Psycho II - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Psycho II Reviews

Page 1 of 34
May 16, 2017
An excellent addition to a film that`s already a masterpiece.
April 17, 2017
Si on ne le compare pas trop l'original, a passe
April 15, 2017
170415: Too convoluted.
½ April 11, 2017
I can't fault this movie for giving us a sequel that whilst not quite up to Hitchcock standard, manages to do enough story-wise to make its existence worthy. A nice twist ending is the icing on this plain looking but tasty cake of horror.
½ November 6, 2016
You know what. It's not bad I mean I felt really bad for Norman and throughout this movie I thought it was a decent squeal and it was entertaining to watch you really do start to question what's going on and yes the twist at the end is a bit over done but still a decent movie
½ September 25, 2016
It gets very interesting as it goes
September 17, 2016
Surprisingly good sequel to a film that never should have had a sequel. Written by Tom Holland and directed by Richard Franklin, the story picks up 22 yeas later with Normal Bates being released from a mental hospital to again run his family hotel when he finds himself receiving phone calls from his "mother." Things are complicated by his helping a young waitress, Meg Tilley (who I miss very much as an actress), and by Marion Crane's sister, Vera Miles, who is wanting Bates sent back to jail. Like the original, this film bases it's scare in reality and mental illness, but then hints at the supernatural. Holland gets a majority of the credit for pulling off a script that is a logical continuation of the original story that also manages to stay true to the spirit of the original, dark humor included. And top all of this off with an excellent score by Jerry Goldsmith that wisely did not try to ape Bernard Herrmann's original score. A much better of film than one would certainly have expected.
September 16, 2016
Sure, making a sequel to Psycho is just as bad as remaking it. However, Psycho II manages to get by on an entertainment value alone by not trying to top the previous film. In many respects, the film is a brilliant sequel to the original classic. In the same vein as 2010: The Year We Make Contact, somebody decided to make a sequel to a masterpiece a couple of decades later, and I think they did a terrific job. It does have a very Hitchcock feel to it, but even if you didn't know anything about Hitchcock, you wouldn't be able to tell much of a difference, I think. If you do, then you'll appreciate the finer touches. I personally liked the film's death scenes and the effects they pulled off in them. The film is also more of a thriller this time around too. Despite some of the acting and dialogue, it still manages to ring it in and be quite a bit of fun.
August 27, 2016
A surprisingly good sequel to the original masterpiece.
½ August 6, 2016
Of course, the original is in a separate class altogether, but this is a worthy follow-up that earns its twists and turns
July 12, 2016
It's not really fair to compare it with its predecessor. "Psycho II" is masterful sequel to a masterful original. If more sequels were like this maybe people wouldn't dwell so much upon seeing them. A marvelous example of how a great horror sequel is done.
½ June 16, 2016
Much better than it should have been due to Perkins and crane shots. No one should ever try to follow up Hitchcock. The ending is ridiculous.
June 13, 2016
A good horror sequel, Anthony Perkins does a good job in this movie.
June 6, 2016
A decent sequel but suffers heavily do to a weak story and hammy performances.
May 25, 2016
Unnecessary sequel with quite silly scenes but in overall looks like a good old fashioned 80's thriller\horror movie.
May 19, 2016
Not so good like the first film but it's a good sequel.
½ April 28, 2016
Psycho 2 (1983) ?? 1/2
Surprisingly well directed sequel with lots of thrills and chills. Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins) is released after 22 years of psychiatric care to hopefully live a normal life, but specters of his crimes - and his mother - continue to haunt him. Unexpectedly good followup to Hitchcock masterpiece that (unfortunately) goes for graphic violence toward the end. Perkins' performance is every bit as frightening as it was 23 years ago.
Super Reviewer
February 11, 2016
Everyone onscreen is having a high old time in this return to Hitchcock's masterpiece that begins, lest anyone's forgotten, in the shower (that shower) and from there we proceed to find out if modern medicine has cured ol' Norman Bates. But in truth does anyone want him better? Do even we want him better? Perkins et al dive into the deep end of the pool with salacious glee as we watch him twitch and squirm through every difficulty. Can he keep his sanity? No cast should ever be allowed to have this much fun.
February 2, 2016
Interesting how all the nuances combined make it a faithful sequel, though the overall story is quite fuzzy for one's first watch.
Super Reviewer
January 29, 2016
There's something almost sinful about knocking this tragically underrated classic. It does everything a good sequel should aspire to and then does a lot more. There's a fresh take on the concept that really works, and the twists are ingenious. In the original, Hitchcock was trying to take what was essentially a tacky, pulpy concept and make it work, and that's of course what he did. And he did it by finding an innovative and devilishly clever way of telling the story. Well they did it again with the sequel damn it! lt's almost like people are afraid to consider it a good or great movie from the outset because it has too much to contend with, like being in the shadow of the original and because it wasn't Hitchcock directing, and so on...............Open your mind, and get involved, this is a brilliant movie.
Page 1 of 34