it make a difference? Remember it was Hitchcock's parlance, too. A nice sly visual pun at the Ed Geinisms at play. I suppose this also explains "The Birds", as well...Bob Clarkhttp://www.designersdilemma.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-85293377863163536322010-02-24T19:17:27.033+00:002010-02-24T19:17:27.033+00:00MovieMan,
The duty I have to my readers (if I hav...MovieMan,<br /><br />The duty I have to my readers (if I have any or not this blog would be pretty much identical) is to represent the relationship between me and the film, not to pander to them.<br /><br />"I'm more interested in engaging with a different point of view than dismissing it outright (whether from a position of objective contempt or subjective disinterest, the latter being your own)."<br /><br />You continue to misunderstand. I am writing MY point of view. I am not even bringing other positions into the equation here. I have great interest in opinions but for the purposes of the review I see no reason to go on about them when I'm giving mine. The discussion comes after, in these comments.<br /><br />"Is everyone a member of the baseball-playing community if they play sandlot, a member of the filmmaking community if they shoot home videos, a member of the writer's community if they compose a shopping list?"<br /><br />The short answer I think is yes. The long answer is absolutely they are.<br /><br />"I'll be interested in your view on IV even if you don't review it."<br /><br />IV particularly interests me as it is part prequel.Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07036103762441216161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-76487447399507797562010-02-24T19:13:52.448+00:002010-02-24T19:13:52.448+00:00Hmmm, of birds or of a "bird" (to use St...Hmmm, of birds or of a "bird" (to use Stephen's homeland's parlance)?Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-24332909905652121932010-02-24T19:13:27.572+00:002010-02-24T19:13:27.572+00:00By the way, the above is not meant to exclude you ...By the way, the above is not meant to exclude you from the "critical community" - obviously not, as I placed you within it in the previous community. But you have an irritating habit of obeying the rules yourself, yet leaving the door open for the less scrupulous. Couching your complaints about Kane in nuanced readings of the film and within the context of an deep and broad-based appreciation of cinema, but philosophically accepting the philistine who will write off the film thoughtlessly and refuse to be challenged.Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-16940243219907067572010-02-24T19:11:37.364+00:002010-02-24T19:11:37.364+00:00"Despite our following Vera Miles I never fel..."Despite our following Vera Miles I never felt that we had "switched" from Norman to her so instantaneously, just that we were returning nominally to the status quo with a newly skewed view on it. Dramatically, what should we have seen Norman doing during this interim?"<br /><br />One word: Taxidermy.Bob Clarkhttp://www.designersdilemma.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-80416342599551602852010-02-24T19:10:05.117+00:002010-02-24T19:10:05.117+00:00No, Stephen, the relationship is between the film,...No, Stephen, the relationship is between the film, yourself, and your readers. You've ensured that by making your pieces public.<br /><br />What you call "doublespeak" and "qualifications" I call "nuance" and "thoughtfulness." I'm more interested in engaging with a different point of view than dismissing it outright (whether from a position of objective contempt or subjective disinterest, the latter being your own).<br /><br />People who don't offer criticism, particularly thought-out criticism not of the "I like it" and "I didn't like it" are not a member of the critical community. Is everyone a member of the baseball-playing community if they play sandlot, a member of the filmmaking community if they shoot home videos, a member of the writer's community if they compose a shopping list? Or do only critics get downgraded to this level of accessibility?<br /><br />Fair enough on III. I'll be interested in your view on IV even if you don't review it.Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-88212040618539262102010-02-24T19:08:16.391+00:002010-02-24T19:08:16.391+00:00MovieMan,
You seem to be saying that I should pre...MovieMan,<br /><br />You seem to be saying that I should preempt those 'contentions' and dilute my opinion a little in anticipation. That approach would be slightly dishonest and not at all conducive to good criticism, discussion.Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07036103762441216161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-12550407792592897232010-02-24T19:06:15.909+00:002010-02-24T19:06:15.909+00:00Interesting points. Despite our following Vera Mil...Interesting points. Despite our following Vera Miles I never felt that we had "switched" from Norman to her so instantaneously, just that we were returning nominally to the status quo with a newly skewed view on it. Dramatically, what should we have seen Norman doing during this interim? Should we have flashed forward to the detective arriving at the motel, presented from his pov? That might be an interesting approach.