top of page

Grupo

Público·111 miembros

Psycho III(1986)


What a nasty delight. I might even prefer this to Psycho II considering that, in lacking the further psychology of Norman found in the previous installment, it drops all pretense and embraces the pulpy, often disgusting visceral rhythms of the first film. It moves and plays like a neon mix of mid-80s slasher, with that existential repetition and lack of self-awareness, while also functioning as a manic riff on the themes of the original. It's very fun and, with the prominence of cartoons in the film acting as inspiration and tone-setter, often wacky in a productive sense. Worth a late-night watch!




Psycho III(1986)


Download Zip: https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmiimms.com%2F2udUTb&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AOvVaw0W_ypB8Qk2te3Q8mQkoJHa



In issue #57 of Fangoria Magazine, screenwriter Charles Edward Pogue revealed the plot of his original script. In this version, it was Duane who was the killer and had intentionally come to the Bates Motel because he was obsessed with Norman. Maureen was a neurotic psychologist who had come to the motel to replace Dr. Raymond from the previous film -- Pogue had intended to cast original victim Janet Leigh in the role. Universal rejected these ideas, arguing that Bates had to be the killer and Leigh was wrong for the film. However, Maureen's actions remained virtually unchanged, her character was merely changed to a young nun.


As a first-time director, Perkins was interested in the psychological aspects of the story and the character over carnage. In front of the camera, Perkins was again wonderful as Norman, finding new ways to shade the character that he had lived with for so long. Even as the bodies begin to stack up, Norman is always seen as someone compelled to kill due to forces beyond his control, ultimately more pitiable than conventionally scary.


Yes there is gore because this is the mid-80s and a horror film is not allowed to not have it. Yet one may be surprised about how tame Psycho III is and how legitimate it tries to be as an exploration of the mind of Norman Bates. Those who are killed are not the main characters (at least in the run-up to the finale) but are rather filler for the demands of audiences who thirst for buckets of blood. Take out the murder scenes and what you have is, at its core, a psychological character study. As I stated earlier, Anthony Perkins is really the only one who knows Norman Bates, and much like his on-screen counterpart, it was hard for Perkins to break away from this typecast.


Psycho III is the best of the Psycho sequels for the sheer fact that it was directed by, essentially, Norman Bates. Perkins feels for the dilemma Bates is in he because he too is typecast in the real world as the psychopath. This unique aspect is what makes Psycho III work regardless of its flaws (and there are quite a few). On the surface, it is seen as just another horror sequel, but deep down, it is actually a moving film about trying to break free of the demons that haunt us and the redemption that so many aspire to receive, but ultimately fail to achieve. All of the credit goes to Anthony Perkins who, unfortunately, did not direct another film; he was a legitimate talent behind the camera and it is unfortunate that he was unable to direct again. However, I hope that viewers delve into Psycho III and sincerely listen to what Perkins is trying to say. One may see a slasher film, whereas I see an autobiographical piece of a character and the actor who plays him.


These tests were undertaken with two objects in view: (1) To make psycho-physiological measurements of a group of successful athletes, in order to develop a placement test for athletes. (2) To compare the results of these tests with the results of the same tests upon a control group of non-athletes. 041b061a72


Acerca de

¡Bienvenido al grupo! Puedes conectarte con otros miembros, ...

Miembros

bottom of page