That it sticks so close to the masterful original and yet is so terrible is what’s most fascinating about the remake. The only major differences between the two films is that the remake is in color, has a different cast and crew, and is absolutely, completely awful. Inevitably, the experiment failed, and Psycho 1998 remains one of the most fascinating – and important – failures in the history of cinema.Īlmost everything about Van Sant’s remake, from the opening credits to the dialogue (apart from a few modernized words here and there) to the exact timing of shots and editing, is identical to the original. It was so influential, in fact, that, in 1998, acclaimed director Gus Van Sant ( Good Will Hunting, Milk) attempted the impossible – a shot-for-shot remake of the original that would attempt to capture the essence of Hitchcock’s classic and update it for modern audiences. Psycho was been a major influence on filmmakers around the world since its release, and was one of the most recognizable and culturally influential works of art of the past century.
When it came out in 1960, it was a revelation, moving people in ways they’d never been moved by cinema before earning substantial critical, and financial, success. In 1998 Gus Van Sant directed a nearly shot-for-shot remake of Alfred Hitchcock’s 1960 classic “Psycho”. Cameron Johnson thinks the remake was terrible, but at the same time is kind of glad it exists.Īlfred Hitchcock’s Psycho, widely considered one of the best horror films, and films in general, of all time was notable for its creative cinematography, complex, and shocking, plot (even by today’s standards, it’s pretty surprising) and excellent performances.
0 kommentar(er)
