Gus Van Sant's Psycho is fine; it just has no reason to exist, outside of catering to a generation of contemporaries who refuse to watch black-and-white films. A shot-for-shot remake of Alfred Hitchcock's original, thrilling masterpiece, Van Sant makes no effort to try and do anything different with the material, possibly fearing the backlash of altering a perfect piece of work. Why, then, did he even choose to make the film? It seems more a self-indulgent exercise in futility—a complete waste of time and money that does little more than appeal to Van Sant's morbid curiosity of how exactly Hitchcock achieved each shot. This is more of a film school assignment than art—or, worse still, than entertainment. Opt for the original instead.

Share This Gallery:

Comments & Discussion

  1. Chris • August 27, 2016 @ 3:57 PM

    Who the heck wrote this article? It says “Gus Van Sant’s PSYCHO is fine” You gotta be kidding me! It might be the most terribly miscast film in Hollywood history! What a piece of junk!

  2. K. • August 27, 2016 @ 3:46 PM

    I have great affection for the original Clash of the Titans, but I actually prefer the remake (Just my opinion, folks.) I think the worst remakes are usually horror films: Psycho, The Wicker Man, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Evil Dead, Halloween, Dawn of the Dead. Those remakes were just dire.

  3. Balam • January 8, 2016 @ 2:35 PM

    Yes I’m afraid that new Clash of the Titans is far far worse than the original.

  4. uh.hellno • November 1, 2013 @ 6:24 PM

    New Clash of the titans is worse than the original? You must be out of your mind.

  5. tony • October 19, 2012 @ 10:38 PM

    unfortunatly i’ve seen most of these movies and the movie people should try for something better.

Join The Conversation:

Trending Articles

You Might Also Like

Close Menu