<br /><br />I think, for all the credit given to our identification with Norman over the years, that this identification may actually be a more subtle effect than people have lately taken it for. In other words, on the surface the film is supposed to remain a conventional thriller which is why we shift back to the sister - only that Hitch has pulled the rug out from under us and our newfound sympathy for Norman is an undercurrent running beneath the "conventional" surface we're watching.<br /><br />At any rate, while some of the approaches you suggest could make an interesting (perhaps more interesting?) film I like the reveal of Norman's "Mother" personality just where it is. Though I knew the plot of the film going in, to the point where the shower scene didn't really jolt me, the end of the movie still packed a punch (at least when I saw it revealed on the spoiler-filled AFI broadcast, which I saw before seeing the whole movie! Man, I've had a fragmented viewing experience of Psycho, haven't I?).Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-38818189482589627252010-02-24T19:05:57.717+00:002010-02-24T19:05:57.717+00:00"If you don't want to mitigate against th..."If you don't want to mitigate against those circumstances (with more diplomatic language) that's your choice, and a fair one, but surprise is no longer an excuse."<br /><br />Diplomatic towards whom? The relationship here is between the film and myself. Why should I litter my reviews with doublespeak and qualifications. I don't need to represent other people's views. They can do that.<br /><br />"As a member of the critical community"<br /><br />Everyone is a member of the critical community. <br /><br />"Anyway, what did you think of III and IV? Will there be upcoming reviews of those? I'm very interested in seeing II now and will definitely give it a fair shake."<br /><br />III is a definite step down, quite poor in many respects. I haven't seen IV yet. I don't think I'll be writing about III.Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07036103762441216161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-1116444518718339222010-02-24T19:05:38.918+00:002010-02-24T19:05:38.918+00:00Man, the swtich from Norman to Marion's sister...Man, the swtich from Norman to Marion's sister always bores me to death. Instead of a psychologically complex suspense thriller, the movie basically becomes a Scooby Doo mystery. We've seen a victim's family try to hunt down a killer in countless films before, and the moment "Psycho" starts following their example, it nosedives.Bob Clarkhttp://www.designersdilemma.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-84085994625006662572010-02-24T19:01:17.832+00:002010-02-24T19:01:17.832+00:00Wish I could revise comments. That's supposed ...Wish I could revise comments. That's supposed to be "(these "diaristic" pieces are noW public and open to contention) not "not public" which completely contradicts my point. Argh.Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-23001092751711373872010-02-24T18:58:18.163+00:002010-02-24T18:58:18.163+00:00I suppose the main problem is Hitchcock (as well a...I suppose the main problem is Hitchcock (as well as screenwriter Joseph Stefano and author Robert Bloch) could never figure out a way to show us the transition from one personality to the next while still maintaining Norman's POV. It's that broken disruption of center-stage characters that I find so disarming to the film-- it is, quite frankly, ruined by the fact that after the first two acts we're pulled away from the a character the film has gone to such great lengths to make us identify with. Against all odds-- against the creepiness of his introduction, against the brutality of the supposed-protagonist's murder, against the chilling way that he hesitatingly cleans it all up-- we have bonded with Norman Bates, and it just feels wrong, on a primal level, to be torn away from him. Obviously, it's easier to portray his disintigration from Mamma's Boy to Mamma from the perspective of a third-person, but that doesn't make it interesting. In fact, it lessens the curiosity factor, and returns the film back to the rather flat status-quo of before. <br /><br />Many, if not most, of Hitch's films are disastrously uneven, and yet at times they still find ways to supercede their rather surprisingly unadressed weaknesses. "Vertigo" always felt a little cheap to me, the way it reveals the trick up its sleeve to the audience of the elaborate con-game being played before James Stewart figures it out-- yet somehow, perhaps becuase of Stewart's unflinching performance, perhaps because of the consistently haunting atmosphere throughout, and perhaps most of all in the way the film closes out on both a repetition and a emotional high-point, the film survives. Too bad such an escape-hatch couldn't have been found for "Psycho".Bob Clarkhttp://www.designersdilemma.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-9505026711710161082010-02-24T18:57:28.054+00:002010-02-24T18:57:28.054+00:00Bob, I think you're describing a different fil...Bob, I think you're describing a different film than the one Psycho intends to be. Our sympathy with Norman is still at some remove; it sounds from Stephen's review (and others I've read) that Psycho II is much more about Bates' inner state than the other film was meant to be. I guess the Norma's sister thing never bothered me much. I enjoyed following them around as the track down Norma and didn't feel the need to be very involved with them.