Psycho III is the series' first installment to not have some form of mystery/twist (those who have viewed Psycho and Psycho II know what I'm talking about). Though a story doesn't need those things to be good, here the lack of such an element makes it seem something is missing. It should be mentioned that I don't consider the information we discover at the end (SPOILER: Emma Spool was Norman's aunt, not his mother) a twist because it merely reconfirms the status quo we had going into the second film. Anyway, that's not really my point here. My point is that with the lack of some form of mystery, this film becomes an-only-slightly better than typical 80s slasher flick. You don't care about any of Norman's victims like in Psycho I; they are clearly only here to be offed by him. As for the supporting characters, you can't really relate to their motivations and the actors portraying them are "meh" at best. I will say, though, that Anthony Perkins does give his best in his third go-around as Norman Bates, showing how invested he had become in the character. He also does a pretty capable job of directing; it's just a shame that this is the only film he would be at the helm. Additionally, though the story is fairly thin in many places, it does an interesting job of showing the psychological struggle Norman is going through at this time. That is probably the most (sadly, maybe only) interesting thing about the plot. Overall, the negatives and positives of Psycho III balance out, leading to an unremarkable film. "Unremarkable" isn't the worst thing to call a movie, but that's pretty awful for one with such an iconic character.