Psycho III Reviews
We open with a strange prologue in which nun-to-be Maureen (Diana Scarwid) denounces God, inadvertently causes the death of another nun, and runs away. Wandering through the desert, she?s picked up by greasy drifter Duane Duke (Jeff Fahey), who does not seem to get that she is not picking up on his advances because a) she used to live in a convent, and b) he is a greasy drifter.
Anyway, the two split ways, and we move on to the Bates Motel, where things have picked up right where the finale of Psycho II left off. (There is even a flashback in case you have forgotten how that one ended.) Our old pal Norman (Anthony Perkins ¿who else?) has posted a help wanted sign, and it is Duane who gets the job. Maureen shows up later, and Duane gives her the infamous cabin no. 1. But Norman cannot shake the feeling she is not Maureen, but Marion Crane.
As a movie, it is so-so. The film plays like a smart mystery poorly mixed with a dumb 80s slasher flick; there is one rather graphic murder scene that feels added in just to cash in on the horror trend of the time. It does not seem a part of the Psycho series. The other deaths, however, are right in line with the minimum-blood, suspense-over-gore technique.
The plot is a little nonexistent this time around. Norman seems to be falling for Maureen, and vice versa. Duane is a creep. A nosy reporter (Roberta Maxwell) has come to town to check up on Norman's rehabilitation. And mother?s been talking again.
That is all there is, really. Gone is the intricate mystery of Psycho II (I will not bother to compare this to the original Psycho; it would not be fair). In its place is a rather interesting, softer character study - can a mass murderer and a mentally unbalanced former religious type find love? - blended with a less engaging chain of killings. The screenplay, by Charles Edward Pogue, lacks the kick of the previous entries, as it does not contain the glorious surprises of those films.
Which brings me to those three key scenes. Two are just nifty bits that always catch my eye. In one, the famous shower scene is recreated nearly shot-for-shot... in a telephone booth. In the other, a body is hidden in the motel's ice machine; will the sheriff notice the ice he is sucking on has some blood on it.
It is the third key scene that really gets to me. It is yet another take on the shower scene, this time with Mother entering Maureen's room just as she did those many years ago. But the script throws us a curve, resulting in a move that is smarter than anything else in the movie. I will not tell you what it is (you shall have to see for yourself), but it is a scene that gets me every time.
Behind all this is Perkins, who, in addition to his reprisal of his most famous role, also marks his directorial debut. Perkins knows the material and seems to enjoy tinkering with the characters. His decision to have everyone play a little too over-the-top doesn?t quite work, as what is meant to come off as black humor often times comes off as merely Jeff Fahey not acting well. Still, Perkins? playful mood keeps the movie from sinking into an overly-serious zone, and some of the plot?s dumber moments are allowed to be tossed aside with tongue in cheek.
So just as Psycho II was a great movie on its own and a fair successor to Psycho, Psycho III is a decent movie on its own and a fair successor to Psycho II. Its not a great movie by any means, but any fan of the Hitchcock classic whose curiosity was snagged by ?Psycho II? should find something of interest to see here. It is not, as its ads once claimed, the most shocking of them all, but it does have enough clever bits to earn a recommendation.
Directed by Perkins, this is an enjoyable dark comedy with some slasher 80's moments but it's lacks mystery and suspense of "Psycho" and "Psycho 2". Perkins is game as always as Norman Bates and he has some humorous moments. Scarwid and Fahey did good job on their roles. While Maxwell does her part well but she is kinda annoying in the movie. Although an minor box office disappointment. "Psycho 3" went on to have an cult following. As his directorial debut, Perkins directed some stylish sequences and he gives tributes to the first "Psycho".
In the end "Psycho 3" does have its ups and downs but it is certainly amusing for die-hard fans of the series. On a side note, originally the script by Charles Edward Pogue was much darker. Dwayne Duke was a killer, who was obsessed with Norman and Maureen Coyle was going to be the new psychologist for Norman. In some ways, that version of that movie, if it was made. It could be been better but Universal rejected the ideas. Some film critics and fans of the series certainly liked "Psycho 3" more than "Psycho 2". So judge it for yourself.
If we can be honest for a minute. Trying to make a sequel to a Hitchcock movie is gonna be hard no matter how good a filmmaker you are. I like this movie because Perkins is probably the only other person besides Hitchcock, that gets the character of Norman Bates. In this aspect he succeeds very well in adding to the depth of this iconic character. No it isn't the best movie, but if Anthony Perkins wants to play Norman Bates a few more times. Then I will gladly fork out the money to see it.
Jeff Fahey gives a great sleazy performance as a drifter who starts trying to exploit Norman's strange quirks and gets more than he bargained for.
Well worth a rental, fun stuff.