<br /><br />Btw, Hitchcock may have shot himself in the foot if he DID intend us to sympathize with Norma's sister, because supposedly he was hell-bent on exacting revenge on Vera Miles for stepping out of Vertigo. Gave her a frumpy hairdo and clothes, and shot her unflatteringly through the whole thing.Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-88666756668883467952010-02-24T18:54:52.834+00:002010-02-24T18:54:52.834+00:00"I don't say it because I wasn't surp..."I don't say it because I wasn't surprised at liking things people don't and vice versa." As a member of the critical community, which you have forwarded yourself as intentionally or not (these "diaristic" pieces are not public and open to contention) you should be surprised, or at least interested in that. Your work and opinions no longer exist in a vaccuum, and the sooner you recognize that the stronger your work will be, in my opinion. But you're a stubborn bloke, and I'm not going to change your mind on that anytime soon, so moving on...<br /><br />"I don't expect people to point-blank dismiss my opinions" I think you HOPE they don't, but can you really say you EXPECT them not to after CK? I don't think you're that naive. If you don't want to mitigate against those circumstances (with more diplomatic language) that's your choice, and a fair one, but surprise is no longer an excuse.<br /><br />Anyway, what did you think of III and IV? Will there be upcoming reviews of those? I'm very interested in seeing II now and will definitely give it a fair shake.Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-73005292119859001022010-02-24T18:44:54.721+00:002010-02-24T18:44:54.721+00:00Bob, you articulate very well much of what I got a...Bob, you articulate very well much of what I got and didn't get from Psycho. <br /><br />For me the key always was the mind of Bates and the performance of Perkins. That is what made it unique, and Psycho II, like the film or not, focuses more clearly on these elements.<br /><br />The discussion in the original between Marion and Norman leading up to her death and the shower scene itself I think are marvellous. Afterwards the film does become rote and fade into the ranks of films which never promised so much.Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07036103762441216161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-39924399060649521252010-02-24T18:34:58.231+00:002010-02-24T18:34:58.231+00:00The only thing remotely interesting about "Ps...The only thing remotely interesting about "Psycho" after Marion Crane's car is swallowed by the sinkhole is Anthony Perkin's performance at the very, very end. I couldn't give less of a damn about the other people who get killed, or Crane's sister, or even the half-baked baloney about split-personalities that the shrink spouts out like exposition in a bad 50's sci-fi movie. Perkin's gaze as "Mother", however, is enough to grab my interest, however fleetingly. It shows that Hitchcock had stumbled upon a really interesting story, but never articulated it in quite the right way. We jump from Crane to Bates seamlessly, which is audacious, ambitious and absolutely well done. Why, then, do we jump to Crane's sister and the others? At that point it becomes a rather rote, predictable story. <br /><br />The mistake, I feel, was to avoid jumping into the "Mother" persona for so long. If we had somehow made the transition from Bates to his alter-ego as we had before, without anyone getting in between them, then we would have had a really outstanding film. As it stands now, the whole shifting POV feels like a savvy gambit that never really pays off as much as it should. Had the transition from one personality to the next had been as perfect as that between victim to murderer, then the film would've stood as a sly, subtle examination of the shifting mental landscape of a mind fragmented by schizophrenic forces. Hitchcock's narrative gesture itself would've stood as a powerful expression of mental illness. Instead, the way it plays out now, it's not much more than a novel gimmick. <br /><br />"Psycho" is a classic film, there's no doubt about that. But I'm not about to say it's a great one.Bob Clarkhttp://www.designersdilemma.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8035434747786768960.post-30570291435252069472010-02-24T18:26:01.760+00:002010-02-24T18:26:01.760+00:00MovieMan,
"You don't say, "Surprisi...MovieMan,<br /><br />"You don't say, "Surprisingly, I find Psycho II better than the original" or "despite its undoubted formal strengths, Psycho is actually not as acute an experience as Psycho II.""<br /><br />I don't say it because I wasn't surprised at liking things people don't and vice versa. I am watching the Psycho films (nearly finished 3, soon onto 4) and judging them as is. I can only judge after I have seen them. I don't prejudge or let fame or consensus prejudge for me.<br /><br />The review is for Psycho II. The comparison with Psycho (in terms of how good it is) is an aside. <br /><br />"...that I would not accept a surprised reaction on your part if there was a strong response."<br /><br />I expected that people in general would disagree with my conclusions. I don't expect people to point-blank dismiss my opinions, at least not without saying why or without reference to the film in question.<br /><br />I hope you can see Psycho II and give it a fair crack of the whip.Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07036103762441216161noreply@blogger.com