Psycho Reviews

Page 1 of 2
July 12, 2019
Gus Van Sant's Psycho is as it is because he knows that we have already seen Hitchcock's version, and that, despite replicating the original scene to scene, he also takes unexpected directions. [Full Review in Spanish]
August 6, 2018
Gus Van Sant's oddball, shot-for-shot remake of Alfred Hitchcock's 1960 classic...
December 1, 2012
What Van Sant's film does, tremendously well, is make the material foreign again.
October 22, 2012
a true labour of love, an homage in such deliriously infatuated thrall to its inspiration that it seems more arthouse folly than studio cashcow - or, to cite the psychiatrist near the end of Psycho, "these were crimes of passion, not profit."
September 7, 2011
August 21, 2009
Already my mother and I mourn the day when some AVID editor will dare to digitally tweak Vertigo, spinning it into a virtual romantic comedy starring computer-directed replicas of Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan.
May 26, 2006
Deserves closer consideration than it received.
April 9, 2005
A lot of people may not get the point of recreating a work such as Psycho. I didn't get it, until I saw the film.
January 9, 2004
To my absolute astonishment, I enjoyed the remake more than the original.
February 8, 2003
It's surprising to note that this film, mostly well-acted, is somewhat lacking on the technical side, which is what Hollywood usually does best these days.
January 10, 2003
A Psycho that functions perfectly on its own terms while polishing this jewel of a thriller into its own bright new gleam.
September 10, 2002
Predictably, it's (almost) the exact same film, but I wouldn't say that it's a pointless enterprise.
January 1, 2000
Since this is a virtual shot-by-shot, line-by-line remake of the original masterpiece, it's like watching a new version of a Shakespeare play. Think about it.
January 1, 2000
Though some hard-core fans of the original may scoff at anything that tries to compete, Van Sant's version of Psycho is actually pretty good.
January 1, 2000
There's nothing exactly wrong with Vaughn's performance, which is edgy and scary. Vaughn simply can't help the fact that physically, he is completely wrong for the role.
January 1, 2000
January 1, 2000
January 1, 2000
Is this film better than the original? The answer is no, not quite, but to my shock, it is just about as good of a remake as could have possibly been expected.
January 1, 2000
It remains the most structurally elegant and sneakily playful of thrillers!
January 1, 2000
This gutsy cinematic experiment is more than just a curiosity. It's an intelligent homage (at times even a spoof) and still a bit of a hand-wringer, even though pop culture has spoiled all the surprises.
Page 1 of 2