Psycho 3
There are very few instances of an actor who is playing the lead character in a revered movie franchise who actually goes so far as to get to be the DIRECTOR of a later sequel in that same franchise, but that is exactly what happened in 1986 with Anthony Perkins and his character of Norman Bates in the much acclaimed Psycho horror film series with this being Part 3 in the run (the franchise would ultimately extend to a Part 4 with Perkins returning solely as an actor before his untimely death and then moving on to remake / reboot mediocrity). No doubt Perkins had a tough act to follow here and not just with Hitchcockâs widely considered to be untouchable Part 1 but also with Richard Franklinâs more than compelling Part 2 which was declared by no less an authority than Quentin Tarantino as being better than Part 1 in his opinion. In fact, Perkins had reportedly gone directly to Franklin in order to ask him to come on board as a âco directorâ only to be turned down, obviously harboring some insecurities about his own potential as a director which he would later admit just prior to his death that he felt that he really wasnât fully up to the task of directing himself as his most famous character in what still amounted to being a major horror film. He neednât have worried though especially when viewing the final result as Perkins not only showed a penchant for at times pitch black humor that Hitchcock himself would have appreciated, but he also made a point to scale back some of the more grandiose elements of the prior entries in order to create a more intimate approach to the story. Of course, many of the major components of the Bates character were known to be prevalent in Perkinsâ real life psychological makeup as he was said to have been traumatized by his own relationship with his mother that resulted in his lifelong bouts with mental illness even as Hollywood would always toast him for being the venerable star of the Psycho films. Here though, Perkins (working with screenwriter Charles Edward Pogue) was literally allowed to have free reign in deciding the creative direction of the story and in the direction of the Norman character himself, save for one major story compromise with the studio where Norman (unlike in Part 2 which was more of a whodunit and Norman was innocent of committing any actual murders) was required here to be the true killer and still be carrying on his business of dressing up like his mother and taking on her personality while doing so, having been triggered at the conclusion of Part 2 by the arrival at his house of the crazy old lady whom he worked with at the diner who not only claimed to be his true mother but outright admitted to him that she had committed all of the killings in Part 2 which led to Norman nonchalantly bashing her brains in with a shovel and then having her corpse take her place in his motherâs chair so that Norman can engage in frenzied conversations with her anew while talking in her voice just like in Part 1. But the fact that Normanâs traumatized experiences in Part 2 had led him back to homicidal insanity was secondary to the real draw of this entry, one which no doubt must have delighted Perkins when pitched with the idea for the film. That concept was to have this Psycho film be in many ways a 3 character piece (4 if you count Mother) with Norman obviously being one of the 3 primaries but the other 2 (new) characters being in many ways just about as tortured, dangerous and fascinating as Norman himself especially when all 3 of them manage to intersect and set the story itself in new directions. The first of these new characters is introduced in an opening scene as harrowing as anything ever seen in the series, that showing a young novice nun (Diana Scarwid) who has suddenly lost her faith and become suicidal, only when preparing to jump from the belltower, an older nun who attempts to pull her to safety falls to her own death instead, leading to Scarwid now being completely castigated by the church and being told continuously that she is going to hell before being expelled, a broken shell of a human being who is picked up by our other new character, a shady yet charismatic drifter played by Jeff Fahey on the cusp of his own fledgling career at that point. After pulling over to the side of the road and making a robust rape attempt, Fahey finds himself rebuffed as Scarwid runs for her life and all of this that introduces us to these 2 newcomers is BEFORE we finally reconnect with the one and only Norman Bates, horror movie icon that he is, as the sick bastard is poisoning birds in his birdfeeder so that he can take them back into his house and stuff them (his known favorite hobby). Fahey is the first to arrive at The Bates Motel, inquiring about the job for a daytime desk clerk and quickly being hired by Norman without so much as a standard background check. But when Scarwid arrives with her short blonde hair evoking sudden memories in Normanâs psyche of Janet Leighâs Marion Crane (at one point in preproduction, Leigh was actually in consideration for the role despite her older stature but it didnât pan out), the arguments between he and Mother grow more intense, so much so that when Norman / Mother goes to finish her off, it turns out that the suicidal young woman has opened up her wrists in the bathtub, remarkably compelling Norman to âsnap out of itâ and call for help in ironically saving the poor, tortured girlâs life. This leads to the filmâs (and Perkinsâ) boldest move of all, to actually allow the socially awkward for life Norman to not only have a girlfriend, but to literally fall in love, a development that allows him to resist Motherâs influence enough that (since he only becomes her upon sexual arousal) whenever his physical feelings for Scarwid get so strong that Mother urges him to kill, he instead finds a way to purposely murder other women (mostly small time whores who come around the motel) all as a way of âprotectingâ Scarwid from the same fate which had befallen Janet Leigh simply because he cares about her that much. A fascinating and twisted subtext to be sure, but whatâs possibly even more interesting is the newfound friendship between Norman and his newly hired âassistant managerâ in Fahey. Having apologized to Scarwid upon her arrival at The Bates Motel, Fahey then helps himself to the local barfly women all while keeping a close eye on Norman, coaxing him into the relationship with the former nun as he maintains a casual bromance with Norman even as his character manages to come off as being the edgiest in the film, quickly learning about Normanâs past and his reputation with the townspeople as he starts to notice the mysterious shouting matches coming from Normanâs ominous house on the hill. One must keep in mind that unlike in Part 1 (where Norman would speak openly to strangers about his mother still being alive even though the locals all knew that she was dead), here he makes no mention to anybody that Mother is still up there and talking to him in his head (and still compelling him to kill) and Fahey in playing the role of Normanâs instant yet sinister best friend whom at any time could stab him right in the back with a wink and a smile actually makes us once again (as in Part 2) feel sympathy for Norman even though he is once again the killer here and Fahey is just more of a shady sleazeball who treats women like dirt but is not really a killer per se. As part of his scaled back approach here, Perkins as director uses some minimal lighting techniques in order to isolate the worlds of his three tormented main characters in such a way that may or may not have been a later influence on such David Lynch works as Twin Peaks, but the script also shoehorns in a nosy reporter character (Roberta Maxwell) who is ostensibly there to interview Norman for an anti insanity plea piece that she is doing (and in directly asking him about Marion Crane manages to set him off even more) but it isnât until the final 20 minutes that she conveniently does some real detective work in order to set up a big twist that sadly was more relevant in Part 2 and the female victims who serve as âroadblockâ targets here to protect Scarwid are straight out of a cheap 80s slasher flick. But Perkins is in his element while directly guiding the fate of his most iconic character, even suffering through the indignity of receiving his HIV positive diagnosis during filming, but still making this entry unique and off kilter enough by dividing up the leads here between Norman and 2 other lost doomed souls who just so happened to wander in off the main roadâŚ
8/10